tv Government Access Programming SFGTV December 16, 2018 10:00am-11:01am PST
and the size of ethnic majorities is smaller under the neighborhood model. this simulation did not include more intentionally drawn lines to enhance diversity. >> whereas in this simulation, the average sbac proefficiency score is higher at most psychologicals and the average distance is lower and whereas there continues to be a mismatch where students live and schools are located, and whereas given the mismatch between where students live and where our schools with located it is not physically possible for every child to enroll in their attendance area school with current attendance area school capacities and whereas sfusd has a significant number of citywide schools or strands obvious language based and whereas in san diego unified, lob, elk grove, capistrano, a
student can enroll in their base school without a school choice process. and whereas school districts across the country have had success withdrawing intentionally diverse attendance areas zones to maximize integration within attendance zones and whereas berkeley unified school districts are drawn into three zones, and within each zones, families can make choices within that zone. and whereas bost an public schools use a home-based student assignment system where each family is offered a customized list of schools offered within a one mile raid yans of the family's home. and therefore be it resolved that sfusd will redesign a
school system -- [inaudible] >> -- back to the board of education and be it further resolved the possible development process should include extensive feedback to and from the district, families staff and community. and staff will propose to the board of education concrete measurable definitions for quality school, equity access, neighborhood schools and be it further resolved as a second step once the board of education has approved the definition, staff will confirm the board aways theory of action for a student's assignment and will work with the board to prioritize policies for student assignment. and be it further resolved in
developing a revised student development policy staff will strive to serve the needs of historically underserved students and offer a predictable transparent and accessible student assignment system. and further be it resolve as a third step staff will model initial options for schools and be it further resolved any revised student assignment system will not require anyone who is currently enrolled in a school to change schools: be it further resolved, finally resolved the board of education requests the subject conduct an analysis of transportation needs and plans as they relate
to student assignment. >> president cook: thank you. we have public speakers -- public comment on this item. julia roberts fong and alita fisher. >> good evening again, commissioners and superintendent. as you heard from the various advisory committees at the committee of the whole meeting last week, we are excited to be defining quality schools, equitiable access, diversity and integrated schools. we appreciate that the policy calls for extensive out reach and feedback from our advisory body. however, we have concerns based on the proposed allocation of $500,000 annually for this resolution, a mere 40,000 being set aside for community engagement. as joe biden says, don't tell
me your priorities. show me your budget and i'll tell you your priorities. we look forward to working with the group to make sure that our feedback is not just heard but utilized in upcoming updates. our hope is that a solution has not already been predetermined, but that we will be considered partners in this process. thank you. >> my name's julia roberts fong and i'm one of the members of the san francisco families union which was formed with the hope of supporting meaningful equity and diversionity in public schools. we he concerned about the focus on community-based assignment, home-based, neighborhood model and the fact that this policy specifically points to a predetermined set of models
without prioritizing the needs of families first. and i think that the fact that affluent white families have not shown up and opposed this policy is quite telling. while at the same time you've heard from the african american p.a.c., special ed preponderate a.c., the coleman advocates and other organizations that serve families of color and other families that have not been served well in other ways of the district, that they're not supportive of this policy at this time. i think what will really shift the dynamics at the board are when families are prioritized and listened to, primarily families of color. so again, you know, there's grumbling at the last meeting
when i called out we're basically talking about a neighborhood schools policy, and that has traditionally been in san francisco a dog whistle for segregation, and i think the fact that we're talking about community-based assignment, home based and predetermining a neighborhood model points us that we are moving backwards and we are not prioritizing putting the needs of families of color ahead of affluent families who are on chat rooms right now saying don't worry about the lottery, there won't be a lottery, and are celebrating that. so i would urge you if you are serious about engagement that you make sure that the parent advisory groups are listened to, which was not done to this point. thank you. >> president cook: comments from commissioners? commissioner sanchez? >> thank you. i think i spoke to this point at the committee as a whole, but i just want to reiterate
that the -- the attempts of this district to desegregate schools over the last 40 years have failed mostly because people with means were able to walk away from the district. so integration in my mind means when you walk into a classroom, you see a diverse student population, and we have not achieved that. so our attempts at bussing and through our attempts with ctip, our diversity index, i think all the things that we tried to, i think in good faith, to try to diversefy our student enrollment at schools have largely failed. and i think in the last several years, our schools as pointed out in the resolution have become more racially isolated. i have not seen real evidence of huge numbers of our more marginalized families being able to engage in the system as others have been able to
