In our weekly “Meet the Candidates” series, we are asking each of the eight school board candidates in the Nov. 3 election one question. They are asked to respond in 100 words or fewer.
Answers are published each week, but we are also archiving each answer here to make it easier for voters to browse.
Here are the questions we’ve asked so far:
Mission Local color codes the answers to questions. A yellow background means that the candidate did not directly answer the question. For yes/no questions, we give candidates a green background if they answered yes and a red background if they answered no.
Week 10: How should SFUSD use its reserves?
Virginia Cheung
SFUSD’s reserves should protect students, not come at their expense. Any reserves above the state-required minimum should be determined transparently, with meaningful public input.
Overaccumulating funds can mean understaffed classrooms, students with disabilities lacking paraprofessional support, and essential programs never reaching children.
With a reported fund balance exceeding $420 million, we must ask: Which students need help, and how do we deliver?
I would prioritize investments that improve student outcomes, attract and retain families, reduce chronic absenteeism, expand community schools, and address environmental hazards like lead and asbestos.
Today’s dollars belong to today’s students.
Alida Fisher
In my term, we’ve worked hard to balance our budget. SFUSD should maintain sufficient reserves to protect students from economic uncertainty and unexpected funding losses, but reserves should not become an excuse for austerity or chronic underinvestment. With fiscal stability improving, we should ensure reserves are appropriately sized and use available resources strategically to address the opportunity gap. That means investing in student supports, restorative practices, and a school staffing model that is baseline-sufficient. We must also continue improving forecasting, position control, and contracting so dollars are spent predictably, transparently, and where they have the greatest impact for students.
Ryan Hazelton
We need to invest in our schools to attract higher enrollment, increase attendance, and improve outcomes. First, we should invest in staff who call families of absent children to check in on their needs so we can get children in classrooms. This builds our revenue, which is based on attendance, and improves outcomes since children learn when they are in school. We should expand our community schools model, which improves attendance and outcomes. Lastly, we need early interventions and diagnosis for students with special needs, which improves long-term outcomes and saves the district money. These investments build our budget.
Phil Kim
As Board President, I’ve fought hard to pull SFUSD back from the brink of fiscal insolvency. Reserves should be used to cover one-time emergency expenses or utilized for strategic efforts. For years, the district relied on one-time federal COVID relief funds to cover ongoing expenses, creating a structural deficit when those funds ran out. Spending one-time, emergency dollars on permanent, non-emergency costs long-term is a one-way street toward the kind of crisis we’ve worked so hard to overcome. Our educators and students deserve better than that cycle repeating itself.
Laurance Lee
I would keep about $130 million in reserves for another year, roughly five weeks of expenses. As a small business owner, I know we need that cushion. But we also have children falling behind who need more help. I’ve read school plans where principals counted on staff who never arrived. Those missing staff mean children miss out on reading help and someone checking why they’re absent. I would cut unneeded fiscal consulting and put savings toward the staffing schools need. Before growing reserves further, we should deliver the help we’ve already promised our children.
Reina Tello
The reserves should be used to bring back supports to address chronic absenteeism so that we are not leaving money on the table.
Tim Tung
Reserves are SFUSD’s savings account: they should provide one-time funding for genuine emergencies and to buffer uneven revenues or expenses. SFUSD’s reserves are about 12% of budget–below the 17% recommended best practice–and the forecast shows reserves declining to 3% by 2029. Without adequate reserves, balancing the budget means disruptive cuts to staff and programs, creating instability for students, families, and employees and making it harder to attract and retain the educators we need. We need a credible plan to reach best-practice reserves and clear guardrails for their use and replenishment. One-time reserves should not fund ongoing expenses.
Week 9: What does SFUSD need to do to end state fiscal oversight?
Autumn Brown Garibay
SFUSD has made real progress, including adopting a three-year balanced budget and reaching positive certification.
But ending state fiscal oversight requires proving that stability is sustainable. That means eliminating the structural deficit, ending reliance on one-time funds for ongoing costs, and fixing financial controls, especially payroll, enrollment projections, and multiyear budgeting.
As a board, we should understand the full ongoing cost of commitments before approving them. Fiscal stability should ultimately mean fewer surprise cuts and staffing disruptions, and more consistent investment in the classrooms, educators and student supports that improve outcomes.
Virginia Cheung
SFUSD must build strong, reliable operations and demonstrate disciplined fiscal management year after year. That means maintaining balanced multi-year budgets, strengthening financial controls, and closely monitoring spending and outcomes—especially major contracts and projects such as payroll and financial systems.
But fiscal stability cannot come from cuts alone. We need strategic investments in educators and school staff that build a culture of excellence, improve student outcomes, and make families want to choose and stay in SFUSD.
Increasing enrollment, retention, and attendance strengthens both our schools and our finances by bringing more state funding into the district while creating long-term stability.
Increasing enrollment, retention, and attendance strengthens both our schools and our finances by bringing more state funding into the district while creating long-term stability.
