On Thursday, Scottsdale Unified School District Superintendent Dr. Scott Menzel issued a statement calling criticism of a club that encourages child sexualization under the guise of offering support — Gender & Sexualities Alliance (GSA) clubs — as “targeted attacks,” and suggested that those concerned were bullies to the students involved in the club.
“Recently, there have been targeted attacks on student-created school clubs related to gender and sexual identity, sometimes called GSA clubs. The students who choose to participate in them have a legal right not to be bullied, intimidated, or otherwise targeted by adult members of our community, as well as by any of their peers,” wrote Menzel.
Menzel also asserted that SUSD doesn’t regulate the viewpoints of student-initiated clubs. The superintendent said even GSA viewpoints are protected, comparing it to clubs focused on athletics, politics, and faith. As AZ Free Newsreported, the GSA at Cocopah Middle School was initiated by English teacher Laylee Langner.
“Students’ rights to have differences of opinions, beliefs and interests are protected in the U.S. Constitution and in Arizona statute. Consistent with those rights, SUSD does not regulate the viewpoints of student-initiated clubs. We have athletic clubs, political clubs, and faith-based clubs in our schools, in addition to academic and philanthropic clubs. These clubs welcome anyone; participation in any club is voluntary.
Menzel has a doctorate and masters in philosophy. According to his LinkedIn, he received his bachelor’s degree in religion.
SUSD parent Jill Dunicandenounced Menzel’s response. Dunican told AZ Free News that it demonstrated that the superintendent lacked character and was effectively gaslighting the SUSD community on the severity of GSA’s presence and impact.
“Dr. Menzel’s attempt to frame parents as bullies for speaking out about the hateful curriculum that he has allowed into Scottsdale schools is despicable. Menzel’s use of vulnerable children as a shield to distract from his support for the CRT-aligned GLSEN program that encourages race-baiting, cop-hating, and the sexualization of children is beyond the pale,” stated Dunican. “It’s disappointing that Dr. Menzel has decided to gaslight the community on this issue. It only speaks to his lack of character and further demonstrates he is not a good fit for our community.”
Earlier this week,AZ Free News reported on claims by GSA of the Year winners at Cocopah Middle School that they’d successfully strong-armed SUSD into changing ID policy: instead of bearing their legal names on their IDs, which the budding LGBTQ activists referred to as their “deadnames,” students were permitted to display their chosen name on their IDs. Neither SUSD spokespersons or any of the board members responded to multiple inquiries about the “deadname” policy.
SUSD’s latest controversy comes in the midst of continued national exposure over the connection of their former governing board president, Jann-Michael Greenburg, to a secret dossier on parents and political enemies. Greenburg’s father created the Google Drive dossier, and Greenburg himself had editing access to it.
At the beginning of this month, Scottsdale Police Department (SPD) determined that the case fell outside their jurisdiction because the dossier consisted of open source and/or public documents. SPD passed their investigative materials on to the FBI, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, and Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s office for further review.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Due to the Arizona School Boards Association (ASBA) not withdrawing from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) over its controversial letter asking the Biden Administration to investigate parent and community opposition as domestic terrorists, Dysart Unified School District (DUSD) Governing Board voted last week to leave the association.
The board was split on the decision, 3-2. President Dawn Densmore issued the motion, and Clerk Christine Pritchard seconded. Board member Chrystal Chaffin joined Densmore and Pritchard in voting to leave ASBA. The remaining two board members, Traci Sawyer-Sinkbeil and Jo Grant, dissented.
Superintendent Quinn Kellis said that about three out of every 30 sample policies are based on opinion rather than statute. Densmore emphasized that it wasn’t the quantity that concerned her — it was the quality of those few opinion-based policies.
“Except for the part where they redline the policy about not teaching that you’re biased because you’re a certain race, gender, sex, you know, ASBA recommends we get rid of that,” said Densmore. “It’s just things like that that have me concerned about ASBA.”
Pritchard said that the people once a part of ASBA that made it amazing are no longer there. She described how political ASBA had become since she was elected over 15 years ago.
“I just feel like ASBA has really changed over the years. When I was first elected to the board, it was 2006, I remember going to the ASBA conference in 2006 and it just had a completely different feel,” said Pritchard. “It seems like for an agency or organization that’s supposed to be nonpartisan they are so far one way. And, whether one way’s the right one or one way’s not the right way, the point is that it’s supposed to be nonpartisan. It seems like they’re so politicized and there’s such an agenda and then to not take a stand against NSBA’s action was really disappointing.“I cringe a lot of times when I get their emails because they’re politicized, and I don’t want to be associated with that. And right now we are. It just doesn’t feel good to me.”
Chaffin said that ASBA’s new board member training just complained about “bad bills” passed by the legislature. She said that ASBA pushes certain agendas constantly and doesn’t factor the individual needs of districts.
