Teachers, union ask SFUSD board to reconsider dozens of non‑reelection notices
Loading...
Summary
About 38 non‑reelection notices (including seven special‑education teachers) drew extensive public comment. Teachers and UESF told the board they lacked evaluations, faced retaliation or administrative failures; the superintendent said principals make recommendations but pledged to review names submitted.
Dozens of teachers, union representatives and family members addressed the San Francisco Board of Education during a lengthy public comment period asking the board not to "rubber stamp" the non‑reelection notices listed on agenda page 51.
Linda Plack, executive vice president of United Educators of San Francisco, told the board "there are 38 individuals who are listed here to get non reelection" and said seven are special‑education teachers who in some cases had not received required training or BTSA support. Multiple probationary teachers and special‑education staff then described satisfactory evaluations, classroom safety incidents, incomplete administrative evaluations and what they said were retaliatory decisions after they advocated for underserved students.
Speakers gave specific examples: a special‑education teacher who was assaulted and later received a non‑reelection notice, teachers who said principals failed to provide follow‑up observations or required credentialing information, and staff at San Francisco Public Montessori who characterized changes under a new principal as moving away from inclusive, social‑justice discipline practices.
Superintendent Garcia responded that principals have legal authority to recommend non‑reelection under state law but said district staff will record names and review any particular incidents flagged at the meeting. "We will at least take some time to review those things," he told the room.
Procedural note: the public comment group addressing the non‑reelection notices was given a timed block; the board later moved the consent calendar (which contains personnel items) for roll‑call under section O. The transcript records speakers and requests for the board to examine particular cases further, but no immediate reversal of notices was announced at the meeting.
Next steps: the superintendent said names and documents submitted during public comment are public records that will be reviewed; teachers and union representatives indicated they will pursue contract/representation channels and possible follow‑up with the board.
