Arizona State University (ASU), Northern Arizona University (NAU), and University of Arizona (UArizona) all announced a mask mandate on Wednesday. NAU even encourages students to police their peers on mask wearing and social distancing. As of press time, UArizona hasn’t updated their face covering policy – though President Robert Robbins promised that further guidance would be available this week.
All three universities will enforce the mandate indoors where social distancing isn’t possible. This includes classrooms, teaching or research labs, all clinical programs and centers that serve the public, meeting rooms, workshops, and design or production studios. The universities say that they may even require masks in certain outdoor settings and activities where social distancing can’t be maintained.
These mask mandates will go into effect when classes resume – for ASU, that’s next week. NAU and UArizona start classes in two weeks’ time.
Several weeks ago, ASU said that masks would be recommended only for most students except for certain health care centers and non-campus shuttles. However, the university did allude to the possibility of expanding its mask mandate beyond those areas.
“ […] ASU is now strongly recommending that everyone on campus wear a face cover when inside a university building. We previously communicated that face covers would be required in certain health care centers and on-campus shuttles. Those requirements may extend further to select buildings and at events that may pose a higher risk of transmission,” wrote ASU. “Notification will be provided in advance of events and/or at building entrances if face covers are required. Consistent with the governor’s executive order and the CDC guidelines, we are not making distinctions between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. This will apply to all individuals regardless of their vaccination status.”
Students have already planned protests against ASU’s mask mandate. Maricopa County Young Republicans and the Arizona Young Republicans announced that they would take part in a protest on Friday. Republican governor-hopeful Kari Lake and other special guests will make an appearance at the protest.
“We are going to stand with our brother[s] and sisters at ASU tomorrow!” wrote Arizona Young Republicans. “The madness must end! #FreeASU[.]”
25 Arizona House and Senate Republicans led by freshman State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Phoenix) called for Governor Doug Ducey to do something about the school districts defying state law with their mask mandates. The news release on Wednesday revealed that Republican legislators have urged Ducey privately to take action, to no avail. This public statement appears to be their next step in convincing Ducey to enforce the law.
It’s been over a week since the first school district called a mask mandate: Phoenix Union High School (PXU). Other schools followed suit soon after: most recently, Flagstaff Unified School District (FUSD). Ducey hasn’t taken action – though his spokespersons have relayed Ducey’s finger-wagging statements of disapproval in response to those school districts.
The legislators proposed that Ducey respond to the districts’ actions by withholding federal funding, authorizing temporary Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) for families, inform families of the law, and take legal action.
Hoffman’s statement explained that the ban on mask mandates included a retroactivity clause that puts it in effect – contradicting school districts’ insistence that the law can’t take place until 90 days after the end of the legislative session, per Arizona statute. He noted that the school districts’ behavior undermined lawful government and bordered on anarchy.
“Under Arizona’s constitutional form of government, local governments do not have the authority or power to usurp state law simply because they disagree, yet that is precisely the kind of illegal activity in which many local governments are presently engaged. The Arizona legislature, with the Governor concurring, very intentionally enacted the laws at hand to protect Arizonans and Arizona children from the threat of government mandating them to wear a mask or be injected with a vaccine,” wrote Hoffman. “A resounding message must be delivered to any local government or subdivision of the state considering defying state law – lawlessness will not be tolerated.”
House Speaker Pro Tempore Travis Grantham (R-Gilbert) signed onto the statement admonishing Ducey. He told AZ Free News that he also supports law enforcement stepping in to enforce the law. Grantham hinted that this debacle sparked a legislative priority for next year – adding more teeth to legislation.
“It’s unfortunate that some of our government-funded schools have chosen to blatantly ignore state law and the will of the majority of Arizonans by instituting mandates regarding students wearing face coverings,” relayed Grantham. “I support executive action by the governor to include withholding of taxpayer dollars and expansion of school choice funding options giving more educational choices to parents. I also support any efforts by law enforcement to enforce state law and I encourage parents and teachers to follow state law when sending their children to school and when on school grounds. Next year I will make it a focus to hold those who violate state law accountable and ensure appropriate funding reductions are in place for districts that purposely violate the law.”
State Representative Joseph Chaplik (R-Scottsdale) also signed onto the statement. He reiterated to AZ Free News that disagreement with the law isn’t justification for violation of it. Chaplik wrote the legislation that effectively banned mask mandates in schools. He, too, asserted that the power to act is in Ducey’s hands.
“Just because some don’t agree with policy and law, we should not disrespect and violate it while also teaching children these illegal tactics,” said Chaplik. “We passed this policy due to the inconsistencies of results with mask use and the unknown long term health issues that can impair our children. We need to stop this madness. The legislature did its job and now the executive branch needs to enforce the law.”
