MANHATTAN BEACH -- The second letter saying it was his responsibility to donate $1,200 to his children's public school sent Mark Silva over the edge.

The father of two fired off his own letter, chastising the Manhattan Beach school fund-raisers for seeking donations to make up for state budget cuts.

He said they were worsening the divide between affluent districts, like Manhattan Beach, and poor ones such as Hawthorne, where he's a vice principal.

"If the haves can always solve their problems by throwing money at them, then the system will never be fixed and the gap will just increase," he wrote.

Twenty-five years after California launched a nationwide tax revolt with Proposition 13, Manhattan Beach and other affluent school districts are turning to fund-raising campaigns and other strategies devised in response to the 1978 initiative to pay for everything from teacher salaries to class-size reduction.

Cash-strapped districts are asking parents to give unprecedented sums to education foundations that sprang up after Proposition 13.

They're putting a record number of parcel tax proposals -- a tax that emerged after Proposition 13 limited property taxes -- on the June and November ballots. And they're tapping city coffers.

With that money-making prowess, education leaders say rich districts will weather California's budget storm better than poor ones.

"We've never had cuts as deep as these as a percentage of the overall budget," said Kevin Gordon, executive director of the California Association of School Business Officials. "It trips a big clamor for parcel taxes and foundation involvement. And that is the perfect realization of the phrase, 'The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.' "

Manhattan Beach school district Superintendent Gerald Davis said he's troubled by that prospect. But he said poorer districts often get extra money for their economically disadvantaged students, for English learners and for other special needs.

He also said districts like his need private money to pay for new duties that lawmakers impose on schools without providing the funds to carry them out.

"My job is to lead this district as best as I can, so long as it is not at the expense" of poorer districts, Davis said.

Long before Proposition 13, school funding was so unequal that the state Supreme Court intervened.

In 1971, it ordered California to revamp school funding so each district would receive roughly the same amount of general purpose money per student.

At the time, though, the state's power was limited. Each school district set its own property tax rates and could raise its own revenues.

Then came Proposition 13.

Almost overnight, control of school funding shifted from school boards to state lawmakers, and efforts to equalize funding began in earnest.

Property tax revenues fell 57 percent in the year after voters approved Proposition 13, according to a 1995 book on property tax revolts spawned by the initiative.

The Legislature used a $6 billion state surplus at the time to try to make up for lost revenues. Cities and counties received about 90 percent of their previous levels of revenues, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

School districts received varying amounts because the Legislature was trying to equalize funding among the districts. High-income districts saw decreases of as much as 15 percent, while lower-income districts were cut by about 9 percent.

Parents responded by creating charitable organizations, known as education foundations, that go beyond their parent-teacher associations to raise large sums of money to pay for programs likely to be cut.

Just as Proposition 13's tax revolt swept the state and the nation, so did California's education foundation movement.

In California, more than 400 foundations sprang up. They raised nearly $30 million in 2000, the last year for which figures are available.

Around the country, some 4,000 education foundations raise hundreds of millions of dollars with dinners, dances, auctions, wine sales and golf tournaments.

"Fund raising for American schools has gone way beyond bake sales," said Howie Schaffer, Public Education Fund Network spokesman.

In Berkeley, for instance, the Grateful Dead performed an acoustic concert several years ago to raise money for the school district's renowned jazz program.

The Doors' John Densmore entertained at a February fund-raiser for Santa Monica's arts program, and a Marin County foundation holds an annual regatta to raise $30,000 per school for supplies.

That foundation in the Reed Union School District, which serves parts of Tiburon, Belvedere and Corte Madera, also gives its schools another $715,000 annually -- or $662 per child -- to pay for Spanish classes and other extras.

Foundations have paid for art classes and other extras even though school funding -- contrary to popular belief -- continued to rise after Proposition 13. It just didn't rise as quickly as in other states.

Accounting for inflation, the state legislative analyst said actual spending per pupil has gone from about $5,000 in the 1978-1979 state budget to $7,058 in 2002-2003.

The voters brought greater stability to education funding by approving Proposition 98 in 1988. It set a minimum level of education funding from the state budget, and lawmakers spent even more during California's economic boom.

School districts responded by raising teacher salaries and lowering class sizes. Now school boards are struggling to pay these bills with lower anticipated state revenues.

Education foundations in wealthier districts have stepped in to help pay for teacher salaries, class-size reduction and other basic programs, along with the "extras."

"California is ahead of the curve on this," said Michael Griffith, policy analyst for the nonpartisan Education Commission of the States, which advises states on education issues.

Manhattan Beach's foundation, for instance, has raised $1.6 million since March to restore its class-size reduction program, which was set to be eliminated next year. The money also will pay the salaries of physical education teachers and others facing layoffs.

That is in addition to the $550,000 the foundation provides annually for extras, like the high school television studio.

