Following the settlement of San Francisco’s first teacher strike in 47 years, which closed schools for five days, Superintendent Maria Su and the school board face critical questions that will shape the district’s success, resources, and future. Meanwhile, the district remains under the watchful eyes of the state Department of Education, whose cooperation and approval the school district needs to overcome significant hurdles.
What about the students?
Of immediate concern to the families of students and educators are school district decisions about how the five-day strike will affect school calendars. During the strike, the school district canceled 36 boys’ and girls’ varsity basketball teams and ended the regular season early. But hardworking high school hoopsters will still get the thrill of a lifetime by playing for the city championship at Chase Auditorium on Thursday, Feb. 26 — Lincoln High and Lowell High for the boys’ title, followed by Washington High versus Lowell for the girls’ championship.
The biggest concern now is how the school district will meet the state requirement of 180 days of instruction. Failing to do so not only calls into question whether academic credit can be granted, but also jeopardizes millions of dollars in state funding based on student attendance for instruction. Making up for these lost instructional days by lengthening the school year also makes up for lost revenue that the school district estimated to be between $7–$10 million for each day of the strike and could help it avoid state-imposed fines. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, who seeks teacher union support for his gubernatorial campaign, may be inclined to lessen the financial impact of the strike. However, high levels of student attendance in the days following graduation in June, as well as regular levels of instruction, are not expected. The good news for graduates and their families is that the graduation ceremony dates will not need to be changed.
How does the school district afford the settlement?
The school district estimates that the cost of the new teachers and paraprofessionals contract is $183 million. Educators’ biggest win in the settlement is the school district fully covering health care premiums beginning in 2027. Costs of the contract, some of which will be incurred in the current fiscal year, were not included in school district budgets that relied on cuts this year and anticipated cuts next year.
Failing to meet the state requirement of 180 days of instruction not only calls into question whether academic credit can be granted, but also jeopardizes millions of dollars in state funding based on student attendance for instruction.
The school district is preparing a report to the state Department of Education on how it will pay for the settlement. In November, the school district’s new contract with school administrators came at the expense of eliminating 18 administrator positions. An indication of what the new teacher contract will cost came Tuesday night, when the school board began the process to eliminate 42 positions among counselors, art and music teachers, and paraprofessional employees. Only Commissioner Matt Alexander, who has long maintained that the school district regularly overstates its dire budgetary conditions and eventually finds some money, voted no.
The limited number of layoffs approved represents a fraction of the overall staff reductions possible. Over 250 credentialed staff on temporary contracts do not have to be laid off, but may or may not return in the fall. Every school district headquarters administrator will also receive a release or reassignment letter. Large reductions are occurring across California school districts, including 657 employees at the Los Angeles Unified School District. This week, school board members for the Fresno Unified School District, the state’s third largest, are being asked to lay off 250 employees to close a much smaller $59 million budget gap.
Can school officials continue to avoid school closures?
Beyond layoffs, Superintendent Su and the school board must return to the question of the right number of schools for a shrinking student enrollment. Plans to close about a dozen public schools in October 2024 led to the demise of Superintendent Su’s predecessor and her installation as superintendent. Concerns about the level of public input and planning in that effort mean that the next effort to reduce the number of schools will be lengthier and more involved.
The public phase of school closures has yet to begin, although Superintendent Su at this week’s school board meeting alluded to their necessity. Last November, the school board considered, but did not approve, a resolution acknowledging that the district currently had 14,000 unfilled seats in schools. The earliest the school district could impose school closures would be Fall 2027.
What does the future look like for school district families?
One teacher union demand during the strike was for the district to use “today’s dollars for today’s children” and to draw on its estimated $429 million in reserves to fund a new contract. For the school district to attract San Francisco families to enter or return to the public schools, it must assure them that schools will be able to educate their children not just today but until at least 2038, when today’s kindergarten students will reach and graduate from 12th grade.
The school district operates separately from the city but gets significant additional funding from City Hall and the voters. City officials are now considering reforms to the city charter that will change how city dollars are distributed and spent on education for the next two decades. A high priority for the school district will be to explain how those city dollars help student educational opportunities. The school district’s midyear report, however, discloses that over the past 10 years, when school district revenues and educator salaries increased, student English language proficiency did not improve, and the equity gap between the lowest performing students and the highest performing students barely moved from 57 percent in 2014 to 56 percent in 2024.
These are the monumental questions facing Superintendent Su, the school board, educators, families, and students at the San Francisco Unified School District. The answers will determine the future for San Francisco schools and families.