The Brief

From Los Angeles to Sacramento, teachers unions, many fueled by the “We Can’t Wait” campaign organized by the California Teachers Association and a slew of contract renewals, are rallying for higher pay, better benefits, smaller class sizes and other classroom improvements. Some are threatening to strike.

In the West Contra Costa Unified School District, the call for improved pay and benefits, and classroom improvements, resulted in a six-day strike by the district’s 1,450 teachers that ended earlier this month. The teachers won an 8% pay raise over two years and will no longer have to pay healthcare premiums.

The strike is emboldening other teachers unions that are at an impasse with their districts over contract negotiations.

“We are leading a historic wave of resistance to demand safe staffing, affordable healthcare and student-centered budgets, and local chapters are organizing to strike if needed,” said David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association. “Richmond showed us exactly what is possible: When we stand up for what schools educators and students deserve, we can transform public education.”

There are at least 14 school districts around the state that are at an impasse with teachers unions over contract negotiations. They are: Los Angeles Unified, San Francisco Unified, Oakland Unified, Berkeley Unified, Madera Unified, Evergreen School District, Little Lake City, Upper Lake Unified, Duarte Unified, Newport-Mesa Unified, Oak Grove Union, Apple Valley Unified, Twin Rivers Unified and Natomas Unified.

CTA campaign ratchets up the pressure

Most of these districts’ unions are part of the CTA’s “We Can’t Wait” campaign, which has spent the past few years aligning contracts to end on the same date in order to add pressure on districts in areas where multiple unions would be negotiating and could potentially strike at once.

The campaign has also shared demands for smaller class sizes and caseloads for special education educators, and more counselors, nurses and mental health professionals in schools, as well as competitive wages and benefits to retain and recruit teachers.

“It is our belief that we’ve been siloed,” said Brittoni Ward, president of Twin Rivers United Educators in Sacramento County. “Unified districts all over the state have been dragging themselves year after year through contract bargaining that gets us nowhere. We don’t make any progress, and we all essentially are fighting for the same things. So why not unify on our common goals and make change happen.”

School districts are largely pushing back on union demands, saying that with declining enrollment and rising costs, there isn’t enough money to pay teachers more. Teachers disagree, pointing to expensive outside contracts, high administrative salaries and ample reserves in some districts.

Now, teachers in several districts, including San Francisco Unified, Natomas Unified, Twin Rivers Unified, Madera Unified and Upper Lake Unified, have indicated — by vote or informal survey — that a majority are ready to strike.

Will L.A. teachers strike again?

United Teachers Los Angeles plans a strike vote in January and has already begun polling teachers to determine if there is interest. A strike in the Los Angeles Unified School District would affect 516,000 students.

There is precedent. UTLA took to the picket lines twice in recent years — in 2019, when they went on strike for six days for higher wages, and in 2023, when they walked out in support of school staff in another union.

“I will say that, like in previous years, we have gone on strike, and we’re certainly ready to go on strike,” said Julie Van Winkle, UTLA vice president. “And we feel like we need to be ready in case the district keeps ignoring our demands and making counterproposals that are inadequate. But, we’re also very open to a settlement.”

Los Angeles Unified teachers and the district are negotiating a three-year contract that would have started at the beginning of this school year. Teachers want a complete overhaul of their salary schedule, beginning with an $80,000 starting salary for new teachers, instead of the current $65,000, Van Winkle said.

They also want more arts and physical education teachers, lower class sizes in 11th and 12th grades, free child care centers in closed schools, additional resources for special education, and more psychiatric social workers, attendance counselors and pupil services staff.

Los Angeles Unified district leaders have increased their offers to UTLA multiple times in ongoing negotiations, most recently offering a 4.5% raise and 1% bonus, according to a district spokesperson. The district estimates that UTLA’s demands throughout the 2027-28 school year total more than $4 billion above the district’s current expenditures.

“We deeply value the educators and professionals who serve our students,” the spokesperson said. “We also have a responsibility to maintain long-term financial health so that every generation of Los Angeles students — today and in the future — receives the high-quality, equitable education they deserve.”

