Scottsdale, Gilbert, and Chandler ranked in the top 21 best U.S. cities to raise a family, according to the latest study from WalletHub. Scottsdale was number 10, while Gilbert was number 13, and Chandler ranked 21.
Of all the Arizona cities included, Tucson ranked the lowest. Peoria ranked 49, Phoenix ranked 103, Tempe ranked 106, Mesa ranked 114, Glendale ranked 140, and Tucson ranked 156.
WalletHub assessed 182 cities: 150 of the most populated cities in the country, and at least two of the most populated cities in each state.
The nine other best cities to raise a family were, in order: Fremont, California; Overland Park, Kansas; Irvine, California; Plano, Texas; Columbia, Maryland; San Diego, California; Seattle, Washington; San Jose, California; and Madison, Wisconsin.
The 10-worst cities to raise a family were, in order: Detroit, Michigan; Cleveland, Ohio; Memphis, Tennessee; Birmingham, Alabama; San Bernardino, California; Newark, New Jersey; Fayetteville, North Carolina; Shreveport, Louisiana; Jackson, Mississippi; and Augusta, Georgia.
In its study, WalletHub factored family fun, health and safety, education and child care, affordability, and socio-economics. Each factor was weighted 20 points.
Family fun accounted for: playgrounds per capita, ice rinks per capita, skate parks per capita, bike rental facilities per capita, mini golf locations per capita, parkland acreage, walkability, bike score, number of attractions, recreation friendliness, sports fan friendliness, ideal weather, share of families with young children, and average commute time.
Health and safety accounted for: air quality, water quality, access to healthy foods, pediatricians per capita, share of uninsured children, public hospitals ranking, infant mortality rate, pedestrian fatality rate, driving fatality rate, violent crime rate, property crime rate, family homelessness, and percentage of residents who are fully vaccinated.
Education and child care accounted for: school system quality, high school graduation rate, childcare costs, child day care services, childcare workers per children under 14, parental leave policy, and summer learning opportunities.
Socio-economics accounted for: two parent families, separation and divorce rate, families living in poverty, families receiving food stamps, unemployment rate, underemployment rate, debt per median earnings, wealth gap, and foreclosure rate.
Congressman Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) expressed that he was honored to learn of Gilbert’s ranking.
Honored to see Gilbert make the Top 20.
I work very hard to ensure that my district is safe, affordable, and has premier education opportunities. https://t.co/5wiFKvB9OC
Last Friday, the Heard Museum in Phoenix hosted its first-ever drag show, “Pride Night at the Heard” — and children were present to witness it. BlueCross BlueShield of Arizona served as the major sponsor for the event, with Arizona Public Service (APS) as a regular sponsor.
The show featured Native American drag queens. Sam Toledo, the museum’s digital content manager, told the Phoenix New Times that the show was family-friendly.
The event host was a performer named “Pyraddiction.” The other performers were “Tomahawk Martini,” winner of Miss New Mexico Pride 2022; “Té D. DeMornay,” Mx Titos Pride 2022; “K.Yasss Savage”; “Ritavon DeMornay”; and “Felix.”
Negative commentary on the museum’s Facebook posts about their “Pride Night at the Heard” moved the administrators to delete and limit comments on their posts. Many criticisms concerned the disparity between LGBTQ+ ideologies and certain Native American cultures.
In addition to the drag show, the museum had LGBTQ+ Native American poets read their work.
The museum’s event took place a day before the viral drag show brunch in Dallas, Texas. That controversial event, “Drag The Kids to Pride,” was hosted in a 21-and-over bar.
Multiple recordings of the event depicted children giving dollar bills to the drag queen performers, and even performing alongside them. In the background of the stage there was a lit neon sign that read, “It’s Not Going to Lick Itself!”
“Drag The Kids to Pride” protesters were diverse. There were Christians urging repentance to God. There were also LGBTQ+ individuals insisting that children were too young for concepts like drag queens and transgenderism.
Protesters chanted “Christ Is King!” at attendees of the “Drag Your Kids To Pride” event. pic.twitter.com/tfWOQxAcve
Maricopa County will operate 212 vote centers for the August 2022 primary — double what they had in 2020. By the general election, that number will increase up to 225; 14 of which were converted from outside drop boxes into full vote centers. The county promised to mail voters information about the closest vote centers.
The catch-all, “vote anywhere” system allowing voters to cast ballots at any location rather than a designated precinct has sparked controversy, with critics alleging that it makes fraud easier; namely, ballot harvesting. Voters may drop off their early ballots at vote centers.
