San Francisco Unified School District, California
From Ballotpedia - Reading time: 13 min
| San Francisco Unified School District |
|---|
 |
| San Francisco County, California |
| District details |
| Superintendent: Vincent Matthews |
| # of school board members: 7 |
| Website: Link |
San Francisco Unified School District is a school district in California.
Click on the links below to learn more about the school district's...
- Superintendent
- School board
- Elections
- Budget
- Teacher salaries
- Academic performance
- Student enrollment
- Demographics
- Contact information
Contents
Superintendent[edit]
 |
This information is updated as we become aware of changes. Please contact us with any updates. |
Vincent Matthews is the superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District. Matthews was appointed superintendent on May 1, 2017. Matthews's previous career experience includes working as the state-appointed administrator of the Inglewood Unified School District and the Oakland Unified School District.[1][2]
Past superintendents[edit]
- Myong Leigh was the interim superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District from 2016 to 2017. Leigh's previous career experience included working as the deputy superintendent for policy and operations for the district.[3][4]
- Richard A. Carranza was the superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District from 2012 to 2016. Carranza's previous career experience included working as the deputy superintendent of instruction for the district.[4]
School board elections[edit]
The San Francisco Unified School District school board consists of seven members elected at large to four-year terms.
| Office | Name | Date assumed office |
|---|---|---|
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Matt Alexander | January 8, 2021 |
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Kevine Boggess | January 8, 2021 |
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Alison Collins | January 8, 2019 |
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Jenny Lam | 2019 |
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Gabriela Lopez | January 8, 2019 |
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Faauuga Moliga | January 8, 2019 |
| San Francisco Unified Board of Education | Mark Sanchez | 2016 |
| |
This officeholder information was last updated on July 13, 2021. Please contact us with any updates. | |
Election dates[edit]
Members of the San Francisco Unified School District school board are elected to four-year terms. Three or four seats are up for election on a staggered basis every even-numbered year in November.
A general election was scheduled for November 3, 2020.
Public participation in board meetings[edit]
The San Francisco Unified School District school board maintains the following policy on public testimony during board meetings:[5]
Public Participation
To the extent possible, Board committee meetings shall be the primary venue for public input into proposals from Board members and the Superintendent.
Each person requesting to address the Board on agenda items calendared for Board action or on matters other than those calendared for Board action shall be granted such requests provided a "Request to Speak" is telephoned into the Office of the Board of Education the Monday or Tuesday of the meeting prior to 4:30 p.m., or an individual completes a "Speaker Card", prior to the item being called, on the evening of the meeting. A person wishing to be heard by the Board shall be invited to, but not required to, provide his/her name before speaking.
In order to conduct district business in an orderly and efficient manner, the Board requires that public presentations to the Board comply with the following procedures:
- 1. The Board shall give members of the public an opportunity to address the Board on any item of interest to the public that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board, either before or during the Board's consideration of the item. (Education Code 35145.5, Government Code 54954.3)
- 2. At a time so designated on the agenda at a regular meeting, members of the public may bring before the Board matters that are not listed on the agenda. The Board shall take no action or discussion on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except as authorized by law. (Education Code 35145.5, Government Code 54954.2)
- 3. Without taking action, Board members or district staff members may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by the public about items not appearing on the agenda. Additionally, on their own initiative or in response to questions posed by the public, a Board or staff member may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his/her own activities. (Government Code 54954.2)
- Furthermore, the Board or a Board member may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, ask staff to report back to the Board at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action directing staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (Government Code 54954.2)
- 4. The Board need not allow the public to speak on any item that has already been considered by a committee composed exclusively of Board members at a public meeting where the public had the opportunity to address the committee on that item. However, if the Board determines that the item has been substantially changed since the committee heard the item, the Board shall provide an opportunity for the public to speak. (Government Code 54954.3)
(cf. 9130 - Board Committees)
- 5. A person wishing to be heard by the Board shall first be recognized by the president and shall then proceed to comment as briefly as the subject permits.
- Individual speakers shall be allowed two minutes to address the Board on each agenda or nonagenda item. Any speaker requiring language translation shall be allowed a maximum of two minutes to speak and two minutes for translation. The district will provide translation in as least Chinese and Spanish and, if possible and with adequate notice, in other languages.