Alida Fisher
We’ve made important progress during my term, including adopting a balanced three-year budget and achieving positive fiscal certification. The next step requires sustained and responsible financial management over time.
We must improve budget forecasting and monitoring. We must also modernize inefficient operational systems, including streamlining contracting, procurement, onboarding, and other administrative processes so resources reach schools more effectively and staff can focus on students.
We must invest in student outcomes rather than cutting costs. That means making difficult decisions responsibly and ensuring every dollar is aligned with our highest priorities: academic excellence, equity, and the services students need to thrive.
Ryan Hazelton
SFUSD needs sustained fiscal discipline. The district earned a self-certified positive budget this year, which is genuine progress. However, the state only recognizes that progress when we have shown it consistently over time.
Getting there means addressing the structural deficit through growth strategies: reducing chronic absenteeism to protect attendance-tied funding, and expanding community schools and after-school programming to grow enrollment and improve attendance. We must also push for enrollment-based state funding.
Lastly, we need to provide early interventions for children with special needs, which saves the district money long-term while simply being the right thing to do.
Phil Kim
I am proud to have recently announced that we are moving from a “negative” fiscal certification to a self-certified “positive.” We anticipate receiving our official “positive” certification in December.
One of my highest priorities is to have a stable and solvent district providing an excellent education to every child in San Francisco.
Long-term, we must diligently and properly forecast revenues, budget appropriately, and leverage our restricted and unrestricted dollars in sustainable ways, spending within our means and maintaining a focus on our multi-year projections.
Laurance Lee
To end state oversight, SFUSD must complete the remaining California Department of Education requirements and sustain positive budget certification.
I have followed state fiscal expert Elliott Duchon’s work since 2021. The superintendent should give the board and public a dated schedule for each remaining item, with regular updates.
Then we should go further. While tracing district records, I found that contracted audits covering nearly $200 million a year in city and parcel-tax funds are years late. SFUSD needs a functioning internal audit team and financial reports that show families where the money went and how it helped students.
Reina Tello
State oversight is decided by the California Department of Education CDE. SFUSD self-certified as positive in June, but ultimately, EDC will make the decision in December. SFUSD has to show a balanced budget over a three-year cycle.
Tim Tung
To end state fiscal oversight, SFUSD must demonstrate through its interim reports that it can meet its financial obligations this year and the next two years. Positive certification is an important milestone, but it is not the same as durable financial health.
The district needs disciplined, five- to 10-year financial planning showing how today’s decisions affect future revenues, expenses, enrollment, and reserves. It also needs a realistic plan to build and maintain adequate unrestricted reserves, with clear guardrails for when they can be used.
The goal should be predictable, sustainable financial management and not just avoiding state oversight.
Week 8: How would you address the district’s 24 percent chronic absenteeism rate?
Tim Tung
A 24 percent chronic absenteeism rate shows that SFUSD’s existing system is not producing sufficient results. SFUSD already contacts families around 5 percent of days missed, so I would strengthen the next levels of intervention.
At 7.5 percent, schools should create an individualized attendance plan; at 10 percent, escalate to coordinated case management. I would assess each school’s capacity and direct additional social worker, counselor, family support, or community resources where caseloads show gaps.
Monthly tracking should measure whether interventions improve attendance, with quarterly Board reporting on results and subgroup gaps. I would hold the Superintendent accountable for measurable reductions in chronic absenteeism.
Autumn Brown Garibay
A 24 percent chronic absenteeism rate is too high, and some schools are struggling far more than that. If student outcomes are our top priority, kids need to be in school so we can keep investing in their learning.
I would push the Board to focus on schools with the highest absenteeism, require staff to identify what is keeping families from getting kids to school, and target support accordingly, including after-care, family outreach, health supports, and school climate.
SFUSD has invested new dollars here. Now we need to see whether those investments are reaching the right schools and improving attendance.
Virginia Cheung
I would reduce chronic absenteeism by treating attendance as a signal, not a disciplinary problem.
SFUSD should build systems to use real-time, disaggregated data to identify students early, then partner with families to address root causes, including health, housing, transportation, safety, language access, and belonging.
As a single parent and former early-childhood education leader, I understand both the daily barriers families face and how systems can intervene early.
My nonprofit leadership has focused on preventing homelessness and poverty by connecting families to resources and education. I would strengthen community schools, family engagement, mental-health supports, after-school programs, and trusted relationships so students are supported before absences become chronic.
Alida Fisher
By investing in the people and supports that help students get to school and stay engaged. I continue to highlight that the cuts and projected savings embedded in our updated staffing model are, in many cases, exacerbating our structural deficit in unintended ways.
Chronic absenteeism has a greater impact on SFUSD’s budget deficit than declining enrollment, yet we have eliminated many of the very positions designed to address attendance and student engagement.
Early intervention matters. We must strengthen family engagement, and ensure schools have the counselors, wellness staff, and other supports needed to address the barriers keeping students from school.
