Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Educators, unions and parents urge SFUSD board to reject proposed $26 million in cuts and layoffs
Summary
Dozens of teachers, union leaders, parents and students told the San Francisco Unified School District board that proposed $26 million in budget cuts and layoffs would disproportionately harm school-site supports — counselors, nurses, paraeducators and special‑education services — and urged the board to vote ‘no’ on reductions on March 10.
Dozens of educators, union representatives, parents and students addressed the San Francisco Unified School District board on Feb. 25, imploring trustees to reject proposed budget cuts and layoffs that speakers said would strip essential services from vulnerable students.
Grace Digginson, a second‑year teacher at Aptos Middle School, said the district’s proposed reductions “are not only gonna have real life consequences for all schools, but especially our school,” describing understaffed counseling centers and teachers working multiple roles to fill gaps. “I ask you on March 10 that you vote for no cuts and sending no layoffs,” she told the board.
Union leaders and staff amplified that message. Susan Solomon, president of United Educators of San Francisco, urged the board to stand with educators and “say no to layoffs so that we can do what we need to do for our children.” Rafael Picazo, president of SEIU Local 1021’s SFUSD chapter, detailed long‑declining staffing levels for custodians and environmental health personnel and warned that cuts would imperil the district’s capacity to maintain safe facilities.
Speakers described wide, recurring harms they said would result from cuts: increased class sizes, fewer counselors and nurses, curtailed special‑education minutes and services, and diminished training for restorative practices. A parent and union representative asked the board to seek new revenue locally and statewide rather than reduce school‑site staffing.
Several student speakers described how wellness centers and counseling access affect learning and graduation pathways. Union representatives pledged solidarity; Local 21 and UESF members asked trustees to promise “no cuts, no layoffs.” Community groups, including Coleman Advocates and the African American Parent Advisory Council, linked the budget choices to equity concerns and urged using city and state levers to increase funding.
The board did not take a final vote on the budget at this meeting; public commenters repeatedly urged trustees to adopt a resolution or clear pledge ahead of March 10 that would rule out layoffs.
Ending: Trustees heard the public’s objections at length and were frequently pressed during the subsequent agenda items and committee discussions to produce follow‑up information on proposed reductions and to consider alternatives to layoffs before the district’s next decision point.