because they have means to navigate and to go through the system and visit, for example, 20 schools and have a -- a matrix chart with them to make sure that all the things the schools have for them meet the needs of their own child. i'm dubious about really anything we can do to -- really to diversefy schools because again, people with means will always find a way out of the system. and integration in my mind really means frankly that white kids are exposed to other kids, kids of color. and when white kids leave the system, we get what we have and have -- continue to have, which is entire schools which, for example, are made up of african american and latino students and are segregated with programming. we definitely have to have more
predictability, more transparency, and we definitely have to have better outcomes for communities that have not been served. i'm not necessarily going to propose earlier what i was thinking of proposing in this resolution, which was to -- because this resolution is largely to do with elementary schools, but i do think we need to do, in the same process, address our high schools and to also have predictability and equitiability -- or equity at all of our comprehensive high schools. so also to meet the letter of the law and the moral issues that surround our high school enrollment. unless other board members want to add that into this resolution, i think i can have a parallel resolution as we move forward. >> president cook: commissioner norton? >> commissioner norton: i just
actually thank you, commissioner sanchez, for your thoughtfulness on this? i think i would like to talk about the high school process at some point? i think -- i don't think with this resolution that it -- that they should be tied together? i think we want a parallel process or a -- to be thinking about these things at the same time that we're doing all the prework and the community engagement around student assignment, but i don't want to set preconditions necessarily for what it should look like or shouldn't look like? so i'm just saying i would like to work with you on that as we go forward? but i appreciate not putting it in tonight because i think it would have muddied the waters significantly, and i think we, as much -- we have a lot to do on this strand of the work, and i think we need to be thoughtful on the other strand and how we work those two
together. thank you. >> president cook: commissioner merase? >> commissioner murase: as the president of the school board committee, just want to wish the school board good luck on this work. it is -- it's not an easy process, but it is important work. to get different outcomes, we do have to try different things. i don't think any of us can say we're 100% satisfied with the outcomes the current system has produced. i want to thank the members for working on the student assignment committee. we have been working with incremental changes to make access easier, but we did want to give the subject time to really land and take a leadership role on this issue, so just wish you all the best.
>> president cook: commissioner haney? >> commissioner haney: yeah, that's -- i -- i was on the student assignment committee for the last, i think, four or five years with commissioner merase, so i know that this will be a big challenge for you all, and you know, i -- i had a meeting early on to talk to the superintendent about this. and i was communicating to him my thoughts on it, and he said well, how come the board hasn't called the question on this? how come they haven't put something forward? are you sure that the board is actually on board with moving in a new direction? and i think one of the things that i'm really -- what's really important as a part of this is i think the board is n unified in going through this process, in looking carefully at what we're doing and what other districts are doing and seeing how we can better accomplish or goals that we
have collectively. i think this current system that we have now, you know, set out three primary goals, and i think that we on the student assignment committee and the rest of the commissioners have been pretty clear that we're not accomplishing, and that if we continue to just go down this road with this all-choice system and make small little changes around the edges, that we're not going to get there. and so i hope that, you know, we look at it honestly, and that we keep our -- at the top of our -- our -- you know, we keep equity at the center of what we're trying to accomplish with this. and when you look at, you know, whether it's desegregation, predictability or transparency or equitiable choices, this system that we have right now is not doing any of those things, and i think that if we were just to continue to say let's see what happens next year, let's see what happens in five years, it would be a huge
mistake. so i -- i think that we can come up with a better system. i was -- i wasn't on the board, but i came to those board meetings when the board was coming to the system that we had now, and there was a lot of hope about what might happen. you know, there's nothing magical about what we have. it was a political compromise in many ways. it is a going out on a limb -- it was a going out on a limb. the ctip thing was a whole new concept. there were certain hopes about how the attendance areas and the ctip and the choices would lead to these better outcomes, and i don't any that's happened. for the people who are saying we need to be bolder about integration, we need to be bolder about the options and choice, i hope the board gives us some potential paths forward.
