Whole You, Powered by Spring Health, extends personalized mental health care to more than 245,000 California state employees across 153 departments
By Kristina Piersanti, 5W PR for Spring Health
SACRAMENTO, Calif., — California’s firefighters, police officers, parks departments, correctional staff, and many others spend their careers keeping communities safe and helping people through their worst days. Nationally, first responders develop PTSD at up to ten times the rate of the general population, according to a 2025 meta-analysis published in Clinical Psychology Review[1]. It’s a toll that builds quietly over the routine weight of emergency response and is compounded during high-intensity stretches like fire season.
The California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) is now providing the state’s employees and their families access to Whole You, Powered by Spring Health, CalHR’s new Employee Assistance Program (EAP) offering confidential, personalized support for care, crisis needs, work-life challenges, and everyday wellbeing. A lifelong mental health platform, Spring Health will deliver mental health care to more than 245,000 California state employees across 153 departments, and their eligible family members.
First responders receive the most extensive tier of care under the new program, delivered by trauma-informed providers with direct experience in first responder roles. Support staff within CalFire, the California Highway Patrol and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation also receive an elevated level of support, reflecting the higher-stress nature of their roles. The State’s 153,000 administrative or desk-based staff will also receive support under the new program.
CalHR was drawn to Spring Health’s proven outcomes, not just improved access. According to research published in OJPHI and JAMA Network Open, 92% of members reliably improve or recover from depression or anxiety, and members recover 5.9 weeks faster than the leading competitor, with appointments available in less than two days on average, compared to a 48-day average with traditional EAPs.
“First responders put themselves in harm’s way over and over again to protect the communities they serve. That takes a toll not just on them, but on their families too,” said George Michaels, Chief Revenue Officer at Spring Health. “Partnering with CalHR to support more than 245,000 state employees is exactly the kind of large-scale, public-sector commitment we built Spring Health to deliver on, and we’re honored to help deliver the mental health support they and their families deserve.”
“When people go to work, they shouldn’t have to leave their hearts at home,” said Shannon MacGregor, Statewide Employee Assistance Program Manager at the California Department of Human Resources. “Our first responders carry things most of us never have to. Whole You is our commitment that when they need support, it’s there — fast, confidential and built around what they’ve actually experienced.”
Whole You, Powered by Spring Health, is available now to California state employees and their eligible dependents through their department’s benefits resources. For more information on Spring Health’s lifelong mental health platform, visit our webpage.
About Spring Health
Spring Health is a global mental health company built on one AI-native platform so care follows individuals across every job, move, health plan, and life stage. Independently validated by JAMA Network Open and the Validation Institute, with 92% of members reliably improved or recovered from depression or anxiety and employers seeing a 52% reduction in total mental health claims costs, Spring Health provides personalized lifelong mental health support across self-guided tools, coaching, therapy, medication management, and specialty care. More than 170 million people worldwide have access to Spring Health, which is trusted by leading employers, health plans, and channel partners, including Highmark, Target, The Coca-Cola Company, BlackRock, Microsoft, Pfizer, and Wawa.
[1]Arena, A.F., Gregory, M., Collins, D.A.J., Vilus, B., Bryant, R., Harvey, S.B., & Deady, M. (2025). Global PTSD prevalence among active first responders and trends over recent years: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 120, 102622.
All-gender restroom in California’s State Capitol building. Video screenshot source: CA Family Council
“The law requires that every school campus have at least one all-gender restroom option available to students.”
By Greg Burt, Vice President, California Family Council
SACRAMENTO, CA — California is quietly moving toward mixed-sex bathrooms in K-12 public schools, and the state’s own Department of Education is leading the way.
A new law California Family Council opposed, SB 760, now requires schools to provide at least one “all-gender” restroom option on campus.
Passed in September 2023, the bill was cosponsored by then-State Senator Steve Glazer (D-Orinda). He, then-State Senator Nancy Skinner, now-State Sen. Tim Grayson and Assemblymembers Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Buffy Wicks, and Lori Wilson who represent Contra Costa County, voted for the bill.
The stated goal was to make transgender-identified students feel safer from bullying. But in the rush to accommodate those students’ feelings, lawmakers apparently gave little thought to a different safety question: what happens when boys are given access to girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms?
The State Is Already Building the Roadmap
The California Department of Education has an entire webpage dedicated to “All Access Restrooms,” describing it as a resource offering background information, planning and design resources, laws and regulations, and references for implementing “gender-inclusive” restrooms in K-12 schools.
The background information on that page acknowledges that “the designs of all-access restrooms have been trending in schools throughout the state, the country, and the world,” while noting there are currently no California design standards for these facilities. In other words, the trend is already underway, and the standards are still catching up.
The planning section of the CDE page is even more candid about the scope of what is being proposed. It describes “shifting from multi-user gendered restrooms and single-user all-gender restrooms to offering blocks of restroom facilities for all students;” meaning the goal is not just a single converted nurse’s bathroom tucked in a hallway. The ambition is to redesign entire blocks of school restroom facilities so that boys and girls share the same space.
What Would It Look Like?
The new all-gender bathroom designs typically eliminate urinals entirely, replacing them with individual private stalls accessible to everyone. The CDE’s resources page recommends an academic article published in the Education Sciences Journal titled “Expanding the Scope of Universal Design: Implications for Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation,” by Ellyn Couillard and Jeanne L. Higbee (2018), as a guide for implementation. That an academic paper on gender identity ideology is among the state’s recommended planning resources tells you something about the ideological framework driving these design decisions.
But keep in mind, SB 760 doesn’t require a complete redesign of a single-sex bathroom for it to become all-gender.
You Already Saw It at the State Capitol
If you want to get a glimpse of what legislators have in mind when they convert a single sex bathroom into an all gender bathroom, take a look at one of the converted male bathrooms at the state capitol, used by legislative staffers, adult visitors, and elementary school children visiting on field trips. California Family Council recently took a video of the empty bathroom located to one side of the Capitol Dome.
“I’m pretty sure most parents would object to their young children sharing a bathroom while men are using the urinals,” Burt said. “Even without the adult issue, I’ve witnessed the chaos that occurs when young boys are pouring into the same bathrooms as the girls while visiting the Capitol. The girls are not happy about it.” (Watch video tour of Capitol bathroom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okTcKcP3ACQ)
So, what should parents expect when multi-stall bathrooms are converted to all gender at their child’s school?
