Teacher strike threat grows
PLUS: Matt Mahan jumps into governor race
What You Need To Know
Here’s what happened around the city for the week of January 25, 2026:
- Teacher strike threat grows
- Mahan jumps into governor race
- Tenderloin corner store curfew may be extended
- Castro Theatre Returns
Teacher strike threat grows
Published January 30, 2026
The Facts
The SF Teachers Union (UESF) looks like it will strike, possibly as soon as February 6th. It would be the first teachers strike in San Francisco since 1979.
Officials from the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) say union leaders walked out of a fact-finding session on January 23 without making a counteroffer to the district’s latest proposal. The offers included fully funding dependent healthcare benefits (at no cost to educators), 6% pay raise over three years, and protections for special education staffing.
UESF is asserting that SFUSD has hundreds of millions of dollars available for raises and benefits, which SFUSD disputes. This assertion is partially true: SFUSD does have about $100 million in reserves, but state oversight rules prevent the district from using one-time reserves to fund ongoing expenses like salaries and benefits. UESF has so far rejected any offers of one-time bonuses or other non-recurring payments that would not create ongoing deficit spending. The current budget deficit has been drawing down those reserves, and the district projects they will be fully depleted by 2027-28 if a balanced budget is not achieved.
The fact-finding session is a formal step in the bargaining process, where the district and the union appoint a representative and a neutral third party is appointed by the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to help resolve outstanding issues. After the session, the fact-finder issues non-binding recommendations to both sides.
Full details of the fact-finding meeting, including an evaluation of the district’s financial position, should be available by Wednesday, February 4th.
The Context
The strike threat is part of a broader statewide posture: California teachers unions are increasingly preparing to strike, amid coordinated efforts by the California Teachers Association. At least 32 districts across the state are facing potential strikes, all at roughly the same time.
But SFUSD is under unusually tight fiscal constraints due to a structural deficit that prior administrations have struggled to address. The California Department of Education can override district financial decisions that threaten stability, and state law empowers the county superintendent to reject budgets that don’t provide “adequate assurance” the district can meet its obligations.
SFUSD has made great strides in the past year to close its structural deficit, including cutting non-classroom spending, and shrinking staff primarily in administrative roles, rather than teachers. This work led to the California Department of Education (DOE) to lift the state-imposed teacher hiring freeze, SFUSD avoiding teacher layoffs, and the state agreeing that SFUSD’s budget was back on track.
The GrowSF Take
While we agree trachers need to be paid more, UESF is demanding a contract that SFUSD cannot legally agree to under state oversight. This is political brinksmanship and we think UESF is not negotiating in good faith. Rather than engage in fact-based bargaining, UESF is engaged in magical thinking that will put kids out of school, risk the district’s financial stability, and not achieve the union’s stated goals.
This strike is still avoidable, though. UESF needs to come back to the table with a fiscally responsible counterproposal that the school district can accept without the risk of a state takeover. If they don’t, then public school kids will be thrown back into pandemic-style learning loss.
UPDATE: Our sources in the union tell us that they plan to accept the existing offer of a 6% pay raise plus dependent health benefits after they strike for a few days. Given this likely outcome, we wish the union would put the kids first and save them from learning loss. Our kids deserve better than this.
Mahan jumps into governor race
Published January 30, 2026
The Facts
San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan has jumped into the crowded race, joining a bevy of candidates all looking to distinguish themselves from Governor Newsom.
Mahan is pointing to his record in San Jose, where he doubled homeless shelter capacity through a “quick build” initiative, expanded public safety staffing, and pushed for accountability in government performance. His efforts on homeless shelters cut the number of people sleeping on the street and increased the number in shelters from about 1,500 in 2022 to over 3,000 in 2025. (We must note, though, that, like every other major California city, homelessness continues to rise overall in San Jose due to housing shortages, limited mental health and addiction treatment capacity, and other public policy failures at the state and local level.)
Mahan has also pushed for more public safety resources, increasing San Jose’s police force by over 200 officers since 2022, and advocating for tougher consequences for repeat offenders. He also backed 2024’s Proposition 36, which increased penalties for repeat theft and drug offenses. Proposition 36 passed with 63% of the vote in SF and 68% statewide.