i don't think the solution is neighborhood schools. i do think that there are other types of options that can give more predictability, can guarantee some control choice or zone choice or some initial assignment that leads to better access and also more integrated schools. so i wish you the best of luck with this. i'm really glad that there are three commissioners who are going to continue to carry this other when commissioner merase and i are gone. but i do appreciate the people who came forward and had concerns because this has to be done listenly closely to families, listening closely to the community and making a decision. i think eight or nine years into this current system, i think it's safe to say that it's time to look more carefully at another option. so good luck. thank you, also, to the staff.
i think you did put forward amendments that make this better, and i think this is such a huge part of how people experience our district, and the question of how assignment happens in schools and how we ensure desegregation and quality schools is a central part of what we do, so i don't think it's something we can just say as a let's get to it later. i think we need to put it at the center and i wish you all the best of luck. >> president cook: commissioner maligo? >> i grew up in hunters point, and you know, growing up, people were moving their families different cities because it just wasn't safe, the neighborhood wasn't safe. you know? and i've seen, you know, black and brown families move their kids to better schools for all
sorts of reasons. and, you know, i do think, you know, focusing on quality schools and really paying attention to that. the things that come to me, you know, we have a lot of educators in this city that are having a hard time with their kids and putting them in places where they can get to work. i've been to board meeting where teachers have had to leave the city and leave the school district because it's just been very difficult for them. i say that all to say, you know, there's inclusive community input is always important. i'll just always strongly continue to advocate that we have the voices at the tables, but we also move forward with a system -- you know, times have changed today that is focused on, you know, the unique situations that we have in san francisco with the homeless population, with the foster youth that the advocate mentioned the other night.
and especially really thinking about our educators in this process, as well. but i do think it is time for us to move on this. >> president cook: thank you. and you know, i have a lot of history around this issue, as well. and i think it's fitting that tonight, we recognize carver elementary for building a school that people wanted to be at. i came to this issue sort of in a different way, and first of all, before i say anything, i want to thank commissioner haney for kicking this off. resolution haney strikes again, one last bomb he drops before he -- before he moves on. city hall ain't ready. and, you know, this -- i actually was on the side of supporting the current system, and i was initially challenged
by that when former commissioner fewer was in support of the ctip, and i was speaking to her about that issue. and that's why i'm really glad that rachel came onto sign onto this because you know, this is like that football that gets kicked around in every city, every major -- every city, where we send our kids to school, it ends up being a national conversation. someplace gets highlighted, and all these racially sensitive comments come up. but what really brought me on the side of changing something that was really more focused on communities is actually a bit militant. it was a speech by stuckey carmichael. he made his name organizing black voters in the mississippi delta to take back their counties, to vote in their own
sheriffs and their own school board members. and he was on face the nation talking about the issue of school choice. and he said that integration is a subterfuge for white supremacy. what he meant is we have a system that equates consistency with white. we consider is an accomplishment when -- it an accomplishment when black kids get into while schools. when we look at the current system, the line to get out of a particular neighborhood, it follows that certain pattern. that's why i wanted to bring it back to the carver school, that it's possible to build incredible schools when you have incredible educators, so we don't have to he --