Ryan Hazelton
Chronic absenteeism is a huge problem for our district because it means students aren’t learning, and we are losing critical attendance-based funding revenue for the district.
I run an after-school program serving SFUSD students, and I’ve seen firsthand how quality programming keeps kids coming to school, as it did at Buena Vista Horace Mann, which cut its chronic absenteeism rate by 8 points in a year.
I’d invest in expanding community schools and quality after-school programming district-wide. Secondly, I’d invest in attendance liaisons doing relationship-based outreach to support families with root causes like transportation, housing instability, and health access. Investing … read full response here.
Phil Kim
A 24 percent chronic absenteeism rate is unacceptable and requires clear accountability and a district-wide strategy. We need to use real-time data to intervene early, strengthen school-wide belonging and family engagement, and provide increasingly targeted supports based on students’ needs.
That means understanding and addressing root causes, from transportation and health to housing, safety, and disengagement.
We should also scale the programs that are already working, including AAALI’s Each & Every initiative, which uses student-level data, targeted supports, and family partnership to improve engagement and outcomes.
The board must regularly monitor attendance data, identify disparities, and hold ourselves accountable for measurable improvement.
Laurance Lee
Fund the staff to call families and help get kids to school.
Drew, where I volunteer weekly, cut chronic absenteeism by over 15 percentage points in one year. They celebrated families’ progress with ice-cream parties and put attendance signs at the entrance. Still, 24 percent is too high.
I’ve read school plans where principals counted on assistant principals and outreach staff who never arrived. I’ll push to fund those jobs where they’re needed most and check that they’re filled. When a school falls behind on attendance, I’ll push for help right away.
Reina Tello
We need to have support staff in place to find the why. We need to ensure the school has adequate resources and coordinated approach to support the students. Without an equitable distribution of resources, the students who need the most help will suffer the most.
My daughter struggled with absenteeism in our search to find an elementary school that met her needs. We enrolled and passed through two schools until we finally found a school that supported her emotionally so that academics could be accessed.
My daughter went underdiagnosed for 6 years. I saw how other students fell through the cracks…read full response here.
Week 7: How would you attract and retain teachers in SFUSD?
Reina Tello
First, teachers need manageable class sizes and additional support for the students who need it. Teachers and para[educator]s need adequate prep time; this is a key concern I’ve heard over and over. Yes, the negotiated contract was a good start to attract new educators, as it included medical benefits. But we need to onboard more efficiently. I’ve seen it take up to six months!
Retention will not happen if we continue to ignore the deplorable working conditions caused by budget cuts.
My daughter’s school was just notified that the Special Education Central Office has reduced our teacher allocation … read more here.
Tim Tung
To attract and retain great teachers, SFUSD must offer competitive compensation, budget stability, and a hiring process that is timely, efficient, and welcoming. Teachers should not face recurring uncertainty from late layoff notices and rescissions.
I would strengthen financial planning to provide greater staffing stability, while targeting recruitment and retention efforts toward high-need fields such as special education, STEM, and bilingual education.
We should also expand affordable teacher housing through partnerships with developers and reduce administrative burdens so educators can spend more time teaching. Finally, I would establish measurable retention and vacancy goals and hold the Superintendent accountable for progress.
Autumn Brown Garibay
Attracting teachers means making SFUSD a place people actually want to work, and building stronger pathways into the profession.
Student teachers and credential candidates already working in our schools are some of our best future teachers. We should strengthen partnerships with SF State and other local credential programs so more people can start and build careers here.
Retaining them means being a reliable employer: Competitive pay, correct and timely payroll, stable staffing, and real support once they arrive. It is much easier to keep good people who already know our schools than to constantly start over recruiting from scratch.
Virginia Cheung
At Wu Yee, I built early educator pipelines, won livable wages, and expanded training. I’d bring that to SFUSD.
To attract teachers: Incentive programs like those for language certifications, plus pathways starting in high school with SF State, USF, and City College. Paid credentialing and guaranteed SFUSD placement, prioritizing special education, counseling, and TK. Educators from our communities stay longer.
To retain them: Renew QTEA to protect salaries, expand educator housing, fix payroll so no one goes unpaid, and give new teachers mentoring and manageable caseloads.
Teachers stay where they’re paid fairly, supported, and respected.
Alida Fisher
SFUSD must continue investing in the educators who make our schools strong. That means:
- Providing competitive compensation, benefits such as dependent healthcare and housing;
- Expanding successful “grow your own” programs (like Pathway to Teaching) and credentialing support;
- Addressing workload, especially in special education, by reducing administrative burdens, providing adequate support and release time, and ensuring manageable caseloads.
Retention requires trust. We must engage early, communicate transparently, and work collaboratively to address challenges before they become crises. We must demonstrate through our actions, not just our words, that we respect and value the educators who serve our students every day.
Ryan Hazelton
I’m endorsed by UESF because educators know I’ll show up for them as I did on the picket line in February. Attracting and retaining educators starts with trust: Negotiating in good faith and early, so the next contract doesn’t take a strike to reach a fair outcome.