As of press time, Grantham and Chaplik said that they haven’t seen or heard any responses from Ducey.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
One week into Peoria Unified School District’s (PUSD) school year, parents are already reporting that their students have been required to quarantine until they receive a negative test result – even if they’re not symptomatic or feeling sick in the slightest. Students are required to quarantine 10 days at most, 3 if they test negative for the virus. However, these rules don’t apply to everybody.
Only fully vaccinated individuals, “essential worker” educators that are asymptomatic, and those who’ve recovered from COVID-19 in the last three months aren’t required to quarantine. According to PUSD policy, the district will continue to quarantine all others exposed to COVID-19 at the discretion of Maricopa County Department of Public Health (MCDPH). If the county determines that there’s been an “outbreak,” they will require all students exposed to the infected student to be quarantined.
Educators may remain in school so long as they wear masks if they’ve been exposed and are asymptomatic – but unvaccinated, asymptomatic students who haven’t contracted COVID in the last three months must go home.
“Students, staff, and educators who are close contacts of someone who has COVID-19 and are not fully vaccinated (or have not tested positive for and recovered from COVID-19 in the prior 3 months) must quarantine away from others for up to 10 days following their last exposure per MCDPH. Importantly, per CDC, ADHS, and MCDPH, all close contacts who have been fully vaccinated (starting 2 weeks after the final COVID-19 vaccine dose) do not need to quarantine if they do not have any symptoms. In other words, if identified as a close contact, the need to quarantine depends on a person’s COVID-19 vaccination status and/or COVID-19 infection history. MCDPH recommends that close contacts be tested for COVID-19 3-5 days following their last exposure, regardless of vaccination status.
Close contacts who must quarantine need to be excluded from school and extracurricular activities during their quarantine period. The duration of quarantine is either 10 full days or 7 full days following their last exposure, as long as a COVID-19 test performed on day 6 or 7 is negative and the contact has no symptoms. If a staff member or an educator is determined to be a close contact who must quarantine and they are considered to be an essential worker (as designated by the school), they can continue to work during their quarantine period if they do not have any symptoms and wear a mask while working. Please see the Quarantine Guidance on the MCDPH website for more detailed information.” (original emphasis included and emphasis added)
Previous Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas told AZ Free News that quarantining healthy students is negatively impacting their education. Douglas referenced the stunted reading skills of younger children who’d done distance learning due to COVID-19.
“The parents I hear from, they’re not happy. They don’t want their kids quarantined, potentially without an illness,” said Douglas. “We’re taking very extreme responses to something I don’t think deserves such an extreme response and we’re not looking at the damage it’s doing to our children’s learning.”
Douglas relayed the story of one mother who’d confided that her son was forced to quarantine 6 times for COVID-19 exposure – altogether, he missed 2 months of school – but he never became sick.
The former superintendent asserted that this continued exercise of power has gone too far.
“Unfortunately, and this in my opinion, they’ve just pretty much been given free reign to do whatever they want to do – I think it’s the old saying, absolute power corrupts absolutely,” said Douglas.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
At a time when state officials are pushing ways to improve Arizona’s tourism industry, the Pima County Board of Supervisors reneged on its nearly $40,000 commitment to the Arizona Bowl.
The Arizona Bowl is a NCAA-certified postseason college football game held since 2015 at the University of Arizona’s Arizona Stadium. It is presented with a title sponsor, which for the first five years was NOVA Home Loans. Then in 2020 the game was played as the Offerpad Arizona Bowl.
This year, the Barstool Sports Arizona Bowl is slated to be played on Dec. 31, and the event is expected to bring thousands of football fans to southern Arizona. It is a boost to local tourism that is sorely needed, supporters say.
But on Tuesday the Pima County BOS took a swipe at the new title sponsor and brought what tourism officials say was undue negative attention to the event.
In a 4 to 1 vote, the BOS went back on its commitment of $38,155 toward the game, citing “ethical concerns” with controversial comments and activities associated with Barstool Sports and its founder, David Portnoy. The vote came despite the fact many of the concerning comments date back nearly a decade and that the company in recent years has established a respected reputation.
Barstool Sports is seen by many as an American business success story – the digital media company produces original content focused on sports and pop-culture. Its 280 employees are also involved in producing an amateur boxing league, a radio show distributed by Westwood One, and a number of podcasts.
And then there is the Barstool Fund, which garnered national attention last year when Portnoy led an effort which raised more than $40 million from several sports figures to provide financial support for small businesses hard hit by the pandemic. Some of the recipients were Arizonans.
In July, Portnoy announced Barstool Sports as the new title sponsor of the Arizona Bowl and kicked off an aggressive marketing campaign that will feature the Tucson area as much as the game itself.
