Part of nationwide push to bring back phonics, sponsors seek compromise, CTA refuses to negotiate

By DIANA LAMBERT, JOHN FENSTERWALD, ZAIDEE STAVELY, EDSOURCE.org

California’s largest teachers’ union has moved to put the brakes on legislation that mandates instruction, known as the “science of reading,” that spotlights phonics to teach children to read.

The move by the politically powerful California Teachers Association (CTA) puts the fate of Assembly Bill 2222 in question as supporters insist that there is room to negotiate changes that will bring opponents together.

CTA’s complaints include some recently voiced by some advocacy organizations for English learners and bilingual education that oppose the bill and have refused to negotiate any changes to make the bill more acceptable.

The teachers union put its opposition to AB 2222 in writing in a lengthy letter to Assembly Education Committee Chairman Al Muratsuchi last week. The committee is expected to hear the bill, introduced in February, later this month. 

The letter includes a checklist of complaints including that the proposed legislation would duplicate and potentially undermine current literacy initiatives, would not meet the needs of English learner students and cuts teachers out of the decision-making process, especially when it comes to curriculum. 

“Educators are best equipped to make school and classroom decisions to ensure student success,” the letter said. “Limiting instructional approaches undermines teachers’ professional autonomy and may impede their effectiveness in the classroom.”

Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice, an advocacy nonprofit co-sponsoring the bill, said he was surprised that CTA would oppose legislation that would ensure all teachers are trained to use the latest brain research to teach children how to read.

“Unfortunately, a lot of folks in the field haven’t actually been trained on that, and a lot of the instruction materials in classrooms today don’t align with that,” Tuck said.

Tuck said CTA appears to misunderstand the body of evidence-based research known as the science of reading. It “is not a curriculum and is not a program or a one-size-fits-all approach,” he said. “It will give teachers a foundational understanding of how children learn to read. Teachers will still have a lot of room locally to decide which instructional moves to make on any given day for any given children. So, you’ll still have significant differentiation.”

A nationwide push

California’s push to adopt the science of reading approach to early literacy is in sync with 37 states and some cities, such as New York City, that have passed similar legislation. 

States nationwide are rejecting balanced literacy as failing to effectively teach children how to read, since it trains children to use pictures to recognize words on sight, also known as three-cueing. The new method would teach children to decode words by sounding them out, a process known as phonics.

Although phonics, the ability to connect letters to sounds, has drawn the most attention, the science of reading focuses on four other pillars of literacy instruction: phonemic awareness, identifying distinct units of sounds; vocabulary; comprehension; and fluency. It is based on research on how the brain connects letters with sounds when learning to read.

Along with mandating the science of reading approach to instruction, AB 2222 would require that all TK to fifth-grade teachers, literacy coaches and specialists take a 30-hour-minimum course in reading instruction by 2028. School districts and charter schools would purchase textbooks from an approved list endorsed by the State Board of Education.  

The legislation goes against the state policy of local control that gives school districts authority to select curriculum and teaching methods as long as they meet state academic standards. Currently, the state encourages, but does not mandate, districts to incorporate instruction in the science of reading in the early grades.

“It’s a big bill,” said Yolie Flores, president of Families in Schools, a co-sponsor. “We’re very proud that it’s a big bill because that means it is truly consequential in the best way possible for children. It’s not a sort of tweak around the edges kind though, it’s the kind of bill that really brings transformation. So we are hoping that the Legislature sees beyond the sort of typical pushback and resistance, and in the end, I think, teachers will see that this was a huge benefit for them.”

Seeking compromise

The bill’s author, Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, said she took CTA’s seven-page letter not as an outright rejection but as an opportunity for negotiations.

 “I’m glad they sent this letter,” she said. “They outline their objections and the reasons why, and that’s something I can work with. It’s not a flat, ‘No, we don’t want you to do it.’ They gave me specific items that I can look at and have a conversation about.”

She said that Assemblymember Muratsuchi asked her to work with the CTA on a compromise. She is also meeting with consultants for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Salinas, “to look at the big picture,” she said.

But Flores says the state’s budget problems, with predictions of no money for new programs, may be a bigger hurdle to getting the bill passed than the CTA opposition. The cost of paying for the required professional development for teachers would total $200 million to $300 million, she said. Because it is a mandate, the state would be required to repay districts for the cost.

“That is a drop in the bucket for something so transformational, so consequential,” Flores said. “I hope that the Legislature really comes to that realization. We’re in a budget deficit, but our budget is a statement of priorities.”

