SFUSD Board Meeting Recap — April 14, 2026
After a shorter than usual public comment period where parents and teachers advocated for more Spanish language TK classrooms, specifically at Guadalupe ES, there was a thoughtful discussion on the Queer Trans Parent Advisory Council’s Presentation at the Tuesday 4/14/26 Board of Education Meeting.
The main discussion was Item H.2 Resolution to extend VVGGs by 1 year (presentation here and implications here)
SFUSD’s current student outcome goals (“Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails” or “VVGGs”) were adopted by the school board in October 2022. Each of the three goals had a timeframe of five years, with specific targets by 2027, along with checkpoints along the way.
As noted in our Cheat Sheet for the 4/14/26 meeting, SFUSD has been OFF TRACK or SIGNIFICANTLY OFF TRACK on these Goals since adoption.
SFUSD now seeks an extension of these ambitious Goals. Staff recommended that the district needs to first stabilize its budget and reorganize its school portfolio (a.k.a. school closures) so that new student outcome Goals can be “based on available resources” and strategies to meet the new goals can be aligned with “realistic budget planning.” During the staff presentation, it was emphasized that establishing brand new goals would be a major decision, and would require a lot of resources (time and talent).
As a useful history lesson to set the stage, Commissioners Weissman-Ward and Fisher reminded everyone that in 2022 the board settled on these aggressive goals because when they initially presented more realistic goals, the community pushed back and demanded that SFUSD should strive to be more ambitious.
While there’s always a fair amount of philosophical musing from the school board, no exception during this meeting (for example when Commissioner Fisher stated “SBAC scores are not what we should be using to measure reading proficiency”), for the most part the school board remained focused. Superintendent Dr. Su shared that with several years of data and information now, they will be better equipped to discuss achievable targets when they do revisit the Goals. Commissioner Alexander shared that he is less worried about specific targets, and more about not seeing progress against those targets.
Commissioner Huling supported the one year extension, but challenged that it doesn’t make sense for strategy and goals to be set AFTER budgeting. Superintendent Dr. Su countered that by exiting crisis mode on budget stabilization allows her team to be able to do more strategic work like this. That said, Huling’s point is a strong one – if the district is saying they should “set goals based on available resources and align strategies for student outcomes with realistic budget planning,” (Slide 4) that does seem backwards. Best practice for most organizations is to set their goals based on needs upfront, then design a plan on how to achieve them based on resources.
Commissioner Ray sounded troubled by moving the Goals timeline back, but perhaps was persuaded by the literal and figurative clearest voice in the room, AJ Crabill, who laid out clearheaded guidance to the Board:
- Goals need to be attainable, so as to be respectful of staff, and reflect a foundation in reality
- To have healthy community listening process, the board would have to start engaging in JAN-MAR 2027 if they were going to revisit the Goals and Guardrails for 2028
- Goal-setting should reflect willingness to reallocate resources / they are intertwined:
- Time
- Talent
- Treasure
Crabill ended with “don’t tell educators ‘you are not working hard enough,’ but rather, give them more resources to achieve the (attainable) goals you set.”
Commissioners agreed that they would only be voting to extend the timeframe of the Goals by a year, rather than adjust any of the target numbers without community involvement. It also sounds like there will be more discussion of Goals on May 12, 2026.
Vote: 7-0 to Extend Goals by 1 year (without any modifications)
Item H.4 Declaration of Need for Fully Qualified Teachers (report here)
Each year, SFUSD must report its unmet need for fully qualified teachers to the California Department of Education. For school year 2026-27, SFUSD is reporting a shortage of 368 fully qualified teachers to fill open positions. SFUSD will try to fill these positions through hiring people through 140 emergency permits and 228 limited assignment permits. The teachers hired through emergency and limited assignment permits are not considered “fully qualified.”
This is an annual approval to allow Waivers when needed, and there was minimal discussion.
Vote: 7-0 to Approve