The Facts

SFUSD passed a $1.36 billion budget in a 4-3 vote and updated its Local Control and Accountability Plan ahead of the July 1 deadline. Superintendent Maria Su says the district can now self-certify a positive budget after cutting spending and tightening operations. One major unresolved issue is attendance: SFUSD has said student absences cost it over $60 million in state funding last school year.

The Context

The split was more interesting than a simple yes-or-no headline. As Ezra Wallach at The Standard reported, Parag Gupta, Jaime Huling, and Matt Alexander voted no because they still did not see a strategic enough link between spending and student outcomes. Huling wanted more general-fund money aimed at chronic absenteeism. On the other side, Supriya Ray and Phil Kim joined Alida Fisher and Lisa Weissman-Ward voting in favor. Kim said he would “like to vote no,” but voted yes despite being “very frustrated” that clearer alignment documents showed up only once passage of the budget was at risk. Kim and Ray also want the budget better aligned with outcomes, but risking decertification from the state was too big a risk.

The GrowSF Take

We're glad to see the district continue to move forward balancing its budget, but we share the frustration that the money is not better tied to outcomes.

The uncomfortable truth is that both sides were right: SFUSD needed to pass this budget, and SFUSD still needs to show, in plain language, how the money will improve reading, math, and attendance.