- The president may increase or decrease the time allowed for public presentation.
- Substitution of speakers will not be permitted unless a designated alternate is submitted with the request to speak.
- Individuals requesting to speak who were held over from a previous meeting shall be the first called at the next regular meeting.
- 6. The Board president may rule on the appropriateness of a topic. If the topic would be more suitably addressed at a later time, the president may indicate the time and place when it should be presented.
- The Board shall not prohibit public criticism of its policies, procedures, programs, services, acts, or omissions. (Government Code 54954.3) In addition, the Board may not prohibit public criticism of district employees.
- While the Board recognizes the right of the public to address matters under the jurisdiction of the Board, whenever a member of the public initiates specific complaints or charges against an employee, the Board president shall inform the complainant that in order to protect the employee's due process rights and reputation, it is the policy and preference of the Board to hear such complaints or charges in closed session unless otherwise requested by the employee pursuant to Government Code 54957. The Board president shall also encourage the complainant to file a written complaint using the appropriate district complaint procedure.
(cf. 1312.1 - Complaints Concerning District Employees)
(cf. 9321 - Closed Session Purposes and Agendas)
- 7. The Board president shall not permit any disturbance or willful interruption of Board meetings. Persistent disruption by an individual or group shall be grounds for the president to terminate the privilege of addressing the Board for that meeting.
- The Board may remove disruptive individuals and order the room cleared if necessary. In this case, members of the media not participating in the disturbance shall be allowed to remain, and individuals not participating in such disturbances may be allowed to remain at the discretion of the Board. When the room is ordered cleared due to a disturbance, further Board proceedings shall concern only matters appearing on the agenda. (Government Code 54957.9)
- When such disruptive conduct occurs, the Superintendent or designee shall contact local law enforcement.
- 8. Cardboard, paper or cloth placards may be brought into the Board meeting room only if they are not larger than three feet by three feet and have no wood, metal or other type of holding device.
Budget[edit]
From 1993 to 2013, the San Francisco Unified School District had an average of $552,085,429 in revenue and $559,352,333 in expenditures, according to the United States Census Bureau's survey of school system finances. The district had a yearly average of $199,931,095 in outstanding debt. The district retired $6,799,048 of its debt and issued $37,126,905 in new debt each year on average.[6]
Revenue[edit]
The table below separates the district's revenue into the three sources identified by the agency: local, state, and federal.
| Revenue by Source | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiscal Year |
Local | State | Federal | Revenue Total | |||||||
| Total | % of Revenue | Total | % of Revenue | Total | % of Revenue | ||||||
| Click [show] on the right to display the revenue data for prior years. | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | $148,158,000 | 43.15% | $166,358,000 | 48.45% | $28,845,000 | 8.40% | $343,361,000 | ||||
| 1994 | $200,590,000 | 58.99% | $107,343,000 | 31.57% | $32,087,000 | 9.44% | $340,020,000 | ||||
| 1995 | $240,510,000 | 61.37% | $118,748,000 | 30.30% | $32,622,000 | 8.32% | $391,880,000 | ||||
| 1996 | $209,294,000 | 55.82% | $136,760,000 | 36.47% | $28,890,000 | 7.71% | $374,944,000 | ||||