necessarily equate race with quality. i want our neighborhoods to have confidence in our schools. and a school assignment system on its own accomplishes that. i don't think a board on its own accomplishes that. thurgood marshall had 1100 students when i went there, and seven years later, it had 450. the community gave up on the school. i'm looking at a report that miss rosina tang gave me when i was in high school. balboa was not a school that anybody wanted to go to, and it's in the top five of most highly requested schools in the city. it has a capacity of 270 students, and the requests are 16 1670. a decade ago that's not the story of balance bowl boa, and
naive enough to think that the board was responsible for that. what i want to do it create a system that's easy to understand, and it feels like it serves families. i think we operate in a district where we're just jumping through way too many hoops. like, we have to completely rethink how we engage our community so that they feel like we want to make this a convenient process for them, and we want to make it easy for them. so that's really my main -- what i'm going to be most focused on is that aspect of this resolution. but the work of making schools incredible is also going to be driven by people at the site. i don't want to get into the whole teacher housing speech because i have the rest of the meeting to run, but i stand on this issue on the side based on the words of stuckey
carmichael, and i believe that we can build incredible schools that people in the community build in. with that, roll call, miss casco. >> clerk: thank you, commissioner. [roll call] >> clerk: that's six ayes. [inaudible] >> president cook: section -- section g, special order of business, review and adoption of the annual and five-year report relating to the collection and expenditures of developers, and developer fees, a motion and second. can i have a motion to second on this item? >> so moved. >> president cook: can i have a second? >> second. >> second. >> president cook: superintendent, do you have a
designee to read the recommendation into the record? >> yes, i do. we will have our chief facilities officer, don -- let me -- i can do this. wait. hold on. -- >> seriously? oh, wow. >> >> i'm learning. i'm learning. >> it's kamalanathan, like, kamala harris, and nathan, with all short a's. all right it's late. i'm giving everyone a pass. commissioners, good evening. our recommended action is to review and adopt the developer
impact fee, annual and five-year reports for the fiscal year ending june 30, 2018. i'm joined tonight by larry kircha, who worked on updating our annual reports if you have any questions. >> president cook: commissioner norton? >> commissioner norton: yes, i do have a question. so my question is -- and one of us asks this every time this report comes in front of us. can we raise them more? >> i'm going to refer that question to mr. kircha. >> so every evening -- >> commissioner norton: i know you're going to give me the same answer. >> every even year, the district allows the state to raise the developer fees, so that will happen again in january 2020.
>> commissioner norton: well, then, we'll see you in january 2020. >> president cook: okay. seeing no other questions, miss casco, a roll call vote. >> clerk: thank you. [roll call] >> clerk: that's five ayes. >> president cook: number two, approval of the san francisco unified school district and the san francisco county office of education balance scores. single plans for a student achievement. can i have a motion and a second for approval? >> so moved. >> second. >> president cook: superintendent -- he does need to read the recommendation? >> yes. we have our chief academic officer, brent stevens. >> you did well with my name, sir. the recommended evening -- the
recommended action this evening is that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district approve the san francisco unified school district and county office 2018 through 2022 balance score card/single plan for student achievement. >> president cook: so we have no public speakers signed up for this item. any comments from the board, superintendent? seeing none, miss casco, roll call vote. [roll call] >> clerk: thank you. that's six ayes. >> president cook: thank you. number three, approval of the first amendment to employment contract for superintendent matthews. can i have a motion and a second for approval? >> so moved. >> second. >> dr. matthews, you have a designee? -- oh, i'm sorry. yes, i have a second? >> second .
>> is this where i get to say my recommendation? we're tonight, the board asks you approve the first amendment to employment contract for superintendent matthews. >> president cook: so we have no public comment speaker cards. any comment from the board? commissioner sanchez? >> thank you. just so that the public is clear, this is a -- it extends the contract so that the expiration date is december 22, 2022, which is normal practice for most school districts to have a continual three-year contract. and assuming this passes, congratulations, superintendent.
