Governor Ducey Orders Flags At Half-Staff In Honor Of Former Sen. David Bradley

Governor Ducey Orders Flags At Half-Staff In Honor Of Former Sen. David Bradley

Governor Doug Ducey ordered flags at all state buildings be lowered to half-staff from sunrise to sunset tomorrow, February 20, 2022, in honor of former Senator David Bradley, a long-time public servant who passed away today.

“Arizona is saddened by the passing of Senator David Bradley,” Governor Ducey said. “My deepest condolences go out to his wife Debbie, and his family and loved ones. Senator Bradley had an unwavering dedication to serving the people of Arizona, and we honor his life and years of public service. He was a true statesman who made a positive impact on the lives of many Arizonans across our state.”

Senator Bradley gave 25 years to public service, serving in the Navy, as a social worker for the state, and in the Arizona Legislature, where he served for 16 years. While in the Senate, he served as Minority Leader for two years, during which he worked across the aisle to advance important priorities. He was a licensed professional counselor and played an integral role in youth development. 

“David worked tirelessly to make Arizona a better place, whether through elected office, as a counselor for youth or his work for nonprofits. He cared deeply about doing what is best for Arizonans, and I have the utmost respect for him.” 

“During his time in the Senate, he lived as an example that working across the aisle, for a common good, benefits all Arizonans. Whether by expanding educational opportunities for foster kids, addressing the opioid epidemic, or passing the Drought Contingency Plan, he made a lasting impact on our state.”

Flagstaff High School Threatened Maskless Student With Police, Kicked Him Off Campus

Flagstaff High School Threatened Maskless Student With Police, Kicked Him Off Campus

By Corinne Murdock |

This week, Flagstaff Unified School District (FUSD) employees threatened to call the police on one high school senior for not wearing a mask, ultimately forcing him to leave campus without notifying his parents. The student, Cezar, described his ordeal to conservative talk radio host Jeff Oravitz: he stood outside on a football field with other maskless students, not wanting to be marked absent and desiring an education as he waited for administration to grant them access to the school building. 

“My mindset was: I was going to do this protest and still get my education and just go to school, have a normal school day without a mask, and see how it goes,” said Cezar. “But obviously I’m going to stay being respectful and whatnot because that’s the type of person I am and I feel that’s how we need to approach this situation: just peaceful.”

Cezar said that there were approximately 100 students from his high school who protested with him outside against FUSD’s mask mandate, with another estimated 400 students at other schools protesting as well. When he decided he’d attempt to attend class maskless, Cezar took a video of his encounter with administration. 

The video shows Cezar engaging with various administrators. Eventually he was escorted by a masked administrator, who wore gauges and his dreadlocks in a man bun. Cezar explained that he’d like to still get his education while doing his peaceful protest. The administrator commented that FUSD should try to find someone who can explain to Cezar and his peers what they’re protesting. When the administrator informs Cezar the other students in class will be masked, Cezar says, “No, thank you,” to which the administrator responds, “Yes.”

The pair eventually come upon another male administrator, who informs Cezar that he can either wear a mask to attend class, stand outside on the football field, or have his parents pick him up. Cezar informed the administrator that they could call his parents and that he would go to class. 

Cezar then comes upon the female administrator who repeated what the two prior male administrators said: Cezar would either have to wear a mask or have his parents pick him up. The female administrator refused to call Cezar’s parents.

At that point, Cezar requested that the administrator sign a document confirming that he had been kicked off campus by school staff due to his peaceful protest against wearing a mask. The administrator refused. She suggested Cezar talk to the school board and superintendent about his refusal to wear a mask. 

“I don’t feel like they listen because no ever comes from it,” said Cezar. “And when it does, it’s very minimal.” 

Another female administrator suggested that they call the police because she “didn’t feel comfortable” with Cezar around, and that she was going to retreat to a “safer space.” The administrator then explained to Cezar that his rights ended where their rights began.

Cezar also had another document from his parents asserting his right to peacefully protest masking, replicated below:

“To whom it concerns,

Students have a constitutional right to participate in non-disruptive protests during the school day. This means that school officials cannot retaliate against or discipline student protestors unless the protests cause, or are reasonably expected to cause, the disruption of school events or make it impossible for school officials to maintain order. 