| 1997 | $269,650,000 | 60.01% | $147,825,000 | 32.90% | $31,902,000 | 7.10% | $449,377,000 | ||||
| 1998 | $239,540,000 | 52.85% | $183,672,000 | 40.52% | $30,030,000 | 6.63% | $453,242,000 | ||||
| 1999 | $312,954,000 | 60.40% | $158,750,000 | 30.64% | $46,411,000 | 8.96% | $518,115,000 | ||||
| 2000 | $281,723,000 | 59.73% | $153,177,000 | 32.47% | $36,786,000 | 7.80% | $471,686,000 | ||||
| 2001 | $286,009,000 | 61.86% | $139,186,000 | 30.10% | $37,149,000 | 8.03% | $462,344,000 | ||||
| 2002 | $323,382,000 | 52.66% | $204,505,000 | 33.30% | $86,151,000 | 14.03% | $614,038,000 | ||||
| 2003 | $316,996,000 | 58.71% | $157,325,000 | 29.14% | $65,637,000 | 12.16% | $539,958,000 | ||||
| 2004 | $365,539,000 | 65.67% | $119,762,000 | 21.52% | $71,288,000 | 12.81% | $556,589,000 | ||||
| 2005 | $292,743,000 | 52.05% | $189,030,000 | 33.61% | $80,625,000 | 14.34% | $562,398,000 | ||||
| 2006 | $309,949,000 | 52.23% | $217,610,000 | 36.67% | $65,909,000 | 11.11% | $593,468,000 | ||||
| 2007 | $308,832,000 | 47.15% | $271,465,000 | 41.44% | $74,706,000 | 11.41% | $655,003,000 | ||||
| 2008 | $340,273,000 | 50.92% | $258,139,000 | 38.63% | $69,870,000 | 10.46% | $668,282,000 | ||||
| 2009 | $429,546,000 | 59.34% | $196,568,000 | 27.15% | $97,792,000 | 13.51% | $723,906,000 | ||||
| 2010 | $465,821,000 | 67.38% | $144,206,000 | 20.86% | $81,347,000 | 11.77% | $691,374,000 |
| 2011 | $433,596,000 | 63.35% | $168,042,000 | 24.55% | $82,824,000 | 12.10% | $684,462,000 |
| 2012 | $458,212,000 | 61.36% | $195,653,000 | 26.20% | $92,837,000 | 12.43% | $746,702,000 |
| 2013 | $473,161,000 | 62.87% | $198,811,000 | 26.41% | $80,673,000 | 10.72% | $752,645,000 |
| Avg. | $319,356,095 | 57.52% | $172,996,905 | 32.04% | $59,732,429 | 10.44% | $552,085,429 |
Expenditures[edit]
The table below separates the district's expenditures into five categories identified by the agency:
- Instruction: operation expenditures, state payments on behalf of the district for instruction and benefits, and retirement system transfers
- Support Services: support services, food services, and retirement system transfers for support service staff
- Capital Spending: capital outlay expenditures (i.e., construction, land or facilities purchases, and equipment purchases)
- Debt & Gov. Payments: payments to state and local governments and interest on school system debt
- Other: all other non-K-12 programs, except food services
| Expenditures by Category | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiscal Year |
Instruction | Support Services | Capital Spending | Debt & Gov. Payments | Other | Budget Total | |||||
| Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | ||
| Click [show] on the right to display the expenditure data for prior years. | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | $180,278,000 | 55.23% | $126,037,000 | 38.61% | $5,525,000 | 1.69% | $4,547,000 | 1.39% | $10,036,000 | 3.07% | $326,423,000 |
| 1994 | $193,801,000 | 58.38% | $108,098,000 | 32.57% | $12,523,000 | 3.77% | $4,289,000 | 1.29% | $13,230,000 | 3.99% | $331,941,000 |
| 1995 | $204,393,000 | 54.36% | $107,111,000 | 28.49% | $36,074,000 | 9.59% | $10,411,000 | 2.77% | $18,000,000 | 4.79% | $375,989,000 |
| 1996 | $205,783,000 | 53.08% | $125,760,000 | 32.44% | $26,112,000 | 6.74% | $11,742,000 | 3.03% | $18,270,000 | 4.71% | $387,667,000 |
| 1997 | $230,275,000 | 51.08% | $116,447,000 | 25.83% | $77,436,000 | 17.18% | $10,170,000 | 2.26% | $16,456,000 | 3.65% | $450,784,000 |
| 1998 | $245,974,000 | 52.51% | $121,982,000 | 26.04% | $65,746,000 | 14.03% | $16,655,000 | 3.56% | $18,101,000 | 3.86% | $468,458,000 |
| 1999 | $236,107,000 | 48.83% | $117,131,000 | 24.22% | $95,053,000 | 19.66% | $14,456,000 | 2.99% | $20,820,000 | 4.31% | $483,567,000 |
