The immediacy of the leaders’ warning in 2023 was sharpened by events unfolding around the country. Just a week before they sent their letter, the mass shooting at Covenant Christian School in Nashville had captured national attention, as three children and three adults were killed in a targeted attack that horrified communities and intensified debates over school security. For Adkins and Benz, this incident stood as a grim example of the vulnerabilities shared by many faith-based schools, which often operate with fewer security resources than public systems. In their correspondence, they emphasized that private schools in Minnesota—whether Jewish day schools, Muslim academies, or Christian institutions—were experiencing increasing threats, ranging from hostile messages to security breaches and concerns about potential targeted violence. The leaders argued that these schools should not be excluded from programs designed to protect Minnesota’s children simply because they operate outside the public system. They highlighted the fact that more than 72,000 students attend nonpublic schools in the state—a significant population whose safety, they argued, deserved equal state protection. The letter specifically requested that $50 million be included in the final Education Finance Bill to permit private schools to access the Building and Cyber Security Grant Program and the Safe Schools Program. These programs fund essential measures such as building security upgrades, emergency communication systems, threat assessment training, mental health services, and cyber protection—a growing concern given the rise in online threats targeting religious institutions. Adkins and Benz asserted that excluding nonpublic schools from these programs not only created a dangerous inequity but also undermined a statewide effort to improve school safety for all children, regardless of the type of institution they attended. Their tone was measured but resolute, expressing frustration at previous legislative inaction while urging state leaders to recognize that in an era of increasing threats, security should not be a privilege reserved for one educational category.
The 2023 request did not arise in a vacuum; it followed earlier attempts to persuade state lawmakers to include private schools in Minnesota’s broader security apparatus. In 2022, the Minnesota Catholic bishops, together with Archbishop Bernard Hebda of St. Paul and Minneapolis, had appealed for statewide inclusion in safety funding programs, warning that faith-based institutions remained vulnerable targets. They cited not only national trends but also local incidents, such as vandalism, bomb threats, and harassment directed at religious schools. Despite these appeals, Minnesota’s legislative framework remained unchanged: access to key safety funding programs continued to be limited to public school districts, charter schools, and cooperative educational units. Private schools were excluded due to what state officials described as a structural issue: they lack the local tax levy base required to participate in certain funding models. While public schools can draw on levies to match or supplement state dollars, private schools, which operate on tuition and donations, cannot. To school leaders, however, this rationale missed the broader point—that safety should not be contingent on a school’s funding structure or religious identity, especially when the state was already acknowledging heightened threats to religious communities in other contexts. The leaders argued that safety programs funded through general state appropriations, rather than levies, could easily be extended to private institutions if lawmakers chose to do so. Their frustration stemmed from what they perceived as an inconsistent policy that treated safety as a universal priority in rhetoric but not in practice. They maintained that safety programs should reflect the reality that threats do not discriminate between public and private buildings, and that failing to include all schools left thousands of students exposed to preventable risks. Continue reading…