But districts in less affluent communities can't raise the money to offset anticipated budget cuts.

In Richmond, for instance, the West Contra Costa education foundation raises $250,000 a year, even though it serves five times the pupils in Manhattan Beach. Most of the money comes from grants and corporations, rather than parents.

"It truly is beg and borrow," Susan Wittenberg, the foundation's executive director, said. "I don't begrudge the wealthy districts their affluence. I mourn the fact that the kids who need it the most can't get it, and I don't know how we are ever going to level that playing field."

In Oregon, Portland schools tried to level the playing field by requiring organizations at wealthier schools to give one-third of every dollar they raise to a fund serving poorer schools.

"Now the parents just don't go out and raise the money," Griffith of the Education Commission of the States said. "They don't see what the point is if they have to raise (one-third) more just to buy their children's band uniforms."

For school leaders, though, the chief concern is the reliability of donations for ongoing costs like salaries. That's led some of the big fund-raising school districts to seek parcel taxes to create a new stream of reliable revenue.

In California, parcel taxes were the schools' answer to Proposition 13's limit on taxes based on property values. Parcel taxes levy a set fee per parcel or per square foot of property, and they can pay for ongoing operations.

But Proposition 13 required two-thirds voter approval for "special taxes" like these, posing a major hurdle for most districts.

The state Education Department said more than a third of the parcel taxes proposed since 1983 failed because they fell short of the two-thirds requirement.

Today, 49 of the state's school districts collect parcel taxes, and all but four are in one of the state's 10 wealthiest counties. School leaders said that's a sign that wealthier districts have more success with parcel taxes.

"It is clear the more affluent districts are going for parcel taxes this year, and the less affluent are not," Gordon of the school officials' association said.

But even in some wealthy areas, like Irvine, winning two-thirds of the vote is a struggle.

Irvine has rejected parcel taxes in four elections since 1980 by just a few percentage points. So it sought a novel new tax that required only a simple majority. Last month, 64 percent of property owners approved a fee that's expected to provide at least $3.3 million a year for the maintenance of recreational facilities at schools.

Assemblyman Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, has proposed lowering the threshold for parcel tax elections to 55 percent -- the same percentage California voters already approved for school bond issues.

Simitian said his proposed constitutional amendment faces "an uphill battle," and several school districts aren't waiting for it.

Manhattan Beach, Santa Monica, Palos Verdes, Santa Cruz, San Jose and three other Santa Clara County school districts have parcel taxes on the ballot today.

Santa Monica is going back to the voters for the second time in seven months, after losing a $300-per-parcel tax by 5 percentage points.

The Davis Joint Unified School District and several other districts are considering November parcel tax elections.

"Without the parcel tax increase, the cuts in our budget will be unprecedented," said John Deasy, Santa Monica-Malibu schools superintendent. "This is not the best time for a tax increase ... but when you could lose the programs we are looking at losing, you have to act."

He's also asking Santa Monica's City Council to increase its annual payment of $3 million to the district and the Malibu City Council to give more than the $25,000 it did last year.

In Beverly Hills, the City Council increased its annual payment by 10 percent last year. It pays the district $6.6 million for its residents to use the schools' sports fields and facilities.

State schools Superintendent Jack O'Connell said he has encouraged schools to pursue these "creative" solutions to funding shortages, even though some districts may wind up with more money.

"We are certainly much closer to more equitable funding than we were 30 years ago," he said. "We need to do more ... but we are not going to be able to afford to do much this year."

O'Connell said the state is complying with the Supreme Court's 1971 order, because it only required equity in state funds to schools. Federal money, donations, parcel taxes and other sources don't count. So the actual amount spent per student varies widely.

Equity issues go beyond funding, according to a class action lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

It claims great inequities in educational opportunities in rundown urban schools beset by shortages of textbooks, desks, advanced classes and credentialed teachers. ACLU attorney Catherine Lhamon said poor management caused most of the disparities. But she said donations to schools can mean as much as "$10,000 more per student."

"There may be equal revenues for each district in what comes from the state," she said. "But they are not remotely equal in what is spent on the campuses because there are parents who give to the schools and PTAs."

Such disparities rankle Silva, the Hawthorne vice principal. His children's Manhattan Beach elementary school has computer, music and physical education specialists paid for in recent years by land sales. Another specialist teaches marine science in a sea lab financed with donations, and parent volunteers help in younger students' classrooms.

Three miles away, at the Hawthorne middle school where Silva works, there's no sea lab, few specialists and parents are rarely seen on campus.

There's no locker room for changing, so students exercise in school clothes.

Hawthorne schools do get extra dollars for their economically disadvantaged students. But Silva said most of the money pays for classroom assistants -- the same type of help financed by the PTA at his children's school.

"The differences are like night and day," he said. "As long as the wealthy districts have the option of raising the money locally, I don't think much will change."