SUSD Board Should Be Held Accountable For Violating ‘No DEI’ Statement

SUSD Board Should Be Held Accountable For Violating ‘No DEI’ Statement

By Mike Bengert |

Following multiple complaints regarding the social studies curriculum recently approved by the Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) Governing Board on May 13, the Arizona Department of Education launched a formal investigation. On Wednesday, June 11, Arizona State Superintendent Tom Horne held a press conference to announce the findings. He stated that he would report to the federal government that SUSD violated a statement they signed saying they would not teach Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) content.

Horne clarified that his comments were directed at what he called the three “woke” members of the SUSD Governing Board who voted in favor of the curriculum. Superintendent Scott Menzel responded to this characterization, arguing it was unfair and uninformed—particularly without a full review of the 1,250-page textbook. He called such labeling “a problem from his perspective.”

While finding a common definition of “woke” is a bit of a challenge, most would agree that it originally meant being aware of social injustices, particularly around race, and it was rooted in activism. The term has now evolved into a broader often vague term for hyper-awareness of social issues. Critics often say it is dogmatic overreach where someone pushes rigid beliefs or ideologies beyond reason, imposing them on others without flexibility or evidence.

So, is it fair to describe these board members as “woke”?

Board Members Past

When Member Sharkey first announced he was running for the board, he said it was because of the rise in the parents’ rights movement (rights codified in Arizona Revised Statues), which he blamed (without citing any evidence) for the issues plaguing SUSD. He rejects the idea that parents are best positioned to make educational and healthcare decisions for their children, asserting that trained professionals know better. Sharkey’s reluctance to recognize these rights suggests a troubling approach to governance that may not prioritize parental input nor respect their legal parental rights.

Dr. Donna Lewis, SUSD Governing Board President, ran on her years of educational experience, including being selected as the national superintendent of the year during her time at the Creighton School District. Her academic record leaves a lot to be desired with 13% of her students proficient in ELA and 8% in math the year she was selected. Additionally, her leadership style has been criticized for creating a hostile and toxic environment, prompting a formal public apology from a school board member after her departure.

Then there is Dr. Pittinsky, another education professional and an expert in public education with 25 years’ experience. Someone who only publicly revealed the conflict of interest with his business ties with SUSD after he was called out. Someone who thinks so highly of SUSD that he put his kid in a private school rather than SUSD.

All three of these board members ran on “protecting SUSD” and Menzel and his “woke” curriculum of DEI, SEL, and gender identity. So far, they have shown themselves to be a predictable rubber stamp for whatever Menzel wants.

Dogmatic overreach?

Superintendent Menzel’s Past and Controversial Remarks

Superintendent Menzel previously led Michigan’s Washtenaw Intermediate School District, where he emphasized equity, inclusion, and social justice. In an interview before leaving Michigan, Menzel described white supremacy as deeply embedded in the fabric of American society, stating that acknowledging it offers a chance to “dismantle, disrupt, and recreate something that’s socially just and more equitable.”

These comments drew sharp criticism from Arizona GOP legislators, who labeled his statements as divisive and inappropriate for someone in public education.

Read it for yourself:

So, is it proper to label the three board members as “woke”?

I’ll let you draw your own conclusion.

Curriculum Content and Allegations of Bias

In addition to Horne, Maricopa County Sheriff Jerry Sheridan also raised concerns about the new social studies curriculum and the anti-police messages they contain. Examples of anti-police rhetoric include textbook passages noting that “several police killings caused the nation to grapple with systemic racism,” and “Black Lives Matter activists and others argue that the deaths of many Black people were the result of institutional racism.” The text also mentions that Black men are statistically more than twice as likely to be killed by police than white men.

Critics argue these lessons present a one-sided perspective and fail to encourage critical thinking. For example, the curriculum omits key facts in controversial cases, such as the Department of Justice findings in the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri, which concluded that Brown did not have his hands up and was engaged in a physical altercation with the officer trying to take his gun. Likewise, the curriculum does not mention a Harvard study that reportedly found no racial bias in police shootings after examining hundreds of cases.

