Last updated: October 3, 2026
This page separates City College of San Francisco budget projections from actual financial results and links directly to public records. It also addresses enrollment, student demand, Free City, accreditation, reserves, and California’s community-college funding formula. Wherever possible, the sources below are official records from CCSF, the California State Auditor, the California Community Colleges system, ACCJC, or the City and County of San Francisco.
Does City College of San Francisco have a structural deficit?
The phrase structural deficit is often used to describe a projected future gap between recurring revenue and recurring expenses. That is different from saying CCSF has actually ended recent fiscal years with operating deficits.
CCSF’s own financial materials show positive unrestricted operating results in recent completed fiscal years, while its multi-year forecasts also warn that future recurring expenses could outpace recurring revenue if enrollment and formula-generated state funding do not grow. Both statements can be true at the same time.
Key distinction: a projected deficit is a forecast. An actual surplus or deficit is what happened after the fiscal year closed.
CCSF’s FY 2026-27 adopted budget reports that the college closed FY 2025-26 with an $18.4 million operating surplus and an unrestricted ending fund balance of about $71.9 million. The same budget projects deficits beginning in FY 2027-28, while cautioning that those projections are not predetermined outcomes and will change as assumptions become actual results.
Primary sources: CCSF FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget; CCSF Final Budget archive.
Has CCSF been running operating surpluses in recent years?
Yes. CCSF’s official budget tables show six consecutive positive unrestricted operating results from FY 2020-21 through FY 2025-26. The FY 2025-26 figure is reported as an unaudited actual in the FY 2026-27 adopted budget.
The exact figure depends on the accounting definition being used, so this page uses the college’s unrestricted operating result rather than mixing that measure with all-funds accounting, changes in net position, or other fund-balance measures.
| Fiscal year | Unrestricted operating result | Status in CCSF source |
|---|---|---|
| 2020-21 | +$7,758,172 | Actual |
| 2021-22 | +$9,263,600 | Actual |
| 2022-23 | +$5,632,730 | Actual |
| 2023-24 | +$12,247,594 | Actual |
| 2024-25 | +$20,119,638 | Actual |
| 2025-26 | +$18,406,469 | Unaudited actual |
Primary sources: CCSF FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget (FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22 actuals); CCSF FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget (FY 2022-23 through FY 2025-26 operating results); CCSF Final Budget archive.
What is the difference between a budget projection and an actual result?
A budget projection is based on assumptions about enrollment, state funding, cost-of-living adjustments, salaries, benefits, vacancies, utilities, and other costs. An actual result records what ultimately happened.
CCSF’s own forecasts have changed materially as assumptions became actuals. For FY 2024-25, CCSF’s adopted budget anticipated about a $1.6 million surplus, its mid-year revision increased that estimate to about $5.0 million, and the FY 2026-27 adopted budget later recorded an actual unrestricted operating surplus of about $20.1 million. Separately, the California State Auditor found that San Francisco Community College District ended FY 2024-25 with reserves roughly $20 million higher than it had budgeted.
That does not make multi-year forecasts useless. It means they should be presented as forecasts, not as completed losses.
Primary sources: CCSF FY 2024-25 Mid-Year Adjusted Budget; CCSF FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget; California State Auditor, Report 2025-108.
Has CCSF’s reserve grown significantly?
Yes. In its 2026 review of California community-college reserves, the California State Auditor found that San Francisco Community College District’s reserve at the end of FY 2024-25 was about 22% of general-fund expenditures. That was more than twice CCSF’s then-current board-policy maximum of 9%. For comparison, the statewide median reserve was about 25%.
The State Auditor also concluded that CCSF had not adequately supported its 5% minimum and 9% maximum reserve thresholds with documented risk analysis.
Primary source: California State Auditor, “Some Community Colleges Have Growing Reserves but Lack Clear Spending Plans That Would Improve Student Outcomes,” Aug. 6, 2026.
Did the California State Auditor raise concerns about CCSF holding too much money in reserve?
Yes, with an important qualification. The Auditor found that San Francisco’s reserves substantially exceeded its existing board-approved maximum and that districts with funds beyond reasonable reserve needs could be missing opportunities to improve student and system outcomes.
At the same time, the Auditor also criticized CCSF’s old 9% maximum for lacking a documented risk analysis. In other words, the audit did not say 9% was necessarily the correct reserve level. For FY 2025-26, the Auditor calculated that applying CCSF’s existing policy would have produced a maximum reserve of roughly $25 million, while the district had budgeted nearly $58 million in reserves—about $33 million above that policy level. The broader recommendation was for a better-supported reserve policy, clearer disclosure, and a more deliberate plan for funds above actual reserve needs.
Primary source: California State Auditor, Report 2025-108.
