The Brief

A beloved teacher arrested for soliciting a minor. A coach convicted of sexual abuse. A school district hit with a multi-million-dollar jury verdict for failing to protect students.

The steady drumbeat of stories in recent years about educator sexual abuse in K-12 school districts across California shows the scope of misconduct is much wider than previously known. Yet the stories only hint at how common sexual harassment and grooming behavior has become in schools, with the best available data from the U.S. Education Department suggesting that 1 in 10 children is targeted for grooming at some point in their K-12 education.

A new bill, which is poised to pass the Legislature in the coming days, would give local and state officials more tools to identify and combat sexual abuse, and educate students to better identify the most common signs of grooming behavior. Senate Bill 848, or “Safe Learning Environments Act,” was authored by Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, a Democrat from Alhambra, in response to an investigative report in Business Insider, The Predators’ Playground. The 2023 story documented decades of sexual misconduct involving nearly two dozen different educators, ranging from lewd remarks about students' bodies during class to statutory rape, at a single California school, Rosemead High, which is in Pérez’s district.

Since the article was published, at least five civil lawsuits have been filed by former Rosemead students, while the state attorney general’s Bureau of Children’s Justice opened a rare investigation into the handling of educator sexual misconduct claims, which is ongoing.

“California lacks a comprehensive standardized approach to preventing abuse in K-12 schools,” Pérez told fellow lawmakers in urging their support. “Several high profile cases continue to highlight systemic failures and underscore an urgent need for stronger preventative measures to protect children.”

In an interview with CalMatters, Pérez said she could personally relate to the Rosemead story. When she was in high school, a male staffer some 20 years her senior took an interest in her, asking her questions about sex and boys her age. Then one day, when she returned to campus soon after graduating, he stopped her to ask if she’d turned 18 and if he could take her to dinner. That’s when, Pérez said, it dawned on her that he’d been grooming her for a sexual relationship.

State Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez addresses fellow lawmakers on the Senate floor at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Aug. 21, 2025.

(

Miguel Gutierrez Jr.

/

CalMatters

)

“I didn't tell my parents or anything, but I talked about it with my friends,” she recalled. “And I remember talking about it, even at 17. That's when my friends started sharing their own stories.”

Law would mandate a database of employee misconduct

If it becomes law, Pérez’s bill would create a database of employee misconduct that district administrators must use to background prospective job candidates, require school district officials to report and track “egregious” instances of employee misconduct, mandate training for both educators and students on how to combat and recognize the signs of grooming, and require school districts to implement new written policies defining professional boundaries. It would also apply stricter prior employment check requirements for non-teachers, such as coaches, janitors and bus drivers, update the legal definition of “grooming” to include electronic communications and extend mandated reporter requirements to all employees.

Much of the policy changes in the bill are drawn from a January report produced by the state-funded Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team. The report studied the financial impact of a wave of lawsuits made possible through a landmark 2019 law that temporarily dropped the statute of limitations for victims of childhood sexual abuse to file civil claims against school districts for failing to protect them. Many of the resulting jury verdicts and settlements have been in the tens of millions of dollars, with some much higher.

As CalMatters previously reported, insurance premiums have skyrocketed for school districts, pushing some to the brink of financial insolvency. Estimates for the total value of claims statewide are around $3 billion, with many cases ongoing.

Pérez said this grim reality played a key role in her decision to draft the bill. “There are now dollars and cents being assigned to these cases,” she said. “It's really opened up this conversation about what can we do to better prevent this abuse from happening.”

Billie-Jo Grant, a professor at Cal Poly Pomona and a leading researcher in educator sexual misconduct, said the majority of grooming cases in schools go unreported. In many cases, a student is ashamed or feels complicit in the behavior, Grant said, while employees routinely fail to report suspicious behavior for fear of tarnishing a colleague’s reputation.

Because of a lack of federal data, Grant has tracked teacher arrests using published news clips, which show that more than 3,000 educators nationwide have been arrested since 2017 following allegations of sexual misconduct involving students. California’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing, meanwhile, has opened more than 1,300 investigations of teacher sexual misconduct over the same time period – a figure that does not include cases which are never referred to the state by school district officials.

Grant, who frequently serves as an expert witness in criminal sexual abuse cases, described Pérez’s bill as a great start toward creating more complete data on the frequency of abuse. She stressed, however, that relying on school officials to determine whether misconduct allegations are “substantiated” will lead to underreporting.