Menzel has denied that the curriculum is anti-police or promotes indoctrination, insisting it encourages critical thinking and offers diverse perspectives. However, critics argue the content leans more toward ideological teaching than balanced education. Indoctrination, they argue, is defined by presenting only one viewpoint without room for discussion or dissent—contrary to the principles of real education, which promote inquiry and evidence-based analysis.

Again, don’t take my word for it, see for yourself:

Conclusion

Given the content of the curriculum, the past actions of the board members, and Superintendent Menzel’s own public remarks, it seems labeling the board members and even Menzel as “woke” is appropriate.

When Menzel tells you he would never use an anti-police curriculum or that he is promoting critical thinking among students, or there is no evidence to support any of the claims against the curriculum, don’t believe him. He is lying and trying to gaslight you.

It is incumbent on all of us concerned about the future of SUSD to contact the Governing Board members and tell them to withdraw the approval of this radical curriculum. Any purchase orders placed to procure the materials should be canceled.  

SUSD is facing difficult financial challenges caused by declining enrollment, a result of Menzel’s failed policies. Continuing down the path of implementing this curriculum will not only serve to accelerate the declining enrollment but put millions of federal dollars at risk. With the loss of the federal money, can school closures be far behind?

Menzel can continue to lie and push back against the federal government, but he is playing a high-risk game, a game he is likely to lose. He is putting the future of SUSD in jeopardy to satisfy his own ego.  

The Governing Board needs to seriously consider replacing Menzel before he completely destroys SUSD.

Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.

AZFEC: Replacing Coal Energy From Cholla With Solar And Batteries Could End Up Costing Ratepayers Billions

AZFEC: Replacing Coal Energy From Cholla With Solar And Batteries Could End Up Costing Ratepayers Billions

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

Earlier this year, President Trump signed a trio of executive orders aimed at keeping our nation’s vital coal power plants online. In fact, at the signing ceremony, the President explicitly called out one of Arizona’s coal plants by name. He directed Department of Energy Secretary Chris Wright to keep the Cholla Power Plant online and told the workers to remain calm because they are going to have that plant “opening and burning…coal in a very short period of time.”

The Cholla Power Plant is one of many Arizona coal plants that have either been mothballed or slated for retirement in the near future. In 2019, SRP and the other utilities shut down the Navajo Generating Station, resulting in a loss of 2,250 MW of reliable capacity. Earlier this year, an additional 425 MW of generating capacity was taken offline at Cholla. And over the next 6 years, Arizona’s public utilities, as outlined in Integrated Resource Plans recently approved by the Arizona Corporation Commission, plan to shutter every last bit of coal generation in Arizona by 2032. Most alarming is that according to those same Resource Plans, the replacement fuel for this reliable source of energy will be solar, wind, and battery storage, all to meet carbon free “Net Zero” goals that will cost Arizona ratepayers billions and destabilize the grid.

On the same day President Trump signed the coal orders, the Arizona legislature, led by Representative David Marshall, sent a letter to the Department of the Interior urging the Administration to help keep Cholla, and every other coal plant in the state, online. Last month, every Republican in the legislature voted to send HCM2014 to the Corporation Commission, urging them to protect our grid, fight to keep these plants online, and support the Trump Energy Agenda.

What Arizona ratepayers got instead was a late Friday afternoon news dump from Kevin Thompson, Chairman of the Corporation Commission, blasting the idea of reopening Cholla…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>>

The Devil’s Brief: The Abortion Industry Vs. Arizona’s Preborn Children

The Devil’s Brief: The Abortion Industry Vs. Arizona’s Preborn Children

By Katarina White |

The Screwtape Letters is a satirical novel written by C.S. Lewis in which a senior demon advises his nephew on how to lead humans astray. It exposes moral issues by presenting them from evil’s perspective. It made me think about how Uncle Screwtape would react to some of Arizona’s pro-life laws.

My Dear Wormwood,

You are to be congratulated. The filing of Isaacson v. Mayes is shaping up to be one of our most exquisite triumphs.

Our legal allies are moving swiftly now, carving through the last scraps of pro-life resistance like a scalpel through soft tissue. At the top of our target list is that revolting statute, ARS 13-3603.02 — the one that dares to prohibit abortions based on race, sex, or disability. How dare they presume to protect the weak, the imperfect, the unwanted? That law, Wormwood, is an affront to everything we’ve worked for. A child has Down syndrome? Terminate. It’s a girl? Dispose. The father is the wrong skin color? Eliminate. This is not discrimination — it is efficiency. And we must preserve that efficiency at all costs.

One of our most brilliant human thinkers once said, “The demand that defective people be prevented from propagating equally defective offspring is a demand of the clearest reason and if systematically executed represents the most humane act of mankind.” Ah, Hitler — rarely quoted these days, but his reasoning lives on, albeit in more “palatable” packaging.

Even worse, their laws force abortionists to speak truth — to describe fetal development, risks, alternatives, and the heartbeat pulsing inside the mother’s womb. You know how dangerous truth is, Wormwood. A heartbeat can unsettle even the most hardened conscience. The shape of a tiny hand on an ultrasound has undone entire years of our work. We must strip these laws bare. Truth is the Enemy’s weapon. Silence is ours.

They call it “healthcare” — but we know it’s the slow death of conscience. Strip away protections for the preborn, and soon they’ll stop seeing humanity in the elderly, the disabled, the inconvenient. It’s a spectacular unraveling.

Expect a few murmurs — rallies, opinion pieces, even prayers (tedious, as always). But most will hold their tongues. Remind them it’s impolite to bring up such “divisive” topics. Tell them it’s not their place, that moral clarity is rude, and silence is virtuous. Make them believe that speaking truth is worse than allowing evil to proceed. That, Wormwood, is how we keep them docile.

Meanwhile, our friends in the abortion clinics are prepared. Every life ended is another efficient procedure, another soul fed to the furnace. And Arizona — scorched and sleepy — drifts closer to surrender.

Carry on. The womb is nearly ours.

Your devoted uncle,
Screwtape

Katarina White serves as Board Member for Arizona Right to Life. To get involved and stay informed, visit the Arizona Right to Life website.

OUR AMERICA: DOJ Drops Consen⁠t⁠ Decree Aga⁠i⁠ns⁠t⁠ Phoen⁠i⁠x Pol⁠i⁠ce

OUR AMERICA: DOJ Drops Consen⁠t⁠ Decree Aga⁠i⁠ns⁠t⁠ Phoen⁠i⁠x Pol⁠i⁠ce

By Our America |

Last summer, Our America Foundation’s Arizona Hometown Heroes stood up for local control of law enforcement by protesting against the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) consent decree to the Phoenix City Council. 

And now, we have a victory – the DOJ has dropped the decree recommendation for the Phoenix Police Department (PPD).

We applaud this move, as we believe that communities are best served when they have a direct say in how they’re governed.

AZ Free News reported late last month that the DOJ rescinded the report and recommendation, thanks in part to an aggressive advocacy campaign by Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R–AZ-8). Hamadeh met with top DOJ officials, including FBI Director Kash Patel and Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon (an Our America-backed official), to push for the decision.

This reverses a June 2024 move by Biden’s DOJ, which released a highly critical report after concluding an investigation into the PPD. The report alleged a wide variety of misconduct and abuses by the PPD, and the DOJ pressured the city to sign a consent decree.

This decree would have meant federal monitoring and control over the PPD, and was criticized as a clear-cut example of federal overreach. The PPD was already taking proactive steps to fix any existing issues, and the department enjoyed strong support from the local community.

