As The Voice of San Francisco reported last week, the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is facing its most significant financial crisis since passage of Proposition 13 in 1978. Back then, education funding took a deep dive as a result of a statewide property tax revolt. Now, amidst heightened scrutiny and with less than half the number of students in our public schools as in the 1970s, the SFUSD is being forced to lay off teachers and staff, freeze hiring, and close schools. It’s being put to a test that San Francisco must not fail.
Last week’s report from the State Department of Education documented severe gaps in the SFUSD’s ability to document expenditures, issue accurate paychecks to employees and even compile accurate financial reports. The SFUSD took a second hit from its own outside auditor who, separately from the state, found significant deficiencies and major weaknesses in the SFUSD’s financial statements. The outside auditor noted that “The District currently does not have an internal audit function …Without [one], regular monitoring of internal controls may not take place.” The auditor, and San Francisco taxpayers and residents, were left without “sufficient appropriate evidence to support that the financial statements are free from material misstatement.”
The SFUSD is not without hope or resilience. Both the state and the auditors credited Superintendent Matt Wayne and his staff for providing additional, and more reliable, data and information in follow-up meetings. Neither the SFUSD administration nor the Board of Education is resistant to change. But because of the poor report, the state’s two previously appointed “fiscal experts” have been redesignated as “fiscal advisors” with greater authority to involve themselves in virtually every SFUSD decision that has a financial impact. It is short of a state takeover, but now what used to be purely local decisions are subject to the scrutiny and approval of the state or they may not be implemented. Already, the state has recommended a freeze on all new hiring and the superintendent has agreed. Layoffs of administrators, teachers, and staff will most likely be approved by the School Board on May 14. School Board President Lainie Motamedi has appointed Commissioner Jenny Lam to lead a special committee of the board to elevate its role in finding a way forward.
The SFUSD crisis is too large and deep to be solved only by school officials. All San Franciscans — native and newcomer alike — benefit from and need quality schools. Similarly, when our schools suffer, we all do.
As mayoral campaigns begin in earnest, candidates should acknowledge that the city future they offer voters is highly dependent upon the quality of our public schools.
Now is the time for the mayoral candidates to step up with clarity and vision and state how city agencies can help, financially and otherwise. As the campaigns for mayor begin in earnest, candidates should acknowledge that the city future they offer voters is highly dependent upon the quality of our public schools.
While 30 percent of San Francisco school-age children attend private school, the condition of our public schools is one reason why young families leave San Francisco altogether. Young people should not just see the downtown buildings as towers that dot the skyline. They should envision their future at work in those buildings in tech and other industries because they will have received the necessary academic training to do so from our public schools.
Here are five commitments the mayoral candidates can make to be carried out when in office:
• Send help from City Hall: Because San Francisco is both a city and a county, our school district lacks independent county oversight that helps school districts everywhere else. Superintendent Wayne has pledged to hire an internal auditor by the fall. That person will need help that can be provided through an interagency agreement to send expertise from the controller’s or city administrator’s staffs to the SFUSD.
• Muni coordination: The pain of school closures in 2025 will be eased if parents and kids who depend on public transit are assured it will get them to their new schools. Missed, delayed, or packed buses add to the truancy problem. More “Rapid” lines and buses better aligned with school start times will improve school attendance and enrollment retention.
• School safety: Buses and the environment in and around schools must be safe, too. Last week’s anti-Asian incident on a 29 Muni bus is but one example of what kids face. The Police Department and school officials should revisit the SFUSD policy adopted in 2020 to evaluate whether it sacrifices or enhances student and teacher safety while protecting against criminalization of students.
• Make the Housing Authority a partner for families: Particularly as the SFUSD expands transitional kindergarten, the Housing Authority can be an effective partner to promote parental involvement in their children’s education even before school starts. In my experience as HUD assistant secretary for fair housing, I’ve seen cities and schools come together to help families reinforce classroom learning at home.
• Adding performance requirements to city funding of schools: While city funding is tight, City Hall will continue to support SFUSD programs. To maximize the effectiveness of this support, it should be dependent upon reforms and improvements happening. While this might require going back to the voters to amend funding mechanisms, a mayor articulating this expectation will prevent school district resistance should any develop.
The state intends to be a partner in the SFUSD’s path to financial order. We need to hear what the mayoral candidates will do now, too.
