SFUSD Board Meeting Recap — May 12th, 2026
Public Comment reflected a few big concerns from families:
- Bullying and distraction/gaming on cell phones at school, with support for system-wide “off and away” rules from parents and teachers
- Issues with how enrollment is currently handled, as parents from Yick Wo say their enrollment is currently throttled – this ties in well with the district’s plan to overhaul enrollment next year
Item G.1 Major Decisions Discussion – School Portfolio and Student Assignment (presentation here)
This was indeed the major discussion item of the evening – while there was no vote, this discussion was important so the board could give the District feedback on the two timelines presented.
Dr. Su walked the board through her presentation, making the following points and arguments:
- The district has been focused on Stabilization over the past year, so the district can be financially sustainable
- She and her team are building a plan to reflect realities of enrollment trends, program demand, fiscal realities
- The first focus of her plan is Student Assignment, reflecting what families have been asking for, stating that SFUSD “needs to make the front-door to SFUSD easier to navigate, more transparent, more predictable”
- In terms of closures and mergers, before the district can make long term decisions, it needs to better understand enrollment demand
Dr. Su and her team presented the following timeline as their recommendation:
- 2026-2027 would be focused on meeting family demands, such as TK expansion and K-8 Mandarin Immersion
- Dr. Su thinks that creation of Mandarin Immersion will bring families into SFUSD that might have gone elsewhere, though Commissioner Ray is skeptical of some of the assumptions that Dr. Su’s team might be making in terms of how many students will be attracted by these offerings
- 2027-2028 will be focused on Enrollment. As Dr. Su stated, Lottery creation was designed to enable diversity, but it has not had that impact, and “we need to figure out a different way to meet the needs of our families.”
- Alternative Timeline (slide 5) would have conflicting timelines, so the District is not recommending, but wanted to be responsive to concerns about not moving forward on closures fast enough, and provided this.
Board members (including Commissioners Alexander and Ray) shared concerns about what it means to wait until 2029-2030 to implement mergers and closures, in terms of the student experience for students at schools that are currently under-resourced. Commissioner Ray would like to see a more aggressive timeline, this timeline feels like we are “kicking the can down the road.” Ray also echoed SF Parents concerns that the board and district work together throughout this process.. Commissioner Alexander suggested modest over-resourcing of under-resourced schools in the next few years until enrollment changes kick in. Commissioners overall support the plan even if there are some concerns.
Next Steps:
- Board and district will continue to discuss these items in the meetings ahead
- Community engagement will start at the beginning of the 2026-2027 school year for enrollment changes
- April 2027 would be preliminary proposals for Enrollment changes, following community engagement
Item H.1 Third Interim Financial Report for SFUSD FY 2025-26
(presentation here and report here)
What is the Third Interim Financial Report? (borrowed from the Cheat Sheet)
The California Department of Education (CDE) requires districts with a “qualified” or “negative” certification to submit a Third Interim Financial Report in May.
Deputy Superintendent Chris Mount-Benites presented the 3rd Interim Financial Report, and led with the news that SFUSD now projects a “positive” certification.
- States that Strike was cost neutral (though it is unclear if this is true if students don’t show up the last 3 days in terms of attendance reimbursement from the state)
- Restricted expenditures down since 2nd Interim primarily due to
- $32.3M savings from 334 FTE vacant positions
- This includes many SPED positions – positions still “open” even though a (more expensive) agency person has been serving the need
- $69.7M savings from unused Supplies & Services budgets
- Similar, but smaller savings on the Unrestricted side
- $32.3M savings from 334 FTE vacant positions
- While the above is positive news, it shows the district still not doing a great job of budgeting
- Budget is being balanced, but health care costs projected to keep increasing 10% annually, and the future costs of benefits remain a hurdle, especially as they are “uncontrollable” costs for the district
- Projections include that parcel tax will continue to pass in the future
Vote: Passes 7-0 with all commissioners voting YES
Item H.3 Employment Contracts for District Executive Employees
SFUSD presented employment contracts for two key leadership positions:
Both passed 7-0, perhaps because it was 12:20am!
To borrow from our Cheat Sheet:
The Deputy Superintendent of Education Services role is especially important as SFUSD continues implementing new literacy and math initiatives, curriculum changes, and instructional reforms. Throughout this entire school year, SF Parents has consistently advocated for SFUSD to move toward a permanent Deputy Superintendent of Education Services position in order to provide stronger instructional coherence, stability, and accountability across the district. We hope this role helps continue to develop a more coherent instructional strategy across SFUSD so that schools, educators, and families experience greater consistency, clarity, and alignment around academic priorities.
