Comparisons between states

School trusts vary significantly from state to state for a variety of reasons. The original grants were different. Some states received four or two sections in each thirty-six square mile township instead of one and the resources available on the surface and under the granted lands are very different as well. Some states make the majority of revenue from forestry, while others generate most of the annual revenue from oil and gas under the surface. Every state generates revenue from grazing but the percent of revenue contributed varies substantially from state to state. Arizona generates the largest percent of annual revenue from land in the path of development sold at auction.

In addition, the management of the lands varies. Some states elect the land commissioner in a state wide election. In other states the commissioner is appointed by a board or the governor. The permanent funds associated with the trust lands are also managed differently. In some states the money is managed within the land office and in Texas the responsibility lies within the state board of education. In most states the state treasurer invests the fund sometimes with and sometimes without an advisory committee.

The flow of funding from the land to schools is unique for every state. A few states save all that is earned minus the expenses of land management with schools receiving the annual interest and dividends made on the fund. Others distribute the "renewable resource revenue" directly to schools in addition to interest and dividends from the permanent fund. A flow chart for each state is available on each respective state page and are found under the STATES tab.

The comparisons are provided as a point to begin discussion. Recognizing every trust is different, every state has something others can learn from. Over the years, land commissioners have continually learned and implemented new ideas from their sister states improving what they already do well.

1. Acreage
   1. FY2004
   2. FY2005
   3. FY2006
   4. FY2007 Chart
   5. FY2007 Data
   6. 2008 Surface and Mineral Acreage
   7. FY 2010 Surface and Mineral
2. Permanent Funds
   1. FY 2003 and FY 2004
   2. FY2005
   3. FY 2006
   4. FY2007
   5. FY2007 Deposits
   6. FY 2008
   7. FY 2010
3. Revenue
   1. Annual Revenue FY 2004
   2. Mineral Revenue FY 2005
   3. Surface Revenue FY2005
   4. Mineral Revenue FY 2006
   5. Surface Revenue FY 2006
   6. FY2007 Major Sources of Funding
   7. Mineral Revenue FY2008
   8. Surface Revenue FY2008
   9. Mineral Revenue 2010
   10. Surface Revenue 2010
   11. Top Three Funding Sources
4. Distribution
   1. FY2003 and 2004
   2. FY2006
   3. FY 2007
   4. FY 2008
   5. FY 2010
5. State Enabling Acts
6. State Constitutions
   1. School Land Trusts
   2. Permanent Funds