An education-related bill is receiving rare bipartisan support, though Republicans and Democrats still have major differences on a key part of the proposal as it moves through the legislative process.
HB 2456, sponsored by Representative Beverly Pingerelli, “continues the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind (ASDB) for four years.”
According to background provided by the State Senate, “the Arizona Constitution requires the Legislature to provide by law for the education and care of pupils with visual or hearing impairment. Originally established in 1912 within the University of Arizona, the Legislature established ASDB as its own agency in 1929 to provide schools and programs for the education of persons with visual or hearing impairment and serve as an optional resource to school districts, state institutions and approved educational programs.”
Over the past year, the Senate and House Education Committees of Reference held public meetings and “recommended that the Legislature continue ASDB for eight years.”
Pingerelli’s bill, which was originally introduced to continue ASDB for eight years, first sailed through the House Education Committee in January with a unanimous vote of 10-0. In February, it passed the full House chamber with a 60-0 result. It was then transmitted to the Arizona Senate and the Government Committee, where an amendment was adopted to reduce the number of years ASDB was continued from eight to two. The bill passed unanimously out of that committee, 8-0.
The full Senate chamber then amended the bill, led by Senator Ken Bennett, to continue the ASDB for four years. The body then officially considered the legislation and passed it 27-1, with two Democrat members not voting. Democrat Senator Juan Mendez was the only member to vote against the measure.
After the vote, the Arizona Senate Republican Conference tweeted out a statement, writing: “Senate Republicans are fighting to ensure students and families of the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind receive the best education possible. On the other hand, Senate Democrats are pushing for inequities within this community by refusing to support the oversight needed to guarantee these students are being properly served. Absolutely disgusting!”
Senate Republicans are fighting to ensure students and families of the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind receive the best education possible.⁰ On the other hand, Senate Democrats are pushing for inequities within this community by refusing to support the oversight… pic.twitter.com/lnKjX3Pp7N
The Senate Republicans shared a clip of Senator Jake Hoffman on the floor during the Committee of the Whole consideration of the legislation, explaining “why an 8-10 year continuation of these schools without proper oversight would be a big mistake.” In his remarks, Hoffman stated that “the Constitution gives us the authority and responsibility to provide educational services for deaf and blind children. Yet for some reason, we’ve been treating this incredibly important community within our state like we do the paper pushers at ADOA (Arizona Department of Administration)…. Our job, that the Constitution tasks us with, is to provide the best possible education to deaf and blind children in our state.” He championed the Legislature ensuring that oversight was happening more often at ASDB.
Count Arizona Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne in support of the continuation of the ASDB. Superintendent Horne told AZ Free News: “This school provides a unique curriculum that would be difficult to replicate in a traditional school setting. Braille instruction, direct communication in American Sign Language (ASL), and training in Orientation and Mobility are skills that are critical to the growth of sensory-impaired students.”
Although most of their members voted to clear the bill from the chamber, the Arizona Senate Democrats Conference was furious after the vote, tweeting the following response to the Senate Republicans’ statement: “Try talking to the community before you speak on their behalf. You know that the Conference Committee recommended 8yrs., the House passed 8yrs., the community asked for 8yrs. Senator Hoffman is dragging his caucus down with him.”
Try talking to the community before you speak on their behalf.
You know that the Conference Committee recommend 8yrs., the House passed 8yrs., the community asked for 8yrs.
— Arizona Senate Democrats (@AZSenateDems) April 13, 2023
Following the Senate’s amendments and action, the bill was sent back to the House to be reconciled before its final trip to Democrat Katie Hobbs’ office for her signature or veto.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Upset parents and community members who showed up to voice their opposition to Catalina Foothills School District’s (CFSD) secretive gender identity policies during the governing board meeting on Tuesday were prevented from doing so.
CFSD parents and community members organized in protest following revelation of CFSD’s longstanding unwritten policy that doesn’t require parental notification if boys are entering girls’ restrooms and locker rooms. CFSD declared it wouldn’t reconsider this policy.
The parents and community members were also in protest of another secretive practice dating back several years, in which district staff would acknowledge students using a different gender identity without informing parents. In a September 2021 email, CFSD Principal Mark Rubin-Toles shared a confidential list of the pronouns and preferred names of his students at Orange Grove Middle School.
