by Corinne Murdock | Apr 5, 2021 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
According to Mayor Brigette Peterson, the Gilbert Town Council should reconsider offering $75,000 of taxpayer money annually for employee sex changes. The motion failed in a council meeting last week. After the vote, Peterson indicated that the sex change surgery – referred to as ‘gender-affirming surgery’ – would return to committee for review in the future.
Currently, the town benefits cover therapy and hormone treatments.
Councilmember Aimee Yentes spoke up first on the issue. She said she supported the 3 percent premium increases, but not the sex change surgery.
“I think those are policies that deviate from other positions we’ve taken as a community that delve more into social policy rather than strictly providing medical[ly] necessary benefits to our employees,” said Yentes.
Vice Mayor Yung Koprowski only spoke up to mention she’d vote for adding sex change surgery coverage only to align with Affordable Care Act (ACA) industry standard.
Councilmember Scott September said he concurred with Yentes’ assessment.
The question of necessity for such coverage came into play. Councilmember Laurin Hendrix asked the human resources representative, Deputy Chief People Officer Kristen Drew, if any applicants within the past 5 years had refused to apply for or accept employment because the town didn’t offer sex change surgery coverage.
Drew said there hadn’t been any such applicants.
Despite this history, the mayor claimed that not offering this surgery would be a deal breaker for employees in the future. She also urged the council to be more open-minded, to set aside their own values.
“At some point, it might become an issue and we’ll show that this community is forward-thinking, and there are times that we need to make the tough decisions that may not always align with our own thought process when it comes to our personal choices or our political choices or our religious choices, even but we put Gilbert in a position that provides for whatever the future may hold[,]” said Peterson. “I’m going to encourage our council members to be open-minded in this benefit and look to this community moving forward where we can be strong and handle situations like this that come forward and we’re faced with.”
In an interview with AZ Free News, Hendrix raised several points of contention about the added coverage and the mayor’s perspective. He stated that a sex change surgery is cosmetic – not a true health need.
“I see health insurance for health needs. And I don’t see this as a health need. It’s a cosmetic surgery by choice. I don’t see any reason that taxpayers should have to pay for that,” said Hendrix. “They were comparing it to autism syndrome at the meeting. You don’t wake up in the morning and think [you have autism]. That’s not something where you have a choice. The two are not similar.”
Hendrix said he doesn’t have an issue with people having the surgery. Rather, Hendrix said he doesn’t want taxpayers to have to foot the bill for it.
Further, Hendrix assessed that this benefit could be an incentive for people to take an underemployed job just for the surgery – and then leave after they got it.
It was Peterson’s request to council before the vote that stuck out to Hendrix the most.
“The mayor’s comments at the end were shocking. We have to ‘get past’ our moral values, our standards? But what else would I base my vote on, if I’m going to put aside my family values, my moral values, religious values, or personal standards? What’s my vote based on? What’s left? I gotta base my vote on something,” said Hendrix. “I hope she bases her vote on something other than who paid into her campaign.”
Councilmembers voted unanimously for the 3 percent premium increases, but the motion to add sex change surgery coverage failed 4-3. Yentes, September, Hendrix, and Scott Anderson voted against the measure. The Vice Mayor, Mayor, and Councilmember Kathy Tilque voted for it.
by AZ Free News | Apr 5, 2021 | News
Warm weather is here, and in anticipation of ever-increasing temperatures, Arizona’s largest vaccination site at State Farm Stadium will transition to an indoor site at Gila River Arena in Glendale on Friday, April 23.
The State Farm Stadium site will move to nighttime hours starting Monday, April 5, to avoid daytime heat. It will conclude operations the morning of April 23 and move indoors to Gila River Arena, home to the Arizona Coyotes. Operating from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily, the new Gila River Arena site will have the capacity to administer 1,000 shots per hour.
An indoor vaccination site at Yuma Civic Center transitioned to a state operation on Monday, March 29, with 8,000 appointments per week initially and capacity for 4,000 appointments a day.
An East Mesa distribution center operated by Dexcom opens Monday, April 5, as the Valley’s first state-run indoor drive-thru COVID-19 vaccination site, replacing the outdoor site currently operating at Chandler-Gilbert Community College. The site will start out offering 3,000-4,000 appointments a day.
The new indoor vaccination site in Glendale will use Gila River Arena’s main concourse to check in and vaccinate patients who have appointments, while the arena’s seats will be available for individuals to spend their 15 or 30 minutes of observation after vaccination.
Vaccine recipients will enter through the venue’s main entrance at Gate 4, and parking at the site will be complimentary.
At 11 a.m. every Friday, ADHS makes appointments available at state-run sites for the following week. Registration for these and many other sites is available at podvaccine.azdhs.gov or by calling 844-542-8201 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Both resources offer assistance in English and Spanish.
by AZ Free News | Apr 4, 2021 | News
A controversial pro-life bill, SB 1457, passed on a party line vote of 31-29 after a contentious argument on the House floor.