Advocates say that it is imperative that California mandate instruction in the science of reading. In 2023, just 43% of California third graders met the academic standards on the state’s standardized test in 2023. Only 27.2% of Black students, 32% of Latino students and 35% of low-income children were reading at grade level, compared with 57.5% of white, 69% of Asian and 66% of non-low-income students. 

“It’s foundational,” Flores said. “It’s not the only thing teachers need to know. It’s not the only thing that teachers will need to do and to adhere to, but it’s sort of the basic foundational knowledge of how children’s brains work in order to learn to read.”

The bill would sunset in 2028 when all teachers are required to have completed training. Beginning in July, all teacher preparation programs would be required to teach future educators to base literacy instruction on the science of reading. 

Needs of English learners

The CTA and other critics of AB 2222 charge that it ignores the need of English learners for oral language skills, vocabulary and comparison between their home languages and English, which they need in order to learn how to read. Four out of 10 students in California start school as English learners.

Tuck disputes this. “We actually emphasize oral language development,” he said. “This would be the first statute that would say when instructional materials are adopted, and when teachers are trained in the science of reading, they must include a focus on English learners and oral language development.”

Representatives from Californians Together, an advocacy organization for English learners and bilingual education, applauded the CTA’s opposition to the bill. They oppose the bill, rather than suggest amendments, because they disagree with its overall approach.

“We just don’t think this is the right bill to address literacy needs,” said Executive Director Martha Hernandez. “It’s very restrictive. We know that mandates don’t work. It lacks a robust, comprehensive approach for multilingual learners.”

Instead, Californians Together and the California Association for Bilingual Education have both said they would prefer California fund the training of teachers and full implementation of the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework. 

The framework was adopted in 2014 and encourages, but does not mandate, explicit instruction in foundational skills and oral language development for English learners.

The California Language Teachers Association has requested the bill be amended to include information about teaching literacy in languages not based on the English alphabet, such as Japanese, Chinese or Arabic, according to Executive Director Liz Matchett. However, the organization has not yet taken a position on the bill.

“I agree that we want to support all children to be able to read. If they can’t read, they can’t participate in education, which is the one way that is proven to change people’s circumstances,” said Matchett, who teaches Spanish at Gunn High School in Palo Alto. “There’s nothing to oppose about that. I’m still a classroom teacher, and all the time, you get kids in high school who can’t read.”

Education Trust-West urges changes in the bill to center the needs of “multilingual learners” — children who speak languages other than English at home — and to include more oversight and fewer mandates, such as those that may discourage new teachers from entering the profession.

“If our recommended amendments were to be accepted, EdTrust-West would support it as a much-needed solution to California’s acute literacy crisis.”

Claude Goldenberg, professor emeritus of education at Stanford University, said “it was disappointing” to see CTA’s opposition, particularly because the union did not suggest amendments. He said he had met with representatives from CTA and urged them to identify what could be changed in the bill.

In a recent EdSource commentary, Goldenberg urged opponents to “do the right thing for all students. AB 2222’s introduction is an important step forward on the road to universal literacy in California. We must get it on the right track and take it across the finish line.”

Referring to the CTA’s opposition, Goldenberg said, “Obviously my urgings fell flat. They identified why they’re opposing, but there’s no indication of any possible re-evaluation.” 

Goldenberg, who served on the National Literacy Panel, which synthesized research on literacy development among children who speak languages other than English, has called on the bill’s authors to amend it to include a more comprehensive definition of the “science of reading” and include more information about teaching students to read in English as a second language and in their home languages.

The CTA has changed its position on bills related to literacy instruction in the last two years. It had originally supported Senate Bill 488, which passed in 2022. The legislation requires a literacy performance assessment for teachers and oversight of literacy instruction in teacher preparation. The union is now in support of a bill that would do away with both.

The change of course was attributed to a survey of 1,300 CTA members, who said the assessment caused stress, took away time that could have been used to collaborate with mentors and for teaching, and did not prepare them to meet the needs of students, according to Leslie Littman, vice president of the union, in a prior interview. 

Veteran political observer Dan Schnur said he’s not surprised CTA would oppose the bill since some of its political allies are against it; the question is how important CTA considers the bill. 

“If it becomes a pitched battle, CTA will have to decide whether it is one of its highest priorities in this session,” he said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom hasn’t indicated his position yet, but Schnur, the press secretary for former Gov. Pete Wilson, who teaches political communications at UC Berkeley and USC, said, “This is not the type of fight Newsom needs or wants right now. If he has strong feelings, it’s hard to see him going to war for or against.”