What the Law Actually Requires — And What It Doesn’t
It is important to be clear about what SB 760 does and does not mandate. The law requires that every school campus have at least one all-gender restroom option available to students. It could be single-stall or multi-stall. It must be supplied with menstrual products starting in 3rd grade, and it must be unlocked and easily accessible. But there are no requirements that urinals be removed or that additional privacy measures be added to stalls.
Sex-separated restrooms are still permitted, and most schools will continue to have them.
Burt explained what this means in practice for families. “How each school fulfills this new requirement is entirely up to the local school board. A conservative district might simply relabel a single-occupancy nurse’s bathroom and call it done. A progressive district could use this law as a green light to convert entire multi-stall restroom facilities to mixed-sex use. Parents need to find out right now what their district is planning,” he said.
The CDE’s planning resources make clear that the broader vision goes well beyond a single-stall accommodation in the corner of the building. It points toward a wholesale redesign of school bathroom facilities, one that treats sex-separated restrooms as a problem to be solved rather than a common-sense protection for children.
The Question Nobody in Sacramento Answered
SB 760’s supporters argued the law was needed to protect transgender-identified students from harassment, but the legislature never seriously asked the parallel question: does giving boys access to girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms create new opportunities for harassment and assault of girls?
California has seen case after case in recent years where policies designed to accommodate gender identity have created unsafe situations for female students. The discomfort of girls sharing intimate spaces with biological males is not a lesser concern. Lawmakers who refused to weigh it have not protected children. They have simply chosen which children’s safety matters.
Parents: Now Is the Time to Speak Up
Because each school board will decide how to implement SB 760 on its own campuses, parents have a real opportunity to influence what happens at their child’s school, but that window will not stay open indefinitely. Decisions about restroom redesigns and facility changes get made early in the budget and planning process, often before most parents are even aware the conversation is happening.
If you want a say in how your district handles this new requirement, call your school board member and school administrators now. Ask them directly: how does our district plan to fulfill the SB 760 all-gender restroom requirement? Will existing sex-separated restrooms be preserved? Will multi-stall facilities be converted? Every parent deserves to know the answers.
California Family Council works to advance God’s design for life, family, and liberty through California’s Church, Capitol, and Culture. By advocating for policies that reinforce the sanctity of life, the strength of traditional marriages, and the essential freedoms of religion, CFC is dedicated to preserving California’s moral and social foundation.
The former Comfort Inn, now Antioch Inn & Suites, is being considered for the Homekey+ program to house the homeless at a cost of up to $1.2 million per year. Photo courtesy of Mike Barbanica
Before deciding to accept or reject State Homekey+funding
City staff answer councilmembers’ questions; can only use 15% of CDBG funds to cover the up to $1.2 million annual commitment
By Allen D. Payton
As agreed to during their meeting this past Tuesday, June 23, 2026, the Antioch City Council will hold a study session Monday, June 29th, to discuss and get questions answered regarding the State Homekey+ funding for the Mahogany Housing Project at the Antioch Inn & Suites, formerly Comfort Inn. It will help the council members determine whether they will vote to accept or reject the $34.9 million grant at their next regular meeting on July 28th.
The City would have to commit an initial $750,000 already included in next year’s budget, plus, up to an additional $1.2 million per year for the next five for $6.75 million total and as many as 15 years for a total City commitment of $18.75 million. The State and City funds will provide for the acquisition and rehabilitation of the hotel on Mahogany Way, for approximately 84 units of permanent supportive housing.
On average, the state and city funds combined would total $41.75 million or about $500,000 per unit over the first five years and approximately $54.4 million or $640,000 per unit over the full 15-year period.
However, Mayor Pro Tem and District 3 Councilman Don Freitas asked if the other 40 rooms would still be rented for public hotel accommodations. Another question asked by District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha, that City staff did not have an answer for, was what would happen if a future council chooses to not continue the program. Those are just two of the questions the council members want answered before they vote.
As previously reported, following Council direction at their meeting on May 22, 2025, the City applied for the Homekey+ funding. “The project application assumes ongoing operating assistance averaging approximately $1.2 million annually during the initial five-year period,” for a total of an additional $6 million. “If such funding levels were maintained over the full fifteen-year period, the total potential City contribution could be approximately $18.75 million, from the General Fund.”
“The City would receive the benefit of approximately $34.9 million in State Homekey+ funding,” awarded in May, 2026, “for acquisition and rehabilitation of the project. The City would assume ongoing administrative, monitoring, and compliance responsibilities associated with participation in the program.”
“While the City was a co-applicant and recipient of the award, the City has not executed the Homekey+ Standard Agreement with HCD and has not formally accepted the grant funds. Because the…Agreement has not been executed, the City currently has no contractual obligation to participate in the project. The City would not assume the reporting, compliance, monitoring, or administrative responsibilities associated with the Homekey+ Program.” However, if the Council declines the grant funds, “the City could experience reduced competitiveness for certain future discretionary housing funding opportunities.”
Staff Answers questions
In the City staff report for the item, SM-1 on the agenda, they answered a variety of the council members’ questions.
HOMEKEY+ AWARD STATUS
The project received a conditional award in March 2026. The Acceptance of Terms was signed by both the City and CSH on March 17, 2026.
The award letter indicates that the representations made in the application are the basis for the award. HCD has been preparing the Standard Agreement, which is the final contract document for the award. The Standard Agreement has not been presented to the City as of the writing of this staff report.
HCD TIMELINES & PROJECT MILESTONES
“One of the primary questions raised by Council was related to timelines required by HCD. To staff’s knowledge, there does not appear to be an immediate concrete deadline.
“However, HCD described a series of project milestones tied to the award letter, Standard Agreement, construction, rehabilitation, and lease-up schedule. The longer the City delays execution and project advancement, the more difficult it becomes for the project to meet the milestones contemplated in the award and the Homekey+ Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). Homekey+ is designed to support the relatively rapid development of permanent supportive housing, and HCD expressed concern regarding the amount of time that has passed since issuance of the March 2026 conditional award.
In simple terms, staff understands the timeline issue as follows:
The City has received a conditional award.
The acceptance of award terms was signed.
HCD is preparing or has prepared the Standard Agreement.
