Candidate Name: Virginia Cheung
Phone Number: 415.508.3459
Web site: virginiacheung.com
E-mail: i.am@virginiacheung.com
Name of Campaign Manager: Kara Lugtu
How much do you expect to spend in this contest:
Approximately $50,000
Major Endorsements:
League of Pissed Off Voters
United Educators of San Francisco
Phil Ting, Former Assemblymember
Mano Raju, SF Public Defender
Tracy Brown, Co-Founder, Latino Task Force
Vanessa Marrero, President, Parents for Public Schools
(list in progress as campaign launches)
For identification only
Incumbent whose votes are most similar to the way you would vote:
I'm running because I don't feel fully represented by the current incumbents. As a single mother, the daughter of refugee parents, and a lifelong advocate for education, arts, and family services, I bring a perspective grounded in lived experience and systems-level, cross sector work that is not currently reflected on the board. My approach would center the voices of students, families, and educators, with a focus on stable, fully staffed schools, equitable resource allocation, and strong community partnerships.
Incumbent who votes least similarly to the way you would vote:
I focus on building consensus and working with colleagues across perspectives to prioritize students, families and educators.
1. What lessons did you take from the recent strike? What would you have done differently than the incumbents, if anything?
The UESF strike was a powerful reminder that stable schools depend on a stable workforce. Educators were fighting not only for wages, but for the conditions necessary to provide high-quality education: manageable workloads, healthcare for their families, and adequate support for students.
As a public school parent, I helped organize picket support at my child's school and coordinated communication between families and educators. Nearly 140 parents joined a community group to support teachers on the picket line with food, supplies, and encouragement.
The biggest lesson is that when educators, families, and communities stand together, we can push institutions to prioritize student needs and fight for fully funded public schools. When I listened to educators on the picket lines, they were heartbroken that it had reached the point of a strike. When I heard from parents supporting the strike, they shared a similar heartbreak because they saw how hard our educators worked to fight for the well-being of our students. The strike could have been avoided if the needs of students, educators, and families had been taken seriously in contract negotiations.
As a board member, I would prioritize earlier and meaningful engagement with labor partners and families to prevent negotiations from reaching crisis points. The Board should create stronger communication channels and work collaboratively with unions to address staffing shortages, working conditions, and student supports before they escalate.
Fully staffed and stable schools must be the baseline for our district.
2. What is your stance on school closures for budgetary reasons?
School closures are extremely disruptive and should not be treated as a simple cost-cutting measure. I do not support school closures as a first approach and would support a moratorium, especially given concerns that our current staffing, budget, and infrastructure cannot support such a complex and high-impact process. Closures themselves are costly, and I would require a clear cost-benefit analysis that accounts for both financial impacts and effects on student outcomes.
If consolidation becomes necessary due to sustained enrollment decline, it must be approached with transparency, community engagement, and a focus on improving educational quality. Families deserve clear information about why decisions are being made and how students will be supported.
Receiving schools must be fully staffed, with strong programs, and supported by transportation and after-school services. Any underutilized sites should remain community assets and repurposed as hubs for early childhood programs, family services, or educator housing.
The goal should always be stronger schools, not fewer schools.
3. What is your stance on pandemic safety in the schools? Under what
circumstances might you support instating a mask or vaccine
mandate, or canceling in-person classes? What would be the main
basis on which you make this decision? (e.g., would it be based on
your gut feelings, or whose advice would you listen to?)
Public health decisions in schools should be guided by scientific evidence and expert guidance from the CDC, the California Department of Public Health, and the San Francisco Department of Public Health and not personal opinion.
The primary goal must always be prevention and the protection of the health of students, educators, and families. If public health authorities determine that masking, vaccination requirements, or temporary shifts to remote learning are necessary to prevent serious harm, I would support those measures.
At the same time, we must acknowledge the academic and mental health impacts of school closures. Decisions should carefully balance safety with the importance of keeping students connected to in-person learning whenever possible. The health and safety of our frontline, essential, and emergency workforce, as well as our most vulnerable communities, should always come first.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, I was working at Wu Yee Children's Services, where early educators were on the frontlines, and my son was in preschool. We implemented comprehensive safety measures, including masking, vaccination, social distancing, testing, and improved air filtration, to protect students, families, and staff. I also supported the community by staffing regular distributions of essentials, food, and safety supplies.