“I think what’s left out is all of the times where they simply don’t do an investigation, look at a complaint at face value, and ask the teacher if they’d resign. And that’s the end of the story,” Grant said. “The problem is there is no accountability for school administrators. Our system relies on them doing thorough investigations.”

Law would mandate a database of employee misconduct

A primary element of Pérez’s bill addresses “pass the trash,” a well-documented process in which teachers accused of sexual misconduct quietly resign, only to be hired elsewhere and re-offend. Research funded by the U.S. Department of Justice shows that an educator will on average pass through three different school districts before they are ultimately stopped. Many of these teachers are able to be rehired because of confidential separation agreements, in which school officials agree to not disclose allegations of misconduct to would-be employers in exchange for the educator’s resignation.

That’s what happened earlier this year with David Pitts, a former Rosemead High choir teacher who was placed on administrative leave at a nearby school after he was named in Business Insider’s reporting. A school district investigation of Pitts’ behavior nearly led to an administrative hearing at the state level — a final step that most cases never reach because the teacher has quietly resigned — before Pitts settled. Under the terms of his settlement agreement, Pitts will remain on the payroll until 2026. District officials agreed that if they receive any reference check from a potential employer, they would respond only by “providing Employee's dates of employment and assignments, and indicating that Employee retired from the District." Both Pitts and the district’s head of human resources declined to comment.

Pérez invited Cindy Lam, a Rosemead alum who said she was groomed by Pitts when she served as his student piano accompanist in 2001, to testify in Sacramento in support of her bill.

“By the time he initiated sex with me, I was putty in his hands. And by the time I realized I had been groomed, I was completely isolated and psychologically destroyed,” Lam said. “A law like SB 848 would have adequately educated me about grooming behaviors. I would have known that these interactions were inappropriate and reported them.”

Opposition to the bill, which has bipartisan support, is focused on due process concerns raised by employee unions that have historically opposed similar attempts to strengthen pass the trash laws in California. The California Teachers Association — the state’s largest teacher’s union, which opposed similar legislation in 2012 and again in 2018, — notably does not oppose the bill. The California Federation of Teachers and California State Employees Association, however, which together represent both teachers and the non-credentialed educators who would be included in the disciplinary database that Pérez’s bill would create, recently opposed it. Both unions cited concerns over due process as the primary reason.

“We need to ensure a policy that captures individuals that are unfit to work in education while making sure innocent and unfairly charged employees have fair access to justice,” said California Federation of Teachers legislative director Tristan Brown. “We are committed to working with the senator to make that a reality.”

Numerous other states already rely on similar hiring databases, however, which regulators have cited as key tools in keeping students safe. California is one of just 16 states that lack a comprehensive pass the trash law, a 2022 report published by the Department of Education found.

Back in the Rosemead community, many have welcomed Pérez’s bill as a needed change in a community where boundaries between teachers and students have frequently been blurred. Kristy Rowe, a Rosemead alum who graduated before Lam, testified in support of Pérez’s bill as well.

Rowe said she had a sexual relationship with Paul Arevalo, a business teacher known on campus for inviting cheerleaders to sit on his lap in between classes. Not long after Rowe met him, Arevalo was investigated by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for allegedly offering to buy another female student condoms and sending her sexually explicit messages during class, disciplinary documents show. Arevalo went on to marry a former student and, after transferring to a nearby school in the district, was placed on leave in 2017 when administrators found he’d sexually harassed another student, records show. Arevalo declined to comment.

“Comprehensive legal reform is urgently needed to center the voices of potential victims, to mandate specialized training for educational personnel, and to ensure that future harm is avoided,” Rowe told lawmakers. “Addressing these gaps is not only a matter of justice, it is a moral imperative to protect children, empower survivors, and create a society where such abuse is neither tolerated nor hidden.”

Matt Drange is a freelance investigative reporter based in the San Francisco Bay Area and an alumnus of Rosemead High School. He can be reached at mattdrange@gmail.com.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday accused President Donald Trump of placing him on a political “hit list” and directing federal investigators to go on a “fishing expedition” for a crime it could use to indict him.

The Democratic governor declared that the president was targeting him not for his “mean tweets,” but because Newsom is considering a run for president in 2028.