As we’ve written about in the past, similar moves by the DOJ to take control over police departments in Seattle and Albuquerque resulted in an increase in crime. Furthermore, these decrees put additional financial burdens on departments and in effect work as a de-facto way of defunding the police.

Keeping control in the hands of Americans over Washington bureaucrats is a good bet to make communities safer and stronger.

Our America is an organization seeking to build a broad, diverse coalition of people who support those timeless American values that empower everyone to thrive, including: equal opportunity, mutual respect, and freedom of expression.

REP. ANDY BIGGS: The CCP Has No Right To Buy Arizona’s Land

REP. ANDY BIGGS: The CCP Has No Right To Buy Arizona’s Land

By Rep. Andy Biggs (AZ-05) |

When the history of America is written, it will certainly have a section on our global rivalry with our first existential threat of the twenty-first century: The Chinese Communist Party (CCP). In that narrative, we’ll be reminded of the leadership of President Donald J. Trump who has taken the fight to communists who wish to see our nation collapse. When I am the next governor of Arizona, I’ll follow the President’s lead by working with the State Legislature to get a bill prohibiting the ownership of real property in Arizona by the Chinese government passed and signed into law within the first 60 days of my administration.

Unfortunately, right now our country is stuck with too many weak politicians like Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs, who has failed to stand up to China and protect Arizonans.

Through subversion, cutouts, and espionage, China has attempted to infiltrate the United States and develop surveillance capabilities within our own borders. The CCP’s most recently emergent strategy is to purchase land in the United States, preferably near sensitive military sites and energy infrastructure, to garner intelligence.

At the federal level, I cosponsored the No American Land for Communist China Act to address this problem. Many states are also taking action to proscribe purchases to prevent potential probing by the Chinese government. Arizona’s Legislature recently passed, with exclusively Republican votes, Senate Bill 1109, which safeguarded the United States. 

The bill makes clear that the purpose is to protect critical infrastructure, and to, “…protect this state from global security threats and halt or reverse the influence operation of the Chinese Communist Party that poses a risk to the national security of the United States.”

As you might expect, you cannot find a Democrat who supported this national security bill. Nor would you be surprised to see that Governor Hobbs vetoed the bill. 

Why would Governor Hobbs permit our nation’s enemy, and make no mistake that China’s hegemonic ambition defines it as more than an economic competitor, to purchase lands in our state?

Arizona has one of the largest nuclear power plants in the United States. We have multiple dams that ensure Arizona’s water needs are met, as well as military training facilities used by our services and allies. Our state is home to a huge aerospace and defense complex, with military bases housing advanced military machinery and personnel. Our state’s high-tech industry has grown businesses and fostered talent from across the state and country to become a global giant.

Protecting these assets takes strong leadership, but Governor Hobbs has shown to be weak and indecisive when it comes to protecting Arizonans.

She has failed to recognize the CCP threat that has come across our border, which includes Chinese students attending universities that have been arrested for spying on U.S. military bases. The Chinese military has made scale mock-ups of U.S. aircraft carriers ostensibly to train on how to defeat them. And Chinese bellicosity over Taiwan included a demand that the Chinese military prepare to go to war.

And we’ll never forget the most pronounced example of Chinese surveillance in America when a spy balloon was permitted to float over U.S. airspace, oddly taking a course that flew directly over several sensitive United States military assets before being destroyed over the Atlantic Ocean.

Joe Biden failed to act and keep our nation secure, just like his good friend Governor Katie Hobbs has failed to protect the best interests of Arizonans.

The comparisons between Hobbs and Biden are too similar to ignore: weak, timid, and unable to take action that puts our citizens ahead of foreign threats.

Arizona needs a strong, decisive leader who knows what it takes to keep our state safe. It’s clear now that Katie Hobbs would rather protect the CCP than Arizonans.

Rep. Andy Biggs serves Arizona’s Fifth District in the U.S. House of Representatives. He is currently running for Governor of Arizona in the 2026 election.