As the child’s parent this letter is not only my expressed permission but an assertion of my child’s right to peacefully protest in the following manner:

  • Not wearing a mask –
    • 1) Demonstrating concern regarding the potential health and safety issues, such as decreased oxygen levels and inhalation of harmful bacteria, that arise through mandated mask-wearing forced upon the individual; and 
    • 2) Exercising freedom of choice, conscience, or taking actions aligned with an individual’s creed.

School policy allows for expressive speech at all times, in-so-far as the speech does not interfere with the normal operations of the school. Because my child’s expressive speech will not impact school operations, I expect there will be no issues for my child.

My child is not to be sent to the office. I do not give my child permission to leave campus, nor will I pick my child up. My child shall not be harassed, bullied, or treated differently by any teacher, administrator, faculty, or student for standing up for his/her right to peacefully protest the mask mandates. If any teacher or administrator takes issue with my child’s right to protest, please contact me to meet with them and the principal for further discussion.”

Cezar expressed gratitude that he’s been able to have in-person learning again, but lamented at the difficulties, inconsistencies, and behavior changes from others he’s endured. He described how no educator was willing to help him or even offer a kind word when he was unable to breathe through a mask due to severe allergies.

“The constant masking and being told to put your mask up – teachers are not nice about this, they are kind of aggressive when it comes to making sure our masks are up,” explained Cezar. “I had an incident with a teacher where it’s the end of the school day, I’m walking out and I take off my mask because I’ve been wearing it all day and he like gets right up on me in my personal space and he’s telling me to put my mask back on and he’s demanding it and raising his voice and whatnot. It’s purely not right to talk to us this way.”

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

House Committee Passes Bill Barring Illegal Immigrants From Voting

House Committee Passes Bill Barring Illegal Immigrants From Voting

By Corinne Murdock |

The House Government and Elections Committee passed a bill prohibiting illegal immigrants from voting, HB2492, on Wednesday. The bill would require those registering to vote to prove their residential address, date and place of birth, and affirmation that they are a citizen using a U.S. Election Assistance Commission form. 

If an applicant fails to offer satisfactory proof of citizenship, then the county must attempt to verify the applicant’s citizenship status within 10 days using, at minimum, information from the Department of Transportation (ADOT), Social Security Administration (SSA), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Program, National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems Electronic Verification of Vital Events, and any other databases that the elections official has access to within the state, city, town, county, or federal government. 

Election officials that refuse to reject a registration form would be subject to a class six felony. If officials find proof that the applicant isn’t an American citizen, then they must notify the applicant of their rejection and refer the case to both the county attorney and attorney general for further investigation. However, if an election official can’t find any citizenship information whatsoever, then they will only notify the applicant of their rejection and offer them 30 days to respond with evidence of citizenship. 

The bill would impact federal-only voters — those who made a substantial impact in the 2020 election — because applicants without satisfactory citizenship proof wouldn’t be qualified to vote in federal elections. Exemptions would be carved out for those under the Uniformed And Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), such as military members.

Furthermore, the bill requires that county officials make records of all their efforts to verify an applicant’s citizenship status. They must also present a list of all individuals who registered to vote and haven’t provided satisfactory evidence of citizenship by Halloween of this year. At that point, the attorney general would have until the end of next March to determine each applicant’s citizenship status and submit a report to the secretary of state, senate president, and house speaker.

The legislation sponsor, State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek), explained that the number of individuals who hadn’t shown Documentary Proof of Citizenship (DPOC) went from 1,700 in 2018 to over 11,000 in 2020. 

Hoffman worked with the Arizona Free Enterprise Club to draft the bill, whose deputy director, Greg Blackie, offered testimony to the committee recounting Arizonans’ history of supporting citizenship requirements for voting, citing the state’s approval of Prop 200 in 2004: the Arizona voter-approved initiative that made citizenship a qualification to register to vote. 