[inaudible] >> president cook: roll call vote, miss casco. [roll call] >> clerk: thank you. five ayes. >> president cook: see now, we're at section h, and discussion of other educational issues. we already our report from ali, and we're going to move onto the central kitchen update, dr. matthews. >> so this evening, we'll have an update regarding the central kitchen. we will begin with our chief of policy and operations, orla o'keefe. >> thank you, superintendent and commissioners.
my name is arla o'keefe, i'm the chief of policy and operations. i really appreciate all you've done. i'd also like to acknowledge the hard work and commitment of our over 200 employees who work to serve over 30,000 meals a day. and the number of meals we've served in the last few years has grown from 6.2 million annually to 7.6 million annually. thanks to the board's support, the vast majority are permanent civil service. this evening, there are three different handouts that the commissioners have that give an update on other than what we're talking about. tonight focuses on the culinary kitchens. with that, i'd like to pass it over to jennifer la barr who
will give you an update on the central kitchen. >> thank you, orla. good evening -- maybe good night. thank you for the opportunity today to talk to you about the san francisco school district's culinary journey. today -- sorry. today's agenda, we're going to talk about how we are maximizing s.n.s.'s -- student nutrition services upgrades. first, a little bit about our vision. we are wanting to create a student centered, equitiable and financially stable school food eco systems. our mission is that every day we nourish our students every
day that allows them to thrive inside and outside the classroom. we have a few believes. equity, wellness, partnership, and accountability. our culinary journey, really talking to you today about our work starting in 2013 and then our vision going all the way up to 2028. in 2013, we started working on creating school meal programs that would start meeting our mission, our vision that i mentioned earlier. we've implemented refresh menus which are freshly prepared items at our middle and high schools? you can see that evidenced by the meal numbers that miss o'keefe spoke to earlier?
in 2016, this board passed the good food purchasing policy, and we have been working on implementing that through that point. we also have moved a lot of our staff from t.e.x. to p.c.s. or permanent positions. starting this school year and through 2021 with the support of the voter approved g.o. bond, and the sugary drink tax, we'll be furthering our program. while no decisions have been made, we have been working on a vision for our school meal program going through 2028. so i'm going to talk a little bit about what we're doing now with maximizing our cooking ability with our current infrastructure. so we have been doing some meal program improvement, and i want to talk a little bit about our goals, as well. so one of our goals is to nourish our students with good food throughout the day so that the school food that we're serving is healthy, culturally
diverse, affordable, fair, sustainable, and loved by students. to that end, we have implemented more tuned prepared food. ouch our e.d. kitchen is now purchasing directly from local farmers. last school year and this school year, we're purchasing strawberries from koch farms, brown rice out of sacramento, and most exciting to me is organic beef, which is coming out of sonoma. we're also building a strong school food culture by engaging the whole community in creating a financially stable school food culture that activates student voices and shows how much we care in our students.
we continue to work at our pitch schools with taste tests to engage our students. we are also doing -- with our school food advisory, you'll see a picture of one student developing a recipe right now. we are also working on expanding our school food advisory, as well. we now have a leadership track. within that, we have interns working in our department, and we've had over 50 applicants for our positions for the first year of school food advisory. we are expanding access to meals throughout the day with our breakfast after the bells and school supper programs. one of our newest goals that we just imp implemented this year is to support a thriving
workforce? so we have provided over 20 hours of engaging culinary professional engagement to employees and have more planned. . >> so with the support of the 2016 g.o. bond, we're really addressing our facilities. this is something that historically we have not addressed in san francisco and now we're taking use of the 2016 bond to do so? for our final goal that i'll be talking about, we want to create dining spaces that delight students and kitchen spaces that make it possible to prepare and serve good food. we are continuing with our
dining space redesign work to the tune of $4.1 million? we are also doing school kitchen facility equipment assessment which is going to give us the road map to replacing out dates and out moded and broken equipment? we are making over $1 million investment in kitchen equipment, and we're doing kitchen renovations in partnership with the facilities department. for our central kitchen update, i want to talk a little bit about our vision. so our vision for 2028 -- and while we haven't -- there's been no decisions made yet, i'm just putting it out there where i see us being able to go, and that is to a district central kitchen. there was some talk in consideration for regional kitchens, and given the infrastructure that's needed to do regional kitchens and also the fact that we are in neighborhood schools and the challenges that having kitchens in neighborhood schools pose, i am making the suggestion that we go to one district central
