At the Scottsdale Parent Council (SPC) meeting in February, Dr. Cindy Bochna, Director of Assessments and Accountability, and Ms. Lea Mitchell, Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services from Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) gave a presentation of the K-12 Statewide Assessments. You can view the video of the meeting here, SPC 2-19-25 Meeting.
A couple of interesting and somewhat disturbing points came out during the presentation and discussion.
One being how SUSD and most of the schools are “A” rated by the Arizona Department of Education.
For those of you not familiar with the AZ report card process, according to the Arizona Department of Education website, the
“Arizona Revised Statutes § 15-241 requires the Arizona Department of Education, subject to final adoption by the State Board of Education, to develop an annual achievement profile for every public school in the state based on an A through F scale.
The system measures year to year student academic growth, proficiency on English language arts, math and science. It also includes the proficiency and academic growth of English language learners, indicators that an elementary student is ready for success in high school and that high school students are ready to succeed in a career or higher education and high school graduation rates.”
To find out what grade your child’s school has been awarded, and how many points the school earned in each category, go to AZ Report Cards and search by the name of the school.
I understand that the Arizona Department of Education assigns the grades and SUSD didn’t establish the criteria, nor the weighted values assigned for the grading, but I think it is important that parents understand exactly what goes into the grades assigned and how to interpret them.
So, when you are looking at your child’s school to determine the assessment grade and detailed scoring, I encourage you to scroll down and look at the other information available, specifically the student achievement in state academic assessment reports.
These reports provide details on student proficiency rates for ELA, math, and science. By looking at previous years, you can see how the data is trending.
During the discussion at the SPC meeting, using Chaparral High School as an example, I asked Dr. Bochna and Ms. Mitchell how Chaparral is given an A grade when across all three academic subjects, an average of only 53% of the students are proficient. I asked how a 53% could be an A, isn’t that more like an F?
What I found disturbing was the response I got from Ms. Mitchell. She explained that Stephen Curry and Steve Kerr, both NBA players, only made 45% of the shots they took yet they were rated as world champion basketball players.
So, Ms. Mitchell, are you saying 53% makes you a world champion in academics? Really?!?
Statements like this are silly and make me wonder just how serious they are about education. SUSD students and parents deserve better.
At one point during the meeting, I asked how Arizona compared to the rest of the country. I said that I thought we were somewhere around 48th or 49th. Both Dr. Bochna and Ms. Mitchell said I was wrong, and that Arizona was somewhere around 30th or so in terms of ACT scores across the nation.
In a follow-up email, Dr. Bochna provided me with the following information:
When you look at the data and sort it from highest to lowest, Arizona is right where I said we are, tied with Mississippi and Hawaii for 47, 48, and 49th positions. Arizona is nowhere near the top 30 or whatever position Ms. Mitchell thought. If they were analyzing the data, they should know that. Being a top performer in a state that ranks at the bottom is nothing to brag about.
When you put this performance in some context, the 21.5 ACT score for SUSD is less than impressive. The average ACT score for incoming students at ASU is 26. While a score of 20-23 is considered competitive at many mid-tier colleges, a score of 24-28 is needed for more selective colleges. To get into a top engineering school, a student needs something like a 30 in math and 36 for a composite score. I’m sure there are a handful of students out of the 20,000 in SUSD who score that high, but to get an average of 21.5, many students do not.
While I certainly encourage you to listen to the entire meeting (Dr. Menzel responds to questions at the beginning of the meeting) the points I discussed here are found in the 44:00 to 1:00:00 portion and the 1:13:00 to 1:24:00 segment in the video. Listen for yourself.
For anyone that has been paying attention to what has been happening in SUSD over the past few years, it comes as no surprise that academic performance under Dr. Menzel has been terrible. Thousands of SUSD students each year are not proficient in ELA, math or science, yet over 92% graduate high school in four years. Remember, Dr. Menzel has never met any of his academic performance goals throughout his tenure at SUSD.
This academic record has contributed, in large part, to the steady decline in enrollment, leading to major financial issues the Governing Board is now struggling with. As has been his practice for the past few years, Dr. Menzel proposes cutting teachers and instructional staff positions and hiring more unlicensed social workers to solve the budget crisis, a crisis that his poor management has caused. Actions, if taken, will ensure the Governing Board will be dealing with the same problem again next year.
