Cares from #BoardWatch Parents and Caregivers
Promotional image for a #BOARDWATCH event hosted by Parents for Public Schools of San Francisco. The event takes place on June 24th, 2025, at 6:30 PM. The image features a vintage-style microphone and the text "All voices matter. Share your cares and questions." The graphic also lists the social media platforms X, Bluesky, and Instagram.
As part of our #BoardWatch initiative, parents and caregivers share insights about board agenda items. On June 24th the Board of Education will take action on Superintendent's Proposal - Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Recommended Budget, Item F.1. and discuss Update on Progress of Superintendent's Short-Term Metrics, Item.G2
Read the cares from parents and caregivers.
"I was bummed to see that training and development is on hold. The part about waiting for new leadership stood out. Shouldn’t there always be a backup or succession plan so projects don’t suffer delays during leadership transitions? We’ve had three superintendents in three years. If things keep getting put on hold every time new leadership comes in, progress will always be slow. Hopefully, they’re reviewing the affiliations of their representative to SFUSD. It looks like there has been some progress around fiscal certification and the leadership structure at 555, but I’m still struggling to see how my child fits into this evaluation."
“We adopt massive curriculum changes but don't have the capacity to implement them. At the same time reducing para and classroom support is meant to help close opportunity gaps. Why aren’t we naming the problem? We can't solve problems if we don't have clarity on the causes. Systemic barriers, language access, quality housing disproportionate impacts people of color. Systemic exclusion is the problem.”
“We have outdated systems, and no one seems to have the vision to consolidate and streamline their data collection. Funding structures never account for admin costs and upgrades. It's like trying to roll a cart on square wheels. There should be strategic redundancies to maintain quality.”
“We should have strong leadership in multiple workstreams. Vulnerabilities are symptoms of weak leadership who lack humility in identifying partners who are strong where they lack expertise. Leaders aren’t supposed to know everything, however they should uplift others who are strong where they are not.”
“We motivated a bunch of teachers to retire. Do we have transition plans in place? We lose institutional knowledge and ability to plan succession. As for retirees' replacements, are they equally or more knowledgeable? Do they have professional development plans in place? Are all staff trained in a standard code of conduct? Equity, service, and continuous improvement? Cultural competence? Identifying learning differences? We should have scenario planning for professional development.”
“I am a blind person, and I can’t read the Google Sheet on the Superintendent Review.”
“End of Fiscal Year Budget Update in the June 17 Board Meeting, District staff presented the “first reading” of the 2025-26 budget. The main takeaway: even after the cuts that have been discussed this Spring, the District is projecting large deficits for the next three school years. The likely consequence of these shortfalls is that the California Department of Education Fiscal Advisors will continue to have authority over SFUSD’s budget decisions. After the $113 million in cuts, including the elimination of 448 positions, these are the projected shortfalls: $127 million for ‘25-’26, $83 million for ‘26-’27 and $72 million for ‘27-’28. Please note these amounts combine with the restricted and unrestricted budgets. District staff did not go into detail about what is driving these deficits but mentioned a couple of causes:
Lower enrollment. One of the slides states “Due to State budget updates and lower Average Daily Attendance than predicted, SFUSD will receive less LCFF revenue.” Even though the budget document, which we encourage parents to look at because it’s a standardized format all CA districts must use, shows a 1.8% increase in LCFF revenue sources in the ‘25-26 budget compared to the ‘24-’25 actuals. From what we’ve been hearing, especially around Transitional Kindergarten, enrollment is stable or trending up slightly.
Expiration of one-time or limited funding sources. Over the years we have seen Board Commissioners almost literally beg for specifics about these sources. What are they for? How much are they? When do they expire? District staff have rarely been forthcoming. And very rarely have we heard discussion of how to find new funding.
On the topic of funding sources, there was also a discussion of the Public Education Enrichment Fund (PEEF), which is funding from the City for Science, Library, Arts and Music (SLAM) in the amount of almost $100 million every year, through the year 2040. PEEF has its own Citizen Advisory Council (CAC). Recently, SFUSD Administration has suggested merging the PEEF CAC with the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) Committee. In the meeting, Superintendent Maria Su suggested this would help not “waste people’s time”. This seems like a bad idea since these funding sources are different: one is related to funding from the City, the other from the State. The purposes of these programs are very different: one is for arts and other enrichment, while the other is general unrestricted funding.“
Join #Boardwatch on June 24th at 6:30pm across our social media channels X, BlueSky and Instagram. We encourage you to share your care with us at info@ppssf.org. We will amplify your voice.
References:
Superintendent Metrics March 2025
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DHL57Y0EEDD9/$file/Superintendent%20Metrics.pdf
SFUSD Superintendent Evaluation 2025 Draft June 2025
Superintendent's Proposal - Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Recommended Budget