Both the federal and state government worked to undermine Prop 200. Although the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires states to use its federal form for voter registration, Blackie explained that the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) must consult with each state to include tailored instructions on that state’s voter qualifications; however, the EAC hasn’t included Arizona’s requirement of proof of citizenship. In 2013, the Supreme Court overturned Prop 200, ruling that the NVRA preempted Arizona’s proof of citizenship requirement. In 2018, Arizona’s secretary of state and the Maricopa County recorder agreed to a consent decree ignoring Prop 200. 

“The result has been the complete proliferation of the federal-only voters list,” stated Blackie. “This bill really is necessary to safeguard our voter rolls, ensuring only qualified applicants are properly registered and voting in our elections, restoring confidence and ensuring in Arizona it’s easy to vote, hard to cheat.”

In announcing her vote against the bill, State Representative Sarah Ligouri (D-Phoenix) argued Arizona’s voter registration processes and ID processes are “completely secure.” Liguori said that Arizona should strike down this bill, as Kansas and Alabama did for similar bills.

“I think this legislation is unnecessary and impunitive to newly-registered and new citizen voters,” said Liguori. 

The bill passed 7-6 on party lines. 

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

ASBA Drops Its Membership In National School Board Association

ASBA Drops Its Membership In National School Board Association

By Terri Jo Neff |

Earlier this week the Arizona School Board Association voted to end its relationship with the National School Board Association, a group which has been under fire by parents, school officials, and legislators for several months.  

In her Feb. 16 letter to NSBA, Dr. Sheila Harrison-Williams said the ASBA board of directors voted to discontinue membership in the national organization. Harrison-Williams, who is ASBA’s executive director, referenced a missive the national organization issued to President Joe Biden last fall in which the actions of parents trying to be involved in their children’s education were compared to acts of domestic terrorism.

NSBA has since replaced its executive director and launched a third-party review of certain association activities. But that has not eschewed further concern among Arizona’s school district officials and parents, Harrison-Williams wrote.

“Despite these efforts, it has become clear that ASBA’s continued membership in NSBA has become a hinderance to the work we are undertaking in Arizona on behalf of Arizona’s public school students,” she wrote, adding that the ASBA’s primary obligation is to advocate on behalf of Arizona’s students.

“We are unable to do that if we are continually called to account for the actions of NSBA,” Harrison-Williams wrote.

The ASBA’s announcement comes after state lawmakers were asked to support Senate Bill 1011, which would prohibit public school districts across Arizona from using taxpayer dollars to pay for membership in a state or national school board association. The bill is opposed by the Arizona Association of County School Superintendents and the Arizona School Administrators Association.

However, the issue has become a lightning rod among several school district boards outside Maricopa and Pima counties.  Many of those boards have expressed dissatisfaction with what they see as partisan political interference by the NSBA. This, in turn, put pressure on ASBA’s board to cut ties with the national organization.

Learn more about SB1011 HERE http://azfreenews.com/2022/01/bill-would-bar-use-of-taxpayer-funds-for-school-board-association-dues/

Maricopa County Split Approved by House Government and Elections Committee

Maricopa County Split Approved by House Government and Elections Committee

By Corinne Murdock |

The Arizona House Government and Elections Committee approved State Representative Jake Hoffman’s (R-Queen Creek) bill to split Maricopa County into four separate counties. The four new counties would be Maricopa, encompassing central Phoenix, Tempe, and Tolleson; Mogollon, encompassing north Phoenix, Scottsdale, and Cave Creek; O’odham, encompassing Buckeye, Peoria, and Surprise; and Hohokam, encompassing Gilbert, Mesa, and Chandler. If signed into law, the current Maricopa County officials would continue jurisdictional operations until boards of supervisors could be established in those three counties. The committee approved the bill along party lines, meaning it barely passed with a 7-6 majority. 

Hoffman stated during committee that this would be a fairer representation of current Maricopa County residents, and that any attempts to characterize this bill as a response to a dispute over the 2020 election results was a conspiracy theory. Arizona House Democrats insisted otherwise. 

Gubernatorial candidate Steve Gaynor testified during committee that Maricopa County threatened to overtake Arizona the way that similarly-dominant counties in other states have, such as Los Angeles County, California.

