CPS, teachers union reach tentative deal as lawmaker floats state takeover
The Brief
Tentative Deal Reached: Chicago Public Schools and the Chicago Teachers Union have a tentative contract agreement, which likely includes 4%-5% annual raises and more prep time for teachers. CTU members will vote Monday on it.
State Takeover Proposal: State Rep. Curtis Tarver has introduced a bill to place CPS under the Illinois Finance Authority, citing ongoing budget issues. He plans to hold hearings on the proposal.
Uncertain Future: Neither Gov. JB Pritzker, Mayor Brandon Johnson nor CTU have commented on the deal, and questions remain about how CPS will fund the agreement.
CHICAGO - Chicago Public Schools and the Chicago Teachers Union have reached a tentative contract agreement after several months of negotiations.
The deal now heads to CTU members for a vote.
What we know
While details of the agreement have not been fully released, the deal is expected to include annual raises of 4% to 5% and additional classroom prep time for teachers.
But questions remain about how CPS will fund the contract—and whether the state may need to step in.
Lawmaker Proposes Takeover
Democratic state Rep. Curtis Tarver said the agreement does not address the district's ongoing budget concerns. He has introduced legislation that would place the Illinois Finance Authority in control of CPS.
"This is not new precedent. This happened in the past when CPS was borrowing to the hilt and unable to balance its books that's responsible to taxpayers and most importantly to students who attend those schools," said Tarver.
A state takeover would be controversial and remains a long shot, but Tarver said he wants to hold hearings and bring stakeholders to testify.
"A lot of individuals profess to care about children. A bill like this will allow us to tell if it's really about the children as opposed to the adults in the room," Tarver said.
RELATED:Illinois lawmaker proposes state takeover of Chicago Public Schools
What's next
CTU's bargaining unit will vote on the tentative deal Monday. If approved, it will go to the union's House of Delegates and then to the full membership for a final vote.
Neither Gov. JB Pritzker, Mayor Brandon Johnson nor CTU have commented on the agreement.
Elected school board member Ellen Rosenfeld said, "We hope if this happens, it sunsets when the full board is elected in 2026."
The Source
FOX 32's Paris Schutz reported on this story.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Power bills in California have jumped nearly 50% in four years. Democrats think they have solutions
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers this week advanced several efforts aimed at reining in utility profits and slashing electricity bills as part of their agenda to tackle the sky-high costs of living. The proposals would make sweeping changes to how utilities fund expensive infrastructure projects like putting power lines underground to guard against wildfires. They also would add more oversight around wildfire mitigation spending and put new requirements on utility requests to increase rates. Supporters said the goal is to make the big investor-owned utilities start sharing some of the costs to fight wildfires and build new transmission infrastructure. 'This is not a set of modest tweaks that will make minor improvements at the edges of a problem without offending anyone,' said Democratic State Sen. Josh Becker, the bill's author. 'This is a big deal.' One of the bills is part of the state Senate's package to address affordability amid growing concern about the high costs of everything from gas to groceries. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order last year urging lawmakers to do something to address skyrocketing electricity rates, which rose 47% on average for residential customers between 2019 and 2023, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analysts Office. But Republicans, who are in the minority in both chambers, say Democrats are not meaningfully addressing high prices. They did not support the energy reform bills, saying it wouldn't lower costs, and they unsuccessfully tried to force a vote on a proposal to limit utilities from raising power rates above the rate of inflation. Utility rate increases in recent years have been approved by state regulators in part to help investor-owned utilities bury power lines aimed at stopping wildfires. Some of the deadliest and most destructive fires in recent years have been sparked by power equipment. Pacific Gas & Electric, whose equipment sparked a 2018 wildfire that killed 85 people in 2024, raised its rates six times to help cover the costs of putting power lines underground and other improvement projects. While one in every five ratepayers can't pay their power bills, utilities like PG&E raked in record-breaking profits last year, according to The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group. The group supports Becker's measure and has sponsored a similar effort in the Assembly. 'There are no limits to how much the utilities can ask for in rate increases. There are no limits to how many times a year they can ask,' said Mark Toney, the group's executive director. 