Legislators made an attempt to prohibit vote centers. One such bill from State Senator Wendy Rogers (R-Flagstaff), SB1338, would’ve reinstated precinct voting as well as paper ballots and hand counting. It advanced out of one committee in the senate, but no further.
Another bill, HB2238 from State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek), sought to eliminate emergency vote centers. It failed in the Senate.
The county adopted vote centers amid the pandemic in 2020. They also released an informational video featuring their $10,000 “Phil the Ballot” mascot.
Pima County decided to follow in Maricopa County’s footsteps this year. They will halve their operations from nearly 280 voting precinct locations to 129 vote centers.
Democracy Docket, the brainchild of Hillary Clinton’s Russiagate hoax lawyer Marc Elias, congratulated Pima County for adopting vote centers.
Pima County, Arizona is making voting easier and more accessible by approving 129 vote centers.👏
Pima voters will be able to cast their ballot at any vote center in the county as opposed to precinct-specific polling locations.🗳https://t.co/LyI1GBtspG
Arizona allowed vote centers to be used rather than precincts beginning in 2011.
With less than a month to go before ballots hit mailboxes, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer issued an announcement on Thursday about their increased number of vote centers.
Maricopa County will have 212 vote centers for the August 2022 primary. These vote centers can be used by any registered county voter.
— Stephen Richer—Maricopa Cnty Recorder (prsnl acct) (@stephen_richer) June 2, 2022
Republican National Committee (RNC) leader Tyler Bowyer criticized the county’s decision.
This is awful. Vote centers are terrible for election integrity and should not be implemented without a way for the recorders office to reorganize all ballots physically at the tabulation center. It’s a legitimate issue for hand counting actual precincts. https://t.co/NhIJ7kOeQX
Prior to 2020, contentions with vote centers concerned the fact that there were less of them than there were polling places. Some voter rights watchdog organizations expressed concern that the reduced number of voting sites would pack an adverse, disproportionate impact on minority and low-income voters.
Mailed ballots will be sent out on July 6. A complete list of all vote center locations will be made available on the Maricopa County website approximately 45 days before the election according to the county’s election plan — at some point later this month.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
While denying any wrongdoing, Ford Motor Company recently offered up more than $19 million to settle allegations brought by several states including Arizona that the company made false advertising claims about its C-MAX vehicles, model years 2011 to 2015.
But Ford Motor consumers who may have been misled by the advertising will not share in the payout. Instead, the money will be split among the attorney generals of 39 states and the District of Columbia.
Court documents filed in Maricopa County Superior Court show the portion allocated to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office is $884,364.40, of which $200,000 will be used for attorneys’ fees and costs. The other $684,364.40 will be deposited into Arizona’s Consumer Protection – Consumer Fraud Revolving Fund for use at the discretion of Attorney General Mark Brnovich as provided by law.
The Consent Judgment notes Ford specifically denies it has violated any federal or state laws. And nothing in the agreement precludes consumers from pursing claims against Ford on an individual or class action basis. However, such legal efforts would not be taken up by the State, according to the May 18 agreement approved by Brnovich.
“Only the Attorney General may seek enforcement of this Consent Judgment,” the document states. “Nothing herein is intended to create a private right of action by other parties; however, this Consent Judgment does not limit the rights of any private party to pursue any remedies allowed by law.”
In addition to the monetary payout, Ford agreed to be “enjoined, restrained, and prohibited” from making false or misleading advertising claims concerning the estimated Fuel Economy and Payload Capacity of any new motor vehicles.
The attorney generals of six states—Arizona, Illinois, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, and Vermont—were part of the executive committee which led the investigative action against Ford Motor Company’s C-MAX advertising.
The other attorney generals who will benefit are Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Arizona schools that prohibit students from using bathrooms or locker rooms, or joining sports teams designated for the opposite sex, will likely lose their federal funds for school meals. Federal dollars reimburse schools for qualifying meals, and give low-income students free or reduced-price meals. Throughout the pandemic, schools were able to provide free meals to all students and receive greater reimbursements.
The policy change came from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) announcement last month, clarifying that protected classes within anti-discrimination policy included sexual orientation and gender identity. Schools that fail to update policies and signage to comply with the USDA policy would result in the loss of FNS funding.
The USDA claimed that the move aligned with President Joe Biden’s Executive Order on Preventing and Combatting Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.
Although the USDA notification made no mention of bathrooms, locker rooms, or sports teams, Biden’s executive order did in its first few lines.
“Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports,” read Biden’s order.