City leaders must also set the tone and coordinate across agencies to ensure compliance, consistency, and collaboration in delivering public health guidance.
Transparent communication and trust are essential so families and educators feel informed and confident in the district's approach.
4. How (if at all) would you like to see AI used in the classroom and implemented in the curriculum?
Artificial intelligence should be used cautiously, ethically, and as a tool to support and not replace educators.
AI has the potential to assist with administrative tasks, provide supplemental tutoring, and offer personalized learning supports that help meet students where they are. Used appropriately, it can help free up educators' time to focus on teaching, relationship-building, and student engagement.
However, AI must never replace the role of educators or undermine student privacy. The district should establish clear guidelines for AI use, including strong protections for student data, transparency in how tools are implemented, and guardrails to prevent overreliance.
Just as importantly, AI cannot replace the social, emotional, and developmental aspects of learning. Students need opportunities to interact, collaborate, and grow in physical, community-based environments.
AI should enhance access to learning and support educators, but human connection, mentorship, and real-world interaction must remain at the center of education, particularly in the earliest years of brain development.
5. Do you have practical ideas on how SFUSD can be adequately funded?
SFUSD's financial challenges are driven largely by declining enrollment, rising costs, and operational inefficiencies. Many working families can no longer afford to live in San Francisco, and too many of the city's service and nonprofit workers commute long distances, unable to send their children to SF public schools. Stabilizing and growing enrollment is the most effective path to long-term fiscal stability.
Families stay when schools are fully staffed, programs are strong, and the district provides a predictable, high-quality experience. We must invest strategically in programs that attract and retain families, such as dual-language immersion, arts and music education, STEM pathways, career technical education, community schools, and strong special education services. Investing in today's students helps break cycles of cuts that erode trust, drive families away, and further reduce funding.
We must also improve operational efficiency and transparency. This includes clearer budgeting practices, oversight of contracts and consultants, and ensuring that dollars are prioritized toward classrooms and student-facing services. District reserves must be built and used with clear public engagement, accountability, and transparency. Families and educators deserve to understand tradeoffs and how decisions impact students.
At the state level, funding based on Average Daily Attendance (ADA) creates structural inequities by penalizing districts serving vulnerable students who face barriers to consistent attendance. We must advocate for reforms that better reflect actual student needs.
SFUSD should also leverage its real estate assets through thoughtful, mixed-use development, such as educator housing, early childhood centers, and community hubs, that generate long-term revenue while supporting families.
Finally, we must strengthen partnerships with City Hall, philanthropy, and statewide coalitions to advance structural reforms, including modernizing Prop 13, strengthening Prop 98 by raising the base, improving LCFF to fully fund each student enrolled, and directing excess ERAF to schools, so public education is sustainably funded for the long term.
6. How are you currently involved in the SFUSD -- or how were you involved in the past?
I am a public school parent with a child at Alice Fong Yu Alternative School, enrolled in the Wah Mei before- and after-school program, and a board member of Parents for Public Schools of San Francisco. Through these roles, I regularly engage with families, educators, and district leadership, and attend Board of Education, Parent Association, School Site Council, and ad hoc meetings when possible.
I am an active volunteer in my school community and helped organize parent support during the recent UESF strike, coordinating communication between families and educators and mobilizing resources for teachers on the picket line.
Professionally, I spent more than seven years at Wu Yee Children's Services, one of San Francisco's largest Head Start and family service providers. In that role, the organization partnered with SFUSD to support kindergarten readiness, family engagement, and early learning alignment.
I also helped build coalitions that passed Proposition C (Baby Prop C), expanding funding for early childhood education and the workforce that supports young children.
My career has focused on strengthening systems that support children and families from cradle to career. I work to amplify community voices, build coalitions, and advocate for equitable outcomes and excellent public schools for every child.
7. How do you feel about the current school assignment system (including at Lowell)? Would you make changes, and if so, which ones?
The current enrollment system creates significant stress and uncertainty for families. Parents must navigate complex applications while balancing transportation, work schedules, after-school care, and language access often without clear or predictable outcomes.
We need a more transparent, predictable system that preserves access to strong programs and supports diverse, integrated schools. Improving communication timelines, simplifying processes, and increasing neighborhood stability can help reduce anxiety for families.