It also means fixing SFUSD’s payroll system so educators are paid on time and correctly. We can also support new educators by prioritizing mentorship. Lastly, we must enhance workplace conditions with increased prep time and professional development. Educators stay where they’re treated as partners, not adversaries.
Phil Kim
Retaining our educators is critical. Proactive recruitment, cohesive coaching, and effective site leadership, in addition to long-term fiscal stability, are essential to keeping great teachers.
We also need to confront the reality that many educators cannot afford to live in the city where they teach. I support exploring partnerships that use district land for educator housing, with careful evaluation of financial sustainability and community impact.
The District should also explore basic income pilots, direct financial assistance, and partnerships with nonprofit and community organizations to expand access to diverse housing options.
Laurance Lee
Teachers tell us what they need in the classroom. At Galileo, they rallied behind a colleague who was attacked and transferred because they wanted to know the district had their backs. At Drew, teachers spoke up for the leadership and culture they wanted to preserve. Across the city, teachers are seeking funds for supplies, and I have helped many of them.
Pay matters. So do safety, stable principals, fewer combined classes, supplies, and help that comes when requested. I will bring those voices from the classroom to the boardroom, learn from schools that attract and keep great teachers, and spread … read more here.
Week 6: Do you support strict limits on screen time and use of AI in class?
Laurance Lee
Yes. I support LAUSD’s limits: No routine screen time through first grade and no more than 30 minutes a day through fifth grade, with exceptions for assistive technology and accommodations. This is about how children learn.
I volunteer weekly in a Bayview kindergarten, and see how quickly a screen becomes a game. The educator I work with says it plainly: No AI for elementary students. It is unproven and cannot replace working with a person.
SFUSD should use this winter to hear from students, families and educators, as LAUSD did, and adopt clear rules this spring.
Parents and educators speaking … read more here.
Reina Tello
Yes, I support SFUSD having a similar policy to LAUSD’s, written in consultation with San Francisco parents, and educators to reflect our needs.
I was speaking with Tech in Check about this subject last week. I’d like to work with the community, educators, students and parents to create a policy that is right sized for SFUSD.
I am not against technology, but I believe the research that shows technology has been integrated so fast there was not time to analyze the true impact on our young people and children. There should be a good foundation established before access to any … read more here.
Tim Tung
Yes, I support the core principles of LAUSD’s technology policy: Technology should enhance, not replace, teacher-led instruction; screen use should be purposeful, age-appropriate, and focused on meaningful learning; and younger students should have stronger guardrails around device use.
I also support balancing digital learning with traditional materials and hands-on instruction, providing appropriate accommodations, and giving families meaningful choices.
At the same time, I would not simply copy LAUSD’s policy. SFUSD should engage students, educators, and families early in developing its approach, then use data, research, and ongoing evaluation to ensure technology policies improve student outcomes while preserving high-impact instructional tools.
Autumn Brown Garibay
Yes. SFUSD needs a district-wide technology plan and a bell-to-bell policy for students’ personal devices.
Right now, too many decisions about screen time, student access, monitoring, and safeguards are left to individual schools. That means best practices are not reaching every student consistently.
District technology should be used intentionally because it improves learning, with clear expectations for non-instructional access and protections when devices go home.
Teachers should have flexibility when technology strengthens instruction or accessibility, but the district should set the guardrails. Students should not get a different digital experience simply because they attend a different SFUSD school.
Virginia Cheung
I support a screen-time policy modeled on LAUSD’s, with age-appropriate limits and a ban for students in first grade and younger. Young learners need play, connection, and hands-on instruction, not screen time.
Any policy must be paired with clear guidance for teachers and real flexibility for students with IEPs or 504 plans who rely on assistive technology, along with legitimate instructional and research use for older students.
Implementation matters as much as the policy itself: We need teacher input, family communication, and consistent enforcement across school sites. Done right, this protects instructional time and supports healthy development for every student … read more here.
Alida Fisher
I do! I particularly appreciate LAUSD’s policy focus on balance.
Technology can and should be a tool that enhances teaching and learning, not a substitute for great educators, meaningful relationships, or sound judgment. Every decision about technology in our schools should be guided by two questions: Who benefits? Does it improve student outcomes?
The Board is launching an Ad Hoc Committee on Tech Usage this year to develop updated tech policies for our district. We must adopt clear standards for transparency, accountability, privacy protections, and ongoing monitoring. I support an AI moratorium until we have comprehensive policies in place.
Ryan Hazelton
Yes, I support SFUSD moving to a uniform, bell-to-bell policy like LAUSD’s, rather than the patchwork of school-by-school rules we have now.
My organization, Mariposa Kids, runs entirely screen-free because we follow the research that shows the harmful impacts of screen overuse.
LAUSD’s early results are promising. Teachers report that students are less distracted and more engaged in class. A uniform, district-wide standard would give every SFUSD student that same benefit, not just the ones lucky enough to attend a school that’s already gone further than the district requires.