By Allen D. Payton

Some of the same unions backing Antioch Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson in the Assembly District 15 race on the March primary ballot have spent almost $253,000 attacking one of her three opponents, former Contra Costa County Supervisor Karen Mitchoff.

At least four mailers have been sent to Democrat voters in the district criticizing Mitchoff’s pay raise she voted for while on the board, and her votes against pay raises for county employees.

Two of the mailers obtained by the Herald show they were paid for by “Opportunity PAC – A coalition of teachers, health care givers, faculty members, school employees, and public and private employee organizations.” The political action committee’s Top Funders for the mailers are listed as SEIU (Service Employees International Union) California State Council, California Faculty Association (of the UC and CSU systems) and California School Employee Association.

When asked about the mailers Mitchoff said they’re all pretty much about the same issue. “The same group with the same message. My decision on the pay raise was made over 10 years ago because I wanted to make sure the county supervisors were paid enough to make it a full-time position.” She also pointed out that she did vote for pay raises for county employees, “in 2022, giving them 5% a year for four years, for a total increase of 20%.”

The interesting part is that some of the state teachers’ unions including college and university faculty and staff are helping pay for the mailers, even though as a member of the Board of Supervisors, Mitchoff had no say about education funding.

According to Cal-Access, the California Secretary of State’s campaign finance reporting website, so far, the PAC has made three expenditures of $46,446.03 each for three mailers opposing Mitchoff, two on Feb. 1 and one on Feb. 13, 2024. The cost for a fourth mailer that appear under the PAC’s Accrued Expenses show an additional $46,446.03. That totals $185,784.12. In addition, the PAC spent $37,000.00 on polling and consulting and $30,126.43 on research in their effort against Mitchoff.

Contributions to PAC Total Over $2.5 Million

The PAC is supporting and opposing a variety of candidates throughout the state. Their most recent Form 460 financial disclosure report dated Feb. 17, 2024, shows they have raised $1.715 million this year and their report ending Dec. 31, 2023, shows $803,500 was raised last year for a total of $2,518,500. They had cash on hand of over $1.1 million as of Feb. 17th.

Contributions include the following amounts and sources:

$750,000 from the California Teachers Association Independent Expenditure Committee;

$534,500 from SEIU California State Council for Working People;

$225,000 from PACE (Political Action for Classified Employees) of California School Employees Association;

$190,000 from Smart Justice California Action Fund;

$150,000 from United Food and Commercial Workers Western States Council Independent Expenditure PAC;

$150,000 from California Federation of Teachers COPE (Committee on Political Education);

$150,000 from Service Employees International Union Local 1000, Keeping California Healthy, Safe and Strong;

$100,000 from Service Employees International Union Local 721 CTW, CLC Workers’ Strength Committee;

$75,000 from SEIU United Healthcare Workers West PAC;

$59,500 from Faculty for Our University’s Future, a committee sponsored by California Faculty Association;

$59,500 from Standing Committee on Political Education of the California Labor Federation AFL-CIO;

$50,000 from the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay Bisexual & Transgender) Caucus Leadership Fund; and

$25,000 from SEIU California State Council (nonprofit 501 (c)(5))

Wilson’s Backers Funding Mitchoff Opposition Effort

Wilson’s campaign has been the beneficiary of support from many of those same unions. On her campaign website, Wilson shows endorsements by the California Faculty Association, SEIU California, National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) and United Food & Commercial Workers Local 5, as well as unions that are members of the AFL-CIO.

Wilson and Mitchoff also face two others in the race, including County School Board Trustee Anamarie Avila Farias and Realtor Sonia Ledo in the March 5th primary election next Tuesday. The top two will face off in the November election.

State could retain unpopular written literacy test

By Dana Lambert, EdSource.org – republished with permission

Newly proposed legislation sponsored by the California Teachers Association would eliminate all performance assessments teachers are required to pass, including one for literacy that it supported three years ago. The result could leave in place an unpopular written test that the literacy performance assessment was designed to replace.

Senate Bill 1263, authored by state Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, would do away with the California Teaching Performance Assessment, known as the CalTPA, through which teachers demonstrate their competence via video clips of instruction and written reflections on their practice. 

Eliminating the assessment will increase the number of effective teachers in classrooms, as the state continues to contend with a teacher shortage, said Newman, chairman of the Senate Education Committee.