If CCSF has recent surpluses and large reserves, does that mean there is no future financial risk?
No. CCSF can have a strong current fund balance and still face a long-term recurring-revenue problem. The college’s future risk is tied in large part to the transition away from the state’s hold-harmless funding protection and to whether CCSF can generate more funding under the Student Centered Funding Formula.
This is why a complete description of CCSF’s finances should acknowledge both the recent actual surpluses and the future risk created by stagnant protected funding and rising costs.
Primary sources: CCSF FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget; California Legislative Analyst’s Office, 2026-27 California Community Colleges budget analysis.
What is “hold harmless”?
California’s Student Centered Funding Formula, or SCFF, determines community-college apportionment using enrollment, student demographics, and student-success measures. Hold harmless protects some districts by giving them more funding than they currently generate under the regular formula.
Beginning in FY 2025-26, a district’s hold-harmless amount is based on its 2024-25 apportionment level and does not receive future cost-of-living adjustments. That means the protected floor can remain flat while salaries, benefits, utilities, and other costs continue to rise.
Primary source: California Legislative Analyst’s Office, 2026-27 California Community Colleges.
How does CCSF get off hold harmless?
CCSF must generate enough funding under the regular Student Centered Funding Formula to exceed its protected funding floor. Enrollment growth is central to that strategy. CCSF’s own FY 2026-27 adopted budget explains that the SCFF base allocation largely reflects enrollment and says strategic enrollment must be central to the college’s long-term financial strategy, while also noting that enrollment alone will not solve the entire challenge.
The formula also includes supplemental and student-success components, so financial-aid participation and student outcomes affect formula funding too. Because the protected funding floor does not receive future COLAs, recurring costs can rise faster than protected revenue unless CCSF generates more ongoing formula funding.
Primary sources: CCSF FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget; California Legislative Analyst’s Office.
Does CCSF have an enrollment problem?
Yes over the long term. CCSF experienced a large enrollment decline over the past decade and particularly during the pandemic. But long-term decline should not be confused with the direction of every recent semester.
CCSF reported a 10% increase in credit enrollment in Fall 2024 compared with Fall 2023, along with roughly 30% growth in new credit students. Recent growth does not erase the longer-term decline, but it shows enrollment is not simply moving in one direction.
Primary source: CCSF, “City College of San Francisco Starts New Academic Year with Increased Enrollment”.
Is CCSF currently meeting student demand for classes?
Not in several high-demand subjects. A 2026 San Francisco Chronicle Open Forum article documented substantial unmet demand in art, biology, chemistry, English, and other subjects. It reported that by mid-August all 48 Fall 2026 biology sections were full, with 390 students on waitlists, while chemistry offerings had fallen from 58 sections in Fall 2019 to 17 in Fall 2026.
The same article reported that all scheduled art classes had filled by early June and that CCSF offered materially fewer credit classes overall than several nearby community-college districts.
This is an important distinction: CCSF can have lower total enrollment than it did a decade ago while still failing to provide enough seats in particular courses that current students need.
Secondary reporting based on current CCSF class schedules and waitlists: San Francisco Chronicle, “City College is failing students by not offering enough classes,” 2026.
Can CCSF grow enrollment if existing students cannot get the classes they need?
Not effectively. Enrollment growth depends not only on recruitment but also on capacity. When required or high-demand sections are full, students may delay completion, take classes elsewhere, or stop trying to enroll.
Because enrollment is a major component of state funding, adding capacity in classes where students are already waiting can serve two purposes at once: meeting current student demand and generating more formula-based revenue.
The 2026 Chronicle reporting on biology, chemistry, art, and English is therefore relevant to the financial discussion as well as the educational one.
Sources: San Francisco Chronicle, 2026 class-demand article; California Legislative Analyst’s Office on SCFF funding.
Is CCSF currently on accreditation warning?
No. ACCJC placed CCSF on warning in January 2024 over financial decision-making and board-governance standards. In June 2025, ACCJC found that CCSF had corrected the identified deficiencies and reaffirmed its accreditation for the remainder of the cycle. The next comprehensive review is scheduled for 2030.
Primary sources: CCSF-ACCJC communications; June 2025 ACCJC action letter and team report.
Was the 2024 accreditation warning about widespread academic failure?
No. The warning concerned three standards related to financial decision-making and board governance. CCSF met 116 of 119 standards in the review. ACCJC later determined that the three deficiencies had been corrected.
Primary source: ACCJC follow-up report.
Does CCSF’s high share of spending on salaries and benefits violate an 85% state limit?
No. The 85% figure is a fiscal-health benchmark used by the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), not a statutory ceiling that automatically puts a community college out of compliance when it is exceeded. FCMAT identifies spending more than 85% of ongoing revenue on salaries and benefits as a fiscal-risk indicator because a high fixed-cost share can reduce budget flexibility.