Project milestones are tied to execution and project delivery.
Delay does not automatically terminate the award today, but continued delay increases risk to the award and project schedule.
PROJECT CONFIGURATION & UNIT COUNT
“The existing Comfort Inn currently contains 123 hotel rooms. Under the proposed Homekey+ project, the property would be rehabilitated and reconfigured into a total of 85 residential units, consisting of 84 permanent supportive housing units and one on-site manager’s unit. The reduction in the total number of units does not represent unused space or hotel rooms that would continue operating for transient lodging. Rather, the rehabilitation combines multiple existing hotel rooms to create larger, code-compliant residential units while also incorporating the infrastructure necessary for permanent supportive housing, including kitchenettes, accessibility improvements, property management offices, supportive service and case management offices, community gathering space, laundry facilities, recreation areas and other resident amenities.”
PROPERTY STATUS & REPORTED LOAN DEFAULT
The staff report also shares, “Council and members of the public raised concerns regarding news reports that the
property is associated with a loan default. Since the June 23, 2026, City Council meeting, staff has received additional information directly from the lending institution regarding the status of the loan.
“According to the lender, while a Notice of Default has been filed against the property, there is currently no foreclosure or trustee sale scheduled. The lender advised that it is actively working with the property owner to facilitate the sale of the hotel for the Homekey+ project and is aware that the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has awarded funding for the project. The lender further indicated that it will work cooperatively with the borrower, project partners, and the City to facilitate the transaction and is aligned with HCD’s project timeline.”
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES FOR ONGOING HOMELESS SERVICES:
The staff report also offers some other funding sources for homeless services. However, one source can’t be used, and the City can only use 15 percent of its annual Community Development Block Grant funds, which was suggested by District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker.
“During Council discussion, questions were raised regarding whether existing City, State, or Federal funding sources could be used to offset the potential ongoing operating commitment associated with the Homekey+ project. Staff evaluated several potential funding sources and summarized the findings below.
“Staff evaluated several existing funding sources to determine whether they could realistically offset the City’s projected operating commitment. While each funding source could potentially contribute to project operations, each carries statutory limitations or would require significant reductions to existing programs currently serving Antioch residents. Accordingly, none of the identified funding sources currently provides a complete replacement for the projected operating subsidy without corresponding impacts to existing City priorities.”
Housing Successor Funds
“The City currently allocates approximately $500,000 annually in Housing Successor funds toward homeless services, subject to available fund balance…these funds are expected to remain available for approximately two to three additional years.
“Redirecting the entire annual homeless services allocation to support Homekey+ operations would require discontinuing or significantly reducing programs currently serving approximately 2,688 homeless and at-risk Antioch residents through eight community-based organizations. It would also eliminate or significantly reduce funding for tenant-landlord mediation, eviction prevention, emergency rental assistance, legal services for tenants facing eviction, and a City staff position currently dedicated to housing services.”
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
“Federal regulations limit CDBG public service expenditures to 15 percent of the City’s annual allocation. Based on recent grant awards, this equates to approximately $127,500 annually, although the amount varies each year.
“Using the City’s entire public service allocation for Homekey+ operations would eliminate funding for the City’s competitive public service grant program during that funding cycle, affecting approximately 13 nonprofit organizations currently serving at least 1,655 Antioch residents, including programs supporting seniors, individuals with disabilities, youth, victims of abuse and other vulnerable populations. Additionally, such a change would require a Substantial Amendment to the City’s HUD Consolidated Plan, completion of a federal public participation process, and would not be available until the next funding cycle.
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
“The City receives approximately $350,000 annually through the State’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Program. State requirements dedicate a significant portion of these funds to housing rehabilitation, first-time homebuyer assistance, accessory dwelling units, and administration. Approximately 55 percent of the annual allocation (roughly $190,000 annually) could potentially be directed toward homelessness-related activities through the City’s next five-year PLHA planning process.
“However, redirecting these funds would require reducing or eliminating other housing priorities currently supported through PLHA, including affordable homeownership assistance and housing rehabilitation programs. Any change would require HCD approval and completion of the City’s next required five-year planning process.
“Staff also evaluated whether the HUD Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program could be used to finance ongoing Homekey+ operations. Section 108 is intended to finance capital improvements, including housing acquisition and rehabilitation, public facilities, infrastructure improvements, and economic development projects. It is not an eligible funding source for ongoing supportive services, staffing, case management, or annual operating expenses. As a result, Section 108 could potentially support future capital improvements but cannot be used to fund the City’s proposed operating commitment associated with the Homekey+ project.”
QUESTIONS RAISED BY COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE SUMMARY
1. Is the award final or conditional? Not yet. HCD has issued a conditional award of $34.9 million and the project has advanced beyond the application stage. However, the project is not yet fully finalized because the Standard Agreement has not been fully executed and other program requirements must still be satisfied before grant funds may be disbursed.
2. Has the City already accepted the award? The City previously executed and returned the Conditional Award Acceptance acknowledging the terms and conditions of the award. HCD has confirmed that this document does not, by itself, obligate the City to execute the Standard Agreement or proceed with the project. Execution of the Standard Agreement remains the action that commits the parties to the grant.
3. Does the City have to pay $1.2 million immediately?
No. The operating subsidy is tied to project operations and is not expected to begin until the project is operational, currently anticipated in 2027.
4. What happens if the City declines? If the City elects not to execute the Standard Agreement, HCD would likely rescind the Homekey+ award and the current project would not proceed under this funding allocation. HCD has advised that declining an award could be considered during evaluation of future competitive funding applications; however, any effect on future scoring would depend on the specific funding program and evaluation criteria in place at that time.
5. How does the current loan default affect the project? Based upon discussions between the City’s legal counsel, project representatives, and parties associated with the existing financing, the reported loan default appears to involve the current property owner rather than the Homekey+ project itself. While it may affect the timing or structure of the acquisition, HCD has advised that acquisition through foreclosure, receivership, negotiated purchase, or other lawful means may still be possible. The developer continues to evaluate acquisition options with the lender and trustee.
6. Is this a loan? No. HCD described Homekey+ as a grant program. The City’s obligation is related to its role as co-applicant, payee, and proposed local contributor.
7. Who receives and administers funds? HCD indicated the City is required to be the payee. Specific disbursement controls may be established through escrow or other approved structures.