Phil Kim
Every decision we make about technology in our schools should be guided by one question: Does it improve student outcomes? I am excited to be introducing an ad-hoc committee to develop a district-wide policy that encompasses AI, devices, and screen time TK–12.
I support establishing clear, age-appropriate expectations for personal devices during the school day so students can focus, build relationships, and engage fully in learning.
High-quality digital curricula, adaptive learning tools, online assessments, and assistive technologies can expand access and better meet students’ individual needs. But they should be used intentionally when there is evidence that they improve learning.
Week 5: Do you support school closures and mergers in 2020-2030?
Phil Kim
In October 2025, I led the Board in unanimously giving guidance to the superintendent to develop a concrete strategy that develops a sustainable portfolio and an enrollment policy that is more accessible.
The reality is that we have 14,000 empty seats across the district. Our resources are spread too thin when they could be concentrated and better used to support students, teachers, and programs.
I’m committed to doing this with genuine community engagement, transparent data, and an honest accounting of the trade-offs. Any merger strategy should be paired with a clear plan to strengthen our existing schools.
Laurance Lee
No. SFUSD should spend the years through 2029-2030 building schools families choose, not choosing schools to close.
SFUSD projects 4,600 fewer students by 2032. A forecast is not a closure list. At Drew, I have seen how staffing, programs and trust shape family choices.
Start by strengthening academics and consider adding an immersion program families want to an underused campus. Watch applications and waitlists. Ask families what is missing.
If consolidation is proposed, explain the savings, student benefits, travel changes, and where students and programs go.
The 2024 lesson: listen and address community concerns, help students, and rebuild trust.
Reina Tello
School closures do not save money, and they are a false solution to the problems facing SFUSD.
I do support investing in our public schools, ensuring resources allow for the expansion of programs and equitably distributing those programs across the city, especially in neighborhoods where most of our school-aged youth live.
I support adequate assessments and evaluations to accurately understand what supports are needed by our students in order for them to access their education, so it doesn’t take six years, as it did with my child.
The solutions listed above would create amazing schools, attract enrollment and eliminate the … read more here.
Tim Tung
The district should pursue strategies to improve enrollment and utilization, including expanding TK, expanding capacity in high-demand programs, and fixing the student assignment system.
However, the district also has about 14,000 seats of excess capacity and we need to consolidate our scarce resources so that every school can be fully resourced with teachers, nurses, social workers, and librarians.
Well before decisions are made, the district must engage families, educators, students, and communities early enough for their input to meaningfully shape the analysis and outcome. The process should be transparent, and any savings should be redirected to frontline student services.
Autumn Brown Garibay
Yes, if consolidation is what it takes to make sure all of our schools are really well taken care of.
Right now, some schools simply are not getting what they need to be successful. Under-enrollment is stretching staff and resources across too many campuses, but the goal should not just be to move kids into bigger schools. We need to look honestly at what it takes to provide equitable, consistently excellent schools across the city.
Bringing school communities together also needs to be intentional, with respect for their traditions, relationships, and the opportunity to build something new together.
Virginia Cheung
I do not support school closures as a strategy to balance the budget. Priority must be increasing revenue, strengthening schools, improving outcomes, and stabilizing enrollment by expanding high-demand programs, like language immersion and Special Education.
Closures disrupt communities and accelerate enrollment loss. We must first improve enrollment predictability, optimize facilities, and rebuild trust so families stay in SFUSD. Once enrollment stabilizes, we will better evaluate underutilized sites and true consolidation savings.
Underutilized properties should first be considered for early education, health services, affordable housing, and community-school partnerships that strengthen our neighborhoods.
Alida Fisher
Let’s be clear: Closing schools won’t save money.
SFUSD currently has approximately 14,000 empty seats across 100+ schools, meaning resources are spread too thin.
Thoughtful realignment would allow us to provide more resources across fewer, stronger schools. Every school deserves the resources students need to thrive, including strong academic programs, full-time interventionists, librarians, arts, nurses, social workers, mental-health services, and more.
We have an opportunity to build a school portfolio that better serves students and closes equity gaps, but only through robust community engagement and meaningful buy-in from students, families, educators, staff, and school communities.
Ryan Hazelton
SFUSD’s top priorities must be improving student outcomes and maintaining financial stability. Our first steps should be reducing absenteeism to bring in more state funding and reforming our broken lottery system so we don’t drive families out of the district.
The district’s 2024 attempt to close schools broke trust by showing that they weren’t committed to increasing enrollment. I’m running to rebuild that trust, keep kids in school, and welcome more families to SFUSD.
Consolidation may be necessary at some point, given facilities capacity and enrollment numbers, but it is not the only solution to the challenges we currently face.
Week 4: What would you do to reach math and English targets?
Ryan Hazelton
High-dosage tutoring is an extremely effective evidence-based intervention, and SFUSD’s own programs show it works.
Through the SF Ed Fund’s tutoring partnership, participating students caught up twice as fast. Through Chapter One, SFUSD is expanding high-impact tutoring to 20 of the highest-need schools.