District wants to cut benefits

Teachers in the Little Lake City School District in southeastern L.A. County have yet to call a strike vote, but Maria Pilios, president of their teachers union, is preparing them for the possibility.

The 205-member union isn’t asking for a wage increase; instead, they want smaller class sizes and fully staffed special education classrooms. But the district is negotiating to reduce the amount it pays for its healthcare premiums. It currently pays 100%.

The district intends to start taking the contributions from teachers’ paychecks in January while negotiations resume, Pilios said.

Teachers and staff, many of whom grew up in the community, feel betrayed, Pilios said. She said teachers have gone without raises in the past to ensure they could retain full health benefits.

“This has changed the relationship between the staff and the district,” Pilios said.

The district’s decision means a $12,000 annual pay cut for teacher Mabel Manzur. The eighth-grade math teacher was diagnosed with cancer for the second time recently and was in the middle of treatments when she learned about the insurance change.

Manzur had to make a difficult decision: keep the doctors and treatment she had or move to a cheaper policy and start over with another doctor and possibly new treatments. She worried that her cancer history would make it difficult for her to be accepted into a new plan.

Still negotiating last year’s contract

Madera Unified teachers are tired of waiting for a contract for the 2024-25 school year, so more than 90% have indicated they are ready to strike if an agreement can’t be reached, according to David Holder, president of the Madera Unified Teachers Association.

The union wants a retroactive 8% raise on base salary, but the district is offering 4%.

According to the district, teachers have received a total compensation increase of nearly 38% over the last decade.

“A new teacher coming to Madera, on average, is making about $9,000 less in their first year than the surrounding districts, Holder said. “And so, Madera Unified is almost like a training district where we have young educators — a lot of probationary interns coming in here, finishing their credentials, getting some experience, and then they leave.”

Holder said there are still 30 to 40 open teaching positions in the district being filled by substitute teachers.

Madera Unified had 284 teachers resign from the district since the 2021-22 school year, a 93.5% retention rate, according to a statement from the district.

The union won’t bring forth proposals for this year or next until last year’s contract is completed, Holder said. The union and district started state mediation over the contract last week.

Sacramento could have two districts on strike

Two Sacramento County teachers unions are at an impasse with their districts, meaning potential strikes could affect 60,000 of the county’s students. Both districts are part of the “We Can’t Wait” campaign.

Teachers unions for both Twin Rivers Unified and Natomas Unified are seeking increased pay, a reduction in healthcare costs, smaller class sizes and more special education staff, among other things.

Twin Rivers teachers and district administrators have a long way to go before they reach an agreement. The teachers want a 12% increase in salary over two years. The district has offered 2.5% the first year and no guarantee for the next year, said Ward of Twin Rivers United Educators.

The district’s proposal would mean teachers at the top of the salary schedule would earn $152,000 annually, according to a letter from the district sent to staff in November. Beginning teachers would start at almost $77,000.

Twin Rivers Unified leaders said that the district’s salaries are among the highest in the state and that class sizes remain low.

The teachers union is also asking that the district pay more of the insurance premiums. Twin Rivers currently pays the full premium for a basic plan, but asks teachers to pay for higher-cost health plans, according to the letter.

A family of two on the Kaiser family plan pays about $1,600 a month for insurance, and others with more family members pay more, Ward said.

The district and union began their negotiations in February and are now working with a state mediator. The parties might end up having the contract negotiations move to a state fact-finding panel because of the district’s reluctance to bargain, Ward said.

Twin Rivers United Educators' executive board has already authorized a strike vote, and 80% of its membership signed a petition indicating they are ready to strike if necessary. A strike could happen as soon as March, Ward said.

The union has been at odds with the school district before, getting as far as the fact-finding stage, but it has never gone on strike.

“This time we are mobilized, and we’re ready,” Ward said. “Our membership is ready. And they see what’s going on in Richmond. They’re seeing things happening around the state, and they’re like, if that’s what it takes, we’re ready. We’re here for it.”

EdSource data journalist Daniel Willis contributed to this report.