“I don’t think they reflect our board and our district’s values,” concluded Chaffin.
“And they didn’t stand up for our parents — that’s the biggest piece. And to pay to be part of an organization that stands behind another organization that would make such a blatantly disrespectful comment, I don’t want to be associated with that,” added Pritchard.
Sawyer-Sinkbiel asked the board if anyone had invited ASBA to offer an explanation for not leaving the NSBA. Densmore responded by citing ASBA Executive Director Dr. Sheila Harrison-Williams’ refusal to address the controversy head-on.
Sawyer-Sinkbiel expressed concern that the board’s actions would hurt rather than help their district by cutting out a . She insisted that this was based on a national narrative rather than a local problem.
“We’re worried about Dysart. We shouldn’t be worried about a national narrative,” responded Sawyer-Sinkbiel. “I feel that we are trying to take all the things that we have done and throwing them out with that few percentage [sic] of the bad things. So, I don’t think that we should separate — I do believe we should have ASBA to come out and answer what questions that we do have. Put their feet to the fire. Ask them exactly what is going on.”
Pritchard rebutted that no clarification was necessary based on ASBA’s actions. She assured that DUSD has their own legal services that address their policies, which Kellis confirmed.
“It’s not a misunderstanding where I need them to clarify with me. It’s just a change in their mindset or a change in their organization as a whole. It’s the same type of political agenda and they shouldn’t be that way,” said Pritchard.
Sawyer-Sinkbiel challenged Chaffin on her statement that the board had an attorney. Kellis clarified that they do have prepaid legal through the trust, assigned based on the case.
Pritchard said that statute analysis and policy drafting could be procured. Chaffin asked why the district couldn’t use the money that would’ve gone to ASBA and pay
Sawyer-Sinkbiel challenged Chaffin again, asking who they would hire and if Chaffin was suggesting they not carry out their elected duties of drafting policy. Chaffin responded that she was suggesting that they could hire someone if they needed review of drafted policies or if they needed alerts on legislative changes.
“That’s a lot of ‘ifs’ and I’m not comfortable with supporting a lot of ‘ifs,” responded Sawyer-Sinkbiel.
Pritchard challenged Sawyer-Sinkbiel to weigh her pragmatic concerns with ethical concerns.
“What about our integrity? What does that mean?” said Pritchard. “To stay with them when this is who they are just because ‘Well, they can look at our policies,’ and I understand what you’re saying Mrs. Sawyer-Sinkbiel, I’m not saying be willy-nilly, I’m saying they’re not the only organization that can do that job.”
Sawyer-Sinkbiel doubled down after neither Pritchard or Chaffin could name an alternative to ASBA. She said they shouldn’t leave ASBA and instead settle for telling the association what upset DUSD. Sawyer-Sinkbiel insisted that DUSD didn’t know why ASBA decided not to leave NSBA.
Grant offered an explanation of her “no” vote similar to Sawyer-Sinkbiel: insisting that there may be financial troubles ahead if they didn’t plan prior to taking action.
“We just pulled an agenda item questioning a budget item for a department for $40,000 and we asked them to please go back and rework that. Now we’re talking another budget item that is $28,998,” said Grant. “And if we cancel with ASBA, we have no idea how much we’re going to spent on policy support or BoardDocs and it could be more than $28,998. It just seems to me that we should do our homework and come back with okay, BoardDocs is going to cost this amount of money and somebody to do policy support [will cost that much].”
Chaffin countered that integrity was the greater concern at the moment, not logistics. She said that the board has six months to figure out who would fill ASBA’s shoes.
“How long do you want to compromise […] our integrity to be associated with an organization that views parents the way NSBA does, that is very politicized,” said Chaffin. “We talk about, we don’t want our teachers bringing politics into the classroom. Well, this particular organization is flooding our district with tons of their politicized opinions and their views and agendas. It’s a matter of principle to me.”
The back-and-forth between Chaffin and Grant became more intense after that. Grant repeated that she’d like to see the costs before making a decision on ASBA.
“So there’s a price to integrity?” asked Chaffin.
Grant retorted that their decisions as a board have nothing to do with integrity. She also asked who would lobby for DUSD, if not ASBA.
“It has nothing to do with integrity. We talk about taxpayer money — what if the bill comes back at $50,000? I’m just asking the question,” said Grant. “When you walk in this door, we are now school board members. We may have different political opinions outside this room. […] At the end of the day, we have to be supporting public schools.”
Grant also challenged the notion that ASBA is political. She rejected the notion that the association’s emails were political, asking for specific examples. Grant dismissed Densmore’s example of race-based caucuses, insisting that both state and federal governments have race-based caucuses.