| 2000 | $227,761,000 | 57.79% | $126,425,000 | 32.08% | $20,767,000 | 5.27% | $2,648,000 | 0.67% | $16,549,000 | 4.20% | $394,150,000 |
| 2001 | $245,093,000 | 53.64% | $150,525,000 | 32.94% | $33,969,000 | 7.43% | $2,849,000 | 0.62% | $24,524,000 | 5.37% | $456,960,000 |
| 2002 | $283,320,000 | 52.59% | $202,261,000 | 37.55% | $26,045,000 | 4.83% | $3,846,000 | 0.71% | $23,241,000 | 4.31% | $538,713,000 |
| 2003 | $287,385,000 | 50.21% | $218,339,000 | 38.15% | $34,721,000 | 6.07% | $3,830,000 | 0.67% | $28,038,000 | 4.90% | $572,313,000 |
| 2004 | $257,949,000 | 46.99% | $219,910,000 | 40.06% | $30,498,000 | 5.56% | $3,447,000 | 0.63% | $37,089,000 | 6.76% | $548,893,000 |
| 2005 | $256,401,000 | 44.98% | $225,403,000 | 39.54% | $50,669,000 | 8.89% | $2,229,000 | 0.39% | $35,318,000 | 6.20% | $570,020,000 |
| 2006 | $254,337,000 | 43.33% | $213,830,000 | 36.43% | $75,260,000 | 12.82% | $6,886,000 | 1.17% | $36,626,000 | 6.24% | $586,939,000 |
| 2007 | $266,116,000 | 39.79% | $231,339,000 | 34.59% | $119,589,000 | 17.88% | $11,992,000 | 1.79% | $39,785,000 | 5.95% | $668,821,000 |
| 2008 | $272,940,000 | 36.69% | $260,244,000 | 34.99% | $149,994,000 | 20.16% | $17,508,000 | 2.35% | $43,156,000 | 5.80% | $743,842,000 |
| 2009 | $273,905,000 | 35.21% | $275,676,000 | 35.44% | $160,523,000 | 20.64% | $18,070,000 | 2.32% | $49,695,000 | 6.39% | $777,869,000 |
| 2010 | $294,425,000 | 36.93% | $277,431,000 | 34.80% | $158,869,000 | 19.93% | $22,417,000 | 2.81% | $44,138,000 | 5.54% | $797,280,000 |
| 2011 | $276,412,000 | 36.57% | $268,560,000 | 35.53% | $130,035,000 | 17.20% | $30,489,000 | 4.03% | $50,312,000 | 6.66% | $755,808,000 |
| 2012 | $277,945,000 | 35.98% | $274,423,000 | 35.53% | $124,165,000 | 16.07% | $28,285,000 | 3.66% | $67,635,000 | 8.76% | $772,453,000 |
| 2013 | $282,971,000 | 38.37% | $281,142,000 | 38.12% | $70,261,000 | 9.53% | $31,731,000 | 4.30% | $71,404,000 | 9.68% | $737,509,000 |
| Avg. | $250,170,048 | 46.79% | $192,765,429 | 34.00% | $71,611,143 | 11.66% | $12,309,381 | 2.07% | $32,496,333 | 5.48% | $559,352,333 |
Debt
The table below shows the amount of debt retired, issued, and outstanding in the district for each year.
| Debt | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Fiscal Year |
Retired | Issued | Outstanding |
| Click [show] on the right to display the debt data for prior years. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1994 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1995 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1996 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1997 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1998 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 1999 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2000 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2001 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2002 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2003 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2004 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| 2005 | $1,037,000 | $54,260,000 | $72,393,000 |
| 2006 | $1,019,000 | $126,185,000 | $197,560,000 |
| 2007 | $1,090,000 | $192,000,000 | $388,470,000 |
| 2008 | $1,114,000 | $0 | $387,355,000 |
| 2009 | $1,110,000 | $107,220,000 | $493,465,000 |
| 2010 | $23,835,000 | $185,000,000 | $654,700,000 |
| 2011 | $26,050,000 | $0 | $628,650,000 |
| 2012 | $2,095,000 | $115,000,000 | $730,695,000 |
| 2013 | $85,430,000 | $0 | $645,265,000 |
| Avg. | $6,799,048 | $37,126,905 | $199,931,095 |
Teacher salaries[edit]
The following salary information was pulled from the district's teacher salary schedule. A salary schedule is a list of expected compensations based on variables such as position, years employed, and education level. It may not reflect actual teacher salaries in the district.