“In recent days, federal agents have knocked on the doors of family friends and former employees,” Newsom said in the video. “Not because they found a crime, but because they simply are trying to find one.”

Newsom stated that he was “proud” to join Trump’s so-called “enemies list” that has also included former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, the former vice presidential candidate.

The governor claimed that federal agents were demanding records and “abusing the grand jury process” by “digging through years and years of random documents.” Neither the governor nor first partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom have received subpoenas yet, Newsom’s office said, but he “looks forward” to receiving them.

His office said federal agents have contacted friends, former employees, business associates, donors, and organizations connected to the Newsoms but did not specify further.

The accusations first came in a fiery video statement released Monday, but provided no concrete evidence that the president had orchestrated such a probe and did not identify any of the associated groups or people he said the Justice Department was looking into.

“You can subpoena my records. You can investigate me. You can harass me. Put my name on any and every enemies list that you have,” Newsom said. “But leave my wife and family out of your personal vendetta!”

The White House referred questions about Newsom’s comments to the Department of Justice. A Department of Justice spokesperson did not immediately respond.

This is a developing story that will be updated.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

A year ago, California officials had to report under a new state law how they used automated systems to make important decisions about people’s lives.

They said they never did — a startling answer for a number of reasons, sources told CalMatters at the time, including that there were several prominent examples to the contrary.

Now, the state has issued a more expansive answer: It is currently using six automated systems to make consequential decisions about the lives of Californians.

The systems are used to do things like:

• Predict whether incarcerated people will re-offend 
• Evaluate whether unemployment claims are fraudulent
• Remotely administer exams for California State University students 
• Detect when college students use generative AI to write assignments.

That's according to a report released Friday by the state's technology department. The report is required under a 2023 law mandating that that state agencies annually disclose their use of “high-risk automated decision systems,” which the law defines as systems “used to assist or replace human discretionary decisions that have a legal or similarly significant effect, including decisions that materially impact access to, or approval for, housing or accommodations, education, employment, credit, health care, and criminal justice.”

The law was pushed by civil rights, privacy, and civil liberties groups concerned about harms from AI-like systems. Numerous such systems have been shown to produce results biased against marginalized groups, including those used for high-stakes testing, predicting recidivism, and detecting AI-generated texts.

CalMatters flagged last year’s report as surprising, noting that the state corrections department had reported using software to predict post-release behavior and that the employment department used a fraud detection system that paused benefits for 600,000 Californians between Christmas and New Years in 2020, according to a Legislative Analyst’s Office report.

Though the report names six high-risk systems in use today, state agencies have used some for several years now. Those include COMPAS, which has been used by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to assign recidivism scores to inmates for at least a decade.

The technology department said in the report that it found more systems for its report this year because it evaluated responses from state agencies more thoroughly, including by meeting with agencies and questioning them about their systems.

In addition to the six high-risk systems, the department’s report disclosed an additional six systems initially flagged as high risk but later determined not to be. One was AI used for legislative bill analysis by the California Department of Finance.

The report also notes two high-risk systems that are not currently in use: the Department of Cannabis Control is developing artificial intelligence to analyze whether marijuana packaging violates a law against appealing to children and California State University discontinued use of a language model for reviewing job applications.

Results of the second annual survey come after cities like San Jose and San Francisco released their first AI inventories in recent months. They also come at a time when California-based AI companies like Anthropic and OpenAI are going public and seeking government contracts. Americans are split on whether they trust AI and surveys last year by TechEquity and Carnegie California found that the majority of Californians want safety over innovation. A Gallup poll to evaluate the opinions of Americans found similar results.

Senate Bill 1248, a bill that would have prohibited state employees from using automated decision systems as the sole basis for decisionmaking, was killed last month in the state’s rapid-fire appropriations process.

What’s missing

While the newly-released report shares more information than last year’s, several questions remain about the state’s use of artificial intelligence and other automated systems.

The report does not include generative AI pilot projects underway with support from the governor’s office to do things like help businesses file taxes, support state employees who work on homelessness, and an AI assistant named Poppy that uses language models like Anthropic’s Claude to do things like draft documents, research policy, or build custom AI tools, according to a state website. The website says that 67 state departments provided input during the pilot phase and statewide rollout of Poppy begins next month.

