For a very fraught few months in 2022, all eyes were on the San Francisco school board.
School renaming โ and a portentous New Yorker interview on the subject โ combined with pandemic-era school closures led angry voters to recall, by an average of over 72 percent, three ill-fated board members. The controversy drew national headlines, a sign of parent anger and the political muscle of San Franciscoโs Chinese community.
While over 70 percent of voters opted to recall, only 179,981 San Francisco registered voters returned their ballot โ turnout was low at just 36 percent.
Itโs now been four years since those three board members โ Alison Collins, Gabriela Lopez, and Faauuga Moliga โ lost their jobs. Three candidates will face off next week for a seat on the school board, including one who was highly involved in advocating against the recall.
This week, Mission Local asked each of the school board candidates how they would have voted in 2022.
Virginia Cheung, the top pick of the powerful United Educators of San Francisco, declined to answer the question but said that while she understood the โdeep frustrationโ that led to the recall, it was โultimately costly and divisive.โ
Phil Kim, the incumbent board president, said he supported the ouster. The old version of the school board was focused on the โwrong thingsโ and โmired in distractions,โ he said.
He stands in direct opposition to candidate Brandee Marckmann, who in 2021 fought tirelessly against the recall.
In Marckmannโs response to Mission Localโs question, Marckmann took a common stance amongst progressive politicians: that the recall was fiscally irresponsible, costing taxpayers $8 million. The recall, Marckmann wrote, โdid not solve the districtโs many problemsโ and should be reserved for โegregious circumstances.โ
At the time, Marckmann, who was chair of the progressive political group, the S.F. Berniecrats, canvassed against the recall nearly 10 hours a week, arguing that it was an attempt to oust progressive candidates and an anti-Black response to a failed and highly criticized effort by the school board to rename 44 schools across the district named after historical figures, including Abraham Lincoln and Dianne Feinstein, which was later scrapped.ย
Here is how each of the candidates responded in full:
Mission Local color codes the answers to yes/no questions. A blue background means the candidate answered yes, an orange background means no, and a yellow background means that the candidate answered ambiguously.
Phil Kim
- Job: Deputy director and chief of staff at the San Francisco Human Rights Commission
- Age: 35
- Residency: San Francisco
- Education: PhD in Education, University of California, Berkeley; masterโs in urban education policy from Loyola Marymount University; bachelorโs in neuroscience from Bucknell University
- SFUSD Experience: Charter school educator, SFUSD administrator and current school board president
Five years ago, the school board was focused on the wrong things. Instead of planning to reopen schools after COVID they were mired in distractions like renaming schools.
They stopped focusing on the only mission that matters: ensuring San Franciscoโs kids are offered the best education.
This is a completely different board. Iโm proud that our efforts have led to greater stability and a focus on student outcomes. Weโve gone from negative fiscal certification to positive, re-introduced 8th grade algebra, given teachers historic raises, and are tackling our most pressing challenges: enrollment and portfolio planning.
Endorsed by: Mayor Daniel Lurie, Senator Scott Wiener, Assemblymember Matt Haney, Assemblymember Catherine Stefani, San Francisco Democratic Party … read more here.
Virginia Cheung
- Job: Nonprofit executive
- Age: 42
- Residency: San Francisco
- Education: Bachelorโs from the University of California, Irvine in social ecology
- SFUSD Experience: Parent of child at Alice Fong Yu, former director of Wu Yee Children’s Services
I understand the deep frustration that led to the 2022 recall effort. Public trust in the Board was severely damaged during an extraordinarily difficult time for students, families, and educators.
At the time, my focus was on early education and supporting my preschool-aged child, and I do not think it is especially helpful to relitigate events from a very different moment. The recall was ultimately costly and divisive.
My focus now is forward-looking: ensuring strong governance, transparency, and a clear commitment to student success. We need elected officials focused on our childrenโs education and rebuilding community trust and confidence in SFUSD.
Endorsed by: United Educators of San Francisco, San Francisco Green Party, Supervisor Connie Chan, S.F. Public Defender Mano Raju, Phil Ting, Norman Yee, Eric Mar … read more here.
Brandee Marckmann
- Job: Director of parent-led group
- Age: 53
- Residency: San Francisco
- Education: Bachelorโs in English and French from Central College
- SFUSD Experience: Parent of SFUSD student
No. With SFUSDโs budget deficit, I do not think it made sense to run an expensive recall when the three seats in question were up for election later that same year. These recalls cost SF taxpayers $8 million dollars and did not solve the district’s many problems such as fixing the malfunctioning payroll system. I believe recalls should be reserved for egregious instances where elected officials have broken the law or have continuously failed to perform the basic duties required by their position. In my view the three recalled school board members did not meet this criteria.
Endorsed by: Harvey Milk Democratic Club, SEIU 1021, Supervisor Shamann Walton, Supervisor Jackie Fielder, Dean Preston, Aaron Peskin, Mark Leno, Tom Ammiano … read more here.
Answers may be lightly edited for formatting, spelling, and grammar. If you have questions for the candidates, please let us know at marina@missionlocal.com.
You can register to vote via the sf.gov website.