Cabrillo as a man existed. As countless billions of them have existed.
Cabrillo as a monument, as a symbol, as a story, was/is created. The inclusions and omissions that deem him to be a figure worth celebrating and commemorating are intentional, not incidental.
So is the decision to remove him.
I'm not sure what specifics to curriculum changes you're implying, but any change in curriculum that encourages students to study histories that includes more voices rather than mythology that lionizes those that hold power would lead one to reconsider who we mythologize and commemorate, and why.
Teaching about something is not the same as mythologizing or lionizing. Historical figures are a mixed bag. You're talking about erasure.
The idea is to then let students think for themselves. That's the hard part.
Be honest. You're not really letting students think for themselves. As you said above, you're decentralizing anything from Europe which obviously extends to the curriculum. What does this mean, practically? Throwing out Maxwell's equations? Fourier? Gauss? Newton? English lit? English grammar?
What's the attachment to Cabrillo?
No attachment. He was a mixed bag who died as he lived: by the sword. I am highly resistant to your project to erase history and skulkers like you are never honest about their long-term intentions. Let's say, for the sake of argument, Cabrillo and Cortez never teamed up destroy the Aztec empire. Have you read about Meso-American and the Incan empires? Part of the reason 100,000 non-Aztec Meso-Americans were willing to join forces with Cortez was because of Aztec brutality including slavery, rape, and human sacrifice. There were pyramids of skulls near Aztec temples. About 10 years prior to Cortez' landing, the Aztecs went on a sacrificing spree designed to intimidate the subject tribes that took 100,000 lives. Bernal Diaz del Castillo's account of Aztec brutality is confirmed by the archaeology. The Incan empire was about the same.