According to the latest reports from the Arizona Department of Education (ADE), about half of Arizona’s children rely on free or reduced lunches. It is likely that number increased with the financial stresses due to the pandemic and hiking inflation, as well as the influx of migrant children due to the border crisis.
Children are eligible for free meals if their family income is at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level, while reduced meals are available to children with family incomes between 130 and 185 percent of the federal poverty level.
The Arizona Senate Republican leadership issued a joint press release denouncing the USDA’s latest action. They criticized the Biden administration for prioritizing a political agenda above the wellbeing of children. The leaders contended further that no evidence existed for schools discriminating against children by denying them food over their sexual orientation or gender identity.
“The federal government is literally threatening to stop feeding the poorest of children if schools don’t allow boys in girls’ bathrooms, boys in girls’ showers, or boys on girls’ sports teams,” stated the Senate Republicans.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Extremist Biden Agenda Threatens School Lunches for Arizona's Poorest Kids Unless Boys Are Let into Girls' Bathrooms ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/MIOdgjwase
Arizona Senate Democrats responded that the Republicans’ dismay over children’s food supplies was really another opportunity to vilify transgender children. They insinuated that children were more worried about guns than they were their next meal.
“Vilifying trans kids during pride month is very on brand for Republicans but this is just a distraction,” stated the Democrats. “Children are worried about getting shot in their classrooms [sic] not their classmates [sic] gender identity.”
Vilifying trans kids during pride month is very on brand for Republicans but this is just a distraction.
🚨Children are worried about getting shot in their classrooms not their classmates gender identity. https://t.co/HeknfXlQeQ
— Arizona Senate Democrats (@AZSenateDems) June 3, 2022
This is seriously sick and pathetic. Trying to divide and conquer poor and trans kids during #PrideMonth2022. Thank goodness our kids see through this bullsh*t. https://t.co/xQtOBkNsaT
— Sen. Martín Quezada (@SenQuezada29) June 3, 2022
Earlier this year, Arizona banned males from competing in female sports. The law applies to both private and public K-12 schools, colleges, and universities in the state.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A judge in Mohave County is expected to rule by noon on Monday whether Arizonans could lose their ability to vote by mail without providing an excuse.
Judge Lee Jantzen is being asked by the Arizona Republican Party and its chair, Kelli Ward, to declare the state’s no-excuse voting by mail “system” unconstitutional despite the fact the system has been in effect for three decades. The judge heard arguments last Friday to issue a preliminary injunction to ban no-excuse voting by mail effective with the upcoming Nov. 8 General Election.
About 85 percent of all ballots cast in the 2020 General Election—including Ward’s ballot—were mailed out to voters in advance of the election. But the AZGOP contends the law passed by the Legislature in 1991 violates the constitutional requirement that Arizona’s elections be held in such a way to ensure “secrecy in voting.”
The lawsuit argues the only ballots which should be accepted through the mail are those from voters who provide a satisfactory excuse—such as military service, a disability that makes it a burden to vote in person, or being out of town on Election Day.
(The AZGOP acknowledged in their May 17 lawsuit that there is not enough time to outlaw no-excuse voting for the Aug. 2 Primary Election as ballots are in the process of being printed so they can be in voters’ mailboxes in early July.).
Attorneys for Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs and several county election officials argued to Jantzen that there is nothing unconstitutional with Arizona’s no-excuse voting by mail system. They also advised the judge of the practical problems with trying to ban a practice after 30 years without much advance notice to voters and those responsible for running each county’s elections.
One such problem involves the Active Early Voter List, from which ballots are sent to voters who have signed up to receive them by mail. Those voters recently received a reminder notice from their respective county recorder with the 2022 election schedule and confirming the voters will receive ballots by mail for the primary and general elections.
The AZGOP argued to Jantzen that counties can be forced to accommodate changes in time for the General Election, even if it requires hiring thousands more poll workers and election staff across the state, scrounging to find enough voting machines and other election-related equipment, and locating facilities which can accommodate millions more in-person voters than have turned out in years.
That argument was pushed back on during Friday’s hearing by an attorney for seven of Arizona’s 15 county recorders responsible for the voting by mail process and county election directors who are responsible for election day voting and ballot tabulation.
“They cannot conjure polling places or poll workers out of nothing,” Karen Hartman-Tellez of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office told Jantzen.
Whatever order Jantzen issues in response to the AZGOP’s preliminary injunction request is likely to be appealed. But even if no-excuse voting by mail is allowed to take place this year, the AZGOP’s constitutional challenge does not die.
Instead, the litigation will move forward to a trial under civil court rules, same as any other lawsuit.
