The Brief

A year after he took the top job in 2019, the president of one of California’s largest and most powerful unions said in a newsletter that he wanted to be “the 800 pound gorilla” in Sacramento politics.

Since then, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, the union known as CCPOA representing 26,000 state prison guards, has spent and spent, in a way it never did before. Its biggest recipient: Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has taken $2.9 million from the union since he was elected governor.

That’s 31% of all political spending by the union since 2001.

The union under President Glen Stailey gave $1.75 million to Newsom’s anti-recall campaign in 2021 – the largest single contribution to that effort – and another $1 million to support Proposition 1, Newsom’s treatment and housing plan for people experiencing serious mental illness, which passed by the narrowest of margins this year.

That’s a noted contrast to the union’s relationship with the three governors who preceded Newsom, especially former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who fought the union’s proposed raises and was the target of an aborted recall campaign launched by the union.

CCPOA has contributed more than $9.3 million to political campaigns in the last 20 years

Prior to the Newsom administration, the prison union’s biggest political expense came in 2005, when it joined other labor organizations in fighting a package of ballot measures sponsored by Schwarzenegger that would have curbed state spending and weakened public employee unions. The unions won, dealing Schwarzenegger a major defeat.

Campaign finance records show the union largely stayed out of political fights during former Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration. It avoided the ballot measures that lowered criminal sentences for nonviolent crimes and gave inmates more opportunities for parole — propositions that voters passed and that contributed to declining headcounts in state prisons.

Then Newsom took office, and the union’s pocketbook opened wide.

There are two ways to look at that spending, according to interviews with legislators, labor leaders, former prison officials and budget watchdogs.

In one, it’s a naked display of power: one of the richest unions in a labor-friendly state reminding its top politicians that it can spend with them — or against them. That’s primarily the view from outside the Capitol.

In the other view, from inside the Capitol, it’s a reflection of the union’s anxiety in the face of waning influence as California’s future almost certainly includes fewer prisons and fewer union-represented prison guards to staff them. The numbers don’t lie: California is housing 70,000 fewer inmates in state prisons than it did in 2011.

At the outset of his first term, Newsom floated the idea of closing a single state prison. He’s since closed three and canceled a contract on another private prison, collectively saving hundreds of millions of dollars. But facing a budget deficit and 4,000 fewer inmates projected to be in prison by the end of his term in 2026, Newsom demurred this year from shutting down another institution.

In a year of budget scarcity, when each inmate costs about $132,000 to house annually and the Legislative Analyst’s Office has said the state has space to close five more prisons, Newsom has been stubborn about keeping prisons open. He has said he wants to keep some additional capacity in the system, and that he wants to build up rehabilitative programs that can help inmates reintegrate into society.

Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Newsom, in a written statement said the governor has tried to balance potential budget savings with public safety needs inside prisons.

“Saving taxpayers billions of dollars without impacting public safety, Gov. Newsom has closed more prisons than any of his predecessors,” he wrote. “The governor’s decisions have been based exclusively on meeting the evolving needs of our criminal justice system, in a manner that maximizes public safety and the judicious use of taxpayer dollars.

Nathan Ballard, an adviser to the union and a longtime Newsom ally, said in written responses to questions from CalMatters that the union and the governor had “respectful and substantive” discussions about potential prison closures this budget cycle.

“Union leaders clearly aired their views and listened very carefully to the administration’s priorities,” Ballard said. “The governor made it known that he valued the union’s input. Ultimately, Gov. Newsom’s process is his own, and it would be irresponsible to speculate about how he arrives at any particular decision.”

The millions of dollars the union shoveled into Newsom’s most significant projects were a reflection of the union’s priorities, he said.

“When the union and the governor are in alignment policy-wise, as they were during Proposition 1, the CCPOA does not hesitate to fight hard for the governor’s initiatives,” he said.

“Even while grappling with policy areas where they are less aligned, there is a strong commitment to finding areas of agreement and progress.”