Sawyer-Sinkbeil repeated that she felt a personal attack on DUSD would be a more relevant reason to leave ASBA. She disagreed that NSBA’s letter included DUSD parents. Pritchard insinuated that Sawyer-Sinkbeil wasn’t being objective on the matter because of her having served leadership roles within ASBA.
DUSD membership to ASBA lasts through June 2022, making up .25 percent of the district’s operational budget according to the district. ASBA offers policy support and legal insight on legislative changes relative to K-12 education.
The board also approved a resolution related to the decision to leave ASBA. Densmore, Pritchard, and Chaffin voted for it, while Sawyer-Sinkbeil and Grant voted against it. The resolution asserted that parents had the right to parent their children without obstruction or interference from any political entity or government, and that ASBA’s actions weren’t reflective of that statement.
The resolution cited Education Secretary Miguel Cardona’s remarks during a testimony before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions at the end of September. Cardona said that parents shouldn’t be the sole authority in their children’s education.
“I believe parents are important stakeholders, but I also believe educators have a role in determining educational programming,” said Cardona.
The resolution also called upon the Arizona legislature to pass a bill strengthening protections for parental rights.
The board’s decision came less than a month after voting to end its relationship with the NSBA.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Following an advisory from U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy on youth mental health, the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) encouraged educators to expand social-emotional learning (SEL) implementation. SEL encompasses a wide swath of subjects, including the controversial Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) and Critical Race Theory (CRT), to educate children on handling emotionally-charged issues while building social and self-awareness. SEL often centers around identity, emotions, attitudes, and beliefs.
ADE suggested their free online SEL Course as a means of fulfilling Murthy’s suggestion for educators to create a positive, safe, and affirming school environment. Their course focuses on equity, cultural responsiveness, and trauma sensitive practices. ADE also suggested the PAX Good Behavior Game, only granting free access to teachers and schools.
Citing Murthy, ADE insinuated that the mental health decline in youth would become the next crisis after the pandemic if left unchecked. ADE also asserted that schools are ideal partners for parents in addressing youth social and emotional wellness.
“Educators and school professionals are uniquely positioned to partner with families to best support student social, emotional, and academic wellbeing in our classrooms and schools,” stated the department. “[ADE] encourages school communities to read the latest Surgeon General Advisory to understand the position of young people better and implement the recommendations offered in the advisory.”
Although Murthy’s advisory pressed the importance of reversing the decline in youth mental health, he did also admit that the government lacked knowledge on the long-term impact of the pandemic on children’s mental wellness. In fact, Murthy further admitted that some youths actually “thrived” during the pandemic, reporting increased sleep and family quality time, less academic stress and bullying, and improved schedule flexibility and coping skills.
“Many young people are resilient, able to bounce back from difficult experiences such as stress, adversity, and trauma,” wrote Murthy. “Although the pandemic’s long-term impact on children and young people is not fully understood, there is some cause for optimism. According to more than 50 years of research, increase in distress symptoms are common during disasters, but most people cope well and do not go on to develop mental health disorders. Several measures of distress that increased early in the pandemic appear to have returned to pre-pandemic levels by mid-2020. Some other measures of wellbeing, such as rates of life satisfaction and loneliness, remained largely unchanged throughout the first year of the pandemic. And while data on youth suicide rates are limited, early evidence does not show significant increases.”
SEL hasn’t been the only controversial educational approach supported by ADE. Earlier this year, ADE advertised $5,000 teacher grants through the Pulitzer Center for those who would implement the 1619 Project. Simultaneously, the latest ADE statewide assessment results revealed that students are failing in English and math.
Although controversial among local parents and community members, SEL doesn’t appear to cause issues at the state level.
Governor Doug Ducey supported SEL expansion recently. In August, Ducey announced that a portion of the $65 million for learning programs would go to SEL. The controversial method received $1.6 million out of $20.1 million American Rescue Plan dollars.
Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobb nominated a Phoenix elementary school teacher for a national youth leadership award for her classroom activism rooted in and related to SEL.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) reportedly violated the Stop Trading On Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, a law to dissuade insider trading, according to a compliance analysis from Insider. The report added that the senator either offered proof of payment or a resolution of applicable fines, totaling $1,000. None of Kelly’s staffers were reported in violation of the STOCK Act.
Kelly’s spokesman Jacob Peters assured Insider that the senator was committed to constituents, not special interests. He didn’t offer an explanation on the specific violation.
“Senator Kelly is transparent and accountable to Arizonans, not corporate special interests, which is why he is the only Senator who has taken the collective steps of placing his assets in qualified blind trusts, regularly posting his official Senate schedule on his Senate website, and refusing corporate PAC contributions to his campaign,” stated Peters.