Mahan has also pushed for performance-style accountability in government; a recent KQED report describes his proposal to tie elected officials’ pay raises to measurable results.
The Context
Upon his announcement this past Thursday, Mahan immediately became one of the favorites among the Democratic candidates. While no polls are yet available, prediction markets show him narrowly trailing Eric Swalwell, and ahead of Katie Porter and Tom Steyer.
While the other leading candidates are highly focused on national issues, Mahan’s message is more focused on California, and he is perhaps the most critical of Governor Newsom among the leading Democratic candidates.
GrowSF hosted Mahan with our GrowSF Talent network, and his biggest lesson was familiar to any SF reformer: you can’t compassion your way out of dysfunction — you have to build capacity, measure outcomes, and move faster than the problem.
The GrowSF Take
GrowSF will be watching Mahan’s campaign closely. His focus on building capacity and enforcing accountability aligns with our belief that government must deliver results, not just good intentions. If Mahan can translate his San Jose successes to a statewide platform, he could offer a compelling alternative to the status quo in Sacramento. We’re also watching other candidates closely, including Eric Swalwell, Katie Porter, and Tom Steyer.
We will be sending out the GrowSF questionnaire to all gubernatorial candidates soon, and hope to make an endorsement decision by late spring. Stay tuned!
Tenderloin corner store curfew may be extended
Published January 30, 2026
The Facts
The Board of Supervisors is expected to vote in February on Supervisor Matt Dorsey’s proposal to expand and extend the city’s retail-hours restriction pilot that bars certain retail food/tobacco stores from operating overnight.
According to Gabe Greschler at The San Francisco Standard, officials say inspections and investigations have turned up cash, meth, firearms, and slot machines in some Tenderloin corner stores—fueling the case to expand the curfew into parts of SoMa.
City Attorney David Chiu’s office has used civil enforcement to target repeat offenders; in one example, the city moved to shut down SF Discount Market and Tenderloin Market & Deli after an SFPD investigation found illegal gambling and contraband.
The Context
The current Tenderloin curfew was created by the 2024 Ordinance 129-24, which set a two-year pilot (through July 2026) and allows penalties of up to $1,000 per hour of violation.
A peer-reviewed study in Security Journal analyzing SFPD incident data found drug-related incidents fell during the restricted overnight hours after the pilot began.
The GrowSF Take
We agree there are real problems with a small number of bad actors, but we’re not convinced that expanding a blanket curfew is the right solution. The city has identified specific stores allegedly selling contraband and attracting crime—so target those businesses with aggressive enforcement and rapid nuisance abatement, up to and including closure.
Blanket restrictions are the wrong tool: they punish legitimate small businesses and risk pushing activity to the next block. San Francisco should enforce the laws we already have, shut down offenders fast, and let compliant businesses operate.
Castro Theatre Returns
Published January 30, 2026
The Facts
San Francisco’s Castro Theatre is back! The historic theatre is staging community “soft opening” events on Feb. 6–7, 2026, ahead of its official reopening on Feb. 10.
The theater has been closed since February 2024 for a desperately needed $41 million renovation.
The Context
The Castro Theatre is a 1922 movie palace and city landmark known for its stunning architecture and vibrant role in San Francisco’s LGBTQ+ community. It has hosted countless film festivals, premieres, and community events over the decades.
GrowSF supported its renovation plan, which opponents threatened to derail by trying to declare its interior seats as a historic feature. We argued that the fixed seats were replaced in 2001 (hardly historic!) and that seat-focused fights were largely a tactic to block modernization—including accessibility upgrades.
The renovation plan is aimed at keeping the building viable with more kinds of programming (movies and concerts) and updated infrastructure, as described on the theater’s preservation plan.
The GrowSF Take
GrowSF backed this plan because San Francisco needs iconic venues that can modernize, stay open, and drive neighborhood foot traffic, and we need less procedural obstructionism that drags out projects and keeps spaces closed for years.
We’re thrilled the Castro is close to reopening—and City Hall should get to work fixing its historic preservation process so that more projects like this can move forward without unnecessary delays.