CCPOA's big contracts in Newsom years

Spending lots of money to support the most powerful executive in the state is perhaps not surprising. So what happens to the politicians who cross the prison guard union?

When the union wanted to get rid of John Moorlach, a Republican state senator who was questioning pension benefits for California public employees, it spent more than $1 million against him in his Orange County race. Then the flyers started popping up, sponsored by the union, tying the Never Trumper senator to the policies and personal predilections of Donald Trump.

“It was cartoonish,” said Lance Christensen, Moorloch’s campaign manager in that 2020 race. “You would think that the public safety unions whose job it is to serve and defend and protect Californians would want a guy like John Moorlach, who was law and order and supportive generally of public safety programs.”

Former Sen. John Moorlach lost his reelection campaign in 2020. The California Correctional Peace Officers Association, or CCPOA, spent heavily against him. The Republican lawmaker had carried legislation that would have allowed public employees to choose 401(k) plans instead pensions.

(

Anne Wernikoff

/

CalMatters

)

The prison guard union has spent $3.8 million across 32 state legislative races in this century – $1.2 million of that was spent to defeat Moorlach. He lost to Democrat Dave Min, 51%-49%.

“They decided that it was time to go hammer and tong after him, and take him out,” Christensen said.

The union, which represents about 10% of all state workers, has undoubtedly gotten good deals for its members, arguably none more so than last year, when it negotiated a $1 billion raise over three years. Correctional officers also got a new state-funded retirement perk out of the deal, in addition to their California Public Employees’ Retirement System pensions. And when the state mandated COVID-19 vaccinations for state employees, prison guards were permitted to skip them.

That spending has consistently come under fire from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, which found in 2019 and 2021 that the Newsom administration offered “no evidence to justify (a) pay increase” in an unusually harsh analysis of proposed prison guard raises.

The analysis found that California prison guards have neither a recruitment nor a retention problem, and that their salaries were already in line with the salaries in the counties where they work – if not more than 5% higher than comparable job classifications.

Last year, the Legislative Analyst’s Office excoriated Newsom’s administration for repeatedly refusing to make public a 2018 compensation study on prison guard salaries and benefits. The administration regularly publishes compensation studies regarding its 18 other employee bargaining units.

Instead, the administration provided a 2022 compensation study, which the Legislative Analyst’s Office called “flawed” for its failure to account for overtime pay and its selection of large, metropolitan counties as pay comparison points rather than the rural areas where most prison guards work.

“The study is flawed to the point that it is not helpful in meeting its stated objective and we recommend policymakers not use it to assess whether the state’s compensation package for correctional officers is appropriate to attract and retain qualified workers,” according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Those raises, said Brian Kaneda, deputy director for Californians United for a Responsible Budget, put the state’s budget crisis in sharper relief.

“The CCPOA has a stranglehold on Sacramento politics,” Kaneda said. “Everyone’s struggling right now, but prison guards are getting a $1 billion raise. Explain how this could possibly be the right move for California as we tussle with this historic budget deficit.”

When asked to gauge the union’s influence in Sacramento and the diverging views on its power, Ballard said union leadership concentrates on its members more than its lobby.

“The union’s leaders are focused on matters of character, not reputation,” he said. “The CCPOA’s leaders are street-smart correctional officers who have worked in very tough conditions for decades, and as a group they are not terribly concerned with perceived status.”

Is CCPOA a factor in Newsom's prison closures?

Newsom began identifying prisons to close in 2020. More followed in 2022. Then, Newsom stopped naming additional prisons to close even though they have thousands of empty beds.

What changed? For one, people’s perception of crime spiked in the pandemic — though the kind of crimes that would merit prison time mostly went down.

For a governor who perhaps has ambitions beyond Sacramento, that’s important, said one Democratic legislator who did not want their name used for fear of retaliation by both the governor’s office and the prison guard union.

“I don’t think the CCPOA is the reason we’ve stalled on prison closures,” said the legislator. “I think it’s the governor himself or someone in the governor’s office protecting (the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation).