8. Who gets housed? Residents would be referred to through approved eligibility and referral systems, not through open walk-in access. The final tenant selection and referral process must comply with Homekey+, fair housing, and coordinated entry requirements.
9. Can Antioch residents be prioritized? This requires additional legal and programmatic clarification. County partners have indicated that some projects have used lawful local targeting approaches, but final structure must comply with fair housing and funding requirements.
10. What public safety measures will be in place? The final operations plan should include property management, staffing, service coordination, resident expectations, security protocols, and coordination with APD and County partners.
A Closed Session beginning at 6:00 p.m. will be held to again negotiate contracts with City employee groups who have been working without one since last fall including the Management Unit, Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3, Confidential Unit, Antioch Police Officers Association and Antioch Police Sworn Management Association. The study session will begin at 6:30 p.m. inside the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It can be viewed livestream on the City’s website or the City’s YouTube channel.
No changes in new leaders elected, countywide ballot measures
But lead change in 14th Assembly District second place for November run-off
By Allen D. Payton
According to the Contra Costa Elections Division, with the seven-day deadline to receive mail-in ballots passed on Tuesday and only 2,100 ballots remaining to be processed and 4,000 ballots to be cured, the results are confirmed as of June 10th at 3:23 p.m.: three new leaders have been elected, three re-elected, one ballot measure passed and two failed. A total of 323,422 ballots were cast in the county resulting in a 44.21% turnout.
Plus, according to the California Secretary of State as of 7:25 p.m., second place in two of the closest races in the state have been determined, including one lead change since last Friday’s update.
Source: CCC Elections
County Leader Elections
In the four contested races for countywide positions no changes occurred. Dr. Dana Eaton defeated Dr. Jag Lathan for Superintendent of Schools; Vince Robb defeated his two opponents, Nick Spinner and Kismat Kathrani, for Assessor; Peter Karumbi defeated Deepika Naharas for Auditor-Controller; and incumbent County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar Kristin Connelly was re-elected having defeated challenger Pratima Sonavne.
Source: CCC Elections
Countywide Ballot Measures – A Passes, B & G Fail
In the three countywide ballot measure elections, Measure A, the Urban Limit Line renewal, passed overwhelmingly while Measure B, the County’s sales tax increase and Measure G, the college district’s bond, were defeated.
Measure A increased its margin of victory to 70.2% of the vote in favor to 29.8% opposed.
In the Measure B contest, while more “no” than “yes” votes were counted since last Friday’s update and the margin of defeat increased from 36,562 votes to now 41,093, the percentage of defeat decreased from 57.41% to 56.93% of the vote against. Yet, there are not enough votes remaining to be counted in the county for it to pass.
Although the “yes” votes overtook the “no” votes in the Measure G contest and currently lead by 253 votes, it requires 55% of the vote to pass. There are now 50.03% of the vote in favor to 49.97% opposed. Yet, even if all the remaining 6,100 ballots in the county included favorable votes, the bond measure would still fall about 12,000 votes short of passing.
Source: CA Secretary of State
Lead Change in 14th Assembly District
In the race for second place to determine who will face incumbent Democrat Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks in November in the 14th Assembly District, which includes most of West County and portions of Alameda County, a lead change occurred. Green Party candidate Mark Rendon has overtaken Republican Borgar Solnordal by 1,251 votes, a reversal of 2,201 votes since last Friday’s update and 3,336 votes since Election Night.
Source: CA Secretary of State
10th Congressional District
In the second-place contest to determine who will take on incumbent Democrat Rep. Mark DeSaulnier in November in the 10th Congressional District, which includes most of Contra Costa and portions of Alameda County, Republican Jeff Frese has 3,077 more votes than third-time candidate Katherine Piccinini. He increased his lead by 121 votes since the last update and 233 since Election Night.
The mystery candidate has a website, Facebook page with two followers, X/Twitter feed with zero followers and an Instagram account with one post and one follower as of June 10th. But Frese does not provide a photo of himself or description of what he does for work as a Small Business Owner, which is his ballot designation. Only an email address is provided. An effort to reach him comment about his advancing to the General Election and details about his business were unsuccessful prior to publication time.
Estimated number of unprocessed ballots in Contra Costa County:
Ballots voted at a voting location – 0
Vote-by-mail ballots received on or before Election Day – 0
Vote-by-mail ballots received after Election Day – 0
According to the Secretary of State, “State law requires county elections officials to report final official results to the Secretary of State by July 3, 2026. The Secretary of State has until July 10, 2026, to certify the results of the election.”
Please check back later for any updates to this report.
The governor included $1.7 billion in his allocation to K-12 and community colleges, but is keeping $3.9 billion until next year.
Newsom would raise the statutory minimum COLA from 2.87% to 4.31%.
The revised budget reduces the cost-of-living adjustment for the California State Preschool Program to 2.01% from the January proposal of 2.41%.
With one contentious exception, school districts can check off most items on their wish list for 2026-27 with the release on Thursday of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s revised state budget.
Newsom is proposing to target unexpected billions of dollars from surging state revenues to the priorities that school district leaders had prized, including a higher cost-of-living adjustment, billions of dollars more annually for special education, and a one-time, much larger discretionary block grant.
Also, all employees of community colleges and TK-12 schools will be entitled to up to 14 weeks of paid pregnancy disability leave beginning in 2026-27, which the higher COLA will pay for.
But there remains a major point of contention: Newsom is still withholding $3.9 billion in Proposition 98 funding that school organizations say should go to schools and community colleges now.
School districts had complained loudly that their base funding hadn’t kept up with rising expenses, particularly special education and declining enrollment. Amid overall record state funding, Newsom prioritized new initiatives, including the addition of transitional kindergarten, the creation of community schools and expanded learning after school and during the summer.
“People were looking for base money in their pocket,” said Sen. John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, who chairs the Senate Budget Committee. “The attention to a higher COLA and special education is welcome news.”
Source: EdSource.org
Ted Lempert, president of the nonprofit advocacy organization Children Now, said, “Big picture, the May revision puts $8.1 billion more than the January budget into education. While it’s not perfect, we really appreciate it. The governor and Legislature have done a better job in the last couple of years of protecting funding. That said, kids are still way behind.”