At the same time, we must focus on strengthening the quality of programs across all schools so families are not forced to compete for a limited number of “high-demand” sites. Every student should have access to excellent educational opportunities across the district and not just at a few schools like Lowell.
Excellence should begin early, with strong foundational support to ensure students meet academic and developmental milestones at every stage of their educational journey.
Any changes to enrollment or school programs must be done in partnership with parents, educators, and communities, with thoughtful transition planning to minimize harm and build trust.
8. Some of our schools receive significant funding from parent fundraising. Are you concerned about the inequality in fundraising between schools in rich and poor neighborhoods, and if so, what ideas do you have to make things more equitable?
Yes, I am concerned about disparities in fundraising between schools.
One approach would be to create a districtwide matching fund where philanthropic contributions or major donors match dollars raised by PTAs at under-resourced schools.
This “raise one, give one” model could incentivize fundraising while also directing additional resources to schools that need them most.
Public education should not depend on the wealth of a neighborhood or capacity of the parent community.
9. Are you familiar with the case of Williams et al. v State of California? Do you believe that all schools in the SFUSD are currently in compliance with Williams?
Based on reports of facilities issues and classrooms lacking permanent teachers, I do not believe all SFUSD schools fully meet the spirit of the Williams standards.
Every student deserves safe facilities, adequate instructional materials, and qualified teachers.
Ensuring compliance must be a priority for the district.
10. What is your position on JROTC in the public schools?
While I have concerns about the role of military programs in public education, some students benefit from the leadership and career skills offered by JROTC.
Any such programs should be voluntary and carefully evaluated to ensure they support students' educational and career development without promoting militarization of schools.
11. Would you support district elections for school board members?
Yes, I support district elections.
The current at-large system creates barriers for candidates from working-class backgrounds and underrepresented communities, who may not have access to the resources needed to run citywide campaigns. District elections can help improve representation and ensure that the Board more accurately reflects the diversity of San Francisco's neighborhoods.
District-based representation can also strengthen accountability and connection between board members and the communities they serve, allowing for more responsive and locally informed decision-making.
As a candidate who lives and has worked extensively in the eastern neighborhoods, I experienced firsthand how the current system can limit representation. I was an outlier in the last campaign, which underscores the need to create pathways for more voices from across the city to participate in leadership.
12. What is your stance on allowing noncitizen parents, guardians and caretakers of students to vote in school board elections? Did you take a public position on previous ballot initiatives on the subject?
As the daughter of immigrants and someone who has worked extensively with immigrant families, I support allowing noncitizen parents, guardians, and caregivers to vote in school board elections.
Families who live in San Francisco and send their children to our public schools have a direct stake in the success of the education system. Their voices should be included in decisions that shape their children's learning environments and opportunities.
Including noncitizen caregivers strengthens civic engagement, builds trust in public institutions, and reflects the reality of our school communities.
I have consistently supported policies that uplift immigrant families and ensure they are seen, heard, and represented in decisions that affect their children's education.
13. What are your thoughts on the various non-profit organizations that partner and/or contract with SFUSD?
Nonprofit organizations play a critical role in supporting students and families. They often have deep, trusted relationships in communities and can provide services that schools alone cannot deliver such as tutoring, mental health support, early childhood programs, and family services.
They are also essential partners in delivering high-quality afterschool and Out-of-School Time (OST) programs, which provide enrichment, academic support, and safe spaces for students, especially for working families who rely on extended-day care.
I have worked with nonprofits throughout my career and have seen firsthand the value they bring as trusted messengers and culturally responsive partners. Community-based organizations often provide representative, language-accessible, and culturally affirming supports that are essential for many families.
I strongly support the community schools model, which integrates nonprofit partners, healthcare providers, and other service organizations to provide holistic, wraparound support.
At the same time, these partnerships must be well-coordinated and aligned with district goals. SFUSD should ensure transparency, accountability, and clear communication so partnerships strengthen and compliment, not fragment, the system.
14. How do you see the role of the School Board in comparison to the role of the superintendent?
The School Board sets the vision, policies, and priorities for the district and represents the voices of students, families, educators, and the broader community. The Superintendent is responsible for implementing that vision and managing the day-to-day operations of the district.
The Board is responsible for hiring and firing the Superintendent. The Board has a dual responsibility: to support the Superintendent in executing clear priorities and to hold the administration accountable through transparent oversight, data-driven decision-making, and measurable outcomes. These roles are complementary and essential to strong governance.