“One key to improving the educator pipeline is removing barriers that may be dissuading otherwise talented and qualified prospective people from pursuing a career as an educator,” Newman said in a statement to EdSource.

The bill also would do away with a literacy performance assessment of teachers and oversight of literacy instruction in teacher preparation programs mandated by Senate Bill 488, authored by Sen. Susan Rubio, D-West Covina, in 2021.

The literacy performance assessment is scheduled to be piloted in the next few months. It is meant to replace the Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (RICA) set to be scrapped in 2025. 

New law could leave RICA in place

The proposed legislation appears to leave in place a requirement that candidates for a preliminary multiple-subject or education specialist credential pass a reading instruction competence assessment, said David DeGuire, a director at the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.

“At this time, it is unclear what that assessment would look like, but it could be that the state continues to use the current version of the RICA,” he said.

Newman will present the legislation to the Senate Education Committee in the next few months. Discussions about whether the RICA remains in use are likely to take place during the legislative process.

Rubio recently became aware of the new legislation and had not yet discussed it with Newman.

“For three years, I worked arduously and collaboratively with a broad range of education leaders, including parent groups, teacher associations and other stakeholders to modernize a key component of our educational system that in my 17 years as a classroom teacher and school administrator I saw as counterproductive to our students’ learning,” Rubio said of Senate Bill 488.

Teachers union changes course 

The California Teachers Association, which originally supported Senate Bill 488, now wants all performance assessments, including the literacy performance assessment, eliminated.

“We are all scratching our heads,” said Yolie Flores, of Families in Schools, a Los Angeles-based education advocacy organization. “We were really blindsided by this (legislation), given the momentum around strengthening our teacher prep programs.”

The results of a survey of almost 1,300 CTA members last year convinced the state teachers union to push for the elimination of the CalTPA, said Leslie Littman, vice president of the union. Teachers who took the survey said the test caused stress, took away time that could have been used to collaborate with mentors and for teaching, and did not prepare them to meet the needs of students, she said.

“I think what we were probably not cognizant of at that time, and it really has become very clear of late, is just how much of a burden these assessments have placed on these teacher candidates,” Littman said. 

Teacher candidates would be better served if they were observed over longer periods of time, during student teaching, apprenticeships, residencies and mentorship programs, to determine if they were ready to teach, Littman said. This would also allow a mentor to counsel and support the candidate to ensure they have the required skills.

California joins science of reading movement

California has joined a national effort to change how reading is being taught in schools. States nationwide are rethinking balanced literacy, which has its roots in whole language instruction or teaching children to recognize words by sight, and replacing it with a method that teaches them to decode words by sounding them out, a process known as phonics. 

Smarter Balanced test scores, released last fall, show that only 46.6% of the state’s students who were tested met academic standards in English.

Last week Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, introduced Assembly Bill 2222, which would mandate that schools use evidence-based reading instruction. California, a “local control” state, currently only encourages school districts to incorporate fundamental reading skills, including phonics, into instruction.

 “It (Newman’s SB 1263) goes against not only the movement, but everything we know from best practices, evidence, research, science, of how we need to equip new teachers and existing teachers, frankly, to teach literacy,” Flores said. “And that we would wipe it away at this very moment where we’re finally getting some traction is just very concerning.”

Lori DePole, co-director of DeCoding Dyslexia California, said the proposed legislation would cut any progress the state has made “off at the knees.” 

Among her concerns is the elimination of the requirement, also authorized by Senate Bill 488, that the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing certify that teacher preparation programs are teaching literacy aligned to state standards and a provision that requires the commission to report to the state Legislature annually on how stakeholders are meeting the requirements of the law.

“It would be going away,” DePole said. “Everyone agreed with SB 488, all the supporters agreed, this was the direction California needed to go to strengthen teacher prep with respect to literacy. And before it can even be fully implemented, we’re going to do a 180 with this legislation. It makes no sense.”

Flores said teachers want to be equipped to teach reading using evidence-based techniques, but many don’t know how.

“We know that reading is the gateway, and if kids can’t read, it’s practically game over, right?” said Flores. “And we are saying with this bill that it doesn’t matter, that we don’t really need to teach and show that teachers know how to teach reading.”

Teacher tests replaced by coursework, degrees

California has been moving away from standardized testing for teacher candidates for several years as the teacher shortage worsened. In July 2021, legislation gave teacher candidates the option to take approved coursework instead of the California Basic Education Skills Test, or CBEST, or the California Subject Examinations for Teachers, or CSET. In January’s tentative budget, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed eliminating the CBEST and allowing the completion of a bachelor’s degree to satisfy the state’s basic skills requirement.