| Year | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|
| 2019-2020[7] | $57,679 | $85,219 |
Academic performance[edit]
Proficiency assessments[edit]
Each year, state and local education agencies use tests and other standards to assess student proficiency. Although the data below was published by the U.S. Department of Education, proficiency measurements are established by the states. As a result, proficiency levels are not comparable between different states and year-over-year proficiency levels within a district may not be comparable because states may change their proficiency measurements.[8]
Mathematics[edit]
The following table shows the percentage of district students who scored at or above the proficiency level each school year:[9]
| School year | All (%) | Asian/Pacific Islander (%) |
Black (%) | Hispanic (%) | Native American (%) |
Two or More Races (%) |
White (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-2019 | 50 | 67 | 14 | 21 | 35-39 | 62 | 68 |
| 2017-2018 | 50 | 67 | 12 | 21 | 30-34 | 61 | 70 |
| 2016-2017 | 50 | 67 | 15 | 24 | 40-44 | 57 | 69 |
| 2015-2016 | 49 | 65 | 12 | 21 | 40-44 | 55 | 68 |
| 2014-2015 | 49 | 64 | 12 | 19 | 30-34 | 58 | 68 |
| 2013-2014 | 70 | 85 | 30-34 | 40 | ≥50 | 65-69 | 75-79 |
| 2012-2013 | 64 | 79 | 29 | 40 | 40-44 | 75 | 79 |
| 2011-2012 | 62 | 77 | 32 | 40 | 45-49 | 73 | 75 |
| 2010-2011 | 61 | 76 | 30 | 38 | 45-49 | 45-49 | 74 |
Reading/language arts[edit]
The following table shows the percentage of district students who scored at or above the proficiency level each school year:[9]
| School year | All (%) | Asian/Pacific Islander (%) |
Black (%) | Hispanic (%) | Native American (%) |
Two or More Races (%) |
White (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-2019 | 56 | 69 | 21 | 31 | 40-44 | 69 | 78 |
| 2017-2018 | 55 | 68 | 20 | 29 | 45-49 | 66 | 77 |
| 2016-2017 | 55 | 67 | 23 | 32 | 55-59 | 65 | 77 |
| 2015-2016 | 53 | 65 | 18 | 28 | 55-59 | 61 | 76 |
| 2014-2015 | 53 | 64 | 19 | 27 | 45-49 | 65 | 77 |
| 2013-2014 | 61 | 69 | 35-39 | 41 | ≥50 | 55-59 | 75-79 |
| 2012-2013 | 60 | 70 | 32 | 39 | 50-54 | 72 | 81 |
| 2011-2012 | 60 | 68 | 37 | 42 | 50-54 | 74 | 81 |
| 2010-2011 | 58 | 66 | 33 | 38 | 50-54 | 50-54 | 79 |
Graduation rates[edit]
The following table shows the graduation rate of district students each school year:[9][10]
| School year | All (%) | Asian/Pacific Islander (%) |
Black (%) | Hispanic (%) | Native American (%) |
Two or More Races (%) |
White (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-2018 | 85 | 93 | 75-79 | 74 | ≥50 | 80-84 | 84 |
| 2016-2017 | 84 | 93 | 75-79 | 70 | 60-79 | 85-89 | 84 |
| 2015-2016 | 86 | 94 | 70-74 | 75 | 60-79 | 85-89 | 84 |
| 2014-2015 | 85 | 92 | 71 | 73 | 40-59 | 80-84 | 85 |
| 2013-2014 | 84 | 91 | 64 | 69 | <50 | 85-89 | 87 |
| 2012-2013 | 82 | 88 | 66 | 69 | ≥80 | 80-84 | 83 |
| 2011-2012 | 82 | 89 | 71 | 67 | ≥50 | 80-84 | 82 |
| 2010-2011 | 82 | 88 | 62 | 67 | ≥50 | 80-84 | 85 |
Student enrollment[edit]
| Year[11] | Enrollment | Year-to-year change (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-2019 | 52,417 | -12.6 |
| 2017-2018 | 59,944 | 1.5 |
| 2016-2017 | 59,035 | 1.0 |
| 2015-2016 | 58,445 | 0.7 |
| 2014-2015 | 58,018 | 1.2 |
| 2013-2014 | 57,323 | 0.8 |
| 2012-2013 | 56,841 | 0.9 |
| 2011-2012 | 56,310 | 1.3 |
| 2010-2011 | 55,571 | 0.8 |
| 2009-2010 | 55,140 | -0.1 |
| 2008-2009 | 55,183 | 5.2 |
| 2007-2008 | 52,457 | -6.6 |
| 2006-2007 | 56,183 | -0.1 |
| 2005-2006 | 56,236 | -1.6 |
| 2004-2005 | 57,144 | -1.1 |
| 2003-2004 | 57,805 | -0.7 |
| 2002-2003 | 58,216 | -0.6 |
| 2001-2002 | 58,566 | -2.4 |
| 2000-2001 | 59,979 | -1.5 |
| 1999-2000 | 60,896 | -0.2 |
| 1998-1999 | 61,042 | 0.1 |
| 1997-1998 | 61,007 | -0.3 |
| 1996-1997 | 61,174 | -1.2 |
| 1995-1996 | 61,889 | 0.9 |
| 1994-1995 | 61,340 | -0.5 |
| 1993-1994 | 61,631 | -0.4 |
| 1992-1993 | 61,882 | 0.3 |
| 1991-1992 | 61,689 | 0.0 |
| 1990-1991 | 61,688 | -0.4 |
| 1989-1990 | 61,935 | -0.9 |
| 1988-1989 | 62,528 | -2.1 |
| 1987-1988 | 63,881 | -1.4 |
| 1986-1987 | 64,786 | - |
About the district[edit]
San Francisco Unified School District is located in San Francisco County, California. It is classified as a large city school district by the National Center for Education Statistics. The district served 52,417 students during the 2018-2019 school year and comprised 114 schools.[12]
.svg){kind=link}