Tempering praise for the higher COLA and special education funding, California School Boards Association President Debra Schade said in a statement, “Unfortunately, the Governor’s May Revise masks the underfunding of the Proposition 98 school funding guarantee and the prolific use of one-time money to inflate funding levels in the short term without providing the stability and predictability schools need to plan effectively for student support. “
In his January budget, Newsom said he would withhold $5.6 billion from schools and community colleges until he was certain, early in 2027, that state revenue had actually come through. Schools objected, and the California Teachers Association and the school boards association have threatened to sue on the principle that the Prop. 98 allocations are a voter-approved constitutional guarantee.
In the May revision, Newsom included $1.7 billion in his allocation, but is still keeping $3.9 billion until early next year, when the next governor can reassess. This continues to frustrate school organizations.
“ACSA rejects the Administration’s proposal, as these funds belong in classrooms supporting students,” said Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Association of California School Administrators. “As budget negotiations move forward, ACSA will continue advocating for a final budget that fully honors the state’s constitutional commitment to public education.”
CTA President David Goldberg said withholding the funds “causes serious harm to public schools. This means overcrowded, under-resourced, destabilized classrooms.” This week, he said, “more than 2,000 educators will find out if their layoff notice is permanent heading into the next school year … and their future is in jeopardy with threats to withhold vital funds from our local school districts.”
Asked about the issue during a state budget presentation Thursday, Newsom said education advocates should take a wider view.
“We made some accommodation to that concern, and I would just have them look at the entire balance sheet and be hard-pressed to find an administration over a seven-year period that’s invested more in transforming our TK — a brand new grade — to 12 education system,” Newsom told reporters “(We’ve made) unprecedented, historic investments per pupil, investments that are the envy of many other states.”
The revised funding estimate for Proposition 98, the 40% of the state general fund that must go to TK-12 and community colleges, would be a record $127.1 billion in 2026-27. Per student funding would increase to a record $21,013 per pupil. Funding per pupil from federal and other sources would be $28,282.
That overall revenue estimate, however, would appear at least several billion dollars less than the Senate and the independent Legislative Analyst’s Office had forecast. The May revision marks the starting line for a final dash toward the Legislature’s June 15 deadline, followed by negotiations between Newsom and legislative leaders, with final passage by the July 1 start of the fiscal year.
Laird said that including the withheld $3.9 billion for schools and community colleges will be one of the items. Additional revenue projections, based on May tax receipts, will be a factor.
The table presents proposed and revised budget year expenditures for each agency area. These totals are comprised of State funds which include General Fund, special funds, and selected bond funds. These totals do not include federal funds, other non-governmental cost funds, or reimbursements. Source: Office of the California Governor
Here are some budget specifics:
COLA: Newsom would raise the statutory minimum COLA of 2.87%, determined by a federal formula that does not consider the price of housing, to 4.31%. The effect would raise COLA for districts’ operating expenses, through the Local Control Funding Formula, from $3.1 billion proposed in January to $4 billion. Other programs, including special education, would get the statutory COLA of 2.87%
The 4.31% would become the new base for determining COLA calculations in future years.
SPECIAL EDUCATION: State and federal special education fall well short of districts’ obligations for students with disabilities. Additional state funding for special education offsets districts’ base expenses. Newsom would add $1.8 billion to the extra $509 million increase he proposed in January for a total of $2.4 billion — 43% more than a year ago.
Newsom characterized it as “the largest investment in special education in California’s history … maybe in American history.”
“It’s an area that has continued to be anxiety-inducing because you meet with parents, and they’re demanding more, and we’ve heard that call,” he said.
BLOCK GRANT: In January, Newsom proposed a one-time $2.8 billion grant; he has raised it to $5 billion. He calls it the Student Support and Professional Development Block Grant, and implies it should be used for teacher training for math, reading and literacy support for English learners, along with career pathways and expanding dual enrollment. But districts will have wide latitude to spend the money as they choose.
RAINY DAY FUND: Newsom would raise the Proposition 98 reserve to $10.3 billion, approaching the statutory maximum, as a cushion in the event of a recession or if the spigot of projected revenues from tax receipts from AI startups runs dry.
John Affeldt, managing attorney for Public Advocates, a public interest law firm, warned that the state should plan for that to happen. “Our state cannot continue to rely on temporary AI stock market bubbles,” he said. “To build a budget that will enable our residents to thrive, California needs more robust permanent revenue streams to support our schools and healthy communities. We cannot ask teachers to transform students’ lives while those same teachers are being priced out of the communities they serve.”
COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: Newsom would add $1 billion to the $4.1 billion previously invested in creating 2,500 community schools, which provide community partnerships involving wellness, mental health and career opportunities. His May revision would also repurpose nearly $500 million in extension grants to add more community schools.
“We lead and dominate the nation in community schools,” Newsom said Thursday.
LITERACY AND MATH INSTRUCTION: Since 2019, the state has funded $715 million to hire and train reading specialists and coaches in high-poverty schools — a key element in the state’s comprehensive early literacy plan. But that money, in one-time grants, will expire over the next three years. Newsom proposes $440 million to extend the grants through 2031.
He would also add $60 million to the $30 million funded last year for the Mathematics Professional Learning Partnership, which is creating a statewide network to train coaches and math specialists in the 2023 math framework. Still missing: funding for elementary schools to hire coaches.
Newsom is also encouraging districts to use some of the $5 billion in the discretionary block grant for literacy and math instruction.
Early education and care
In his presentation, the governor largely overlooked early education and child care. The proposal allocates $15 million toward training to help with the implementation of programs such as Transitional Kindergarten and $5 million in ongoing funding to support the use of the Multitudes dyslexia screener at no cost to districts.
But the revised budget reduces the cost-of-living adjustment for the California State Preschool Program to 2.01% from the January proposal of 2.41%. The governor also did not address calls from early education advocates to help support pre-K programs that have been struggling after losing large numbers of children to the new TK programs offered by the state’s public schools.
Patricia Lozano, executive director of Early Edge California, a nonprofit organization that advocates for accessible, high-quality early learning, said the reduction to the cost-of-living adjustment sends a troubling signal to providers who are already operating on the margins.
“Access to affordable child care isn’t just an early learning issue, it’s essential to families’ economic well-being,” she said. “The governor has been a strong champion for children during his years in office, and we’ll be urging the Administration and the Legislature to fulfill the promise of funding additional child care slots and restoring COLA before the budget is finalized.”