Littman disagrees with the idea that there will be no accountability for teachers if the legislation passes. “There’s always been, and will continue to be, an evaluation component for all of our teachers in this state,” she said. “It just depends on what your district does and how they implement that. There’s always been a system of accountability for folks.”

Members currently voting on interest to authorize a strike; district says union’s budget figures incorrect

The two sides differ on amount available for pay & benefit increases by almost $18 million

“You can only get burned so many times before you stop believing them.” – AEA President Bob Carson

By Allen D. Payton

The Antioch Education Association (AEA) is planning to hold a “Rally for Student Success” on Wednesday, Feb. 21 as part of a larger effort of the East Bay Coalition for Student Success (EBCSS). In addition, the local teachers’ union members are voting on interest to authorize a strike.

In a Dec. 18, 2023 post on the Antioch Education Association’s (AEA) Facebook page they wrote, “District revenues have skyrocketed over the last few years but the % of those monies spent on educator’s salaries continues to decline??? How can we attract and retain the best educators for the students of Antioch when this is happening?”

Another post on Friday, Feb. 9, 2024 reads, “Antioch Unified School District Why???” and claims, “AUSD ended the year with $88M in unspent funds. After taking out restricted money and reserves…AUSD STILL has $34.4 million sitting in the bank that can be used for staff salaries and benefits.”

In another Facebook post that day, the AEA posted a flier about the rally which included what they’re seeking. The flier reads, “Join us as we raise our voices in support of/for: quality educators in every classroom, smaller class sizes and caseloads, salary increase reflective of the 8.22% COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment), fully paid medical benefits for all members and safe schools for our students and members.”

According to a June 2023 article on their website, the EBCSS was formed in September 2022, and “is committed to ensuring local school districts continue to prioritize funds to provide the best for student learning and educator retention and attraction. Locals and district management teams in the coalition have been working hard at the bargaining table to win agreements that focus resources on students and educators.”

Emails were sent to both Bob Carson, President of the AEA and a member of the EBCSS, and Antioch Unified School District Superintendent Stephanie Anello asking for more details about a possible strike.

Antioch Teachers’ Union President Offers Details

Carson responded, “No EBCSS association has authorized a strike. What many have done is have preliminary strike authorization votes. Antioch is doing one right now, as is Pittsburg. Other chapters like Piedmont, Pleasanton, Moraga and Dublin have already concluded their strike authorization votes. These are not votes on whether educators are going on strike but whether they will be supporting their negotiating teams until the end and be willing to participate in actions called on by the Association. A final strike vote could only occur after all the steps in the negotiating process have failed. In Antioch and these other locations, we are not there yet.

The goal of the EBCSS and its members is that each student find success. There are many ways to help make that happen. Smaller class sizes so students get more individual attention, the best technology, and safe schools are just some of things the EBCSS advocates for. We believe the most important need in a student finding success in school is to have a quality educator in every classroom. Paying competitive salaries, having full paid medical benefits (at the Kaiser rate), and good working conditions is how you get quality educators.

To be specific to what is happening in Antioch, the AUSD negotiating team presented AEA with their “best and final” offer in a December negotiating session. Since we found that offer lacking in many areas, we rejected it. We were then at “impasse”. We now have a state appointed mediator who is trying to find a way to get the 2 sides to reach an agreement. We have met 3 times with that mediator and have another meeting scheduled for 2/22. No specific offers being presented are allowed to be publicly discussed during mediation. I can tell you we have had no success to date. If the mediator at some point feels there is no hope in facilitating an agreement, either side can then move the negotiations to “fact-finding” where an appointed arbitrator receives information from both teams and writes a statement on their findings. After fact-finding, the 2 sides are required to meet for at least one more negotiating session where the district could again present their best and final offer. At that point, a strike vote could be called.

AEA is hopeful that an agreement can be reached but will not accept an offer that is not reflective of the 8.22% COLA increase the district received this year. Class size, caseloads for counselors and speech pathologists, medical benefits, and salary are the main issues right now.  As you saw on our FB page, we are planning a rally on 2/21, in conjunction with other EBCSS associations. We want to bring attention to the issues. One serious problem for us is the tremendous ending balances AUSD is carrying over every year. This is money provided by the state of California to be used on our students. Instead, its sits in the bank – year after year. This year AUSD had an ending balance of $34,000 million dollars in unrestricted funds (money that can be spent on anything) not used. They had close to another $40 million in restricted funds also not spent. This is after accounting for the prudent reserve required of them to have by the state. To me – and AEA members – that is crazy. That money could be used in many ways to help the students of Antioch and to help AUSD find quality educators.”