A California State University contract with OpenAI to provide a version of ChatGPT is also not mentioned, though surveys of AI use in educational settings have found that the technology can do more harm than good.

The 2023 law mandating the annual high-risk systems report excludes reporting by a number of state agencies, including the judicial branch and the University of California college system. Reporting by CalMatters last month found that a majority of the roughly 60 courts that operate statewide have adopted generative AI use policies. Courts in Los Angeles and Riverside counties have begun testing an AI tool to act as a clerk, drafting orders and producing research memos.

CalMatters is compiling an inventory of automated decisionmaking systems in use by state and local agencies throughout California in order to provide transparency into how governments are using decisionmaking systems and AI. Know about an AI system in use by a state or local agency? Email khari@calmatters.org.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

An estimated 1.3 million Joshua trees burned as the 2020 Dome Fire swept through 43,000 acres of the Cima Dome in the Mojave Desert. Scientists feared the damage extended far beyond the trees, reaching into the underground networks of fungi that help sustain desert ecosystems.

Instead, fungi are thriving underground.

That finding — published in a peer-reviewed study in the journal Fire Ecology — is important because the fungi extend the reach of Joshua trees’ root systems, helping them survive harsh desert conditions. Without the fungi, the desert plants would struggle even more than they already are to recover from the fire.

“Even though things die, there are always plants and microbes that will take advantage of the fire and will really bloom after them,” said Sydney Glassman, a fungal ecologist at UC Riverside and the lead author of the study. “So it’s not all doom and gloom."

Two weeks after the Dome Fire was contained in August 2020, Glassman and a team of researchers collected samples from burned and unburned areas around the Cima Dome volcanic structure east of Baker. The area is home to one of the densest Joshua tree forests in the world. The team collected soil samples near Eastern Joshua trees to assess the fire’s effect on fungal communities. The samples were frozen, processed for DNA extraction, and later sequenced to identify which organisms were present.

Over the next three years, researchers returned to the sites five times, focusing on measuring the amount of the symbiotic fungi and bacteria that live within Joshua tree roots.

They found a fungal system that remained largely intact.

“In this case, other plants survived — like cacti, or different kinds of desert forbs, or other yuccas — so they were maintaining the soil microbial community,” Glassman said.

Sydney Glassman of UC Riverside collects samples of fungi in the Mojave National Preserve.

(

Lynn Sweet

/

UC Riverside

)

These fungi help plants absorb water and nutrients from the soil, while also protecting against pathogens and environmental stressors such as drought.

Experts think that the fungal networks remained resilient partly due to the sparseness of the Mojave, where Joshua trees are spread far apart.

“There’s not really a lot of ground cover in between them, so the fire moves really fast,” Glassman said, meaning the heat did little damage to the soil.

But efforts to restore Joshua trees have seen little success so far. Seedlings face a multitude of threats, including pack rats and increasing temperatures, Glassman said.

“The seedling has to get growing and survive first,” Glassman said. “And then once it’s growing, then it definitely requires these fungi, and those can help them tolerate drought and survive.”

This image shows what's known as an arbuscule, a fungal structure, from an Eastern Joshua tree's root.

(

Arik Joukhajian

/

UC Riverside

)

By 2100, Joshua trees are projected to lose up to 80% of their habitat if greenhouse gas emissions continue increasing. Amid concerns about climate change, experts said that the new study provided insight into how Joshua trees may fare in a hotter world.

Brendan Cummings, conservation director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said Joshua trees face increasing fire and drought risk as human-caused climate change accelerates.

“If we do everything necessary to save the Joshua tree, we will also be saving the broader desert ecosystem,” said Cummings, who has worked on Joshua tree conservation.

Glassman said her research will continue. She hopes to understand the traits of bacteria and fungi that survive fires, and how they're doing it.

Ohio State University evolutionary ecologist Alison Bennett said future research could investigate whether soil fungi play a role in improving the germination and growth of Joshua tree seedlings. However, Bennett noted that challenges in procuring Joshua tree seedlings and waiting for them to reach maturity over decades could make such research difficult.

“There are other aspects of restoration and looking at soil microbiology that need to be built more, and I feel like this paper lays a good foundation for a lot of that future work,” said Andrew Kaiser, an environmental scientist at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife who was not involved in the study.

