Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teacher Pay topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Teachers, union and parents press SFUSD for salary raises and stability amid affordability concerns
Summary
Educators and United Educators of San Francisco told the board that rising housing costs and slow contract progress threaten teacher retention. Speakers presented petitions, vacancy counts and called for the district to use increased revenues to improve pay and staffing stability.
Dozens of teachers, parents and United Educators of San Francisco (UESF) representatives told the board on Nov. 18 that teacher pay, hiring and retention are urgent problems for SFUSD amid rising local cost of living.
UESF Executive Vice President Susan Solomon and political director Ken Trey said the union had gathered thousands of petition signatures calling for stability and security for students and staff; they warned of open positions, chronic substitute shortages and paraprofessional vacancies and urged the board to prioritize compensation in upcoming negotiations.
Why it matters: Speakers linked staffing instability to student learning losses — parents described multiple weeks without permanent teachers, and UESF representatives said vacancies (including over 60 paraprofessional openings) are harming instruction. Several speakers noted that recent state and local funding increases (Proposition 30, LCFF) create an obligation to direct more resources to employee compensation.
Numbers and context: Parents and speakers cited figures during public comment: the district’s three‑year compensation package was described as an 18.5% increase in salary and benefits (an 8.5% salary increase over three years), which some speakers argued would not keep pace with local consumer‑price increases. UESF leaders noted a district budget of roughly $700 million and urged using available funds to address retainment.
Board response and follow up: Commissioners thanked speakers and asked staff for memos on PTA formation procedures and the status of contract negotiations. Superintendent Richard Carranza and staff were asked to work with parents and UESF on next steps; Deputy Superintendent Richard Kerchie and assistant superintendents were cited by parents for on‑the‑ground responsiveness.
Outcome: The public testimony increased pressure on the board to accelerate contract talks and to produce clearer information on vacancies and compensation proposals; no formal board action or appropriation occurred at the meeting.
