CDPH: Super Flu Cases on the Rise in California California health officials have confirmed the spread of a mutated influenza strain known as the “super flu,” as flu-related hospitalizations across the state reach their highest level of the season. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) said Jan.15 that the strain, a mutated form of seasonal influenza A known as H3N2 subclade K, is present in the state. The announcement comes as the department confirmed a second pediatric death linked to the flu since the start of the current respiratory virus season. State data show flu activity has eased slightly from a late-December peak. As of Jan. 3, about 15% of flu tests statewide were positive, down from 17% recorded through Dec. 27. Despite the modest decline, hospitalizations have continued to rise. Flu-related hospital admissions reached a season high of approximately 3.8 per 100,000 people statewide as of Jan. 3, according to CDPH figures. Public health officials continue to emphasize vaccination as the most effective way to reduce the risk of severe illness, even when circulating strains differ from those targeted by the vaccine. “Current seasonal flu vaccines remain effective at reducing severe illness and hospitalization, including the currently circulating viruses,” said Dr. Erica Pan, CDPH director and state public health officer, said in a statement. Pan added that “it is important for families to know that flu vaccines, tests, and treatments remain widely available for all Californians and that it is not too late to get a flu vaccine.” Health officials urge residents to seek medical care if flu symptoms worsen and to take preventive measures as flu season continues across California. Track statewide and regional weekly respiratory virus data
Black Caucus Chair Akilah Weber Pierson Applauds California Ban on Police Officers Wearing Face MasksSen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D-San Diego), chair of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) last week praised California’s new law limiting when law enforcement officers may wear face coverings, calling it a critical step toward accountability and public trust in policing. The measure, SB 627 -- also known as the No Secret Police Act -- was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year and took effect on Jan. 1. It restricts law enforcement officers from wearing facial coverings while performing public duties, except under limited operational circumstances. The law applies to local, state, and federal agencies operating in California and requires departments to adopt and publicly post mask-use policies by July 1, 2026. Weber Pierson, a co-author of the legislation, said the law affirms the public’s right to transparency. “The public has a right to know who is enforcing the law in our communities,” Weber Pierson posted on Facebook on Jan. 14. Framing the issue as more than administrative oversight, Weber Pierson stated that visibility and accountability are essential to community well-being. “Transparency in policing is a public health issue,” she added, noting that communities cannot heal from historical trauma when officers wield authority anonymously. Despite support from civil rights advocates, the law is facing a federal court challenge. The U.S. Department of Justice is seeking to pause its application to federal agents, arguing that the measure interferes with federal law enforcement operations, particularly immigration enforcement. Federal attorneys told the court on Jan. 14 that the law improperly regulates federal officers and exposes them to increased safety risks. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli said officers are increasingly targeted through facial recognition and AI tools, claiming an “8,000% increase in threats” against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. He also cited instances of agents being tracked to their homes and harassed. During the hearing, the judge raised concerns about potential unequal treatment if exemptions apply differently to state and federal officers. A decision on the request to pause enforcement is expected soon. Supporters of SB 627 argue the law advances civil rights by ensuring officers are identifiable during public interactions, while opponents contend it endangers officer safety and undermines federal enforcement authority -- setting the stage for a legal battle with broader implications for policing and oversight in California.
Thursday, 22 Jan 2026
Thursday, 22 January 2026

Rialto Residents, Bassett Community Members Push Back Against Superintendent Hire at Nov. 12 Board Meeting

Rialto Unified Taps Dr. Alejandro Alvarez as Superintendent

Rialto, CA — Community pushback over the superintendent hiring process dominated the Rialto Unified SchoolDistrict Board of Education meeting on Nov. 12, where parents, activists and Bassett Unified community members urged the board to reject the proposed contract for incoming Superintendent Alejandro Alvarez.

The regular meeting, held at the Dr. John R. Kazalunas Education Center, moved through procedural items before an extended and, at times, heated public comment period that stretched across the evening session.

While the agenda included recognitions, student presentations and a slate of routine approvals, it was the consideration of an employment agreement for Alvarez that galvanized residents from inside and outside Rialto.

Board President Dr. Stephanie Lewis opened the meeting by calling the session to order followed by the board’s vote to enter closed session.

Speakers were invited to comment on closed-session items, and several immediately addressed concerns about the superintendent search process, claiming “a lack of transparency and accountability” and criticizing the timing of recent special meetings.

The criticism escalated as speakers questioned whether the district had properly vetted Alvarez.

Two speakers from Bassett Unified, where Alvarez previously served as superintendent, traveled to Rialto to oppose his appointment.

Samuel Vasquez, a Bassett community advocate, cited environmental and governance controversies he said occurred under Alvarez’s leadership.

He referenced high lead levels discovered at Van Wig Elementary School in La Puente. “This was a public health emergency involving preschool children,” Vasquez said. “A superintendent who cannot handle a lead contamination emergency is not a superintendent who can be trusted with the health and safety of Rialto’s almost 24,000 students.”