During the 2018-2019 school year, 53.2% of the district's students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 28.7% were English language learners, and 13.7% of students had an Individual Education Plan (IEP).[13]
| Racial Demographics, 2018-2019 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Race | San Francisco Unified School District (%) | California K-12 students (%) |
| American Indian/Alaska Native | N/A | 0.5 |
| Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander | 38.7 | 11.7 |
| Black | 6.6 | 5.4 |
| Hispanic | 27.4 | 54.6 |
| Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander | N/A | 0.5 |
| Two or More Races | 11.5 | 4.5 |
| White | 14.7 | 22.9 |
Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.
Noteworthy events[edit]
2016: Proposition passed allowing non-citizens the right to vote in school board elections[edit]
On November 8, 2016, citizens of San Francisco passed Proposition N, allowing non-citizen parents or guardians of students who live in the San Francisco Unified School District to vote in school board elections. The proposition was passed with 54% of the vote.[14] It appeared on the ballot as follows:
| “ |
Shall the City allow a non-citizen resident of San Francisco who is of legal voting age and the parent, legal guardian or legally recognized caregiver of a child living in the San Francisco Unified School District to vote for members of the Board of Education?[15][16] |
” |
The city was not the first to allow non-citizens to vote in school board elections. As of 2016, the city of Chicago and six towns in Maryland also allowed for it.[17]
2016: District one of 100 to pursue socioeconomic integration[edit]
The San Francisco Unified School District was included in a list of 100 school districts pursuing socioeconomic integration. The school districts, which included 13 other California school districts and charter schools, were listed in a report published by the Century Foundation. According to its website, the foundation is a "progressive, nonpartisan think tank that seeks to foster opportunity, reduce inequality, and promote security at home and abroad." The report showed that socioeconomic integration grew from two school districts in 1996, when the foundation first started researching the issue, to 100 in October 2016, when the report was published. Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, praised the U.S. Department of Education for offering incentives for school districts to voluntarily use socioeconomic integration.[18][19]
The Century Foundation's report came five months after data released by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in May 2016 showed schools across the country had been largely resegregated. The data showed that "the number of high-poverty schools serving primarily black and brown students more than doubled between 2001 and 2014," according to The Washington Post.[20]
The data from the GAO showed that high-poverty schools did not offer students the same access to opportunities that other schools did and were also more likely to expel or suspend students for disciplinary issues. According to The Washington Post, the rise of resegregation began in the 1990s when school districts that had integrated were released from court-ordered mandates. The student population in the United States also changed, becoming less white and affluent.[20]
A 2007 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court stopped school districts from assigning students to schools based on race. Those in favor of integrating schools started using the socioeconomic status of students as an integration method.[18]
2016: Superintendent leaves for Houston[edit]
On July 27, 2016, Superintendent Richard A. Carranza announced he would be leaving the district to become superintendent of the Houston Independent School District in Texas. The school board appointed Myong Leigh, the district's deputy superintendent for policy and operations, to replace Carranza in the interim starting September 1, 2016.[21]
Carranza served the district for four years, and his tenure "has largely been free of controversy," according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Carranza said Houston ISD had many similarities to San Francisco Unified, though on a bigger scale. “The honest truth is, there is never a good time to make a transition,” said Carranza. “But SFUSD is on really solid ground. You can point in every direction and see solid structures and systems and strategies in place to ensure kids are being taken care of in the city.”[21]