SB 1457 prohibits abortion based on the diagnosis of a genetic abnormality, except for those incompatible with life. The bill classifies the following, except in a medical emergency, as a class 6 felony:
a) performing an abortion knowing that the abortion is sought because of a genetic abnormality of the child;
b) using force or the threat of force to intimidate a person to have an abortion because of a genetic abnormality of the child; or
c) accepting or soliciting monies to finance an abortion because of a genetic abnormality of the child (Sec. 2)
Arizona representatives passed SB 1457 on a party line vote of 31-29 after a contentious argument on the House floor.
House Vote – SB1457
Supporters say the bill is intended to protect the “most vulnerable from discrimination.”
by AZ Free News | Apr 4, 2021 | News
Arizona has joined a coalition of 22 states before the Ninth Circuit defending the Second Amendment rights of American citizens. The states are asking the court to declare California’s law limiting magazine capacities as unconstitutional.
Arizona, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming are filing a legal brief at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Duncan v. Rodriquez – a challenge of California’s unconstitutional ban on extremely common magazines for firearms.
In the amicus brief, the states’ attorneys general note that California Penal Code 32310 violates the Second Amendment: “This Court, therefore, should not apply a balancing approach – like strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny – to a ban on arms commonly used by law abiding citizens for lawful purposes. Such an approach would be inconsistent with the decisions of the Supreme Court in Heller, McDonald, and Caetano.”
“The enumerated right to bear arms reflected in the Second Amendment is fundamental and predates the Bill of Rights. The right is important to millions of Americans, including many of our most vulnerable citizens living in disadvantaged communities. The arms at issue in these proceedings are commonly used by millions of law-abiding citizens for a myriad of lawful purposes,” added the attorneys general.
by Corinne Murdock | Apr 3, 2021 | Education, News
By Corinne Murdock |
After House passage, a bill to require teachers to hold back any K-4 students if they don’t meet promotional criteria was withdrawn. It was scheduled to appear before the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday.
State Representative John Fillmore (R-Apache Junction) was the legislation sponsor. The bill would have required school boards to enact policies and procedures with teeth to enforce these changes.
However, the bill had major exceptions to the rule it sought to establish.
The bill would have allowed any third graders who were English language learners (ELL), experiencing a special education referral or evaluation, diagnosed with a “significant reading impairment” or disability to progress to the fourth grade without meeting criteria, or receiving intervention and remedial services. The exceptions would have also extended to any third grader who demonstrated “sufficient reading skills” or “adequate process” toward third grade reading standards.
Third grade is likely emphasized in this bill because it’s largely acknowledged as a critical progression point for children in their literacy. However, these exceptions wouldn’t have applied to third graders only.
The bill would have extended similar exceptions to first through fourth graders if they were given a special exception by the district’s governing board, an ELL, in the process of special education referral or evaluation, or diagnosed with a “significant reading impairment” or disability.
The House had passed it originally, with amendments, back in February along party lines.
Democrats opposed to the bill said that it would make students more likely to drop out and end up as criminals. They accused the bill of simply “failing” and “forced flunking” of students.
Certain studies have challenged that narrative. 2017 research from Harvard indicated that holding students back in the third grade didn’t increase their likelihood of dropping out of high school.
Republicans in support of the bill responded in kind.
“That’s the key word: what they need. What they need is education. They need to be able to prepare to go forward,” said State Representative Kevin Payne (R-Peoria). “If they’re being pushed along without the proper knowledge, that’s setting them up for failure. We’re not failing them, we’re holding them back. There’s a big difference.”
Fillmore ran a similar bill last year, one that would’ve extended to all grade levels.
Notes on the bill indicate that it was withdrawn from committee last week.Corinne Murdock is a contributing reporter for AZ Free News. In her free time, she works on her books and podcasts. Follow her on Twitter, @CorinneMurdock or email tips to corinnejournalist@gmail.com.
by B. Hamilton | Apr 3, 2021 | News
By B. Hamilton |
On Friday, Governor Doug Ducey engaged in a Twitter exchange with Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego for what he says are policies that “make zero sense.”
The governor sent a letter to Gallego and reminded the public that all State Parks will be open with free admission this weekend.
In his letter, the governor asserted that “Arizona’s parks are open. All parks. Everywhere. Rural and urban. From Phoenix to Tucson to Flagstaff. All towns and municipalities. Enjoy and GOD BLESS! #HappyEaster 3/3”
Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio thanked the governor for his letter:
Phoenix had set temporary restrictions in its parks, including closing parking lots and prohibiting grilling. The mayor made note that the decision was unanimous, however, DiCiccio’s Chief of Staff Sam Stone offered another view of the decision:
