Measure ES would impose a permanent $495 annual tax on most Santa Monica parcels to fund local public schools. It would replace money the city now pays the school district under an agreement that expires next year. Even though it’s a new tax, because it qualified by petition, the initiative needs only a simple majority to pass instead of two-thirds.
What it does
The tax would rise each year with inflation and has no expiration date. It is estimated to raise $12 million a year, all of it for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District or a successor Santa Monica district. A new Malibu district would receive nothing.
The money is unrestricted and could pay for any cost at the district’s discretion.
Owner-occupant seniors 65 and older, 501(c)(3) nonprofits, fully affordable housing, and tax-exempt religious organizations and schools would be exempt.
The revenue is meant to replace city payments under the Master Facilities Use Agreement, which expires June 30, 2027.
The core debate
The central question is whether ES is new school money or a shift in who pays. Its stated purpose is to replace an existing city payment, so the main effect would be to move a roughly $12 million annual cost from the city's general fund to individual property owners.
That gives the "no new money" argument some weight, but the alternative to ES is not the status quo. The city agreement expires in 2027, and the council has ordered contingency plans in case ES fails, so a no vote leaves the district's funding unsettled rather than unchanged.
The reserves argument cuts both ways. Reserves and past surpluses are a cushion, but they are largely one-time money. Covering a recurring $12 million gap from $84 million in reserves alone would exhaust them in about seven years.
The measure's design also matters. A flat per-parcel rate means a condo owner and a large commercial property pay the same amount, and inflation indexing with no expiration date means voters would need a new measure to revisit it. The exemptions narrow the base further.
The Malibu objection is time-limited. The revenue goes to the current joint district, but a new Malibu district would receive none of it once the districts separate.
The case for
Supporters say permanent funding would protect schools from the city’s financial difficulties.
The case against
Critics call ES "a back-door City tax increase" that brings schools no new money. They say the school district ran a $9 million surplus last year, has averaged $14 million annual surpluses, and holds $84 million in reserves. They also object that Malibu schools would benefit without Malibu property owners paying.