At the last Governing Board meeting, Member Pittinsky told Dr. Menzel he wanted to see a deep dive into causes of the declining enrollment. He wants to understand what parents are saying during exit surveys as they pull their children out of SUSD and see the data by site and grade level. All of us involved with SUSD would like to see that information.
I wish Dr. Pittinsky the best of luck as he tries to get this information from Dr. Menzel.
As I have said on multiple occasions, identifying the root cause of the problem and fixing it is the only way anything will change. Unfortunately, change takes time; time that thousands of SUSD students don’t have.
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
On Monday, the Arizona State Senate passed two key pieces of legislation aimed at improving the security and integrity of the state’s election system. These bills, which will now move to the House of Representatives for further consideration, seek to bolster Arizona’s efforts to prevent election fraud and increase voter confidence in the electoral process.
The two bills, SB 1123 and SB 1063, were sponsored by State Senator Mark Finchem, a vocal advocate for election reform. SB 1123 proposes a series of enhanced security measures to protect ballots from fraud and tampering, while SB 1063 focuses on expanding civic participation in the election process.
SB 1123 is a comprehensive measure that aims to implement a variety of advanced security features on Arizona’s ballots. Under the proposed legislation, election officials would be required to use at least three fraud countermeasures including watermarked security paper, secure holographic foil, and forensic fraud detection security inks, among other possible countermeasures.
According to Senator Finchem, these measures are designed to ensure that every ballot is both secure and verifiable. “Arizonans deserve fair and accurate elections, free from fraud and illegal influence,” said Finchem. “This bill was carefully crafted and is a commonsense solution that will increase voter confidence. By adding these countermeasures to our ballots, we can ensure that every vote is accurately counted, verified, and speaks to citizens and the right to exercise their franchise.”
The proposed security features are intended to make it more difficult for bad actors to manipulate or counterfeit ballots. Proponents of the bill argue that these enhancements are essential for safeguarding Arizona’s elections.
SB 1063, also sponsored by Finchem, offers a unique solution to encourage greater civic engagement. This bill allows jury commissioners to offer qualified jurors, who receive a jury summons between 120 and 90 days before a general election, the option to serve as temporary election workers instead of fulfilling their jury duty obligations.
The idea behind this measure is to increase the number of available election workers during election season, which can often be a logistical challenge. By providing citizens with the choice to participate in either jury duty or election work, the bill aims to create greater oversight during elections and reduce the risk of fraudulent activity.
“Extending civic duty services to allow citizens the choice to participate in jury duty or elections will ensure greater oversight in an effort to deter the schemes pulled by fraudsters,” said Senator Finchem. “Senate Republicans will continue to work in good-faith to provide Arizonans with much-needed reforms to uphold the integrity of our election process.”
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Arizona State Senate recently passed a bipartisan bill that seeks to address the state’s ongoing physician shortage and expand health care access for residents. Senate Bill 1214, sponsored by Senate President Pro Tempore T.J. Shope, allows pharmacists in Arizona to independently administer tests and treatments for certain medical conditions, offering a potential solution to the growing demand for healthcare services.
The legislation, which passed the Senate overwhelmingly, now moves to the Arizona House of Representatives for further consideration. If approved, the bill will empower pharmacists to provide more comprehensive care, including diagnosing and treating common illnesses such as flu, COVID-19, and Strep Throat, as well as offering other preventative treatments.
Arizona has been facing a shortage of healthcare professionals, particularly physicians. This shortage has left communities with limited access to medical care. SB 1214 aims to increase access to basic health services by allowing pharmacists to independently test for and treat certain conditions.
Under the new legislation, pharmacists would be authorized to order, perform, and interpret tests that are FDA-approved and waived under the federal Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) of 1988. They would also be able to initiate treatment for conditions such as influenza and other illnesses identified by the Department of Health Services (DHS) through a statewide standing order, rule, or executive order.
The bill would also allow pharmacists to work with patients’ primary care providers to ensure continuity of care. This collaborative approach aims to alleviate the burden on physicians while ensuring patients receive timely care, especially in the face of an overburdened healthcare system.