In particular, the governor’s plan to significantly increase the cost-of-living allowance for TK-12 schools while cutting it for preschools drew fire.
“He decided to backstop health premiums and local schools, while punting on aiding families who desperately search for affordable child care,” said Bruce Fuller, who co-authored a new report from the UC Berkeley Equity and Excellence in Early Childhood alliance on the dire outlook many pre-K programs are facing.
Lempert, of Children Now, said he hoped the cuts to the early education COLA would be reversed by the Legislature in the final budget.
the STATE BUDGET PROCESS
Governor’s initial budget proposal:
Must be released by Jan. 10.
Assumes an estimate of revenues the state will collect over the next 18 months (by June 30, 2027). Actual revenues often differ significantly due to economic conditions, federal policy and unforeseen events, such as the destructive fires in Los Angeles.
MAY 14 revision:
Governor issues May budget with revised general fund revenues, including its impact on Proposition 98.
LATE MAY to EARLY JUNE:
Legislature’s budget subcommittees report to the full budget committees.
JUNE 15:
Constitutional deadline for the Legislature to pass the budget bill.
MID-JUNE TO LATE JUNE:
Negotiations between the Assembly speaker and the Senate president pro tempore with the governor; the Legislature passes the final budget, and the governor signs it before the fiscal year starts on July 1.
Legislature’s response:
The Assembly and Senate have until June 15 to hold hearings and respond with their own version.
Negotiation:
Behind closed doors, legislative leaders and the governor settle differences. Lawmakers sign off, and the governor signs the final version.
Governors have increasingly used the budget to rewrite statutes outside the legislative process. That’s why it’s important to read the fine print in massive “budget trailer bills” written after the budget is passed.
About 40% of the state’s general fund will go to schools and community colleges. The bulk goes to keeping schools running, but in some years, new money is spent on new programs, such as transitional kindergarten and community schools.
The Antioch Unified School District Board of Trustee cut the budget and 159 positions after saving 16 Classified staff positions during their meeting on Wednesday, May 13, 2026. Photos by Allen D. Payton
Over 16 positions saved at request of three trustees, but no teachers
Board first heard from state’s Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team CEO
By Allen D. Payton
During another long meeting, the Antioch School Board, on Wednesday night, May 13, 2026, on split votes cut the District budget, and laid off 159 employees including 48 teachers and 30 other Certificated staff. Area 3 Trustee Dee Brown voted to abstain on all three votes. But the Board voted unanimously to accept the offer of one-day furloughs by Superintendent Dr. Darnise Williams and administrative staff, including principals. That will save the District about $117,000.
The meeting and votes followed split votes the previous Wednesday when the Board majority opposed the budget and staff cuts. The Board again met at 7:00 p.m. in the Deer Valley High School Theater with the expectation of a greater turnout than the District’s Board Room could accommodate. But that, once again, proved to be unnecessary as very few teachers, staff and members of the public attended the meeting.
The District was facing a $31.5 million budget deficit and the proposed budget cuts totaled $18.7 million. But how much was actually cut wasn’t clear due to the over 16 Classified staff positions that were saved. Also saved, was the District from a potential takeover by the State and County Offices of Education, known as receivership.
The Board faced two deadlines requiring them to vote to make the cuts that night. First, the District had to give final layoff notices to employees by Thursday, May 14th as well as submit their financial plan to the County Office of Education by Friday, May 15th.
Very few District teachers, staff, parents and other members of the public attended Wednesday night’s meeting inside the Deer Valley High School Theater.
The trustees heard from District staff, including Bob Carson, president of the Antioch Education Association, the local teachers’ union, who supported the cuts to avoid the takeover and from residents who opposed them.
Then the Board was provided a presentation Regarding Projected Cash Flow by Mike Fine, the Chief Executive Officer of the California Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), which, “assists and provides guidance to local educational agencies in the areas of business and financial management practices.” He described his organization as “the guardian of the receivership process” but stressed to the trustees that FCMAT’s efforts were to work with financially challenged districts to avoid it.
“The majority of our work is absolutely avoiding receivership,” he added, which he estimated to be 80% of FCMAT’s work.
Fine also informed the Board and District leadership that the expected May Revised Budget from Governor Newsom on Thursday would change the financial figures being discussed and that it would be positive for the District. That turned out to possibly be true as the governor’s 2026-27 budget proposal increases spending on K-12 by $2.5 billion. (See related article)
The Antioch School Board Trustees heard impassioned pleas against the cuts by parents before the votes on May 13, 2026.
Trustee Requests & Board Votes
Following several responses to questions by District staff and requests by individual trustees to save certain jobs, including school psychiatrists and Reading Intervention Teachers by Area 5 Trustee Mary Rocha and Paraeducators by Area 3 Trustee Dee Brown, who was also unsatisfied with requests for information from District staff not being provided, the Board took three split votes.
Area 4 Trustee Olga Cobos-Smith was satisfied that the District didn’t need one psychiatrist per school because best practices only required one for every 500 to 700 students. That was enough for her to change her “no” vote on the budget from last week. After Rocha was satisfied with the explanation from District staff that they had a plan to handle the loss of the Reading Intervention Teachers, she joined the other three trustees in voting in favor of cutting the Classified staff positions.
The Board approved the proposed list of 78 Certificated staff cuts. Source: AUSD
At 11:34 PM, on a vote of 3-1-1 with Rocha voting “no” and Brown voting to abstain, the Trustees approved the Budget Reduction Plan including the concessions that saved several specific jobs.
The Board the voted 3-1-1, again, on final layoffs of 78 Certificated employees which, were mainly teachers.
After Rocha was able to get the other board members to agree to saving the jobs of the Behavior Support Specialists (3 FTE), Board Certified Behavior Analyst (1 FTE) and Instructional Assistants – Bilingual (12.4275 FTE), the Trustees voted 4-0-1 on final layoffs of a little over 81 Full-Time Equivalent Classified Services employees. Brown again, voted to abstain.
The AUSD Board of Trustees voted to approve the proposed list of cuts to Classified staff positions except for those highlighted in yellow. Source: AUSD. Highlighted by the Herald.