kitchen that would support all district sites, depending on their own capability? we will also be able to have capacity to support programs throughout the city and through the year, so looking to summer and supporting programs at the dcyf offers, as well? we will also have finishing kitchens as over 90 locations, so the schools that currently are receiving prepackaged food, a vision is for them to eliminate the prepackaged food and for us to start serving bulk food at those school sites that is provided by the central kitchen. we are looking at aid model that bust on public schools has implemented quite successfully and has seen an increase in participation as a result. we're also making sure that 20-plus middle schools and high schools continue to be self-supporting and we are looking at schools in the bayview and arts school, looking to create something
like for profit kitchen facilities so that we can help to create the s.n.s. programs. and also creating career pathways for our s.n.s. dining staff as well as partnering with our c.t.e. students so our students have an opportunity to work with us after they graduate. so a little bit about the work we're doing with the 2016 g.o. bonds. we're making a 4.6 million investment at the center. it's being built to support 5,000 meals a day. there's a big delta there for us to be able to do more out of that space. also creating a professional development facility for our dining staff with a project
start date of april 2019. in the pictures that he sue up there right now, the top one is the current facility, and it is very outdated and our staff, josh davidson is here right now. he's doing an amazing job with the facility he has, but we're excited when he has the if a ilt is that he needs. it will be green, it will be the vision of zero he mission that we want to embrace and we're also making a $2 million investment at the marina kitchen? we're looking at this to not only serve the marina students but to be a catering kitchen for our district? again another professional development facility, also looking to see what we can do to partner with c.t.e.? that has a project start date of april 2020? and we are hoping when that kitchen is done, s.n.s. can be
the sole source caterer for this district. and with that, i'd like to open it up to questions. thank you. >> president cook: thank you for the presentation. commissioner norton? >> commissioner norton: well, first of all -- >> president cook: i'm sorry. i'm sorry. we do have one speaker, joshua davidson. >> hi, everybody. i'll be brief because i have to be at work in, like, six hours so i'm josh davidson, i'm the chef for sfusd, and actually, i think as of a week ago, i'm a permanent employee, which is pretty exciting. [applause] >> so this is -- i'm coming up -- i think ten days, it'll be my ninth anniversary in sfusd, and we have seen massive change over the last nine years. and the thing i'm most excited about is i think in jennifer, we finally have someone who's
ambitious enough to take us forward. and the vision is great. there's a lot of work ahead of us. turning the ship is going to be a huge project. just getting the plumbing working in my kitchen is, like, if we can do that in the next year, i'll be real excited. but there's just so many opportunities for us to do great work here and to really make the food a part of welcoming students and make the school environment somewhere they want to be throughout the day that nourishes the whole child. and i will disagree with jennifer on one thing, though. the mindful needs, great, but if you had the koch strawberries this summer, they're great. the watermelons, the spaghetti squash. i did a whole meal organic and
local. it was great. the students loved it. i had a tremendously fun time putting it together with my team, and every day can be like that. we have just another ten years of work, and then that's the vision, that's the goal. i think we'll get there. i think we'll get there with jennifer, if no one steals her away in the meantime. i think we'll get there with orla, if no one steals her away in the meantime. >> president cook: commissioner nor tton. >> commissioner norton: i want to welcome you to the board. it's really wonderful to have you, and i was so excited that we were able to steal you away from another district i won't mention, and i didn't get any angry calls from my friends on that board, but i expected to,
so really just happy to have you on board and really excited to see this plan. as josh pointed out, this is a long time coming. you know, many of us -- i've been here a little longer than josh. he said nine years. i think it's ten for me, but we've been talking about a central kitchen at least that long and probably a lot longer than that, so it's really exciting to see this reach a -- you know, start to really move? and i guess i'm -- i should know this, and i think i've forgotten, but do -- will -- so how much bond money do we have already secured from the voters, and do -- would we have to put some of this work into a future bond? >> so we have -- as of -- with the 2016 bond, $20 million that has been said aside for s.n.s.
