Budget Information and Bargaining Trends
January 30, 2026
Presented By:
William “Bill” Diedrich – Partner
Cerritos • Fresno • Irvine • Riverside • Pleasanton • Sacramento • San Diego
Agenda
2
Statutory/Funded Cola
3
COLA | Estimated COLA (at Governor's Budget) | Statutory COLA (at May Revision) | Funded COLA (at Budget Act) |
FY 2026–27 | 2.41% | TBD | TBD |
May-26 | Jun-26 | ||
FY 2025–26 | 2.43% | 2.30% | 2.30% |
FY 2024–25 | 0.76% | 1.07% | 1.07% |
FY 2023–24 | 8.13% | 8.22% | 8.22% |
FY 2022–23 | 5.33% | 6.56% | 6.56%1 |
FY 2021–22 | 1.50% | 1.70% | 2.70%2 |
FY 2020–21 | 2.29% | 2.31%3 | 0.00% |
FY 2019–20 | 3.46% | 3.26% | 3.26% |
FY 2018–194 | 2.51% | 2.71% | 2.71% |
(Super COLA 3.70%) | |||
FY 2017–18 | 1.48% | 1.56% | 1.56% |
FY 2016–17 | 0.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FY 2015–16 | 1.58% | 1.02% | 1.02% |
FY 2014–15 | 0.86% | 0.85% | 0.85% |
FY 2013–14 | 1.65% | 1.57% | 1.57% |
1. In addition to statutory COLA, Assembly Bill 181 (Chapter 52, Statutes of 2022) authorized LCFF base grant adjustments effective fiscal year 2022–23.
2. Assembly Bill 130 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 2021) authorized a compounded COLA comprised of statutory COLA adjustments attributed to fiscal year 2020–21 (2.31%) and fiscal year 2021–22 (1.70%), and an additional 1% increase in LCFF base grant for an effective increase of 5.07% from 2019–20 to 2021–22 funding levels.
3. The 2020–21 May Revision proposed a 10 percent reduction to certain components of the LCFF formula that are also subject to COLA. The 2020–21 Budget Act did not contain the 10 percent reduction.
4. The 2018–19 Budget Act authorized a higher COLA, known as "Super COLA”, for school districts and charter schools.
How COLA is Calculated (EC 42238.1)
4
(b) For the 1999-2000 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter, the Superintendent shall compute an inflation adjustment equal to the product of paragraphs (1) and (2):
(1) Compute the sum of the following:
(A) The statewide average base revenue limit per unit of average daily attendance for the prior fiscal year for school districts of similar type.
(B) The amount, if any, per unit of average daily attendance received by the school district pursuant to Article 8 (commencing with Section 46200) of Chapter 2 of Part 26 for the prior fiscal year.
(2) The percentage change in the annual average value of the Implicit Price Deflator for State and Local Government Purchases of Goods and Services for the United States, as published by the United States Department of Commerce for the 12-month period ending in the third quarter of the prior fiscal year. This percentage change shall be determined using the latest data available as of May 10 of the preceding fiscal year compared with the annual average value of the same deflator for the 12-month period ending in the third quarter of the second preceding fiscal year, using the latest data available as of May 10 of the preceding fiscal year, as report by the Department of Finance.
Implicit Price Deflator
5
Impact on Negotiations
6
7
BARGAINING TRENDS
We Can’t Wait!
8
Coordinated Bargaining Campaign Involving 77,000 Educators in 32 California School Districts Serving 1 Million Students.
What is it?
9
Impetus
10
A report, The State of California’s Public Schools, conducted by GBAO Strategies for the California Teachers Association and released last month, found that four out of 10 educators surveyed are thinking about leaving the profession because they’re not getting the support they need in school and can’t make ends meet at home.
My District is listed, what can I expect?
11
My District is not listed, what can I expect?
12
What do we do?
13
Other Trends
14
Certificated
Other Trends
15
Classified
Addressing Trends
16
17
Question
Answer
18
For questions or comments, please contact:
Thank You
William Diedrich
(951) 683-1122
wdiedrich@aalrr.com