Mill levies aid state foundation aid
In the mid 1950’s a legislative interim Education Committee determined that state assistance was set at arbitrary levels. In 1959, the State of ND enacted a uniform 21-mill county levy and provided a supplemental state appropriation to ensure that school districts would receive 60% of the cost of education from non-local sources. Taking into account the financial burdens suffered by low property valuation and high per student cost school districts, the Legislature weighted aid payments that favored school districts with lower enrollments and higher costs.

As early as 1965, a Statewide Study of Education found that the “public system of  education in ND in certain key respects may be demonstrated to be inadequate, ineffective, inefficient, and inequitable.” By the early 1970s, federal and state courts were beginning to address issues of spending levels for education and whether those levels should be dependent on the wealth of the school district in which the student lives. North Dakota responded by amending the state aid program and doubling the per student payment. In the 80s the state eliminated the 21-mill county levy and increased state aid. In 1982 a method of funding known as the “70-30”concept departed from existing state aid formulas and required a30% equalization factor to arrive at each district’s entitlement. Local mill levies would be employed to raise the district’s local share of the cost of education.

A number of legal actions in the 80’s and 90’were initiated for the purpose of declaring North Dakota’s system of public school finance unconstitutional. Although three of the five justices held that the state’s education funding was unconstitutional, state law requires four members to declare a statute unconstitutional. However, the majority indicated there were three principal areas in need of attention – “in lieu of revenues, equalization factors, and transportation payments. The 1995 Legislature enacted a variety of bills to deal with transportation funding, special education funding, and increases in per student payments for isolated schools.

Changes were made, but inequities continued.