But despite the company’s various successes, four Pima County supervisors turned their backs on the fact that the 17-member executive board of the Arizona Bowl vetted the new title sponsor. Among those on the executive board are Brent Deraad of Visit Tucson, Ted Maxwell of the Southern Arizona Leadership Council, and Joe Snell of Sun Corridor.
Critics of the BOS vote call it “misguided” and point to the fact many of the criticisms deal with comments and activities involving Portnoy and other company personalities from more than a decade ago.
The BOS also turned its back on comments from Kym Adair, who is serving as executive director of the bowl game.
Adair did not make excuses for prior inappropriate comments some found offensive, admitting there were jokes “that have missed, comedies and content that didn’t land or stand the test of time.” She did, however, emphasize the company’s various successes, which include being the only sports media company with a female CEO.
Barstool Sports also has a recent connection to Arizona, Adair told the board in a written statement. Earlier this year the NCAA abruptly cancelled a major women’s golf regional event in Louisiana, leaving a dozen teams without an opportunity to try for the Championship.
A Barstool Sports official got the company involved with the NCAA and several teams across the country ended up at the “Let Them Play” tournament in Chandler in May.
Flagstaff Unified School District (FUSD) will implement a mask mandate in defiance of state law. The FUSD Governing Board passed the motion unanimously during Tuesday’s meeting.
FUSD took a similar stance to other school districts implementing a mask mandate, rationalizing that the law doesn’t take effect until September 29, notwithstanding the retroactive clause.
FUSD Superintendent Michael Penca said that he’d struggled with the decision to reinstate a mask mandate.
“Over the last week I’ve asked myself, ‘If the Arizona state law, which prohibits school districts from requiring masks, was not in place, would FUSD be requiring masks?’ With the information that we have about the high rates of community transmission, and recommendations by the CDC and health officials, I believe the answer would be a resounding yes,” said Penca. “With legal guidance from our district attorney tonight regarding the date that this law goes into effect, the FUSD Governing Board has an opportunity to reconsider its previously adopted requirement regarding mask use, which encourages but not requires mask use. In order to balance the benefits of in-person instruction with the health and safety of its students, staff, and our communities.”
However, not all board members appear to have shared Penca’s indecision on mandating masks. Board member Christine Fredericks introduced the motion, spelling out her email and daring parents opposed to the mask mandate to send her hate mail. Fredericks read out loud the proposed mask mandate in full.
“Send me your hate mail. Make sure you spell my name correctly so I get it,” said Fredericks.
Despite the rationale from FUSD and other schools like Phoenix Union High School District (PXU) that Arizona law requires 90 days from the end of the legislative session in order for a law to take effect, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey has repeated that the mask mandate ban is in effect.
“Arizona does not allow mask mandates, vaccine mandates, vaccine passports or discrimination in schools based on who is or isn’t vaccinated,” said Ducey. “We’ve passed all of this into law, and it will not change.”
Arizona does not allow mask mandates, vaccine mandates, vaccine passports or discrimination in schools based on who is or isn’t vaccinated. We’ve passed all of this into law, and it will not change.
Arizona House Republicans concurred with Ducey’s assessment. Through freshman State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Phoenix), Republicans issued a statement on Wednesday encouraging state officials to hold local governments accountable for breaking the law.
House Republicans encouraged Ducey to withhold federal funding from school districts not complying with the law, authorize temporary Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) for students in schools breaking state law, send notices to all families attending schools non-compliant with the law informing them of the law, and take legal action against the districts.
“Under Arizona’s constitutional form of government, local governments do not have the authority or power to usurp state law simply because they disagree, yet that is precisely the kind of illegal activity in which many local governments are presently engaged. The Arizona legislature, with the Governor concurring, very intentionally enacted the laws at hand to protect Arizonans and Arizona children from the threat of government mandating them to wear a mask or be injected with a vaccine. Additionally, the legislature very thoughtfully attached a retroactivity clause to the law, so that there would be clear and consistent application of the statute for families and children throughout Arizona,” wrote Hoffman. “It borders on anarchy and destabilizes the very foundation of our society to have local governments effectively refusing to comply with the law. It must not be allowed to stand. Any local government that willfully and intentionally flaunts state law must be held accountable.”
Parent commentary on the mask mandates during the meeting was divided.
Parents in favor of the mask mandates cited their fear that their children would be hospitalized and suffer from long-term effects due to COVID-19. Some said that even one death was one death too many.
Parents against the mask mandates said that the fears over the Delta variant and any COVID spread is overblown. They cited that COVID-19 most greatly impacts the overweight, sickly, and elderly. They also questioned the efficacy and safety of long-term mask-wearing.