I’d push to expand both so every struggling reader has access. I also want to see consistent implementation of our new literacy and math curricula across every school site, and ensure educators have the professional development they need to deliver it well. We need a surge of investment in programs that work.
Phil Kim
Reaching our math and English targets requires staying relentlessly focused on what happens in classrooms every day: High-quality curriculum, strong instruction, and targeted support for students who need it most.
I will continue pushing SFUSD to use data to identify where students are struggling, invest in effective professional learning and coaching for educators, and ensure interventions reach students early.
We also need to learn from schools that are accelerating outcomes, particularly for students furthest from our goals, and scale what works. Our budget, staffing, and central-office priorities must ultimately be aligned to improving student outcomes.
Laurance Lee
A two-point rise in third-grade reading is welcome, but at 49 percent, SFUSD is 21 points short of its 2028 target. Stronger curriculum and coaching improve instruction; learning walks show where implementation falls short.
But teachers need classroom support, and struggling students need targeted intervention. Some schools made double-digit ELA or math gains over three years. The district should identify what worked, adapt it for other schools, and track progress year-round.
District leaders must clear barriers and change course when results stall. Individual schools are showing that big gains are possible. SFUSD now needs a plan to make that progress system-wide.
Reina Tello
In order to improve math and reading levels, we must have an assessment of needs for our students. We need to make sure that our students are accurately diagnosed with any learning disabilities in order to ensure we have the programs and services necessary to support them.
We need to expand the programs that ARE working to all schools.
Tim Tung
To reach our math and English targets, we must focus relentlessly on fundamentals: effective instruction, sufficient learning time, and targeted support. I would ensure 100 percemt implementation of SFUSD’s approved, research-backed English curriculum, with coaching and accountability for schools that need support.
I would reduce chronic absenteeism and ensure students receive the state-recommended instructional minutes in core subjects. I would expand targeted tutoring, WIN time, and other evidence-based interventions, prioritizing students and schools with the largest achievement gaps.
Finally, I would direct resources toward these highest-need students and track results using SFUSD’s existing assessments, holding the Superintendent accountable for measurable progress.
Autumn Brown Garibay
Reaching our math and English targets requires strong instruction, early intervention, and transparency about what is actually working. SFUSD collects student progress data throughout the year, but the Board and families need a clearer school-level picture of where students are making gains and where they are falling behind.
We cannot reach ambitious goals while working in the dark. Better information will help us identify successful practices, share them across the district, and direct support where students need it most. If elected, I will keep the Board focused on using that information to turn district-wide goals into meaningful improvement for students.
Virginia Cheung
I would prioritize early intervention and direct resources toward what works.
In the first five years, children develop language and build the foundations for literacy and math. I would strengthen SFUSD’s partnership with the Department of Early Childhood and early education providers to improve kindergarten readiness and equip parents to talk, read, sing, and learn with their children.
I would set measurable literacy and math intervention goals and hold the district accountable for identifying gaps early and tracking progress, providing targeted high-dosage tutoring through before- and after-school programs, and promoting partnerships with community organizations to provide learning kits, particularly for TK and kindergarten families.
Alida Fisher
As we continue implementing new literacy and math curriculum, we must invest in ongoing professional development, instructional coaching, differentiated academic supports (including strong Tier 2 interventions) and behavioral supports, so every educator has the tools to meet students’ diverse needs and every student has the opportunity to succeed.
I believe strongly in the principle of targeted universalism: When we design systems and services that effectively support students who face the greatest barriers, the benefits extend to all students. As John F. Kennedy said, “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Investments in inclusive practices strengthen entire communities.
Week 3: Do you support moving forward with area-based school assignments?
Alida Fisher
Short answer: it depends.
Longer answer: We all agree that our current enrollment system isn’t working. As we know from previous attempts to update our system, families consistently emphasized that enrollment redesign won’t succeed without a parallel commitment to equitable school resourcing. Previous questions remain just as important today: How do we:
- Ensure every school offers a high-quality educational experience?
- Guarantee equitable access to language pathways, special education services, STEM programs, and inclusive learning environments across all enrollment zones?
- Invest in under-enrolled and historically under-resourced schools so that families see them as strong and desirable options?
Ryan Hazelton
Yes, with one condition: Integration goals must be built into the zone design from the start. Every neighborhood school also needs to be genuinely well-resourced so families feel good about where they are assigned.
At Mariposa Kids, I hear every spring from families dreading the current lottery process. They are asking for predictability and confidence in their local school. The board voted for this in 2020. The superintendent must deliver it without further delay.
Phil Kim
Yes. Families deserve clarity and predictability from their public school system. San Francisco has one of the highest private school enrollment rates in the country, and this directly impacts our funding.
We need to make enrolling in SFUSD easier, not harder. As board president, I led the board in naming zone-based enrollment as a Superintendent priority. We are moving toward the goal of area-based assignments with data, intention, and careful planning. Families across the city have made clear they want change, and they deserve a plan that delivers.
