Authorities are investigating allegations of an alleged recording device that was placed beneath a desk shared by two fellow board members during the board’s Sept. 22 meeting.
The school’s video of the open meeting showed Temecula Valley Unified School District Trustee Melinda Anderson placing an object beneath the desk.
Is it illegal to have a recording device in a public open meeting that is already being recorded and videotaped?
California’s Brown Act generally permits people attending an open meeting to record its proceedings, provided the recording does not persistently disrupt the meeting. It prohibits intentional electronic eavesdropping or recording of confidential communications without all parties’ consent, but excludes public proceedings and circumstances in which participants reasonably expect to be overheard or recorded. The question is whether it authorizes putting equipment on someone else’s seat or table.
Those provisions do not, by themselves, establish whether Anderson’s actions did or did not violate the law. Determining what the device did, when it operated and what communications it captured or transmitted would be necessary to assess the allegations. It isn’t known if the device recorded anything or was activated..
Why would Board Director Melinda Anderson want to have a recording of Emil Barham or Steve Schwartz?
In April, the board censured Barham over remarks during a December 2025 public meeting indicating an intention to pursue action against another trustee’s spouse. Valley News reported that the adopted resolution characterized the remarks as reasonably perceived as retaliatory. Other proposed allegations were removed before the board approved the censure.
Anderson’s allegations against Barham predate the device controversy.
When asked for a quote for this story, Anderson replied, “I am planning on resigning because of the ongoing harassment and threats that have been made toward me and my family by another board member. There is a history on various social media accounts of threats against me and my family. This has been going on for over a year.
“My final decision came after Mr. Barham made a threat in closed session at the last meeting that caused me to fear for the safety of my children and I have decided to remove myself from the board in hopes that Mr. Barham will focus on someone or something else and leave me and my family alone.”
Director Emil Barham said, ‘It is sad and disheartening that a fellow school board member would plant an eavesdropping/surveillance device to possibly use against me in my reelection, and that another member would sit back, witness the incident and not report it.”
Anderson has repeatedly reported vulgar name-calling and open threats against her and her family.
The resolution and censure in April of 2026 directed Barham to avoid disruptive conduct, intimidation, harassment and uninvited personal confrontations, and to address disagreements through established board procedures. A censure expresses formal disapproval but does not remove a trustee from office.
Emil Barham is up for reelection this November.
The videos obtained through a California Public Records Act request reported that Anderson placed the device after closed session business had ended and before the public session began. One news outlet described the footage as occurring near the end of closed session, citing Barham and Schwarz, but the video shows it was clearly after closed session.
According to the video, Anderson approached the desk while Trustee Jen Wiersma was in the room at her seat. Anderson attached what appeared to be a recording device underneath. Additional footage showed Anderson retrieving the object after the public session ended.
Anderson is reported to have asked permission from a law enforcement officer at the meeting who she reported said it was ok.
The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department said deputies responded Sept. 26 to the district offices on Rancho Vista Road after receiving a report of surreptitious recording. The Southwest Sheriff’s Station’s Investigation Bureau took over the inquiry. While the investigation is ongoing, there are no new details to report from the Sheriff’s Dept.
Anderson said in a social media statement that she had begun carrying a recording device to document threats she said were being directed at her. She said she was consulting attorneys about leaving the board and believed continued service endangered her children. Her announcement was not a formal resignation, according to Anderson, however she is expected to make a public statement at the Oct. 13 board meeting.
Barham and Schwartz have called for Anderson and Wiersma to resign, as Wiersma was in the room, but said she wasn’t fully aware of what was going on and it’s not something she needs to be involved in.
Wiersma said, “After the closed session ended on September 22nd, Dr. Anderson asked Dr. Komrosky if she could speak with me alone. When he left Dr. Anderson unexpectedly shared with me that she had been given permission by an officer to record the upcoming public meeting. Due to the contentious circumstances between her and Mr. Barham, I did not question her business or stated collaboration with law enforcement.”
Wiersma also is not seeking reelection. She said, “Despite the challenges, it has been an honor to serve our students and families at TVUSD these past four years. I’m hoping to pass the baton on to Ronda Bowen, current candidate for Trustee Area 3.
Wiersma filed sexual harassment charges against Steven Schwartz last year.
Dr. Joseph Komrosky, TVUSD Board President, said, “This incident has raised concerns that I take seriously as Board President. My priority is to ensure that our Board meetings are conducted in a respectful and professional environment where everyone feels safe and can have confidence in the integrity of the proceedings.
“That said, this is not a matter of student safety or education; it is pure politics among trustees at the highest level.”
On social media some have called for Dr. Komrosky to call a special meeting. He said, “There are core administration out at this time, and it isn’t necessary, as the regularly scheduled meeting is just two days later.” Also, as to whether there was possibly a crime committed, he said, “It is inappropriate for TVUSD to comment on whether a crime was committed; that is a law enforcement issue.”