As a board member, I would prioritize elevating community voices of students, families, educators, labor partners, and community-based organizations to ensure policies reflect lived experiences. This includes ensuring strong coordination across systems, including partnerships with nonprofits, OST providers, and community schools that support the whole child.
Accountability also means asking hard questions, ensuring responsible stewardship of public dollars, and requiring clear reporting on outcomes, resource allocation, and implementation.
Strong governance requires clarity of roles, collaboration, and a shared commitment to delivering stable, fully staffed, and high-quality schools for every student.
15. Would you ensure that all San Francisco students have access to a free, public pre-K program? If so, how?
Yes, I strongly support universal access to high-quality, public pre-K. Early childhood education is one of the most effective investments we can make to improve long-term academic, social, and economic outcomes.
San Francisco is uniquely positioned to lead in this area. Voters passed Baby Prop C, creating a permanent funding source and establishing the Department of Early Childhood. The city has also expanded income eligibility, making childcare free or affordable for many families, including households earning up to approximately $310,000 for a family of four.
To fully realize universal access, SFUSD must work in close partnership with the Department of Early Childhood, Head Start providers, community-based nonprofits, and our strong network of family child care small businesses. Transitional Kindergarten (TK) should be aligned with this broader ecosystem to ensure a seamless continuum of care and learning.
We must also invest in building a strong early education workforce by recruiting, training, and retaining educators so classrooms are fully staffed from day one. Several community organizations are already collaborating on workforce development, and we should continue to support and scale these efforts.
Universal pre-K requires coordination, workforce investment, and sustained public commitment, but it is achievable and essential to our democracy and building resilient future leaders.
16. Have you read Diane Ravitch's book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System? What lessons should the District take from this work? Whether or not you've read the book, what role do you see for charter schools in the public education System?
High-stakes testing, school closures, and the rapid expansion of charter schools have not improved outcomes at scale and have often destabilized public school systems, particularly in underserved communities.
A key lesson for SFUSD is that sustainable improvement comes from investing in educators, strengthening curriculum, supporting students' holistic needs, and building stable school communities, not from punitive accountability systems or constant structural disruption.
I believe strong public schools are the foundation of a healthy democracy, and our priority should be investing in and strengthening SFUSD schools so every family has access to a high-quality option.
Charter schools can play a limited role, but they should not undermine public school funding, equity, or stability. Any charter presence must be held to the same standards of transparency, accountability, and inclusion, and should complement and not compete with our public education system.
Read more about my vision for child-centered development in my blog post here<: https://www.ppssf.org/news/more-than-test-scores
17. What do you think of the current requirements that students take the SBAC test, and what are your thoughts on standardized testing in general?
Standardized tests like SBAC should not be the sole measure of student success. While they can provide useful data on certain academic benchmarks, they often fail to capture the full range of skills students need to succeed.
Students learn in different ways, and relying too heavily on test scores can reinforce inequities and lead to narrow definitions of achievement. Test-based systems can overlook creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and the diverse strengths students bring to the classroom.
Schools should use multiple measures of student progress and focus on holistic development. This includes life skills such as financial literacy, health and nutrition, independence, and college and career readiness.
Assessment should support learning, not define it. We need a more balanced approach that values growth, well-being, and real-world preparation alongside academic achievement.
18. How can the public schools better address the needs of Special Education students and ESL students?
Inclusive education benefits all students. Students with disabilities and English learners should have full access to the general curriculum with the supports they need to succeed which should include fully staffed and supported teachers with paraprofessionals, language specialists, differentiated instruction, and strong Tier I and Tier II systems.
We must invest in early and ongoing assessment and intervention so students' needs are identified and addressed promptly. Too many families report that their children's needs are overlooked or delayed, often due to understaffing and insufficient resources.
Fully funding Special Education is essential. Underinvestment leads to poorer student outcomes, increased litigation, and higher long-term public costs. We must protect Special Education and multilingual learner services from budget cuts and prioritize staffing, training, and inclusive practices.
Family engagement is also critical. Schools must provide language access and culturally competent services so families can be true partners.
As a former director at one of the largest Head Start and family services providers, I prioritized support for Special Education, English learners, and students furthest from opportunity. I will carry those values into my role as a school board member.
When we design systems for our most vulnerable students, we strengthen outcomes for all.