District Says Teachers’ Union Using Old, Incorrect Information

In response to the request for more details from Superintendent Anello and the claims by the AED, the school district’s Associate Superintendent for Business and Operations, Liz Robbins shared the following: “Their information is from the unaudited actuals report which shows how the District ended the 2022-2023 school year.

Our first interim budget report which was presented to the Board in December,  provides the most current financial information.

$46.2 million is restricted monies; $22.5 million is unrestricted. Of the $22.5 million, $18 million is allocated for potential salary and benefit increases. $4.5 million is allocated for school improvements and upgrades including HVAC, security, and technology. Lastly, $9.4 million of the ending fund balance is the set-aside required by the State for economic uncertainty. This leaves approximately $500k of unassigned funds in the ending fund balance.

The budget is not a static document, and an updated second interim financial report will be presented to the Board on March 13.”

$17.9 Million Difference Between District Budget & Teachers’ Union Figure

According to the 2023-24 First Interim MYP (Multi Year Plan) – Components of Fund Balance chart on page 80 of the 2023-24 First Interim Budget Presentation, provided to the school board at their meeting on Dec. 13, 2023, it shows $15,961,836 “Assigned for Potential Employee Negotiated Settlement”. That plus the $521,041 in Unassigned/Unappropriated funds results in about $16.5 million available for salary and benefit increases, which is $17.9 million less than what the teachers’ union claims is available.

AEA President Disagrees Says District Using Projected Estimates

That information was provided to Carson who was asked if he had a final response on the matter, for now. He provided the chart (above) and replied, “In September of each year the district presents to the school board their ‘unaudited actuals’. This financial report reflects the district’s final year end closing from the previous June (end of the financial year). The numbers I gave you are from that. Those numbers are what the district had left over from the previous year. Money not spent. That’s a fact – straight from their reporting.”

“The December (which Liz references) and March interim reports are estimates based on what the district says they are going to do. The September report is what they did,” Carson continued. “What they really spent. For example, last year the district said they would have $7 million in unrestricted funds left over in their December interim report but in September they had $34 million!!!!! Their estimate was way off. I will bet you a soda it will be way off again come September 2024. On top of all that, the district received an 8.22% COLA increase!!!”

“If this was a one-year bad projection, we would understand. It happens every year and it’s just getting worse. I will attach the ending balances over the past few years. You can only get burned so many times before you stop believing them. It’s frustrating. We want the students of Antioch to have quality educators in every classroom. Our proposals are fair attempts at making that happen. We are by no means trying to break the bank – not even close,” Carson concluded.

The teachers’ rally will be held from 4:00 – 5:30 p.m. at the corner of Auto Center Drive and Century Blvd.

OAKLAND, Calif.  – SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West President Dave Regan issued the following statement on California’s healthcare worker minimum wage law (SB 525):

“California’s healthcare worker minimum wage law (SB 525) addresses critical staffing shortages by helping to retain existing healthcare workers and attract new caregivers to the industry. The state needs to hold fast to its commitment to invest in its healthcare workers and solve the staffing crisis in our hospitals, clinics, and medical centers. 

Passed overwhelmingly by the state legislature and signed by the Governor, the bill had backing from across the healthcare industry, including the California Hospital Association and frontline healthcare workers.

The impact of the new healthcare minimum wage on the state budget has been severely overstated. As part of a compromise among healthcare stakeholders, the minimum wage will be gradually phased in over the next few years. In addition, a UC Berkeley Labor Center report states that the impact on the California budget will be partially or fully offset by low-paid workers no longer relying on Medi-Cal for their healthcare coverage.

With billions in profits, the healthcare industry has the financial resources to raise wages for their lowest-paid workers. Even before Governor Newsom signed the healthcare worker minimum wage into law, many healthcare employers had already implemented or incorporated a path to a $25/hr minimum wage for their workforce, including Stanford Healthcare, Fresenius Medical Care, Satellite Healthcare, and the biggest healthcare provider in the state, Kaiser Permanente in its largest labor contract. 

Frontline healthcare workers are counting on the state of California not to waver from its commitment to addressing the patient care crisis and supporting those who provide that care.”