The Board also voted to accept the superficial gesture of one-day furlough by the superintendent and administrative staff including principals. It means those staff members won’t be paid but also don’t have to show up for work that day. After Rocha asked about increasing it to three days, Dr. Williams said that would have to be taken to the Personnel Commission, first. The motion on the matter then passed 5-0, saving the District approximately $117,437.
The Board’s work on the budget is not over as they still face another deadline in October, Dr. Williams shared. But by then, with additional state funds, assuming the governor’s budget proposals are approved by the legislature, the Antioch trustees job may get easier.
Antioch Inn & Suites formerly Comfort Inn located across from the Lowe’s store on Mahogany Way. Photos courtesy of Mike Barbanica
Governor Newsom announces $111 million in voter-approved Prop 1 funding to communities to get people off the streets and connected to mental health care
To date, Homekey+ has created 50 supportive housing projects with 2,471 affordable homes —including 620 homes for veterans
By Office of the Governor of California
SACRAMENTO – Building on California’s strategies leading to a 9% reduction of unsheltered homelessness last year, Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the award of voter-approved Proposition 1 funding to create another six affordable housing communities including one in Antioch. The communities are part of the state’s Homekey+ program to expand supportive housing and behavioral health services statewide. Today’s announcement creates 307 new permanent supportive homes to provide stability for veterans and other Californians who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness and living with behavioral health challenges.
Last year, the Antioch City Council approved purchase of the hotel, formerly the Comfort Inn, now, the Antioch Inn & Suites, “to serve as permanent housing for homeless families/individuals with prior behavioral health issues” and veterans. But it’s still operating as a hotel. Recently, the Council discussed using the location for the unhoused voucher program and a possible site for a warming center but did not pursue either use.
Our state investments have launched critical programs for local communities to help get vulnerable people off the streets and into housing and care. Together, we’re breaking cycles of homelessness that took decades to create — and we’re doing it with urgency, compassion, and accountability.
Governor Gavin Newsom
Governor Newsom is the first governor to have prioritized new housing, homeless, and mental health programs, and is turning around the impacts of this national crisis on California, leading the first reduction in unsheltered homelessness in more than 15 years.
More than 1.2 million adults in California live with a serious mental illness, and 1 in 10 residents meet the criteria for a substance use disorder, greatly increasing their odds of experiencing homelessness.
Proposition 1, advanced by the Governor in partnership with the Legislature and approved by voters in 2024, helps local communities provide vital care and housing for these vulnerable residents. Prop 1 is transforming California’s behavioral health systems with a $6.4 billion Behavioral Health Bond for housing, services, and treatment for veterans and people experiencing homelessness, including $2.25 billion through Homekey+ to serve individuals with mental health or substance use challenges and veterans.
“Proposition 1 and Homekey+ funds are supporting communities throughout California by investing in affordable homes with supportive services,” said Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency Secretary Tomiquia Moss. “The homes created through today’s awards will provide stability and dignity to Californians most in need.”
With today’s awards, Homekey+ has so far allocated $858.8 million to support 50 permanent supportive housing projects that will create 2,471 affordable homes throughout California for individuals experiencing or at risk of homelessness with behavioral health challenges. Of these homes, 620 are reserved for veterans.
“Each new Homekey+ award means more than housing. It means stability, dignity, and a fresh start for veterans in need,” said CalVet Secretary Lindsey Sin. “With 75 more veterans’ homes in this round, and 620 total veterans’ units across 50 projects, we are seeing the real impact of strong partnerships and a shared commitment to those who served. CalVet is proud to continue working alongside the California Department of Housing and Community Development and local partners to turn these projects into places where veterans can rebuild their lives.”
Approximately $1.033 billion in Proposition 1 bond funds are currently available through Homekey+ to cities, counties, housing authorities, and tribal entities for permanent supportive housing projects serving veterans. Another $1.11 billion is available for projects serving all target populations, through a combination of Proposition 1 bond funds and Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention Program (HHAP) funds.
In addition to supportive affordable housing through Homekey+ and HHAP, through Proposition 1 bonds, the state is also funding 6,800 residential treatment beds and 26,700 outpatient treatment slots for behavioral health.
“HCD is working with CalVet to advance California voters’ vision for a state in which people with mental health challenges have the services and support they need to succeed in a life lived off the streets,” said HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez. “We have reached a point where the numbers are reflecting the cumulative impact of our programs, and we look forward to building on those successes under the soon-to-be California Housing and Homeless Agency.”
The Homekey+ awards announced today total $111 million to create 307 homes across six projects, with 75 units for veterans and six manager units:
The City of Antioch in partnership with California Supportive Housing, will receive nearly $34.9 million in Homekey+ funds to acquire and rehabilitate a hotel into 85 homes, including one manager’s unit. The project will set aside 21 units for veterans and 21 units for transitional age youth. The development known as CSH Mahogany Housing is conveniently located near two bus stops and a busy commercial area that offers amenities such as a grocery store, pharmacy, restaurants, retail stores, and two major medical centers. It is located on Mahogany Way near Auto Center Drive, adjacent to Highway 4 across from Lowe’s.
The City of Cudahy in partnership with National Community Renaissance of California and Prima Development, will receive just under $8 million in Homekey+ funding to fill a financing gap for Amanda Villas. The project will have a total of 140 homes, including two manager’s units. The project dedicates 69 units to individuals experiencing chronic homelessness, 18 of which are designated as Homekey+ units for people facing a behavioral health challenge. In addition to Homekey+ funds, HCD’s Multifamily Finance Super NOFA Program awarded $6.7 million in 2023. Project-based rental subsidies of $33.1 million have been committed by the Los Angeles County Development Authority.
The County of Fresno, in partnership with UP Holdings California, LLC and RHCB Development LP, will receive just over $27 million in Homekey+ funding for Sendero Commons, a new construction project with 88 homes, including one manager’s unit. The project dedicates 45 units to veterans. HCD’s No Place Like Home program awarded $10 million in 2022. The Homekey+ award will fill the financing gap and replace the need for tax credits.
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, in partnership with The RightWay Foundation, will receive more than $12.5 million in Homekey+ funding to acquire two newly constructed buildings with a total of 33 homes, including two manager’s units, to serve youth who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness with a behavioral health challenge. All units include a kitchen and private bathroom
The City of Los Angeles, in partnership with National Community Renaissance of California, will receive $15.6 million in Homekey+ funding to rehabilitate a motel into Huntington Villas, with 52 homes for individuals experiencing homelessness with a behavioral health challenge and one manager’s unit. The project also has funding and rental subsidy commitments from Los Angeles County.