As Los Angeles homeowners grapple with the expense of rebuilding after last year’s devastating fires, an L.A. City Councilmember is putting forward an idea that could lower some costs.

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, has introduced a motion to explore waiving part of the city’s portion of the local sales tax for fire victims who purchase rebuilding materials in the city.

The 1% of the local 9.75% sales tax that goes into the city’s general fund would be given back to consumers under the proposal. The waiver could apply to lumber, appliances and other rebuilding goods purchased within the city.

The motion, introduced Friday by Park and seconded by Councilmember John Lee, says: “The City should do everything within its power to alleviate the financial burden for these residents and businesses in order to facilitate their return and stabilize the Pacific Palisades community.”

Would it make much of a difference? 

Economists told LAist the proposal could help many homeowners mitigate the high cost of rebuilding, but likely wouldn’t tip the scales for under-insured, under-resourced property owners.

“It wouldn't hurt if it's very well designed and easy to use,” said Alexander Meeks, a director at the Santa Monica-based Milken Institute. “But I'm not sure if it's really going to tackle the scale of the financial challenge that survivors are facing.”

Meeks noted that the tax waiver wouldn’t lower up-front costs such as environmental testing, architectural design and permitting. And it may not help homeowners sourcing raw materials from outside the city.

Zhiyun Li, a UCLA Anderson School of Management economist, said the waiver could help some homeowners justify the additional cost of rebuilding more fire-safe structures.

“Homeowners must typically pay out of pocket to upgrade to IBHS+ standards, which are more stringent,” Li said. “The tax waiver could encourage upgrading to IBHS+ standards or investing more in mitigation, thereby reducing future risk and improving the likelihood of maintaining insurance coverage.”

What’s next for the proposal? 

The proposed tax relief would not be available to properties that have been sold since the fires started in January 2025.

The motion has been sent to the City Council’s budget and fire recovery committees. If approved by the full council, it would require the city administrative officer, the Office of Finance and the city attorney to report back to the council within 60 days on options for crafting a tax relief plan.

The motion calls for the report to consider factors such as how to minimize the burden of administering the tax relief, what documentation homeowners would have to submit and what it would cost the city to oversee the program.

Senate and House Republican leadership have resurrected a stalled plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security after a record 47-day funding lapse.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in a joint statement on Wednesday that the House will take up a measure passed by the Senate last week to fund most of DHS except Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through the end of September.

Republicans would then attempt to fund ICE and Border Patrol for three years using a party-line budget reconciliation bill that would not require support from Democrats.

"In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited," Thune and Johnson wrote.

The agreement comes nearly a week after House Republicans dismissed an identical plan, refusing to take up the Senate-passed measure and instead passing a 60-day short term funding bill for all of DHS that had little chance of overcoming Democratic opposition in the Senate.

Johnson called the agreement a "joke" and President Donald Trump declined to publicly endorse the deal. Trump had previously resisted any package that did not include his push to overhaul federal elections known as the Save America Act.

"I think any deal they make, I'm pretty much not happy with it," Trump told reporters last week.

Democrats welcomed the agreement as in line with their pledge not to give ICE any more money without reforms after immigration enforcement agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. But the deal does not include any of the policy demands Democrats are pressing for, such as a ban on masks for immigration enforcement officers and requiring warrants issued by a judge, not just the agency, to enter homes.

"For days, Republican divisions derailed a bipartisan agreement, making American families pay the price for their dysfunction," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered."

Trump seemed to bless the revived plan earlier Wednesday, writing on social media that he wants a party-line bill to fund immigration enforcement on his desk by June 1.

"We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won't be able to stop us," Trump wrote.

Despite the shutdown, ICE has been minimally impacted because Republican lawmakers approved $75 billion for ICE through another party-line budget reconciliation bill last year.

Congress is on a two-week recess, but the Senate and House could move to fund all of DHS except ICE and CBP as early as Thursday using a procedure known as unanimous consent that allows the chambers to circumvent formal voting as long as no member objects.

Even during a recess when most members are not in Washington, this could be unpredictable, especially in the House, where many hard-line conservatives oppose a deal that does not fully fund DHS.

