The resounding “No” of the electorate on Tuesday meant good news for public education, but only because our list of urgent matters did not get lengthened. While it’s important to enjoy victories when they arise, the set of critical issues facing us has not disappeared along with Schwarzenegger’s threats. Here is a review of some of the major problems we as a community must confront now.
The Labor Dispute
The votes at the ballot box did nothing to address the current fiscal crisis that the San Francisco Unified School District is facing. The Governor still has our Prop. 98 money, and our support staff (SEIU Local 790 members) and teachers are still underpaid. Strikes by either or both of these groups would be incredibly detrimental to everyone in our community, especially kids, but they remain real possibilities because of the breakdowns in communication.
The lack of financial transparency on the part of the district has made it impossible for those not at the negotiating table to assess the situation. As reported in Tuesday’s San Francisco Examiner, Ed Harrington’s review of the fact-finding information showed the potential to cover the wage raises and expanded health coverage for one year, but not necessarily past that.
Further, we, the public, don’t as yet know if the identified possibilities are because of uncovered capacity or because of trade-offs elsewhere, and what those trade-offs might be. While questions still remain, this news does indicate that there may be some viable reallocation choices that would lead to a resolution of this crisis.
Parents for Public Schools is providing information on its website about the situation as it unfolds. This site will be regularly updated. Materials from the district, 790 and UESF can all be found there, along with links to recent articles, and questions that PPS has posed to all parties in order to clarify the current situation. PPS is also gathering questions from the community to add to this list. http://www.ppssf.org/labor.htm
Superintendent Search
The process of searching for a new superintendent will be complex and needs to start now. Because Superintendent Ackerman will be leaving at the latest by the end of the school year and perhaps earlier, we do not have someone at the head of the district who is in a position to make longer-term decisions. From the labor disputes to developing a new assignment strategy, there are too many critical issues on the table for us to be without an educational professional guiding the school board along.
But because of those same issues, the BOE does not have the luxury to solely focus on recruiting a new superintendent. Furthermore, recruiting will be difficult, because being at the head of our district, or any large urban district, is quite a challenge. We will want our Board to take the time to develop a solid plan, and then use it to find and choose the best possible candidate, not necessarily the candidate meeting the minimal requirements who can start the soonest. To provide some breathing room, an interim superintendent should be appointed as soon as possible (Ed note: It was announced last night that Deputy Superintendent Gwen Chan will begin serving as Superintendent in March and continue through 2007. This will promote stability and continuity in the district).
Student Assignment/Consent Decree
In the middle of Election Day excitement, the judge presiding over the Consent Decree determining the parameters and goals of the SFUSD student assignment process determined that that it will expire on December 31st of this year. The short synopsis was that the Diversity Index, which was created to meet the terms of the Consent Decree by desegregating schools and programs without the use of race as an indicator, was not working and was perhaps contributing to resegregation.
This decision is unlikely to affect the assignment procedure for this coming school year (although that has not yet been confirmed), but it does mean the pressure is on to devise a new plan. It is imperative that the school board members read the full report of the Student Assignment Community Advisory Committee, which reviews many possible option and scenarios, and meet with the members of the committee (http://portal.sfusd.edu/data/cacsa/Recommendations.pdf).
School Closures
Families of school age children have been leaving San Francisco over the last several years, meaning that enrollment in our schools is declining. That decline, coupled with the financial shortfalls has pushed the strategy of closing schools forward.
At this point, 19 schools are under consideration:
Cabrillo ES Starr King ES
Chinese Education Center Treasure Island ES
John Muir ES Aim High Academy MS
John Swett ES Enola Maxwell MS
Jose Ortega ES Gloria R. Davis MS
Malcolm X ES Luther Burbank MS
McKinley ES Willie Brown, Jr. MS
New Traditions ES June Jordan School for Equity
Rosa Parks ES Newcomer HS
Sheridan ES
Unlike last year, the process is at least starting earlier, giving the community some time to at least weigh in on how the decisions are being made. A very detailed presentation that was made at this past Monday’s Board of Education meeting provides much needed information about how the process is going to move forward. Community members, and especially those at schools on the list, should examine this presentation carefully to make sure that the information about your school is accurate (http://portal.sfusd.edu/data/superintendent/School_Closure.pdf )
The issues around enrollment and funding are real enough, but the approach taking to these school closures still rankles a bit.
The goals that the closures are supposed to meet seem ill-defined, which is the last thing we need for actions that are going to affect children and communities so dramatically. Is the problem that we have too many school spots in general for the number of students we have? If that’s the driving force, than perhaps an approach that phases out schools as opposed to abruptly closing them and dislocating students is more advisable.
If it’s primarily a financial goal, what are all of the options that are available for meeting these shortfalls and shouldn’t closures being considered as a choice amongst those options as opposed to a given?
Realistically, the enrollment and fiscal objectives are intertwined, but the current approach feels like the harshest way to meet them. We need to look at our needs over the longer-term. The next several years will most likely have a continued decline in school population (and thus school dollars), but if the Mayor is serious about supporting families in San Francisco, we may well see an increase in the medium-term (and in dollars). Phasing schools out seems to be the least disruptive approach as well as the approach that would give us the most flexibility.
These are tough times for all of us. The successes at school sites are still there and many good things are happening, but the larger struggles are beginning to overshadow those positive aspects. The only way to move forward is to do it openly and together; there is simply no other choice.
Lisa Schiff is the parent of two children who attend McKinley Elementary School in the San Francisco Unified School District and is the president of the board of directors of Parents for Public Schools of San Francisco (http://www.ppssf.org).