Senator Shope emphasized that the legislation is designed to expand health care options for Arizonans. “This bill is an important step to help ensure Arizonans can receive routine health care services when they need them,” said Shope. “I’ve spoken with many people who desire to go to their local pharmacies for diagnoses and treatments of various illnesses. With this proposal, we give our citizens the choice to expand their health care options.”
Shope also highlighted the qualifications of pharmacists, many of whom are fully trained to perform tests and administer treatments. “It’s a win-win for Arizonans and Arizona pharmacies – many of which have qualified men and women who are fully capable of handling these tests and treatments, especially amid a physician shortage,” Shope explained.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
One Arizona town recently pledged cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
On Tuesday, the town of Fountain Hills passed a resolution (6-1) pledging cooperation with ICE’s mass deportation efforts under the Trump administration.
The resolution cited the existence of over 647,000 illegal immigrants with pending charges or convictions for violent crimes within the U.S. as justification for the town’s support.
“[T]he Town remains steadfast in its commitment to protecting the safety and well-being of its residents, particularly those most vulnerable to criminal activities such as human trafficking and drug distribution,” stated the resolution. “[T]he Town will continue to comply with all applicable federal and state laws, recognizing that there can be conflicts between federal and state laws.”
The resolution also committed the town to not becoming a sanctuary town as others in the state have done, and pledged to seek assistance from the U.S. Attorney General’s office to indemnify the town and employees for any assistance or cooperation provided to federal immigration authorities.
According to a press release also issued on Tuesday, Fountain Hills Town Council member Allen Skillicorn drafted and introduced the resolution. Skillicorn cited his past experience as an Illinois state lawmaker as the impetus for presenting the policy.
“Not long ago I was a state legislator. I had to solve problems, both present and in the future,” Skillicorn said. “My commitment is to our town and keeping our town safe from crime.”
Fountain Hills, passed a resolution of cooperation with ICE to enforce Federal immigration law. “My commitment is to our town and to keep our town safe!”
— Skillicorn for Arizona🌵 🇺🇸 (@allenskillicorn) March 5, 2025
The resolution didn’t pass unanimously.
Councilwoman Peggy McMahon questioned whether Skillicorn was accusing town council members, staff, and community members of impeding law enforcement. McMahon further alleged the resolution would encourage racial profiling.
“Are you saying they’re not doing their job in enforcing the laws? Are you implying the town and the sheriffs are not committed to cooperating with enforcing laws to protect the health, the welfare, and the safety of our community?” asked McMahon. “Accordingly, the resolution to me is moot and legally unenforceable. So I don’t even know why we’re talking about it.”
McMahon also argued that illegal immigrants were responsible for just a small fraction of crimes committed in their town and the state as a whole.
Councilman Brenda Kalivianakis, who voted for the resolution, asked why the resolution was necessary. Kalivianakis criticized the resolution as another “time-sink” designed to further other council members’ political careers and not the town’s priorities.
“This seems like a solution looking for a problem. This isn’t a problem we have in this community. It seems like a case of just virtue signaling. Here I am, I’m going to lead the way on DEI and all these nationally divisive issues and then I’m going to appear in some small newspaper tomorrow and be called a hero,” said Kalivianakis. “Why are we talking about things that don’t matter?”
During the same meeting on Tuesday, the town council passed a resolution (5-2) banning Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and the usage of gender identity-based pronouns.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
We always knew it would be costly, and experience has proven that true. But now, in a newly released report published by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club and the AZ Liberty Network, the cost for Arizona’s largest utility to go “Net Zero” was found to be even more expensive than expected coming with a massive price tag of at least $42.7 billion by 2038.
History of the Green New Deal in Arizona
The “green” agenda is not new to Arizona. In 2006, then Chairman of the Corporation Commission Kris Mayes pushed through the first mandates in Arizona, requiring our utilities to get 15% of their energy generation from “renewables” by 2025. Those rules alone have already cost ratepayers $2.3 billion. In 2018, an out-of-state billionaire funded a proposition on the ballot that would have required utilities to obtain 50% renewable generation by 2035. That measure went down in flames, being rejected by a 2-1 vote.
And these aren’t just public statements. The utilities have committed to going “Net Zero” in SEC filings to their shareholders, and they even compensate their top executives (page 68) based on how much “clean” energy they build in our state. Unsurprisingly, these commitments completely shape their resource plans…