“My presumption is the governor is moderating his views on public safety because of where he wants to go nationally. And so he’s super careful about any perception of being soft on crime.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at San Quentin State Prison announcing that the facility will be transformed to focus on training and rehabilitation on March 17, 2023.

(

Martin do Nascimento

/

CalMatters

)

In its heyday during the prison building boom of the 1990s and 2000s, the prison guard union would never have had to account for such calculations, said former Corrections Secretary Matt Cate. Back then, both parties had incentives to make nice with the union.

“At the time, the Democrats were more moderate than they are now and they were doing everything to support labor generally,” said Cate, who was appointed corrections secretary in 2008 by Schwarzenegger and stayed for two years under Brown, leaving the office in 2011. “Meanwhile, Republicans were staunchly in favor of law enforcement and long sentences because they didn’t believe in rehabilitation and re-entry.

“So CCPOA had an open field. It was just a much easier job than what the CCPOA faces today. It’s not as easy today to be an 800-pound gorilla as it would have been 20 years ago.”

Cate doubts the union is the sole reason, or even the main reason, that Newsom stopped designating prisons for closure. Closing a prison is like closing “a small city,” Cate said, with 3,000 inmates and 800-1,000 employees represented by a dozen or more different unions. The prison system’s health care is managed by a federal monitor, and another federal monitor oversees the state’s prison mental health care.

Taking on a Democrat, and losing

One legislator who crossed the prison union and whose career survived was Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Los Angeles Democrat, who said the sharp-elbowed tactics employed by the union under Stailey, its president, were reflective of the union’s approach in the 1990s, a time when the union’s power was at its height.

“If they sneezed,” he said, “people got a cold.”

In 2020, Jones-Sawyer fell into their crosshairs, literally.

The union ran an online ad against Jones-Sawyer that showed Stailey pointing at a wall of photos of legislators. Over Jones-Sawyer’s photo was a piece of white paper with crosshairs and a red dot. Jones-Sawyer took that as a threat, and the union pledged to pull the ad down and re-edit it.

“It became clear that if they wanted to get back the power, they needed to take somebody out to put the fear into everybody,” said Jones-Sawyer, who won re-election that year. “They thought I was an easy target to take out. They learned that was not the case.”

A finger belonging to California Correctional Peace Officers Association president Glen Stailey points at a bullseye taped over the official portrait of Democratic Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer in a Facebook video produced by the association.

(

screenshot via Facebook

/

CalMatters

)

Jones-Sawyer notes that the union didn’t spend much under former Gov. Brown – not until the threat of prison closures became a reality after Newsom’s election in 2018.

“Once they started talking about closing prisons, that’s when the fear from the CCPOA came up,” Jones-Sawyer said. “That’s when they started writing double max-out checks.”

Jones-Sawyer said he’s frustrated by what he sees as abuses within the prison system, especially guards with multiple infractions keeping their jobs. The Office of the Inspector General earlier this year found that the corrections department had reclassified a backlog of staff misconduct complaints as “routine grievances,” and allowed the statute of limitations to expire in 127 complaints between 2022 and 2023.

Now, Jones-Sawyer said, he’s considering calling for an audit of the prison system’s facilities and spending.

“When (the corrections department) comes back and says this is the best way to do it, we try to see their logic and a lot of times we don’t,” he said.

Are those hard-charging tactics isolating the prison union? One bill introduced this year may be an indication. The bill would limit the number of empty beds available in the prison system to account for the declining inmate population.

Among the bill’s registered supporters are immigration advocates, the California Public Defenders Association and anti-incarceration lobbies.

There was just one group registered in opposition: the CCPOA.

L.A. City Councilmember Ysabel Jurado introduced seven motions Tuesday, all geared toward providing immediate and long-term relief for community members who’ve been hurt by the aftermath of the Lineage warehouse fire in Boyle Heights.

