New SF school board member Ann Hsu didn’t waste time speaking out. In the first meeting for the three commissioners appointed after the Feb. 15 recall that rocked the city, Hsu and others took a stand on looming layoffs, chastising the San Francisco Unified School District’s budget keepers for reticence in making commitments to restore school funding.
Hsu’s position — that if extra money comes from the state in the next few months, SFUSD should try to spend it — was notable given her entrepreneurial background and recent work on a board that oversees school district spending. Her stance also seemed to make her instant allies with at least two holdover commissioners. (Hsu was a prominent organizer in the recall campaign, which the holdover commissioners opposed.)
As things stand, the school district plans to cut $15 million from school sites and $35 million from the central administration to help close a $125 million deficit. (Some of those central cuts would also diminish staff and services at school sites.)
Officials have hinted, not so subtly, that a rosier state budget could provide extra cash in May. But chief financial officer Meghan Wallace, budget director Ann Marie Gordon, and deputy superintendent Myong Leigh all cautioned last night that, if that money shows up, restoring cuts before summer would be easier said than done.
For one, there would be little time for school-by-school revisions before the district finalizes the budget in June. They said late tinkering could upset state watchdogs, who are following SFUSD efforts to dig out of a massive financial hole. Veering off course could invite more oversight or even a state takeover of the district. There are also projected deficits in coming years because SFUSD’s enrollment, the source of much of its state funding, keeps slipping. In a few years’ time, enrollment could drop to 47,000.
Further complicating matters, administrators warned, a late reversal of layoff notices might be stymied by teacher contracts. In May, schools are deep into their planning for the fall semester. If a windfall materializes, they said, it may be better to go through with layoffs and allocate money after enrollment shakes out in the fall. (The district traditionally does this reshuffling anyway in what it calls the “fall revise.”)
That prompted strong words from Hsu, who was tired of hearing why saving the jobs of teachers and other school employees in May wouldn’t work out. Instead of telling us what we can and cannot do, she urged the staff, “come back and tell us how we can do it. We are the decision makers. We can figure out a way to do it.”
Holdover commissioners Matt Alexander and Kevine Boggess (neither of whom were eligible for recall in February) made similar arguments to put potential windfalls back into schools as quickly as possible. Alexander has been pushing for more administration layoffs to offset school site cuts. Two weeks ago, he seemed optimistic that the budget update presented last night would incorporate his suggestions.
But that’s not going to happen, Alexander acknowledged last night to The Frisc. While more central cuts could be identified, the process won’t wrap up soon enough “to create savings that could be used to offset the school site cuts,” he said. To save jobs before the summer starts, he added, SFUSD needs that extra state money in May.
Hsu admitted that last-minute budget revisions aren’t typical procedure, but these are not typical circumstances. The hedging, she said, sounded like the excuses she and her colleagues heard about the recent debacle that has botched hundreds of teachers’ pay and benefits and left some with extra tax bills and other penalties. (Making teachers whole, plus 15 percent interest, would cost the district at most $300,000 this year, CFO Wallace promised last night.)
Wallace called the potential state windfall a “shiny possibility” that could distract the board from the long-term effort of fixing the structural imbalance that stems from the enrollment decline.
The budget staff’s reticence appeared to catch their boss, Superintendent Vincent Matthews, off guard.
Alexander pushed back “with all due respect,” saying that what Wallace deemed a distraction was in fact money that could help kids coming out of a pandemic with learning loss and social-emotional needs. It would be irresponsible, he observed, not to get that money into classrooms because of “technical timing.”
Commissioner Jenny Lam, the board’s new president, warned that going through with school cuts even if the money is available could drive even more families out of the district.
Prompted by Alexander at last night’s meeting, Superintendent Vincent Matthews said he was about to ask school principals via email to prepare contingency plans in case the extra cash came through. The budget staff’s reticence about last-minute changes appeared to catch Matthews, their boss, off guard. (Alexander told The Frisc this was a “miscommunication” between the superintendent and the budget staff that they’re going to clear up.)
Matthews’s email went out this morning and, while stressing there was no guarantee of extra money, it did seem to hold open the chance of saving jobs this spring. “We don’t want any site to have to scramble if additional funds are allocated,” the letter reads, “so we ask that you now begin the process of establishing what your priorities would be if additional funds are allocated.”
Estimated dollar amounts for each school will be sent out Friday, according to the email. That said, principals must still submit a budget by Friday based on current proposed cuts.
The controversial recall is in the rearview mirror, but the new board isn’t starting from scratch. Problems that have vexed the district in recent years, which have stirred up parents, teachers, union organizers, and equity advocates, remain unresolved with no quick fixes.
Alex Lash is editor in chief of The Frisc.