with what i just discussed, we would have to go outside and secure additional funding to achieve that. >> commissioner norton: whether it's from private funding or an achievement bond, that's to be determined. >> yes. we haven't determined that. >> president cook: commissioner merase? >> commissioner murase: thank you very much for the report. i've been looking forward to the report for a while, and i appreciate the holistic approach rather than just attacking one problem at a time, really thoughtful about building out capacity, really incompete investing in the staff who worked in this area and to include students. so i hope that you will continue in this very positive direction? it's very exciting to see so much progress in a relatively short period of time, and i really want to acknowledge our labor partners at sciiu for
coming to the district in a constructive, productive way to help us with this challenge. >> president cook: commissioner haney? >> commissioner haney: yeah, this is great. i'm really -- i -- a number of years ago, it seemed like this is sort of -- a bit of a dream, and one of the things that's especially exciting about it is how we've done it, and i hope that we continue to do it in close partnership with our staff and with our labor partners. i think, you know, there's a sense, and we do this with the good food purchasing policy, you know, when you're talking about food, if you do it in the right way, and you think about who's making it and where it's made and how it's prepared, and really people experience it that way. so it's important that we just didn't say all right, we're going to outsource this or we're going to do some cheap way of doing this, but we're actually building the capacity ourselves, taking advantage of the extraordinary staff we
have, bringing them on in a more permanent way. i know it may cost a little bit more. we subsidize our food program in general, but i think it's worth it, and i hope our schools experience it that way, and our staff experience it that way, and ultimately our students experience it that way, with food that's prepared locally and sourced locally. all of the things that this makes possible in terms of leading with our values and not just how we teach but -- you know, everything that we do in our schools, and food is essential. so keep doing that, and i hope that that continues. thank you, josh, as well, and to the leadership of everybody who makes this happen. >> president cook: okay. also, i want to notice joshua.
he's great. and thank you for the presentation. so if you have no other comments, good night. number three, educational revenue augment fund. >> so the staff presenting will be myong lee, and he'll be joined by reeta marva. >> we love our peanut gallery colleagues, so we're going to try to spice it up for them. thank you, commissioners. we know you had a lot of presentations and a long meeting, but we did see this as an important topic to cover night. our chief facilities officer
and i are going to try to team up. >> financial. >> sorry. chief financial officer. my mistake. so she will take the first half of the presentation, and then, i will finish up, and the topics we are going to cover are a little background about our revenue sources, we're going to talk about allocation of property taxes, the educational revenue augment fund or eraf, and then a little bit about what basic aid districts are. so with that, miss maravan. [inaudible] >> one more time. okay. you missed my humor, but that's all right. okay. so as myong mentioned, just to set the context and framing for
our discussion and understanding of what eraf is, we just wanted to go through very briefly, for those commissioners who have been around for more than five years will recognize what revenue limits were. so as most of you know, school districts in california get their funding through a combination of local, state, and federal sources. most of those local, state, and federal resources are general purpose funding, i.e., unrestricted, but they also include some very specific restricted funding, especially some of our state and federal sources of funding. and since the early 1970's, school districts have received our general purpose or unrestricted funding through what was called the revenue limit formula.
it's quite complicated, but somehow, the state uses some calculation to set a per student funding level each year -- or used to under the revenue limit, and districts would get their proportionate share of that state funding based on the unit of average daily attendance of the district. so the revenue limit funding was set as a ceiling, and it was -- it came to school districts as a combination of local property taxes and state aid. the school districts would normally get the local property taxes from the local municipalities and counties, and the state would makeup the difference between what they were owed in total revenue limit and what they received in property taxes.