“The two largest counties by population in the country, Los Angeles and Cook, are examples of what Maricopa will likely become if action is not taken,” Gaynor testified. “Their governments are wasteful and unresponsive to citizen needs, and they are unpleasant places to live.”

Los Angeles County has a population of over 10 million, while the second-largest county, San Diego County, has over 3.3 million. Similarly, Maricopa County is by far the largest county in Arizona at around 4.5 million residents. The next-largest county, Pima County, doesn’t come close in terms of population count: a little over 1 million. The federal government estimated Arizona’s total population last summer to be around 7.3 million citizens, meaning Maricopa County contains around 62 percent of the state’s population. 

Considering the size of its constituency, Maricopa County has only five supervisors, and one of other county officials like sheriff, secretary, and recorder. By comparison, Greenlee County, the least-populous county at under 10,000 residents, has just two less supervisors and the same number of other county-wide officials. 

President Joe Biden eked out a victory in Arizona thanks to Maricopa County, earning over 10,400 more votes in the state than former President Donald Trump. Biden won just over 50 percent of the vote in Maricopa County, or over 1.04 million votes, while Trump won over 48 percent of the vote, or 995,000.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

School Choice Scholarship Expansion Passed By Senate

School Choice Scholarship Expansion Passed By Senate

By Corinne Murdock |

In a party-line vote on Wednesday, the Arizona Senate approved a bill to expand the state’s K-12 school choice scholarships: the Arizona Equal Opportunity Education Act. 

SB1657 expands Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program eligibility by allowing more classifications of students to participate. That includes those with: disabilities identified by public school systems in other states; a parent that is a veteran, first responder, or full-time health professional; income that qualifies for federal free and reduced-price lunch programs; a household that receives benefits from Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or Section 8 Public Housing Assistance; participation in federal Title I services for low-income students under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA); residence in the attendance boundary of a school that qualifies for schoolwide Title I Program funding under ESSA or whose governing board submitted a plan to the School Facilities Oversight Board within the last two years requesting additional construction or funding due to exceeding existing capacity; or current or past participation in the Education Recovery Benefit Program, Open for Learning Recovery Benefit Program, or any successor state grant program. It also would entitle participating children to access Classroom Site Fund (CSF) dollars. 

Additionally, permissible ESA expenditures would include public transportation services; educational devices such as calculators, laptops, telescopes, microscopes, and printers; and consumable educational supplies like paper, pens, and markers. The legislation also ensures that school districts cover expenses for independent educational evaluation from qualified examiners obtained by parents, like psychiatrists. 

American Federation for Children (AFC) Arizona State Director Steve Smith asserted on “The Conservative Circus” that the legislation marked the largest expansion of school choice in state history. Smith cited polling numbers that 78 percent of minorities in Arizona support school choice.

“I’m still trying to figure out why Democrats voted against this,” remarked Smith. “We’re talking about the kids that need the help the most, the Democrats — who I’m told over and over again are always helping the downtrodden — continue to vote no.”

Smith called out the three House Republicans who killed a similar bill last year to expand school choice: State Representatives Michelle Udall (R-Mesa), Joanne Osbourne (R-Goodyear), and Joel John (R-Buckeye). 

State Senator Paul Boyer (R-Glendale), the bill sponsor, argued in last week’s Senate Education Committee that opposition to the bill concerning a reduction in public school spending was reducing children to dollar signs. He cited that Arizona has invested over $8.6 billion into public education since 2016, and that the state set an all-time record with its latest per-pupil spending: well over $14,000. 

“I can’t tell a parent, ‘Sorry, we haven’t done enough on the funding side,’ when we really have. And at one point we have to say, we have to let every child who wants to go to the school of their choice, they should have that opportunity, too,” said Boyer.

Boyer insisted that the greater issue at hand was allowing parents to choose the best educational options for their child.

As AZ Free News reported, the legislation earned the backing of NFL Alumni Association chaplain and Phoenix-based pastor Drew Anderson; he credited school choice for his escape from the school-to-prison pipeline. Anderson insisted that school choice defined a “civil rights movement of our era.” 

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.