According to Jurado, the legislative package is centered around three priorities:

• “Immediate relief and cleanup”
• "Accountability, transparency and site safeguards”
• “Long-term oversight and community power”

Jurado is calling for a Mitigation Response Fund of up to $10 million to provide aid for affected residents and small businesses that have lost revenue as the neighborhood continues dealing with foul odors, flies, rats and other vermin. Jurado also wants to see higher penalties for corporate negligence, and create a commission to advise L.A.’s city leadership on environmental justice policy.

After the fire in mid-June, tons of food at the cold storage warehouse were left to rot. Now, more than a month later, community members are still dealing with odors and pests, which have disrupted local businesses, community spaces and everyday quality of life.

Local activists and community members say the Lineage fire aftermath is part of a long legacy of environmental injustice in Boyle Heights. In recent decades, residents have also dealt with pungent smells from rendering plants in the neighboring city of Vernon. And up until 2015, Vernon was also home to Exide, a battery recycling facility that contaminated the soil of thousands of homes in surrounding communities with lead. The taxpayer-funded cleanup for that issue is still ongoing. Lineage also has several facilities in the city of Vernon.

Jurado’s proposed commission “can serve as an interdisciplinary body to identify and start to protect our communities from historical harms that continue to function as standard practice today,” said mark! Lopez, a community organizer at East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice.

Community members will have a chance to provide public comment on Jurado’s motions before they move to a full council vote.

In a statement, Jurado said recovery "cannot mean removing debris and moving on.” In her view, it must also involve the “aggressive pursuit of every recoverable dollar from responsible parties” and "give communities that have carried Los Angeles' environmental burdens real power over what happens next."

Lineage President and CEO Greg Lehmkuhl previously said in a statement that he cannot estimate how long the cleanup will take. “What we can tell you is this: there are people on site working on this recovery 24/7,” he added.

L.A. County will provide assistance grants to small businesses that suffered financial loss from the Lineage warehouse fire that burned for a week in June in Boyle Heights. The fire's aftermath has many in the community seeking help to recover.

Why it matters

The county surveyed business owners in the area who said they are continuing to face a loss of customers and revenue amid persisting odor from food in the Boyle Heights warehouse that continues to rot in the summer heat. The fire started June 17 and burned until June 24. It initially generated significant air quality hazards and prompted evacuations.

About the funds

The grants from Supervisor Hilda Solis’ discretionary budget will be disbursed within 45 days — and then draw from countywide funds if needed. The county will also seek reimbursement for the grants from Lineage. The Department of Public Health and County Counsel will also evaluate new fees and penalties for businesses that pose environmental or health risks in L.A. County. Some fee increases could fund county assistance for future economic disasters.

Who is eligible

Small businesses within the affected area will be able to apply for the grants. The county is looking to prioritize initial funding for businesses that have not already received emergency financial support from other organizations.

More details to come

The Board of Supervisors and Department of Economic Opportunity will announce more about the amount of assistance and how to apply when those details are made final. Affected business owners and residents can find more information on the L.A. County Recovers website.

What to have ready

Existing documentation from L.A. County recommends you collect the following documentation of any damage.

(

Courtesy L.A. Department of Economic Opportunity

)

(

Courtesy L.A. Department of Economic Opportunity

)

The Los Angeles City Council voted 13-1 on Tuesday to put a measure on the November ballot that will ask voters whether homes affected by the Palisades Fire should be exempt from the city’s controversial “mansion tax.”

If passed, the exemption would apply to the sale of homes damaged or destroyed by the fire. The exemption would last until early 2030, five years from the date of the fire.

This could potentially reduce the tax’s revenue up to 6% — or $32 million each year — according to a May 2026 report from the L.A. Housing Department.

How the ‘mansion tax’ works 

The “mansion tax,” officially called Measure ULA, is a tiered tax on real estate selling for $5.4 million or more. The tax, which was passed by voters in 2022, funds programs such as rental assistance, eviction defense and affordable housing construction in the city.

The measure has fierce defenders, as well as staunch critics. A statewide ballot measure sought to kill the tax before it was pulled by supporters earlier this year in exchange for a legislative deal in Sacramento.