so this was this direct correlation between property taxes and state aid. so for every dollar of property tax that increased -- [inaudible] >> -- the local control funding formula. and in addition to this change in the funding methodology, there were a whole host of what we call categorical programs that were restricted and used into very specific activities were consolidated and rolled into this local control funding formula, the lcff. so now, the lcff accounts for
general purpose funds which we get as base grants as well as targeted funds that are generated through our student demographics, and those are supplemental and concentration fund. and as i mentioned earlier, a whole bunch of categorical programs have been eliminated, although at the state level, a few remain, such as after school funding through the state. if you look at this chart, this ten-year graph of the proportionate share of state -- of -- sorry, state aid versus property taxes, it can be a little misleading. if you notice, back in 2009 and 10, all the way through almost 13-14, when the lcff was implemented, most of our
revenue limit general purpose funds came from property taxes. in fact that one year, we almost received 100% of our property tax -- of our revenue limit purely from our property taxes. and then in 13-14, when lcff provided more revenue and started providing funding to education, the property tax amount, proportionate share started leveling off, and we started getting more in state aid. so it looks like we get a huge amount of our funding through our local property taxes, but if you looked at the share that -- of property taxes that sfusd receives in comparison to what the statewide average is, we actually get a very -- a relatively smaller share of property taxes. our property taxes makeup about
33% of the total collection from the city, compared to other california school districts, which they get about 54% of the -- of the share of property taxes. and these proportionate shares or ratios was set for different -- all the different school districts by a state legislation, which is under assembly bill 8 in 1979. and if we were to change that share -- so if you go to -- so they're i guess statutorily driven and specific to different counties. and if we were to attempt to change that allocation, it would require legislation at the state level in order to do so. yeah. you want to take it from here? >> so just to continue that somewhat -- and the next few slides, before i forget, i want to acknowledge city controller
ben rosenfield who provided most of the next several slides in briefings and information that he has been providing to officials at the city and county, so they are equally helpful for us to understand this situation that came to light a couple of weeks ago about this eraf windfall, so we really appreciate the controller for sharing these slides with us. so we have this pie chart that shows that distribution within san francisco of property taxes proportionately to different entities. so she mentioned a minute ago that most california districts get a little over half of the property tax dollar. that is unusually low in our case, and just to run through these numbers a bit, the biggest part of this pie chart, it's about two thirds, goes directly to the city and county, and then, the sort of
r.n. -- i'm sorry, the kind of light orange, i guess, wedge of this pie that says 9%, that is -- that represents a little less than 8% that comes to sfusd, and the remainder goes to city college. so that's the portion that really represents the longest standing share of the property tax dollars that comes to the district. and then, more recently, in 1992, the state creates what's called the educational revenue augmentation fund, or eraf, and that was done in a time of state budget crisis or state budget woes. and what happened there was the state required counties to shift money into eraf, this new creation, and eraf allowed the state to reduce its payments to
minimum funding guarantees for school districts. so it was a way to manage their problems, their fiscal issues at the state level, and it's been with us ever since, since 1992, and we'll explain more about how eraf works in a moment. but in the current day of each dollar property taxes, about two thirds goes to the city, about 8% comes to sfusd, about 1.5% to city college and a small portion to other entities, and then 25% is shifted into what's call this educational revenue augmentation fund, eraf. so this is a really important chart about what's happening now with eraf. so if you look on the left-hand column of this stacked bar chart, this shows what a typical relationship is like in -- in terms of how the funds
flow to education or to other purposes. so -- and this has been true for the city and county of san francisco and sfusd all the way through the last -- you know, until recently. so 16-17 or even 15-16 perhaps. so that red bar that cuts across both bar charts is a representation of the minimum funding that's guaranteed to a district. so -- including ours. and typically, the portion that funds schools directly, the red part, is not enough to meet the minimum funding guarantee. and then, the next -- the next source is eraf. so the portion that goes to schools from eraf is then added to the school property tax. and when you add those together,