“If you are like me, you may have been challenged recently to keep some of our kids’ pronouns and preferred names straight — and to remember what can and can’t be shared with families,” stated Rubin-Toles. “It is our responsibility to protect student privacy in these matters.”
At Tuesday’s meeting, CFSD warned that it had reduced its public comment time, prioritized district parents and local community members, and deprioritized those who spoke on the same subject at previous meetings.
“Lack of discussion does not mean we haven’t heard you. I assure you, we have,” stated Board President Eileen Jackson.
CFSD has indicated in past emails and recent board comments that student privacy and the relationship between educators and their students takes precedence over parental rights. That caused an uproar among some within the Tucson community, but their voices weren’t heard on Tuesday. CFSD indicated during the meeting that those upset with their administration had spoken out enough on the subject.
CFSD had 11 pro-LGBTQ+ students defending their policies speaking first. The students emphasized that they had a right to privacy, and that the district should be able to keep student information secret from parents.
After the students, CFSD parents and community members had their turn to speak. However, the only ones allowed to speak were 17 individuals who were also supportive of CFSD’s policies.
Following an earlier meeting this month, CFSD asked KGUN 9 to correct their reporting to say that many of the upset speakers at that last meeting weren’t CFSD parents or community members.
In response, an organized group of CFSD citizens accused CFSD of lying. The group, CFSD Concerned Citizens, cited the district’s unwillingness to improve policy or allow public discussion on their concerns as the reason for their organization.
Last weeks media coverage and board’s response lied saying majority of speakers were activists from a church and non-district affiliated. This is not the case. Attendees included CFSD families, residents and community members who want transparency and items to be put on the (1/4) pic.twitter.com/zOav23A9uc
— Cfsd ConcernedCitizens (@Concerned4CFSD) April 10, 2023
CFSD Concerned Citizens partners include School Board Watchlist, Protect Arizona Schools Coalition, Heritage Foundation, Moms for Liberty, Alliance Defending Freedom, Center for Arizona Policy, Goldwater Institute, and AZ Women of Action.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A Christian university’s case against a Phoenix school district over alleged religious discrimination got a hearing on Tuesday.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), who filed the lawsuit on behalf of Arizona Christian University (ACU) against the Washington Elementary School District (WESD), spoke with AZ Free News after the hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction in the Arizona District Court.
ADF lawyer Jake Reed said they felt confident in their legal arguments and that the judge that heard the case, Steven Logan, was well-versed on the arguments ahead of Tuesday’s hearings. Reed said they’re hoping for a ruling within the next few weeks, considering ACU needs to place their student teachers for the upcoming year by the end of this semester.
“This is a pretty simple case about religious discrimination,” said Reed. “A public body is telling a university they can’t place their teachers because of their religious faith.”
WESD terminated its contract with ACU in February. Its governing board members cited ACU’s Christianity as a principal factor for their decision. Leading on the effort was board member Tamillia Valenzuela, who said that ACU’s Biblical perspective that traditional sexual morality and the standard of marriage between one man and one woman directly opposed her and other LGBTQ+ community members. Valenzuela received support from fellow board members Kyle Clayton and Nikki Gomez-Whaley.
“[W]hen I went and looked into not only [ACU’s] core values but then the statement of faith that they ask their students to sign and live by, what gave me pause was it’s not just teaching but it’s teaching as they say with a Biblical lens, with a proselytizing is embedded into how they teach, and you know, I just don’t believe that belongs in schools,” said Clayton. “I would never want, you know, my son to talk about his two dads and be shamed by a teacher who believed a certain way and is at a school that demands that they, you know, teach through [a] Biblical lens.”
Gomez-Whaley said she would be open to those who claimed to be Christians who were accepting of LGBTQ+ lifestyles.
“[E]ven though [ACU] may not do anything illegal where they are preaching or using Bible verses, I do believe that we owe it to especially all of our students when we’re working in equity but especially our LGBTQ students and staff who are under fire who are not protected, and who we have already pledged to support,” said Gomez-Whaley. “We cannot continue to align ourselves with organizations that starkly contrast our values and say that we legitimately care about diversity, equity, and inclusion and that we legitimately care about all of our families.”