California lawmakers are expected to adopt a $356 billion state budget today that would largely avoid or delay billions of dollars in social service cuts Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed last month.

Then, the (real) budget negotiations can begin.

Today’s vote is only a formality, because lawmakers are constitutionally required to pass a balanced budget by June 15 each year to continue collecting their pay. They have until the end of the month to strike a deal with Newsom before the new fiscal year starts July 1.

In the next two weeks, legislators will have to settle their differences with Newsom on health care cuts, funding for schools and homelessness and more.

Here are five takeaways from the Legislature’s spending plan:

Punt and soften healthcare cuts

Faced with federal funding cuts under the tax and spending law President Donald Trump signed last year, Newsom proposed several measures to limit healthcare coverage for undocumented immigrants as well as refugees, asylees and human trafficking survivors.

Top legislative Democrats want to delay those cuts by a year while looking for alternatives to soften the impact.

Newsom also wants to raise the monthly Medi-Cal premium undocumented immigrants pay from $30 to $50. But lawmakers prefer waiting him out, proposing to leave the decision to the next governor.

“I don’t think it’s about Gavin Newsom,” said Sen. John Laird, a Santa Cruz Democrat who chairs the budget committee. “It’s really about trying to stretch as far as we can in the hope that we don’t have to make those cuts.”

The Legislature rebuked Newsom’s proposal to reinstate stringent Medi-Cal asset tests for seniors and adults with disabilities by July, instead pitching a less restrictive limit to take effect in fiscal year 2027-28. With bipartisan support, the lawmakers also rejected Newsom’s proposed cuts to the In-Home Supportive Services program.

They did, however, agree to Newsom’s plan to spend $300 million to subsidize private healthcare for low-income Californians.

Restoring some child care, TK-12 money

Democratic lawmakers want to add 22,000 state-funded child care slots over the next few years. They also rejected Newsom’s proposed reduction of 6,800 state-supported spaces due to declining federal and state funding.

The new slots would prioritize children ages 3 and under. Advocates who applauded the proposal say it would address a gap left unfilled by Newsom’s transitional kindergarten expansion to reach 4-year-olds.

Banking on a rosier revenue forecast, state lawmakers proposed $2.7 billion more in funding for TK-12 schools and community colleges than Newsom did in May.

Schools and educators were hoping for more. They wanted the Legislature to reject Newsom’s proposal to withhold $3.9 billion in constitutionally guaranteed school money — an accounting mechanism to prevent overpaying schools in case the projected revenue doesn’t materialize.

“We demand that the Legislature and the governor follow the law, stop with the gimmicks and the shell games, and fully fund our schools,” said David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association. “Our union is prepared to do whatever it takes to hold them accountable if they don’t. Our students deserve no less.”

More generous with counties

The Legislature’s spending plan would give counties more money to step up eligibility checks for Californians applying for food stamps and health care benefits, reviews that are now required under Trump’s spending bill.

It would also allocate $125 million to help counties reestablish indigent care — a program serving low-income Californians that largely went away under Obamacare.

State lawmakers also want to set aside $900 million for the state’s homelessness fund, whereas Newsom included just $500 million in his proposal.

More revenue, please

Newsom proposed three new tax measures and lawmakers are on board with them:

• Applying a sales tax on most company software, like Slack and Microsoft Suites
• Capping tax credits big corporations claim
• Extending a tax on Medi-Cal health providers, which the state has relied on to qualify for more federal funding.  

The proposals come at a time when California voters have rejected most local tax initiatives during the June primary. But Newsom’s proposals require no voter approval — just the support of two-thirds of each legislative chamber.

There’s still an appetite among lawmakers to make corporations pay up. Senate Democrats had proposed a monthly charge on big employers for having employees enrolled in Medi-Cal, but have now backed away from the plan, instead asking the next governor to pitch “fully viable options” next year.

Save more money for rainy days

There’s a consensus between the Legislature and the governor to raise the ceiling on the revenue the state can deposit into its rainy day fund. The question is how much. State leaders are constitutionally required to make deposits into the account each year, but the balance cannot exceed 10% of the state’s general fund tax revenue under current law.

Changing that amount would require voter approval. Lawmakers are considering placing a measure on the November ballot that would allow them to sock away more money for lean years. They have a tight deadline of June 25 to settle on what they want to put before voters.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.