“I hope to hear about Houston dramatically reducing school suspensions, introducing LGBT studies and becoming a sanctuary school district,” Board President Matt Haney said. “For us, these are our values, this is what has been important in San Francisco, and Richard has reflected that.”[21]
When he accepted the interim position, Leigh said he was not interested in pursuing the permanent position. “I don’t see myself as a candidate for the role, but I definitely see the need in the meantime. I’m stepping up because I feel this is how I can be of most value and service to the district,” said Leigh.[21]
Leigh ultimately changed his mind and applied for the permanent position, but the board did not choose him. Vincent Matthews was appointed to the role on April 4, 2017.
Contact information[edit]
San Francisco Unified School District
555 Franklin St.
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: 415-241-6000
See also[edit]
| California | School Board Elections | News and Analysis |
|---|---|---|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
External links[edit]
- Search Google News for this topic
- San Francisco Unified School District
- United Educators of San Francisco
- California Department of Education
- California School Boards Association
Footnotes[edit]
- ↑ SF Gate, "New SF school superintendent to make $310,000 a year," April 4, 2017
- ↑ Los Angeles Wave, "Inglewood administrator to become San Francisco school chief," April 7, 2017
- ↑ San Francisco Examiner, "New SF schools superintendent to earn $310K salary," April 5, 2017
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 San Francisco Chronicle, "SF schools chief Richard Carranza leaving for Houston job," July 28, 2016
- ↑ San Francisco Unified School District, "BB 9323 Board Bylaws: Meeting Conduct," accessed July 1, 2016
- ↑ United States Census Bureau, "Public School System Finances: Historical Data," accessed December 1, 2015
- ↑ San Francisco Unified School District, "19-20 salary scheduled K-12 Fully Credentialed Teachers," accessed July 13, 2021
- ↑ U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC: EDFacts, "State Assessments in Reading/Language Arts and Mathematics- School Year 2018-19 EDFacts Data Documentation," accessed February 25, 2021
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 To protect student privacy, percentages were reported as ranges for groups of 300 students or fewer. If five (5) or fewer students were included in a data set, the data was replaced by "PS."
- ↑ U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC: EDFacts, "Four-Year Adjusted-Cohort Graduation Rates - School Year 2017-18 EDFacts Data Documentation," accessed February 25, 2021
- ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "ElSi tableGenerator," accessed March 8, 2021
- ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "Search for Public School Districts," accessed March 8, 2021
- ↑ National Center for Education Statistics, "Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey," accessed March 8, 2021
- ↑ San Francisco Examiner, "Voters appear to support measure allowing non-citizen voting," November 9, 2016
- ↑ San Francisco Elections Office, "San Francisco Voter Information Pamphlet and Sample Ballot," accessed September 26, 2016
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Pasadena Star-News, "Pasadena group pushing to give voting rights to non-citizen PUSD parents," November 23, 2016
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 The Washington Post, "These are the 100 U.S. school districts that are actively pursuing socioeconomic integration," October 13, 2016
- ↑ The Century Foundation, "About the Century Foundation," accessed October 18, 2016
- ↑ 20.0 20.1 The Washington Post, "On the anniversary of Brown v. Board, new evidence that U.S. schools are resegregating," May 17, 2016
- ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 San Francisco Chronicle, "SF schools chief Richard Carranza leaving for Houston job," July 27, 2016
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2021 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
EncycloReader
is supported by the 
KSF