Reed shared that in the 11 years of WESD and ACU’s relationship, there were well over 100 students placed as either student teachers or in teacher shadowing positions. Of those students, 17 went on to be hired by WESD.
When asked whether WESD could attempt religious discrimination in future contracting decisions under the guise of other reasons, Reed said that those incidents, if they were to occur, would have to be scrutinized.
“The government can’t treat certain people worse than everyone else. Students shouldn’t be denied opportunities because of their religious beliefs,” said Reed. “The government can’t pick and choose what beliefs they allow.”
WESD proposed to settle by extending a separate agreement with ACU for one more year — but not the agreement at issue.
Ahead of the hearing the judge denied an amicus brief filed last week by The Goldwater Institute, a public policy research and litigation organization. Logan stated in his order that the WESD didn’t consent to the brief and that the Goldwater Institute didn’t present relevant matters that hadn’t already or couldn’t be brought to the court by either party.
“The parties’ briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is complete, thorough, and more than sufficient for this Court to make a ruling,” wrote Logan.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) nixed a faith-based advisory committee following pushback from parents.
The initiative originated from TUSD’s Equity, Diversity & Inclusiveness (EDI) department early last month, in an attempt to promote cultural diversity through inclusiveness of different religious faiths.
Kinasha Brown, the assistant superintendent for EDI, advised the TUSD community in an email that the faith-based advisory committee would partner with the district to weigh in on TUSD initiatives, programs, policies, and projects; coordinate K-2 literacy activities; support TUSD enrollment and registration drives; develop service-based learning opportunities; and offer an annual faith-based symposium.
“Our community prepares all students to become responsible, ethical and engaged global citizens by creating relevant, dynamic and joyful educational experiences that embrace cultural diversity,” read the email.
Following parental outcry over the committee, TUSD Superintendent Gabriel Trujillo issued a statement via email that the committee gave the impression that TUSD wasn’t secular and religiously neutral. Trujillo further clarified that the committee wouldn’t have decision-making power.
“This advisory committee is not going to have any decision-making power in any area of curriculum, instruction, programming, policy-making in schools, but we would like to at least reach out to the faith-based community in terms of where they can contribute with the overall needs of TUSD kids,” Trujillo said.
Trujillo’s email followed parents’ statements of opposition to the proposed committee during last week’s special governing board meeting.
One mother, Kate Goldman, said she was “really upset” by the proposed committee. Goldman questioned how TUSD would “equitably” ensure that all religious and non-religious groups would be represented.
“My child we intentionally put in a public school where I felt there would be a safe difference, a distinction, between church and state,” said Goldman. “I just don’t see the need, for a secular institution that I thought prided itself on critical thinking to be advised in any way by any faith whereas the evidence advisory committee that’s stupid, that’s school I thought. You are the evidence advisory, I thought. Why are we having a faith-based one?”
Goldman expressed worry that a faith-based group would squash all other equity efforts.
Goldman also testified that she attempted, unsuccessfully, to sign up to join the group, claiming that the signup links and emails wouldn’t go through.
Arnie Bermudez, a father, challenged the legality of the committee.
“Why are we trying to shoehorn religion into our school district since there are already private schools all over Tucson that can fill this gap?” asked Bermudez.
Watch the TUSD governing board meeting remarks against the faith-based advisory committee here:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Gov. Katie Hobbs ended the free learning loss summer program established by her predecessor, former Gov. Doug Ducey. The remaining funds intended for Ducey’s program, $37.5 million, will now be doled out at the Hobbs administration’s discretion via grants.
While discussing the termination of Ducey’s summer program, an unnamed Hobbs spokesperson erroneously claimed to ABC15 that the free summer camp program, OnTrack, was designed to be a one-time arrangement. Yet, Ducey promised prior to leaving office that OnTrack would occur once more this summer.
Hobbs announced the grant solicitation last month.
We have launched a new competitive grant solicitation for summer enrichment programming! This $37.5M grant program is available to schools, higher education institutions, nonprofits and community organizations. Find full details on OSPB's website: https://t.co/m6OkYQx3Bh
According to a pre-app solicitation video, the Hobbs administration will prioritize programs that lend themselves to equity-oriented outcomes.