The County of Santa Barbara, in partnership with DignityMoves, will receive a Homekey+ award of just over $11.7 million to build the 30-home Calle Real Family Village to serve veterans, youth, and other Californians experiencing or at risk of homelessness, as well as one on-site manager. Nine units are dedicated for veterans, with three of those reserved for veterans aged 18-24. The project will utilize modular units and include indoor and outdoor community spaces. It is located within one-half mile of transportation stops, a medical clinic.
This adds to state investments made by the administration and Legislature since 2019 to help local communities address homelessness, including the launch of the first-in-the-nation Homekey program that has funded nearly 16,000 homes across more than 250 projects that will house an estimated 172,000 Californians over the projects’ lifetimes; $4.95 billion through current and previous rounds of the HHAP Program; $2.2 billion through Homekey+ to serve individuals with mental health or substance use challenges and veterans; $1 billion in Encampment Resolution Funds to provide services and housing to help 23,000 individuals across 120 encampment sites transition from homelessness.
The Homekey+ NOFA allocates funding by region based on a proportionate share of veterans and others experiencing homelessness, and by share of extremely low-income households whose rent is more than half of their income. There are also allocations for rural projects and for projects serving youth experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Homekey+ applications will continue to be reviewed and approved on a rolling basis.
Reversing a decades-in-the-making crisis
From the very first moments of the Newsom administration, California has approached the decades-in-the-making housing and homelessness crisis with focus and urgency. No other state has devoted as much time and attention to these twin problems – and California is a leader in producing positive results. Governor Newsom, in partnership with the Legislature, has continued to make progress in reversing decades of inaction, leading to a 9% reduction in unsheltered homelessness, a first in more than 15 years:
Expanding shelter and support — Providing funding and programs for local governments, coupled with strong accountability measures to ensure that each local government is doing its share to build housing, and create shelter and support, so that people living in encampments have a safe place to go.
Addressing mental health and its impact on homelessness — Ending a long-standing 7,000-bed shortfall in California’s behavioral health system by rapidly expanding community treatment centers and permanent supportive housing units. In 2024, voters approved Governor Newsom’s Proposition 1, which is transforming California’s behavioral health systems. It is estimated that funding from Proposition 1 will create 6,800 residential treatment beds and 26,700 outpatient treatment slots for behavioral health care.
Creating new pathways for those who need the most help — Updating conservatorship laws for the first time in 50 years to include people who are unable to provide for their personal safety or necessary medical care, in addition to food, clothing, or shelter, due to either severe substance use disorder or serious mental health illness. Creating a new CARE court system that creates court-administered plans for up to 24 months to help people struggling with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, often with substance use challenges, get the treatment and housing they need to recover and thrive.
Streamlining and prioritizing building of new housing — Governor Newsom made creating more housing a state priority for the first time in history. He has signed into law groundbreaking reforms to break down systemic barriers that have stood in the way of building the housing Californians need, including broad CEQA reforms.
Removing dangerous encampments — Governor Newsom has set a strong expectation for all local governments to address encampments in their communities and help connect people with support. In 2024, Governor Newsom filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court defending communities’ authority to clear encampments. After the Supreme Court affirmed local authority, Governor Newsom issued an executive order directing state entities and urging local governments to clear encampments and connect people with support, using a state-tested model that helps ensure encampments are addressed humanely and people are given adequate notice and support.
Newly apppointed Contra Costa County Superior Court Judges Hann Fakhoury and Amanda Karl. Photos: Office of the California Governor
By Office of the California Governor
Governor Gavin Newsom announced on Friday, March 27 2026, his appointment of two more Superior Court Judges in Contra Costa County, Hanni Fakhoury and Amanda Karl.
Hanni Fakhoury, of Contra Costa County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Contra Costa County Superior Court. Fakhoury has worked as a Partner of Moeel Lah Fakhoury since 2021, where he works in white collar and federal criminal defense as a trial attorney and mediator. He served as an Assistant Federal Public Defender at the Federal Public Defender for Northern District of California from 2015 to 2021. Fakhoury worked as a Staff Attorney and Senior Staff Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation from 2011 to 2015. He worked as a Trial Attorney at the Federal Defenders of San Diego from 2007 to 2011.
According to his Linkedin profile, “Fakhoury is an accomplished litigator who represents individuals and companies in criminal prosecutions and government and regulatory investigations. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and a Northern California Super Lawyer. In addition to litigation, Hanni serves as a mediator in the Northern District of California’s ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) program and is a co-lecturer at UC Berkeley School of Law.
According to his bio on his law firm’s website, Fakhoury is a “Bay Area native” and “proudly serves the Northern District of California as a member of its Criminal Justice Act (CJA) trial panel, representing indigent criminal defendants. He was also selected by the Northern District bench to serve on the court’s Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility, Criminal Rules and Practice Committee, and CJA Administration Committee.”
“A sought-after teacher, Hanni…co-teaches a seminar on white collar crime. He has presented and lectured at over 100 legal conferences to wide audiences, including judges, attorneys and the public at large.”
Fakhoury received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law. He fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Charles S. Treat. Fakhoury is a Democrat.
Amanda Karl, of Alameda County, has also been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Contra Costa County Superior Court. Karl has worked as a Partner at Gibbs Mura since 2022, where she also worked as an Associate from 2016 to 2021. She served as a Law Clerk at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California from 2015 to 2016 and at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from 2014 to 2015.
According to her profile on the Gibbs Mura website, Karl “represents consumers, employees and others who have been harmed by corporations. She has prosecuted a wide range of complex cases, including product defect, failure-to-warn, wage and hour, data breach, sexual assault, and securities cases, within a variety of industries. In 2024 she was honored as a Rising Star by Law360, a highly selective award that recognizes top attorneys under the age of 40.
Karl received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law as a member of the Order of the Coif, a national honorary scholastic society, which extends invitations to the top 10% of Berkeley Law’s graduating J.D. students by grade point average. . She fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Charles B. Burch. Karl is a Democrat.
The annual compensation for each of these positions is $244,727.