"Let's make this simple: caving to Democrats and not paying CBP and ICE is agreeing to defund Law Enforcement and leaving our borders wide open again," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, wrote on X. "If that's the vote, I'm a NO."

If a member does object, that could require waiting for another vote when all members are back from recess.

Claudia Grisales contributed reporting.
Copyright 2026 NPR

California clocked its second-worst snowpack on record Wednesday, a potentially troubling signal ahead for fire season.

It’s an alarming end to a winter that saw abnormally dry conditions briefly wiped from California’s drought map in January, for the first time in a quarter-century.

Though precipitation to date has been near average, much of it fell as rain rather than snow. Then March’s record-breaking heat melted most of the snow that remains. The state’s major reservoirs are nevertheless brimming above historic averages and are flirting with capacity, and a smattering of snow, rain and thunderstorms are dousing last month’s heat wave.

But experts now warn that California’s case of the missing snowpack could herald an early fire season in the mountains.

On Wednesday, state engineers conducting the symbolic April 1 snowpack measurement at Phillips Station south of Lake Tahoe found no measurable snow in patches of white dotting the grassy field.

“I want to welcome you call to probably one of the quickest snow surveys we’ve had — maybe one where people could actually use an umbrella,” joked Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources. “We’re getting a lot of questions about are we heading into a hydrologic drought? The answer is, I don’t know.”

State data reports that California’s snowpack is closing out the season at an alarming 18% of average statewide, and an even more abysmal 6% of average in the northern mountains that feed California’s major reservoirs.

Only the extreme drought year of 2015 beat this year’s snowpack for the worst on record, measuring in at just 5% of average on April 1st, when the snow historically is at its deepest.

“I think everyone's anticipating that it will be a long, busy fire season,” said Lenya Quinn-Davidson, director of the UC Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Fire Network.

“Without a snowpack, and with an early spring, it just means that there’s much more time for something like that to happen.”

‘It’s pretty bizarre up here’ 

In the city of South Lake Tahoe, which survived the massive Caldor Fire in the fall of 2021 without losing any structures, fire chief Jim Drennan said his department is already ramping up prevention efforts.

“It's pretty bizarre up here right now. It really seems like June conditions more than March,” Drennan said. “People are already turning the sprinklers on for their lawns.”

Without more precipitation, an early spring may complicate prescribed burning efforts. But Drennan said fire agencies in the Tahoe basin can start mechanically clearing fuels from forest areas earlier than usual.

“That means we can get more work done,” he said.

It also means homeowners need to start hardening their homes now, said Martin Goldberg, battalion chief and fuels management officer for the Lake Valley Fire Protection District, which protects unincorporated communities in the Lake Tahoe Basin’s south shore.

Goldberg urges residents to scour their yards for burnable materials, create defensible space and reach out to local fire departments with questions. The risks are widespread — from firewood, wooden fences, gas cans, plants, pine needles — even lawn furniture stacked against a house.

“In years past, I wouldn't even think of raking and clearing until May,” Goldberg said. “But my yard's completely cleared of snowpack, and it has been for a couple weeks now.”

‘A haystack fire’

Battalion chief David Acuña, a spokesperson for Cal Fire, said fire season is shaped by more than just one year’s snowpack.

Climate change has been remaking California’s fire seasons into fire years. And California’s recent average to abundant water years have fueled what Acuña called “bumper crops of vegetation and brush.”

“Most of California is like a haystack. And if you’ve ever seen a haystack fire, they burn very intensely because there's layers of fuel,” Acuña said.

Like Quinn-Davidson, Acuña wasn’t ready to make specific predictions about fires to come.

But John Abatzoglou, a professor of climatology at UC Merced, said the temperatures and snowpack conditions this year offer a glimpse of California in the latter decades of this century, as fossil fuel use continues to drive global temperatures higher.

How this year’s fires will play out will depend on when, where and how wind, heat, fuel and ignitions combine. But it foreshadows the consequences of a warmer California for water and fire under climate change.

“This,” Abatzoglou said, “is yet another stress test for the future in the state.”

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