Parsing City College Funding Measure Proposition O

By Ann Marie Galvan


City College has been hit hard with budget cuts and staff layoffs, and Proposition O could generate up to $37 million annually, according to City Controller Ben Rosenfield. The measure requires City College to submit an expenditure plan that would then need to be checked by an oversight committee so the funds won’t be available immediately, but City College needs this secure source of funding.


Illustration by JohnTaylor Wildfeuer/The Guardsman

Just this year, 38 full-time instructors were laid off along with over 100 part-time lecturers. Over the past three years, City College has lost 40% of its programs and enrollment is in a steady decline. English classes and ESL classes have been hit hard by the layoffs and class cuts, and class sizes are huge to accommodate students. Over 300 students were reportedly waitlisted for English 1A and 200 students were stuffed into a single ESL course.

With classes and waitlists of this size, students are being turned away. English 1A is a transfer-level course, so it is vital for City College students looking to continue their education, and cuts to ESL programs are detrimental to immigrant communities seeking to build their lives in the city and the United States. City College is a stepping stone for English language learners, and the cuts to the ESL program is a huge loss to San Francisco’s future.


These courses are the entry point for many to the workforce and for becoming active participants in San Francisco city life, and students should not be turned away. People from all backgrounds benefit from City College’s programs and workforce development opportunities. The revenue generated from Proposition O could help City College potentially return to its pre-pandemic course schedule and help it continue to serve the city of San Francisco.

2 thoughts on “Parsing City College Funding Measure Proposition O

  • Rick Baum

    Please explain why my post was not included here. I would benefit from knowing your criteria.

  • Patrick Durnal

    It’s unfair to force property owners to pay more taxes to pay for a public college. It is not the responsibility of the public to pay for classes, that teach English to non English speakers. That is there own personal problem. Furthermore these parcel tax ballot measures are sneaky insertions into a voting system that seems to be readily accessible to SFUSD elites and unionists, trying to profit off of us hard working private sector workers and home owners who typically don’t have time to understand the sneaky ballot measure tactics and to take the time to counters them. The SFUSD is behaving like A leagalized RICO organization, every time they sneak parcel tax measures on the ballots.

Comments are closed.

The Guardsman