This would include programs that emphasize social-emotional learning (SEL) as well as those targeting students from low-income families, students of color, children with disabilities, English learners, migratory students, students experiencing homelessness, and foster care youth.
The grant process also requires applicants to explain how their program would be “culturally competent” and “gender-responsive”: key words for SEL education. The former refers to acknowledging cultural differences and addressing cultural inequalities; and the latter refers to fixing gender inequalities. Both concepts lend themselves to the greater goal of equity.
Hobbs has committed her administration to advancing equity and social justice. Unlike equality, which proposes equal treatment that may result in unequal outcomes, equity proposes disparate treatment in order to achieve purportedly equal outcomes.
Today is World Day of Social Justice, a day that was created for countries around the world to promote solidarity, equality, and equity. Here in Arizona, I will work to ensure we do that every day. https://t.co/1XVB0FlQsm
Ducey launched the program in March 2022 with $75.3 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to offset the learning losses and mental health blows caused by COVID-19 pandemic remote learning.
The program funded just under 700 summer camps offering over 110,000 camp opportunities statewide. Over 70,600 students participated in the free program, 68 percent of whom were from Title I schools. Campers reported positive outcomes on 86 percent of learning goals, and those in credit recovery programs earned nearly 5,600 credits.
Arizona OnTrack Summer Camp helped catch our kids up with rigorous, engaging and fun summer learning experiences.
Hobbs’ administration proposed an initial award distribution of 40 percent rural, 20 percent tribal, and 40 percent urban. However, they noted that this allocation structure could be changed to meet internal diversity quotas.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona State University (ASU) and Northern Arizona University (NAU) announced Monday that they would begin banning TikTok from their campuses.
In statements to media outlets, the universities cited orders from the Biden administration regarding federal contractors as the rationale for walking back their usage of the platform.
Both ASU and NAU said they would begin deactivating their university-affiliated accounts beginning on Monday. One of ASU’s main accounts, @arizonastateuniversity, last posted in February. One of NAU’s main accounts, @nausocial, last posted a recruitment video to the platform on Monday.
Initial information provided by an ASU spokesperson relayed that ASU would block access to TikTok on its WiFi and university networks. However, in a revised statement, ASU noted that the ban would concern ASU-managed devices, not student devices accessing university networks.
“TikTok will no longer be allowed to be installed on ASU-managed devices as the university takes steps following President Biden’s recent order for federal contractors,” stated ASU.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued the order in late February, giving federal agencies and contractors up to 30 days to comply. OMB Director Shalanda Young cited the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 as the basis for the guidance.
The act instructed the OMB, the administrator of General Services, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the director of National Intelligence, and the secretary of Defense to craft guidance removing TikTok from government devices.
According to the OMB guidance, federal agencies are currently in the second phase of this order: 90 days of ensuring compliance and ceasing contracts with the noncompliant. The third phase directs federal agencies to ensure compliance in future contracts and solicitations for 120 days.
The act made exceptions to the ban for law enforcement activities, national security interests and activities, and security research. However, each exercise of this exception must be given via approval and documentation from an agency head or their designee on an annual basis.
Then last month, a TikTok spokesperson claimed to multiple media outlets that the Biden administration demanded that its parent company, ByteDance, either sell TikTok or face a nationwide ban. The U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee had voted earlier in the month to given Biden the power to ban the app.
As tensions between the Biden administration and TikTok mounted, the White House faced scrutiny for posting a video reportedly created using another app owned by ByteDance: CapCut.
Biden has also faced criticisms for his use of TikTok influencers for the past two years to attract younger voters, inviting controversial figures like transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney and LGBTQ entertainer Benito Skinner (Benny Drama) to the White House.
The Biden administration also authorized thousands in cash payments to create an “influencer army” using TikTok stars. One of them, Ellie Zeiler, was asked to push Biden administration messaging on the Ukraine war, rising gas prices, and historic inflation rates onto her 10 million followers.
NEW: I’ve obtained the *Confidential* White House PR email sent to TikTok influencers begging them to “do an intimate” zoom call with Dr. Fauci.
