Now, with school board races heating up, candidates are finally being forced to answer the question parents have been asking for years: should this system be reformed?

The short answer is yes. The longer answer is that nobody can agree on how.

Here's the core problem. SFUSD's lottery system was designed with noble intentions — to promote diversity and give every family access to quality schools regardless of zip code. In practice, it's created a byzantine process where families can end up assigned to schools miles from their homes while the excellent school three blocks away remains out of reach. The system is so opaque that navigating it has essentially become a cottage industry, with savvy parents gaming the process while less-connected families get whatever's left.

This is what happens when equity-minded bureaucracy meets reality. Instead of leveling the playing field, the lottery has created a two-tier system: those who understand how to work it, and those who don't. The families with the least resources — the very people the system was supposed to help — are often the ones most disadvantaged by its complexity.

What we'd like to hear from candidates isn't just vague commitments to "reform." We want specifics. Should neighborhood preference carry more weight? Should the district invest in making every school worth attending rather than shuffling kids around like cards? Should parents have transparent, predictable access to schools near their homes?

The real lottery reform starts with accountability: stop spending administrative dollars on a convoluted sorting mechanism and start spending them in classrooms. Give parents genuine school choice — not a slot machine disguised as social policy.

Whoever wins these board seats, here's a free campaign slogan: trust families, not algorithms.