Benefiting 4 million small businesses

SACRAMENTO – A federal district court this week upheld Senator Steve Glazer’s Truth in Lending law in a summary judgment that declined to hear a lawsuit filed by a lender organization that argued the law did not apply to them.

Under legislation that Senator Glazer, D-Contra Costa, authored in 2018 (Senate Bill 1235), California became the first state in the nation to give small business owners the same protections that Truth in Lending laws have given consumer borrowers for more than half a century. The law became permanent this year when Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senator Glazer’s follow-up bill, SB 33.

The lawsuit, brought by online financers called the Small Business Finance Association, sought to invalidate regulations that the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovations (DFPI) adopted to implement Senate Bill 1235, which requires lenders and other finance companies to provide clear and consistent disclosures to small business owners when they offer them financing and when they close a deal.

CORRECTION: The court ruled in favor of the DFPI’s motion for preliminary injunction. The summary judgment (Motion for Summary Judgment) concluded that the disclosures required under the Department’s regulations were lawful under the First Amendment and were not preempted by federal law.   

In his 14-page order, the judge, R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California, dismissed the plaintiffs’ arguments and praised state regulations implementing the law for protecting small business owners.

“The disclosures will help small businesses understand the cost of SBFs (Subscription Based Financing) and OECs (Original Equipment Costs) and do comparison shopping … Small businesses have asked for standardized disclosures that uncloak the true cost of financing and highlight useful information like “APR (Annual Percentage Rate), repayment amount, frequency of payments and prepayment penalties. The Regulations mandate such disclosures, thereby helping small businesses make informed credit decisions.”

DFPI Commissioner Clothilde Hewlett called Judge Klausner’s decision a “significant victory for small business owners and consumer protection in the State of California. SB 1235, and the accompanying DFPI regulations, ensure that more than four million California small businesses have protections like those enjoyed by consumers under the Truth in Lending Act for more than 50 years.

Hewlett continued: “These regulations empower small businesses to make informed credit decisions and better understand the cost of small business financing products, including merchant cash advances. The DFPI is committed to advancing opportunities for small business owners to achieve the California dream by ensuring a fair financial marketplace.”

The law is aimed at providing small business owners stronger footing in the rapidly evolving small business finance market, where fast-moving online lenders were replacing traditional banks in a largely unregulated world of loans and more innovative financing options.

“The federal district court agreed with the premise of my law, and that is that small businesses should be protected from abuses that were trapping them in a spiral of debt as the online lending industry evolved,” Senator Glazer said. “This law offers a modest measure – disclosure — to help level the playing field for small business owners. It is making California a leader in protecting the interests of small business owners as they seek the capital they need to grow.”

Previously, state and federal Truth in Lending laws applied only to consumer finance. Even the owners of the smallest companies were left to fend for themselves on the theory that they were sophisticated merchants who understood the world of finance. Increasingly, however, that is no longer true. Today’s small business owners are often immigrant entrepreneurs struggling to get their enterprises off the ground with little knowledge of the finance industry. Others are young people or early retirees with no background in finance.

Under the law, the financer must disclose the following at the time they offer financing of less than $500,000 to a business owner:

• Total amount of financing
• Total cost of financing
• Term length
• Frequency and amount of payments
• Pre-payment policies
• Annualized rate

Editor’s Note:  The Herald previously reported in this article, based on incorrect information in a press release from Glazer’s office, that Judge Klausner had granted a preliminary injunction against Opportunity Financial LLC (OppFi). That was in error. Judge Klausner’s summary judgment order contained no such order and no motion against OppFi was before the court.

Antioch councilman, retired police lieutenant, only union member in the race adds United Steelworkers Local 326 to list

Antioch, CA – On Thursday, Oct. 26, 2023, Mike Barbanica, candidate for Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors District 5, announced the endorsement of United Steelworkers Local 326. Barbanica comes from a long line of union workers, including his father and father-in-law who were Teamsters and his grandfather, uncles, and cousins who were members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). Barbanica joined the Retail Clerks union (now known as United Food and Commercial Workers) at just 16 years old, and he is currently a member of the Teamsters.

United Steelworkers Local 326 is a local branch of America’s largest industrial union, with 1.2 million members and retirees. They are responsible for negotiating labor contracts, advocating for workers’ rights, and providing services and support to members such as grievance resolution and organizing.

“We are proud to endorse Teamster and Councilman Mike Barbanica for Contra Costa County Supervisor,” said Tyson Bagley, President of United Steelworkers Local 326. “As the son and grandson of union workers and a union member himself, we know that Mike has the right values and right experience to keep delivering for Contra Costa workers and their families. We trust that at the county level, he will prioritize growing good-paying union jobs and always fight to protect our workers and their rights.”