In April, Kelly exercised a stock option in a company designing a supersonic aircraft called Boom Technology (previously called Boom Aerospace, also known as Boom Supersonic). In recent years, the company partnered with China to aid in development. Kelly didn’t file the disclosure until August: four months later. The STOCK Act requires legislators to disclose these actions within 30 days of notification or 45 days of transaction.
Kelly wasn’t alone in his violations, and far from the worst nationally; Insider reported at least 48 other congressmen and 182 congressional staffers also violated the STOCK Act. These findings came from “Conflicted Congress,” a review of adherence to the STOCK Act.
Insider ranked legislators’ compliance with the STOCK Act by marking them green, indicating good compliance; yellow, indicating borderline noncompliance; and red, indicating serious noncompliance and potential ethical issues. Kelly was marked yellow, along with Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ-03). The remainder of Arizona’s senators and representatives were marked green.
Senators Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) were the only two senators marked red. Tuberville’s profile cataloged 132 STOCK Act violations totaling $894,000 at least, but no staffer violations; the senator claimed that he paid applicable fines but didn’t provide proof. Feinstein’s profile cataloged one STOCK Act violation totaling over $15,000 at least; like Tuberville, Feinstein claimed that she paid applicable fines but didn’t provide proof. Three of Feinstein’s staffers also violated the STOCK Act.
Those Republican representatives marked red were: Pat Fallon (TX-04), with 118 violations totaling over $9.11 million; Lance Gooden (TX-05), with 12 violations totaling over $60,000; Kevin Hern (OK-01), with 25 violations totaling over $1.07 million; Blake Moore (UT-01), with 76 violations totaling $76,000 and one staffer violation; Chris Jacobs (NY-27), with 12 violations totaling $356,000 and one staffer violation; Dan Meuser (PA-09) with 36 violations totaling over $120,000; Diana Harshbarger (TN-01), with 728 violations totaling $728,000.
Those Democratic representatives marked red were: Sean Patrick Maloney (NY-18), with eight violations totaling over $11,000 and one staffer violation; Susie Lee (NV-03), with over 200 violations totaling at least $267,000; Tom Suozzi (NY-03) with approximately 300 violations totaling at least $3.2 million; Tom Malinowski (NJ-07), with 145 violations totaling at least $845,000; and Kim Schrier (WA-08) with one violation totaling over $500,000.
Some of the representatives and senators provided explanations or general comments for their Insider profile on these STOCK Act violations.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Phoenix chapter of a national activist group attempting to implement more LGBTQ and social justice-oriented curriculum in K-12 schools, Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), urged teachers to introduce controversial materials “under the radar” by incorporating them to personal classroom libraries. Even if teachers were caught, they were advised to just continue with their efforts after apologizing.
The advice came from a featured guest speaker and fellow activist who identified himself only as “Rex,” a high school teacher for over 16 years and co-sponsor of a high school GSA which he and his students call by an alternative name: “Student Alliance For Equality,” or “S.A.F.E.” club.
“It’s not hard and you [teachers] can do it. I guess I want to say you can do it under the radar without drawing attention to yourself. I would encourage you to try. If you get slapped down, you get slapped down, and you apologize and you move forward,” said the teacher. “It can be done. You need to be ready for some pushback. But I submit to you that the kids are ready, they’re willing and they’re open. It’s the adults that are struggling and stiff-arming and passing all the laws.”
The teacher went on to give a presentation on incorporating “inclusive curriculum” into K-12 classrooms alongside GLSEN Phoenix board member Andi Young. In addition to her activism, Young is seeking a master’s degree in social work from Arizona State University (ASU).
The Protect Arizona Children Coalition (PACC) first discovered this admission from GLSEN Phoenix. PACC President Lisa Fink told AZ Free News that their mission is to stop the push for Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) in K-12 schools.
GLSEN Phoenix’s advice to teachers came about a month after its co-founder and National Board Member, Dr. Madelaine Adelman, informed teachers and community members that their organization is attempting to become a statewide presence — “GLSEN Arizona.” Adelman alluded that GLSEN would venture into lobbying by establishing a presence in areas like the state capitol.
Adelman, an ASU associate professor of justice and social inquiry, expressed confidence in GLSEN Phoenix’s ability to grow into a statewide organization, citing their working relationship with the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) and the Arizona School Boards Association (ASBA).
“We already have a relationship with the Arizona Department of Education. We’re part of their task forces,” said . “We have a relationship with the Arizona School Boards Association and we work in coalition with them on different kinds of issues.”
ADE cites GLSEN heavily as a key reference for a variety of needs: student assistance, school or district policymaking, professional development, and parent training.
ASBA has featured GLSEN as an educator for its members — in 2019, GLSEN presented its research on the state of LGBTQ student experiences in K-12 schools during an ASBA series on equity. On Phoenix Children’s Hospital’s Gender Support page, GLSEN and ASBA are listed side by side as educational resources.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