Vasquez also accused Alvarez of “stalling” and “stonewalling” during a fiscal health risk analysis process required by the Los Angeles County Office of Education, claiming that essential documents “simply did not exist.”

Another Bassett speaker said he had witnessed “a pattern of concealment,” adding that Alvarez “cut off parents frompublic comments during public meetings,” behavior he argued Rialto should reject as it “moves forward and moves our students into success and accountability.”

Rialto parents echoed those concerns.

One parent, Claudia, speaking through a district translator, said families felt excluded from the hiring process.

“Parents should be the ones given the opportunity to select the superintendent,” she said, adding that she was representing 18 parents who “do not feel appreciated” by the district.

She urged the board to delay any decision on the contract.

The tension stood in contrast with the celebratory student presentations earlier in the evening, including reports from the District Student Advisory Committee and performances in honor of Native American Heritage Month.

Students highlighted academic achievements, college readiness efforts and campus arts activities across RialtoHigh School, Eisenhower High School, Carter High School and Milor High School.

At Rialto High, ASB Vice President Levan Wikap reported that 162 students “qualified for the state seal of biliteracy,”while Eisenhower student Valeria Montes shared that seniors were “hard at work on their Cal State and UC applications.”

Despite the full agenda, many attendees remained focused on the superintendent vote.

The agenda indicated trustees would consider the contract after an oral summary of salary and benefits, as required by state law.

The meeting adjourned with the next regular board meeting scheduled for Dec. 10.

The Most Read

CDPH: Super Flu Cases on the Rise in California California health officials have confirmed the spread of a mutated influenza strain known as the “super flu,” as flu-related hospitalizations across the state reach their highest level of the season. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) said Jan.15 that the strain, a mutated form of seasonal influenza A known as H3N2 subclade K, is present in the state. The announcement comes as the department confirmed a second pediatric death linked to the flu since the start of the current respiratory virus season. State data show flu activity has eased slightly from a late-December peak. As of Jan. 3, about 15% of flu tests statewide were positive, down from 17% recorded through Dec. 27. Despite the modest decline, hospitalizations have continued to rise. Flu-related hospital admissions reached a season high of approximately 3.8 per 100,000 people statewide as of Jan. 3, according to CDPH figures. Public health officials continue to emphasize vaccination as the most effective way to reduce the risk of severe illness, even when circulating strains differ from those targeted by the vaccine. “Current seasonal flu vaccines remain effective at reducing severe illness and hospitalization, including the currently circulating viruses,” said Dr. Erica Pan, CDPH director and state public health officer, said in a statement. Pan added that “it is important for families to know that flu vaccines, tests, and treatments remain widely available for all Californians and that it is not too late to get a flu vaccine.” Health officials urge residents to seek medical care if flu symptoms worsen and to take preventive measures as flu season continues across California. Track statewide and regional weekly respiratory virus data

Black Caucus Chair Akilah Weber Pierson Applauds California Ban on Police Officers Wearing Face MasksSen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D-San Diego), chair of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) last week praised California’s new law limiting when law enforcement officers may wear face coverings, calling it a critical step toward accountability and public trust in policing. The measure, SB 627 -- also known as the No Secret Police Act -- was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year and took effect on Jan. 1. It restricts law enforcement officers from wearing facial coverings while performing public duties, except under limited operational circumstances. The law applies to local, state, and federal agencies operating in California and requires departments to adopt and publicly post mask-use policies by July 1, 2026. Weber Pierson, a co-author of the legislation, said the law affirms the public’s right to transparency. “The public has a right to know who is enforcing the law in our communities,” Weber Pierson posted on Facebook on Jan. 14. Framing the issue as more than administrative oversight, Weber Pierson stated that visibility and accountability are essential to community well-being. “Transparency in policing is a public health issue,” she added, noting that communities cannot heal from historical trauma when officers wield authority anonymously. Despite support from civil rights advocates, the law is facing a federal court challenge. The U.S. Department of Justice is seeking to pause its application to federal agents, arguing that the measure interferes with federal law enforcement operations, particularly immigration enforcement. Federal attorneys told the court on Jan. 14 that the law improperly regulates federal officers and exposes them to increased safety risks. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli said officers are increasingly targeted through facial recognition and AI tools, claiming an “8,000% increase in threats” against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. He also cited instances of agents being tracked to their homes and harassed. During the hearing, the judge raised concerns about potential unequal treatment if exemptions apply differently to state and federal officers. A decision on the request to pause enforcement is expected soon. Supporters of SB 627 argue the law advances civil rights by ensuring officers are identifiable during public interactions, while opponents contend it endangers officer safety and undermines federal enforcement authority -- setting the stage for a legal battle with broader implications for policing and oversight in California.

New Ballot Push: Initiative Would End Prop 50 Temporary Congressional Maps After 2026

Victory Community Church Invites Inland Valley Residents to Worship Service in Ontario

Commentary: How CalMatters Turned a Handbag Into a Political Firestorm and Exposed a Journalism Blind Spot

Exit mobile version