The Serrano decision has caused policy makers in California to search for departures from the current system of public school finance. Citizen and legislative evaluation of alternative finance systems is being confused by the employment of diverse interpretations of Serrano. Although the Court's decision may appear to indicate clear-cut methods of repair, a careful analysis of criteria implied by reform proposals and the logic of Serrano reveal substantial divergences. The Serrano criteria prohibit most proposals currently being promoted--expanded supplemental aid schemes and system neutrality alternatives are clearly misguided reform attempts; full state funding, coordinated tax base sharing, and proportional power equalizing seem to be acceptable, with coordinated tax base sharing being the best alternative. There is, however, an internal conflict in the Serrano logic. Insofar as local district control is maintained over choice of property tax rates, and property assessed evaluation is retained as a major source of revenue, the portion of Serrano calling for a family's cost of education to be independent of the wealth located in the district in which the family resides cannot be met. (Author/IRT)