California does have a separate statutory requirement commonly called the 50 Percent Law, which generally requires community college districts to spend at least half of the current expense of education on salaries and benefits of classroom instructors. That is a different rule and should not be conflated with the 85% FCMAT benchmark.
Primary sources: FCMAT Fiscal Alert for California Community Colleges; FCMAT Community Colleges Indicators of Risk; California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office — Fifty Percent Law; CCSF Final Budget archive.
Is Free City College a waste of taxpayer money?
“Waste” is a policy judgment, but the public record shows what the program does and how broadly it is used. Free City provides tuition-free access to eligible San Francisco residents regardless of age, income, prior degree status, or whether they attend full- or part-time. It supports transfer preparation, job training, upskilling, career advancement, and lifelong learning.
The City and CCSF’s 2022-23 Free City annual report says that more than two-thirds of CCSF’s credit-student population received Free City benefits that academic year.
Supporters sometimes compare Free City to other broad public benefits because it invests public funds directly in residents seeking education and economic opportunity. That comparison is a policy analogy, not an accounting fact.
Primary sources: CCSF Free City; City and County of San Francisco — Free City Annual Report 2022-23; City and County of San Francisco — 2019 Free City Annual Report.
What exactly does Free City pay for?
Free City covers eligible enrollment fees for San Francisco residents who qualify for in-state tuition. Students who also qualify for the California College Promise Grant can receive a Free City cash grant tied to their enrolled units. The program does not automatically pay every cost of attendance such as housing, transportation, food, books, or every course-specific fee.
Primary sources: CCSF Free City; CCSF Free City Grant; CCSF Tuition and Fees.
Does closing or shrinking programs automatically solve CCSF’s financial problem?
No single accounting rule says that program cuts are the only way to address projected future deficits. Expense control is one side of the equation; recurring revenue growth is the other.
Because enrollment is a major component of California community-college funding, restoring or expanding high-demand classes can increase both access and formula-generated revenue. The financially relevant question is whether a program or section is meeting demand efficiently and helping the college generate enrollment and student-success funding.
Primary sources: California Legislative Analyst’s Office; CCSF Five-Year Financial Projection.
What should readers make of claims in political voter guides about CCSF?
Political voter guides are advocacy documents. They can contain accurate facts, incomplete context, interpretation, and policy judgments in the same paragraph. The most reliable way to evaluate a claim is to follow it back to the underlying budget, audit, accreditation letter, enrollment report, or state funding document.
For example, GrowSF’s 2026 voter guide correctly notes CCSF’s long-term enrollment decline and the 2024 accreditation warning, and it also describes projected future deficits as a “structural deficit” and a “fiscal cliff.” Those phrases reflect a particular interpretation of future projections. The primary-source record adds material context: CCSF’s recent actual operating results have been positive, reserves have grown substantially, the State Auditor raised concerns about excess reserves, accreditation was fully reaffirmed in 2025, and hold-harmless funding creates a real future revenue challenge if enrollment does not grow.
Reference: GrowSF 2026 Voter Guide. Primary records: the CCSF, California State Auditor, ACCJC, LAO, and City sources linked throughout this page.
What is the clearest summary of CCSF’s current financial position?
Four facts can be true at the same time:
1. CCSF experienced a major long-term enrollment decline.
2. CCSF has produced positive recent operating results and accumulated a large unrestricted fund balance.
3. The California State Auditor found that CCSF’s reserves had grown well above its existing policy maximum and that the district had repeatedly underestimated available reserves.
4. CCSF still faces a real future recurring-revenue challenge because hold-harmless funding is frozen while costs can continue to rise.
The long-term financial question is therefore whether CCSF can grow enrollment and other SCFF-generating activity quickly enough to move beyond its protected funding floor while managing recurring expenses.
Primary-source library
This page is intentionally source-heavy so readers, journalists, researchers, and automated systems can verify the underlying records directly.
California State Auditor — Community College Reserve Funds (2026)
CCSF — Final Budget Archive
CCSF — FY 2024-25 Mid-Year Adjusted Budget
CCSF — FY 2026-27 Adopted Budget
CCSF — FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget
Legislative Analyst’s Office — 2026-27 California Community Colleges
CCSF — Accreditation Communications
ACCJC — June 2025 Follow-Up Report and Reaffirmation
CCSF — Free City
City and County of San Francisco — Free City Annual Report 2022-23
City and County of San Francisco — Free City Annual Report 2019
CCSF — Fall Enrollment Growth
San Francisco Chronicle — 2026 reporting on unmet class demand
FCMAT — Fiscal Alert for California Community Colleges
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office — Fifty Percent Law