'You can't blame them for asking for the sky.' Under Becker's proposal, utilities would be required to use public financing to fund the first $15 billion spent on capital investment projects. The option would allow utilities to access funding with lower interest rates, and utilities also would be prohibited from collecting a return on that investment for shareholders. That would save customers $8.8 billion over the next 10 years, Becker said. The bill would also set up a state-backed fund to reimburse utilities for wildfire projects, among other things. But the state may not have money to pay for that this year. The bill would also increase oversight of utility budgets and their wildfire spending. Utilities would have to include at least one rate increase proposal that doesn't exceed the rate of inflation in their requests. The proposal also calls for $60 billion worth of credits to apply on bills over the years during the summer months when usage is often at its peak. Senate Democrats overwhelmingly advanced Becker's measure this week. But Republicans, utilities and the California Chamber of Commerce said it would only drive up more costs. The legislation 'moves today's utility costs around without eliminating them,' the chamber said in a letter in opposition. New regulations around rate increase and shareholder returns also could halt utilities' investment in preventing wildfires or enhancing the grid, the letter said. Republican State senators said rising power bills are caused by Democrats' policies and push for more electric vehicles and less reliance on fossil fuels. In the Assembly, meanwhile, Republicans have called for permitting reforms to make it faster and cheaper to build better utility infrastructure. 'The regulation regime that we have in this state is oppressive and definitely drives prices,' said Sen. Roger Niello, a Republican. 'Your package of affordability is rather modest in number, but it is even more modest in its potential impact.' Lawmakers also advanced a slew of other measures aiming to provide relief to ratepayers, including one that would prohibit utilities from using rates to pay for lobbying efforts and one that would allow California to join a regional energy market with other Western states to help increase grid reliability.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Status of Epstein Files After Musk Allegation Against Trump
Elon Musk joins President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 11, 2025. Credit - Jin Watson—Getty Images The breakdown in relations between President Donald Trump and his one-time ally Elon Musk has played out over social media in spectacular fashion, with the two engaging in a tit-for-tat spat. The row initially started over politics. Musk expressed his vehement disapproval of Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' calling it a 'disgusting abomination' and encouraging people to 'kill the bill.' Meanwhile, Trump maintained that the fall-out was prompted by Musk being upset over the removal of electric vehicle subsidies—a provision that made Tesla vehicles more affordable. But the fight has since taken a far more personal turn, bolstered by Musk's allegation that Trump is listed in the files related to the late financier and alleged sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' Musk said in a post shared via his social media platform, X. He did not provide evidence pertaining to this. The accusation has spurred Democrats to chase the full unsealing of the Epstein files. California Rep. Robert Garcia and Massachusetts Rep. Stephen F. Lynch—Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform—sent a letter on June 5 to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Kash Patel. 'We write with profound alarm at allegations that files relating to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have not been declassified and released to the American public because they personally implicate President Trump,' read the letter titled 'Is Trump Suppressing The Epstein Files?' The White House responded, saying that the move by the Oversight Committee members was 'another baseless stunt that bears no weight in fact or reality.' Here's what to know about the Epstein files and the renewed push to declassify them following Musk's allegation. On Feb. 27, Bondi released more than 100 pages of declassified documents related to Epstein—as part of the Trump Administration's vow to be more transparent regarding the high-profile case. During the presidential election, Trump promised to appease the clamoring for the alleged 'client list' of Epstein's since his arrest and subsequent death by suicide in 2019. Though Bondi called this the 'first phase' of declassified files, people were underwhelmed by the published pages, as much of the text had been redacted. Bondi's release included Epstein's 'black book,' which had previously been published. It featured names like Trump and former President Bill Clinton, but as the New York Times reported, there were people in the book with whom Epstein had never even met, and thus listed names are not necessarily connected to Epstein's activities. One of the only never-before-seen documents included in the release was an 'Evidence List' of catalogued evidence obtained by investigators. Bondi blamed the FBI for the fact that the report was incomplete, suggesting in a published letter to Patel that the FBI had more information related to Epstein. Bondi ordered Patel to deliver the rest of the investigation documents and 'conduct an immediate investigation' to understand why she had only received parts of the files. There is much discussion as to whether a fully-fledged 'Epstein client list' even exists. Jacob Shamsian, Business Insider's legal correspondent who has covered the Epstein case for years, said via social media on Feb. 27: 'I should also point out that the 'Jeffrey Epstein client list' does not exist and makes no sense on multiple levels (you think he made a list???). But if Pam Bondi wants to prove me wrong, I welcome it.' Read More: Trump Attorney General Pam Bondi Blames FBI for Incomplete 'Epstein Files' Musks' allegations have brought the Epstein files back into the spotlight, but there were already calls for them to be published in full. In April, Trump was asked by a reporter about when the next phase of the files are due to be released, to which he responded: 'I don't know. I'll speak to the Attorney General about that. I really don't know.' Since then, Democrats have continued to push for more documents to be released. Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman of New York released a statement in May, 'demanding that [Bondi] promptly release the Jeffrey Epstein Files in full.' Spurred by Musk's allegation, Democrats including Garcia, Goldman, and Lynch are now renewing these calls for more transparency. But it remains to be seen whether or not the pressure will be enough for Bondi, Patel, or Trump to provide more answers. Trump's connection to Epstein dates back decades. In a 2002 interview with New York magazine, he famously said that Epstein was 'a lot of fun to be with.' 'It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,' Trump told the reporter. In July 2019, NBC News' TODAY released unearthed video footage believed to be from 1992, which showed Trump greeting Epstein at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The two men could be seen laughing as they engaged in conversation. After Epstein's 2019 arrest on federal sex trafficking charges, Trump made strides to distance himself. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office in 2019, Trump said: 'I had a falling out with him [Epstein]. I haven't spoken to him in 15 years. I was not a fan of his, that I can tell you.' Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bipartisan group of Georgia lawmakers pushes back on proposed federal 10-year ban on state AI limits
Six Georgia lawmakers joined more than 250 of their colleagues nationwide to ask Congress not to hamper their ability to regulate artificial intelligence. Midjourney/AI-generated art A bipartisan group of state lawmakers, including six from Georgia, is calling on Congress to cut a provision out of the massive federal spending bill that freezes state regulations on artificial intelligence for 10 years. 'As state lawmakers and policymakers, we regularly hear from constituents about the rise of online harms and the impacts of AI on our communities,' the lawmakers wrote. 'In an increasingly fraught digital environment, young people are facing new threats online, seniors are targeted by the emergence of AI-generated scams, and workers and creators face new challenges in an AI-integrated economy. Over the next decade, AI will raise some of the most important public policy questions of our time, and it is critical that state policymakers maintain the ability to respond.' The Georgia signers were Sen. John Albers of Roswell and Reps. Todd Jones of South Forsyth and Gary Richardson of Evans, who are all Republicans, as well as Democratic Reps. Scott Holcomb and Tanya Miller of Atlanta and Sam Park of Lawrenceville. In all, 261 legislators from all 50 states signed the letter. Georgia lawmakers from both chambers met over the summer last year to discuss potential AI regulations. Albers, who chairs the Senate AI study committee, often stressed that he did not wish to overregulate, saying that he saw lawmakers' duty as balancing protections for Georgians with creating a friendly environment for businesses. During this year's legislative session, no major AI bills passed into law, including broadly popular provisions like increasing penalties for using AI to create child pornography or deceptive 'deep fake' campaign advertisements. An Albers bill intended to create a new state advisory board on artificial intelligence and to require local governments to report on their use of the technology died in the Senate Economic Development and Tourism Committee on the advice of Suwanee GOP Congressman Rich McCormick. Then-committee chair Brandon Beach, who now serves as U.S. Treasurer, said at the time that McCormick told him not to take any action on AI because Congress would take care of it. Senators created a new committee this year to examine artificial intelligence and digital currency, but members have not yet been appointed and no hearing dates have been set. The GOP's megabill, which has become the cornerstone of President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, passed the House by a single vote and is now in the hands of the Senate. Getting the legislation through the House was a challenge the first time, with factions within the Republican Party at odds over the size of cuts to federal programs and the expected increase in the deficit. The new focus of the AI provision could prove to be another sticking point. Members of the House including Rome Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene have indicated they were not aware of the regulation ban when they voted for the bill and will not support it when it comes back to the House unless the rule is removed. 'I voted for President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill because it delivers his MAGA campaign promises and he endorses the bill and wants Congress to pass it in order to fund his MAGA agenda,' Greene said on social media. 'Do I love the price tag? NO. But I want OUR policies funded. I campaigned across the country for YEARS with Trump, more than any member of Congress, and the man NEVER said he would destroy state rights for 10 years to let AI tech companies run rampant!!! TAKE IT OUT OR I'M VOTING NO WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE HOUSE!!!!!' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
