Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Student Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Parent alleges online contact with 13‑year‑old and raises concerns about Poway High baseball staff

Poway Unified School District Board of Education · January 23, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A Poway Unified parent told the board a social‑media message aimed at his 13‑year‑old daughter came from an account linked to the Poway Titans and said he believes members of the high‑school baseball coaching staff are involved; he says he filed a police report and a restraining order but has not seen a concluded district investigation.

At the Jan. 23 board meeting, parent Tony Russo used public comment to tell trustees he had reported an abusive direct message sent to his 13‑year‑old daughter from an account he said was associated with the Poway Titans travel‑baseball group.

Russo said the message included sexual innuendo and named his daughter. “I filed the police report that day,” he told the board. He said he went to Poway High School, that the on‑duty school resource officer dismissed the report, and that he later filed for a restraining order to protect his daughter. “I have reason to believe that the Poway High School coaches and coaches are all involved,” he said.

Russo also alleged that some Poway High coaching staff are employed by a private travel program and use school facilities for private lessons, including one‑on‑one instruction he said is paid for by families. “These lessons are all done in taxpayer dollars,” he told trustees, adding that families believe they must join the travel program to make the Poway High team.

Board members heard Russo’s account but did not take immediate action. Trustees asked staff clarifying questions during consent‑item discussion and later confirmed that allegations of student safety or staff misconduct are handled through the district’s investigative process and, when applicable, law‑enforcement channels. There was no district denial or completed investigative finding announced at the meeting.

What was said at the meeting is a public complaint; the board chair and staff did not resolve the allegations on the record. The parent said he had filed a restraining order and a police report; he said he had met with school administrators but that his concerns remained unresolved.

The district did not provide a formal response or finding during the meeting; trustees asked staff to ensure appropriate follow‑up and to clarify investigative steps in response to public safety concerns.