State and local lawmakers have considered reducing the tax or exempting newly constructed apartment buildings. Their ideas have been guided by economic studies that found the tax was slowing down housing development in the city. So far, none of those reforms have mustered enough support to pass.

Where council members stand

Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, whose district includes Highland Park, Chinatown and Westlake, previously spoke against the measure’s scope at a City Council meeting on July 1.

“Any exemption should only be for homeowners whose primary residence was destroyed, and people who genuinely need help rebuilding, not LLCs, investors or people with a portfolio of properties,” Hernandez said. “We had the opportunity to write those protections into this ordinance, and we didn’t.”

Hernandez criticized her colleagues for shooting down the post-fire eviction protections she proposed after tenants living in her district lost work as gardeners and nannies in the Pacific Palisades.

“When wealthy property owners need relief, we’re willing to bend over backwards,” she said. “But when working class people and tenants need protection, suddenly our hands are tied and the political will is not there.”

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, voiced support for the measure at the same meeting.

“Putting this tax on these folks who are trying to recover and reckoning with the fact that some of them just aren’t coming home, is just unspeakably cruel,” Park said. “It’s an exemption that applies in very narrow circumstances to original owners and first transactions for five years, only for residential properties. This is the least we can do as this community continues to recover.”

In Tuesday’s meeting, Hernandez cast the lone vote against placing the measure on the November ballot. Thirteen council members supported the move. Councilmember Curren Price was not present for the vote.

What happens next 

L.A. voters will have the final say on whether Palisades homeowners will be exempt from the tax. The proposal needs a simple majority of support from voters in the upcoming November general election to pass.

How to keep tabs on the L.A. City Council

The L.A. City Council tends to meet Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Meetings typically start at 10 a.m.

Here’s how you can follow along:

• Attend in person: The council typically meets at City Hall, Council Chambers, 200 N. Spring St., Los Angeles
• Watch the live broadcast
• Here’s how to submit a comment or contact the council

It’s a tumultuous time for healthcare. Federal and state budget cuts are changing the rules for public benefits. Most people with Medi-Cal won’t be affected, but it may be confusing to figure out whether your benefits will change.

Are you on Medi-Cal, or is someone in your family worried about the cuts?

Tell us about your health coverage, and we'll share advice, information and updates.

The two most important things to do: Update your contact information with your county benefits office, and keep an eye out for any letters mailed from the county or state.

You can update your information by calling your local county office or online with a BenefitsCal account.

Here are the key changes, what they mean, and where to get help.

Changes for immigrants

Non-citizens — undocumented immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and people with pending immigration cases — are the group most affected, even those with a green card. The state has an immigration status chart to help you check whether these changes apply to you. If they do, you’ll get a letter.

Undocumented immigrants

• As of Jan. 1, immigrants over age 19 without legal status can no longer apply for Medi-Cal (children remain eligible). 
• Those already enrolled keep benefits if they renew on time. If they miss the renewal deadline and coverage ends, they have three months to reapply. After that window, they cannot sign up again. 
• Anyone who loses Medi-Cal may apply for emergency services. Those are limited to pregnancy, emergency visits and nursing home care.
• Starting Jan. 1, 2027, this group moves to “fee-for-service” Medi-Cal that limits some coverage. Doctors visits, prescriptions, and mental health treatment won’t be affected. Confirm your doctor accepts this Medi-Cal type, or find a new doctor by calling 1-800-541-5555.
• Adults ages 19-64 must also prove they are working or volunteering at least 80 hours a month. Students, people with disabilities and parents with young children are exempt from the work requirement. Starting July 1, 2027, adults lose dental coverage. Those 19-59 will also pay a $30 monthly fee.
• Children and pregnant individuals will remain eligible for Medi-Cal.