Laurance Lee
Yes. I support moving forward with area-based school assignments.
SFUSD opened doors for me. I want children to walk to excellent neighborhood schools that open doors for them.
Families need different things. Southeast families want access to more strong schools. Eastern neighborhoods need more seats close to home. Many Westside families want to preserve what works today. Tuesday’s board discussion made clear one plan must address all three.
As a commissioner, I would back a plan that expands strong options and makes enrollment more predictable across the city. Otherwise, a zone is just a shorter commute to the same problem.
Reina Tello
Yes. All schools have qualified teachers. What we need is for the district to ensure all schools have access to the programs their students need. We need language pathways across the city, not just in some areas of the city.
Students should be allowed to choose a school with specific programs and services they need, e.g. special education, until the district can expand those programs into the neighborhood school. The district needs to make sure that historically marginalized neighborhoods have equitable resources especially if the need is higher.
Tim Tung
Yes, with appropriate safeguards in place. A zone-based system will provide families with greater predictability and access to schools near their homes. At the same time, the district needs to provide access to specialized programs, such as language immersion, when families prioritize access to those programs over proximity.
Informed by meaningful community input, the district should utilize existing enrollment and demographic data to thoughtfully design zones that also support its diversity and equity objectives.
This should be an iterative process where the district regularly analyzes results and then makes improvements to increase family satisfaction, student outcomes, and enrollment stability.
Autumn Brown Garibay
Yes. Families should be able to attend a great school close to home, without fear of the lottery. That means having a seat at their local school with strong teachers, rigorous instruction, extra help for kids who need it, and opportunities that make families want to choose their local school.
I will hold the district accountable for giving SF families a predictable, area-based approach to school assignment. But assignment alone isn’t enough. We need great schools in EVERY corner of our city, and I will hold the district accountable for making sure every family has access to one.
Virginia Cheung
I support moving toward area-based school assignments, but programs must be planned before zones are finalized.
Every year, about 4,100 students apply for kindergarten, yet roughly 600 do not enroll in SFUSD. For TK, more than 2,200 applied, but only about 1,500 enrolled in 2025–26. Families are making choices about where to educate their children, and losing them in TK or kindergarten can mean losing years of enrollment and revenue.
Only 28% of kindergarten families list their attendance-area school first and that percentage varies widely by neighborhood. SFUSD itself identifies choice as an important tool for protecting… read full response here.
Week 2: Did you support the 2022 recall?
Virginia Cheung
I generally do not support recalls, particularly when an election is approaching, because they can be costly and divisive. At the same time, I strongly support voters’ democratic right to organize, petition their government, and hold elected officials accountable.
I was not an SFUSD parent during the pandemic or the events that led up to the recall. During the pandemic, I was a senior leader at Wu Yee Children’s Services, where my focus was responding to the immediate needs of children, families, and frontline workers.
As frontline workers ourselves, we kept childcare open for essential workers and provided families… read more here.
Alida Fisher
I was against the recall. I was worried that a recall would distract us from the urgency of reopening schools safely during the COVID pandemic.
Our district was on the brink of insolvency; the California Department of Education was perilously close to placing SFUSD into receivership due to our structural budget deficit, yet the district was slated to absorb the multi-million-dollar cost of the recall.
The commissioners were up for reelection in November, mere months away, so why not wait until then, instead of wasting resources on a special election? It felt like an end-run around our democratic process.
Ryan Hazelton
I believe recalls should be reserved for serious crimes or corruption, not for elected officials whose politics we dislike or whose governance has disappointed us.
That said, the 2020-21 school board was genuinely dysfunctional, and families were suffering the consequences. I voted to recall one of the three members while questioning the motivations behind the broader effort.
The right lesson from 2022 is not that recalls are a legitimate political tool, but that school boards must govern with competence and accountability so recalls never enter the conversation.
Phil Kim
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 Francisco’s kids are offered the best education.
This is a completely different board. I’m proud that our efforts have led to greater stability and a focus on student outcomes.
We’ve 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.
Laurance Lee
Yes, I was all in on the 2022 recall. Families had lost trust in a district that had stopped listening. When the protest signs came down, I stayed to do the quieter work.
Today, I read with Bayview kindergartners every week, and I see myself in some of those students. I also serve on the Bond Oversight Committee, bringing a contractor’s eye to keeping costs honest on hundreds of millions of dollars in school facilities projects.
I’m an SFUSD graduate. Our schools opened doors for me, and I want to help make sure every family can trust their schools and… read more here.
Reina Tello
I opposed the February 2022 recall because it was backed by over $2 million from billionaires and venture capitalists. In contrast, [in] the regular November 2022 elections, the three winning candidates collectively spent less than $150,000. Billionaires should not be the ones making decisions about our public schools.
At the same time, I understand and respect that many SFUSD parents supported the recall for good reasons having nothing to do with big money.
Autumn Brown Garibay
I am not a fan of recalls. They take time, money, and attention away from the work elected officials should be doing.