“I am honored to have earned the trust and endorsement of the United Steelworkers Local 326,” Barbanica said. “Growing up in a union family, and as a proud union member myself, I have always supported unions because I have seen firsthand how they improve lives and help working people reach their dreams. On the Board of Supervisors, I will continue to put working families first and that means fighting for greater health care access, more affordable housing, and keeping our community safe and secure.”

Barbanica is running for Contra Costa County Supervisorial District 5, which spans the north shore of Contra Costa County, including the cities of Hercules, Martinez, Pittsburg and portions of Antioch and the unincorporated communities of Alhambra Valley, Bay Point, Briones, Rodeo, Pacheco, Crockett, Tormey, Port Costa, Mt. View, Vine Hill, Reliez Valley, and Clyde.

Barbanica is a 21 year veteran of the Pittsburg Police Department, where he retired in 2007 as a police lieutenant and earned the Bronze Medal of Valor Award for his service. Barbanica and his team were credited by the police chief with bringing about a 20% decrease in crime. Barbanica and his wife Kristine are the owners of Blue Line Property Group where they help local families access affordable housing. In 2020, Barbanica, a Democrat, was elected to the Antioch City Council and currently represents District 2.

For more information on Mike Barbanica for Contra Costa County Supervisor, please visit www.mikebarbanica.com.

About Mike Barbanica

Democrat Mike Barbanica is a veteran of the Pittsburg Police Department, where he served 21 years and retired in 2007 as a police lieutenant. On the force, Mike ran a street level narcotic and crime unit that was credited with reducing crime by 23% in Pittsburg.

In 2020, Mike was elected to represent District 2 on the Antioch City Council where he’s been cracking down on dilapidated properties, improving public safety, and getting small businesses the funds they need to succeed.

Mike and his wife Kristine are the owners of Blue Line Property Group, where they help local families access affordable housing. Mike has received numerous awards for his teaching and coaching of others, including the California and Hawaii Region “Outstanding Brokerage of the Year” and the region’s “Broker of the Year.” He also authored an international bestselling book.

With over 20 years of experience protecting our community as a police officer and now an elected Councilmember with a thriving small business, Mike is running for Contra Costa Board of Supervisors to ensure Contra Costa County is a place where every family has equal opportunity to thrive and to use his experience to tackle the housing crisis, ensure we get serious about public safety, and build a stronger community for all who call Contra Costa County home.

Mike is also active in his community. He is a member of the Elk’s Club, the local Knights of Columbus, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, the National Association of Realtors, the Pittsburg Italian American Club, and other service organizations.

Mike and his wife Kristine raised their three children in the Antioch community and are grandparents to four grandchildren.

Will also allow for light manufacturing

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 2023, following public comments mostly by local union workers in support of the warehouse projects on E. 18th Street, the Antioch Council had a few questions and comments. The project is owned by the San Francisco-based DECA Companies.

“I didn’t want large truck traffic going westbound into the city,” District 3 Councilman Mike Barbanica said. (See related article)

“The conditions of approval require signage to direct trucks to go east to 160,” said the project developer’s representative.

“Are these regulatory signs or suggestion signs?” Barbanica asked.

Where the signs go, what the verbiage will be and the regulatory aspect will be determined in discussions with city staff, the project representative shared.

District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson’s only concern was regarding the landscaping, that it be drought tolerant.

“Everything post-colonialism is evasive in this country. A little-known fact, Goldilocks broke into a house, ate all they food, destroyed they property and refused to leave. Just wanted to point that out. I think it is important, as we look to the future to work locally. It’s important to a person’s quality of life,” said Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker said.

In response to comments by members of the public about being able to work locally instead of traveling to job sites on Highway 4 she said, “It’s probably one of the worst freeways in the East Bay according to my experience. Capitalism demands that people be poor so that other people could be rich. We can make sure that industry comes to the city to make those jobs a reality.”

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock said, “I like these sites because of the local hire.”

Referring to the union workers who spoke in favor of the project, tonight she said, “it gives them back their quality of life by being at home.”

“Did we resolve the native plant thing?” Mayor Lamar Thorpe asked.

“We made a commitment we would improve our native plant species,” the developer’s spokesman said.

All five motions on the E. 18th Street East Warehouse Project passed on 5-0 votes.

The council also approved all five motions for the West Warehouse Project on 5-0 votes.