Refugees, asylum seekers, some green card holders

• Starting Jan. 1, 2027, refugees, asylum seekers, humanitarian parolees, and survivors of domestic violence or trafficking move to “fee-for-service” Medi-Cal. They will still be able to see the doctor, pick up prescriptions and see the dentist, but they will no longer have a health insurance plan. Call 1-800-541-5555 to find a new doctor if your current one does not accept it.
• Six months later, this group will lose full-scope Medi-Cal and dental benefits, keeping only pregnancy and emergency care.

Promotoras, community health workers and legal aid groups can help answer questions about this.

Adults without children

About 5 million Californians gained Medi-Cal coverage when the Obama administration expanded eligibility to childless adults and those earning slightly above the federal poverty level. Now this group faces stricter requirements in order to keep their health coverage.

Work requirements

• Beginning Jan. 1, adults 19-64 and many immigrants must prove at least 80 hours each month of working or volunteering, or half-time schooling. 
• Who’s exempt: children, seniors, pregnant people, those who are disabled or have serious health conditions or addictions, people on Medicare, those recently released from prison, American Indians and Alaska Natives populations and some former foster youth.
• The state will mail a letter if this applies to you. Most renewal packets come in a bright yellow envelope, but notices may look different. Respond quickly.

More frequent renewals

Beginning next March, the state will check Medi-Cal eligibility every six months for adults ages 19-64 and many immigrants, verifying income, work status, and other requirements. Renewal may happen automatically; if it doesn’t you will receive a letter asking for more information.

Seniors (65+) and people with disabilities

Starting July 1, 2027, seniors (65+) and people with disabilities cannot own more than $21,000 in assets, including savings accounts, cash and property other than a home and a car. For couples it’s $31,000 total. This limit also applies to non-citizens. Your county benefits office or a local legal aid group can clarify what counts; the state also has an FAQ about the new limits.

If you’re afraid of losing coverage, do these things right now

Not everyone will be affected, and some people won’t need to do anything. If you’re required to report work hours or other information, you’ll receive a notice in the mail or through the BenefitsCal online portal if you have an online account: Check both regularly.

The state doesn’t yet have a timeline for initial notices, but advocates say the best move now is simply keeping your information current. This is especially important because the rules keep changing.

“It’s so vital they watch the mail, look out for communications from the county, and are responsive to requests for information,” said Jack Dailey, director of health policy at the Legal Aid Society of San Diego.

Bukola Olusanya, regional medical director for St. John’s Community Health, talks to a patient in a mobile clinic van in Los Angeles on Feb. 6, 2026.

(

Jules Hotz

/

CalMatters

)

If you get a notice: You should have plenty of warning before benefits are terminated – respond promptly to any notice of action.

If you get a notice that your benefits will be cancelled and you disagree with that decision, you can appeal and request a state hearing, which “allows you to temporarily freeze an adverse action and keep your benefits while your appeal is being reviewed,” says Alicia Emanuel, a staff attorney with the National Health Law Program.

If you’ve already lost coverage: You have 90 days to restore benefits without filing a new application. Submit the requested information in that window and, if you still qualify, you shouldn't see a coverage gap. After 90 days, you'll need to reapply from scratch.

Where to get free help

Promotoras — community health workers trained through groups like Vision y Compromiso — can meet you in your neighborhood, explain benefits in plain language, and help with Medi-Cal applications. Rosa Lopez, a promotora in Long Beach, said many immigrants worry about losing coverage: “I tell them you don’t have status, don’t worry. The first thing is your health.”

Community clinics often have benefits counselors on staff, and legal aid groups offer free advice for confusing letters — call the Health Consumer Alliance at (888) 804-3536, or check its website. The state also runs a helpline at (800) 541-5555 and keeps its website up-to-date.

One more thing worth knowing: Medi-Cal eligibility isn't just one door — there are several ways to qualify, based on conditions such as income, age, disability, or pregnancy. Before the state can terminate your benefits under one category, it must check whether you still qualify through any of the others. “It's a really critical protection because sometimes an individual is in fact eligible through a different pathway,” Emanuel said. And by law, Medi-Cal must provide free language assistance for people with limited English proficiency.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.