After years of attending Board meetings, I had lost faith in the board’s leadership. Achievement gaps persisted without a clear plan to improve outcomes, despite stated commitments to our highest-need students. Financial problems continued without a credible plan to change course and avoid overspending.
I wanted urgency, accountability, and a focus on whether district decisions were improving students’ education. Commissioner Collins’s lawsuit against SFUSD deeply troubled me. Taken together, these concerns ultimately led me to vote to recall.
Tim Tung
Yes, I supported the 2022 recall because the SFUSD Board needed greater accountability and a stronger focus on student outcomes, sound governance, and effective execution. The recall was ultimately approved by San Francisco voters. My support was based on concerns about the direction and performance of the Board, not partisan or personal considerations. I believe elected officials should be evaluated against clear goals, transparent data, and measurable results. As a Board member, I would bring that same standard of accountability to SFUSD: setting clear policies, monitoring implementation, acknowledging shortcomings, and making course corrections when the evidence shows they are necessary.
Week 1: What is your No. 1 priority?
Autumn Brown Garibay
The number one issue in our district is access.
For students, I will expand access to strong, consistent instruction and the support every child needs to reach grade level in reading and math. For educators and staff, I will ensure access to professional development, quality classroom resources, and, at a minimum, correct and timely payment.
I will also ensure the district provides families access to clear, timely and honest information, from navigating enrollment to understanding whether their child is succeeding in school.
Virginia Cheung
My top priority is improving student outcomes while strengthening SFUSD’s financial stability through higher enrollment, retention and attendance.
As the parent of a fifth grader at Alice Fong Yu Alternative School, I remember the anxiety of navigating SFUSD enrollment. It should be predictable, with high-demand programs like dual-language immersion available in every neighborhood, and fully staffed classrooms, especially in transitional kindergarten and special education.
We must also reduce chronic absenteeism. In 2024–25, absences cost SFUSD an estimated 4.4 million hours of learning and more than $60 million in state funding, harming both students and district finances.
Alida Fisher
My top priority is ensuring SFUSD’s resources are aligned with student outcomes to close persistent equity gaps.
Budgets are moral documents and must reflect our commitment to investing where students need the most support. Throughout my time as a parent advocate and School Board Commissioner, I have championed literacy initiatives, evidence-based curriculum, and targeted interventions.
As we continue implementing new literacy and math curricula, we must invest in professional development, instructional coaching, and differentiated academic supports so every educator has the tools to meet students’ diverse needs and every student has the opportunity to succeed.
Ryan Hazelton
Every year at Mariposa Kids, which provides after-school programming for SFUSD families, I hear from prospective SFUSD families frustrated by the enrollment lottery. The complexity drives families to private schools or out of SF, and every family we lose costs the district thousands in state funding.
Superintendent Su has a plan and timeline to move to a proximity-based system. We cannot delay it further. As a board member, I will require regular public reporting on implementation milestones to hold the district accountable. Six years after the board voted for enrollment reform, families are still waiting. That ends next year.
Phil Kim
As a former seventh grade science teacher and lifelong educator, I believe the most important relationship in any school system is between a teacher and a student.
My No. 1 priority is improving student outcomes by ensuring every classroom is led by a qualified and effective teacher. Teachers need consistent support, strong instructional systems, and the stability to focus on their students, not uncertainty about budgets or operations.
After years of fiscal mismanagement, we have begun to stabilize SFUSD’s finances and operations. We cannot go backward. My focus is making sure we sustain that progress so every student, in every neighborhood … read full answer here.
Laurance Lee
I’m a lifelong San Franciscan and SFUSD graduate, and my number one priority is literacy.
I volunteer each week teaching kindergartners to read in Bayview, so I see firsthand how the right support helps children succeed. As Vice Chair of SFUSD’s Bond Oversight Committee, I’ve learned the importance of accountability and measuring results.
The Board should set clear literacy and attendance goals, publicly track progress, and replicate what works across schools. Every child deserves to read at grade level, and every decision the Board makes should move us closer to that goal.
Reina Tello
Trust between the district and educators, between district and parents, and the district and community has been damaged.
I feel that the lack of communication at SFUSD between all parties involved — the district, parents, students, faculty — creates problems and barriers to better schools. While attending the ad hoc committee on community engagement, a lot of the issues that were surfaced don’t have “Simple Solutions” but would be greatly improved by having consistent, honest, transparent communication.
When elected, I will use the skills that I have learned to work with the community to ensure we are rebuilding trust.
Tim Tung
My number one priority is putting SFUSD on a sustainable financial path so we can focus on students rather than recurring fiscal crises. While the current budget is balanced, the District’s projections show deficits emerging in two years, including as the Prop G parcel tax expires. At the same time, major labor agreements expire June 30, 2027, making responsible negotiations an immediate priority. I would bring rigorous public finance oversight to these decisions, balancing competitive compensation and educator stability with sustainable finances. That foundation will allow us to focus on fully staffing schools and improving student outcomes.
