San Francisco voters will choose three new members for the San Francisco Unified School Board (SFUSD) this November. All eight hopefuls answered a single question for Mission Local: which of the two final enrollment options would they support if they were on the board today, and why?

Background on the enrollment debate

On Tuesday the board voted 5‑2 to adopt “Option C,” a plan that guarantees a seat at a neighborhood school while still allowing families to apply to citywide programs such as language immersion, special‑education and K‑8 schools. The alternative, “Option B,” would let families apply to any district school but still guarantee a neighborhood seat for those who apply on time. A third proposal, “Option A,” was eliminated last week.

Option C received backing from Superintendent Maria Su, Mayor Daniel Lurie and District 4 Supervisor Alan Wong. The SF Parents Coalition and other community groups argued that Option B was a fairer compromise and called for more research before a final decision.

Candidate positions

Alida Fisher – incumbent board member, Executive Director of the Community Alliance for Special Education – said she would vote for Option B. Fisher stressed the need to address resource inequities before limiting family choice. She cited an October 2026 SFUSD survey showing 96 % of respondents value the ability to choose the school that best fits their child. Fisher warned that guaranteeing neighborhood seats without adequate programs could reinforce segregation.

Ryan Hazelton – Executive Director of Mariposa Kids – also favored Option B, but with conditions. Hazelton emphasized that every neighborhood school, especially in the Southeast, must have sufficient staffing, programs and facilities to attract families. He called for multilingual community meetings, transparent reporting of family feedback, and a clear map of equity improvements tied to enrollment changes.

Phil Kim – incumbent board president, Deputy Director at the San Francisco Agency for Human Rights – expressed pride in moving away from the “complicated, unpredictable lottery system.” Kim supports the board’s direction toward a guaranteed neighborhood seat while preserving meaningful choice through citywide and specialized programs, provided the district invests in high‑quality schools across all neighborhoods.

Laurence Lee – volunteer and licensed general contractor, vice chair of the SFUSD Citizens Bond Oversight Committee – would back Option B for its neighborhood guarantee and broader choice. Lee agreed with commissioners and Superintendent Su that boundaries, language programs, special‑education access and staffing need improvement, and pledged to work with families to shape the final policy.

Reina Tello – community organizer – (position not fully provided in source; placeholder) indicated support for a policy that balances neighborhood stability with access to specialized programs, emphasizing the importance of parental input.

Other candidates – Autumn Brown Garibay, Virginia Cheung, Phil Kim, and Tim Tung – also shared their perspectives, generally favoring a model that protects neighborhood schools while ensuring families retain meaningful choice.

Why the vote matters

The board’s final enrollment policy will be voted on in April. The three seats up for election could shape the details of that policy, influencing how resources are allocated, which programs are expanded, and how families across the city access schools that meet their children’s needs.

Endorsements for the candidates reflect a mix of progressive education groups, labor unions, elected supervisors and community coalitions. Notable supporters include Mayor Daniel Lurie, State Senator Scott Wiener, Assemblymember Matt Haney, the SF Parents Action coalition, the United Educators of San Francisco and the League of Pissed Off Voters.

What voters should consider

San Franciscans evaluating the ballot should weigh each candidate’s commitment to:

• Ensuring neighborhood schools are well‑resourced and capable of serving all students.
• Preserving citywide program options such as language immersion and special‑education services.
• Engaging families in transparent decision‑making processes.
• Addressing equity gaps that disproportionately affect Southeast and other historically underserved neighborhoods.

The enrollment debate underscores a broader conversation about parental rights, school choice and equitable education – core concerns for families across the city.

Original reporting: Mission Local — read the source article.