May 20 Oppose letter Governor's May Revised Budget: Charter School Eligibility for ERAF

May 20, 2024

The Honorable Scott Wiener, Chair 
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Comm. 
1021 O Street, Suite 8620  
Sacramento, CA 95814

The Honorable Jesse Gabriel, Chair 
Assembly Budget Committee 
1021 O Street, Suite 8230  
Sacramento, CA 95814 

Re:  Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF): Charter Schools–OPPOSE 

Dear Chairs Wiener and Gabriel: 

On behalf of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, we respectfully request that your committees reject the Administration’s proposal to unconstitutionally redirect local property tax dollars away from core public services provided to our constituents. The Administration’s proposal not only directly conflicts with constitutional protections approved by voters in 2004, but will result in dramatic losses of local general purpose revenues that will affect critical local programs and services for the foreseeable future – without increasing funding to charter schools. 

In Marin County alone, the proposal would result in the ongoing loss of approximately $1.1 million in Excess ERAF funding per year to 65 local governmental entities that deliver vital transportation, public safety, safety net, and other services to our communities.  

In 2004, after a lengthy negotiation between the Administration, Legislature, and local governments, Proposition 1A was considered and overwhelmingly approved by voters. Proposition 1A amended the State Constitution to bar the Legislature from “reducing for any fiscal year the percentage of the total amount of ad valorem property tax revenues in a county that is allocated among all of the local agencies in that county below the percentage of the total amount of those revenues that would be allocated among those agencies for the same fiscal year under the statutes in effect on November 3, 2004.” 

When the dispute over ERAF and charter schools arose in 2021, the Legislature directed the State Controller’s Office to issue guidance to county auditor-controllers in affected counties; in that guidance, the Controller did not include charter schools in the allocation methodology. That finding was appealed in court. The trial and appellate courts rejected these arguments, finding that the appellants failed to establish that the statute includes charter schools in the allocation of ERAF.  

The Administration’s proposal to “clarify” that charter schools should receive funds from ERAF would clearly violate the constitutional provisions contained in Proposition 1A, as it would reduce the total percentage of property tax revenues allocated to counties and cities below what the laws in effect on November 3, 2004 would have provided. The courts have determined that those statutes did not include charter schools, as reflected in the guidance from the State Controller’s Office and the final decision of the appellate court.  As such, the Administration’s proposal is not simply a “clarification” of the law; it overturns the Controller’s interpretation which was repeatedly upheld by the Courts.  

Lastly, this proposal if allowed to go forward would result in disproportionate impacts among these counties in the context of the significant safety net cuts included in the May Revision among all counties. We urge you to reject the Administration’s proposed trailer bill language and appreciate your consideration of our concerns.  

Sincerely, 

Dennis Rodoni, 
President Marin County Board of Supervisors 

Cc: Marin County Board of Supervisors 
Senator Mike McGuire 
Assemblymember Damon Connolly