by Mike Bengert | Aug 23, 2024 | Opinion
By Mike Bengert |
As Scottsdale parents, grandparents, community members, and taxpayers evaluate their choices for school board, it’s important to remember that your vote reflects not just your choice of a candidate, but also the values and policies they represent.
One group of candidates—Michael Sharkey, Donna Lewis, and Matt Pittinsky—are endorsed by the Scottsdale Education Association (SEA), which is affiliated with the Arizona Education Association (AEA) and the National Education Association (NEA) teachers’ unions. Their campaign suggests they aim to “protect SUSD,” implying they will defend and uphold current policies. This includes supporting Superintendent Dr. Menzel’s agenda, which focuses on “dismantling and disrupting” SUSD to promote social justice and equity.
While Dr. Menzel emphasizes social emotional learning (SEL), diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and gender identity, academic performance in SUSD has declined. Teacher and principal turnover are at an all-time high, and Dr. Menzel’s performance evaluation shows he has failed to meet any of the district’s academic achievement goals. For instance, only 60% of 3rd graders are proficient in English Language Arts (ELA), 46% of 8th graders in math, and just 34% of 9th graders in science.
Michael Sharkey, one of the SEA-endorsed candidates, claims one of his priorities is “Represent With Integrity,” pledging respect, honesty, and transparency. However, his LinkedIn statements suggest a dismissive attitude toward parental input on educational decisions, which raises concerns about his commitment to academic integrity. He says:
“So why am I running? Over the last few years, there’s been an uptick in the ‘parent’s rights’ movement. This is the notion that parents are best situated to make educational and healthcare decisions for their kids. While I am 100% in support of parents working WITH teachers and doctors, I reject the premise that parents know better than experienced/trained professionals.”
Once Sharkey received significant pushback on his post, he quickly rewrote it.
Remember the saying, when someone tells you who they are, believe them.
Dr. Donna Lewis, another SEA-endorsed candidate, highlights her being selected as the 2020-2021 Arizona National Superintendent of the Year while serving as Creighton Superintendent. That year, only 13% of the students enrolled at Creighton were proficient in ELA and only 8% in math. Not exactly superintendent of year numbers.
Her tenure at Creighton School District saw her implement so-called innovative approaches like dual-language, multi-age, and constructivist learning. However, even two years after the COVID-19, union-driven school shutdown, academic proficiency rates at Creighton remained dismally low, raising questions about the effectiveness of these innovations. In 2023, ELA proficiency was 17% and math 12%. So much for the innovative approaches.
Why would SUSD parents and Scottsdale community members vote to elect someone to the school board with this less-than-impressive past performance as a superintendent and no past or present ties to SUSD? How long has she even lived in Scottsdale or the SUSD?
Matt Pittinsky, the third SEA-endorsed candidate, says he supports neighborhood schools yet chose to send one of his kids to Brophy, which could indicate a lack of commitment to improving SUSD from within.
The SEA-backed candidates often promise to engage with parents respectfully and transparently but simultaneously criticize those who express concerns or exercise their legal rights in education. This disconnect between their promises and actions reflects a broader trend of undermining parental involvement and accountability. The Scottsdale community has resisted SEA-endorsed candidates, with two other candidates winning the last election.
At the last SUSD Board meeting, a Board member read a Let’s Talk message from a Scottsdale Unified employee revealing the employee’s fears about speaking out against current administration policies:
“… in light of the current climate where many of us feel apprehensive about speaking out. It’s become increasing evident that dissent with the current administration may result in severe consequences.”
So much for the SUSD value of inclusion, where “we create an equitable environment where everyone is respected, is treated with dignity, and has a sense of belonging.”
We cannot afford to elect a slate of SEA-backed progressive candidates who will only continue to “protect” Dr. Menzel and his failed policies.
We need a Governing Board dedicated to academic excellence, parental rights, fiscal responsibility, and school safety.
Gretchen Jacobs, Jeanne Beasley, and Drew Hassler, the Just Be Honest team, would provide that for the SUSD Governing Board.
Their campaign website is SUSD Strong. They don’t want to “protect” the status quo. They want to change it.
They care about the district and have a plan to focus on academics over activism, be honest with parents, respect their right to have a primary role in their child’s education, be good stewards of taxpayer money, bring fiscal responsibility to the district, and improve safety and security for all students and staff, not only on campus but whenever they are involved with a district event or service.
If you want to see a Strong SUSD, Gretchen Jacobs, Jeanne Beasley, and Drew Hassler will make this a reality.
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
by Tamra Farah | Aug 22, 2024 | Opinion
By Tamra Farah |
The author of this opinion piece would like to clarify that the title refers to individuals like Aaron Dunton and does not apply to any other individuals named in this article. In addition, the reference to sexually grooming kids concerns encouraging LGBTQIA gender identity considerations. Further, the mention of sexualizing kids refers specifically to encouraging kids to access the specific library books indicated and not to anything else.
Concerns over sexual grooming in Arizona schools and inappropriate educational agendas have intensified. The use of grooming materials and activities by teachers, the Arizona Education Association (AEA) agenda, and the damning Department of Education’s Enforcement Action report on sexual misconduct in schools are telling.
Not in Our Schools recently outlined concerns over reported misconduct and the promotion of LGBTQ and social justice agendas in Arizona schools. There are also concerns about the growing influence of LGBTQ and social justice agendas in Mesa Public Schools (MPS) through the actions of teachers and organizations like GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network).
Some Mesa teachers reportedly use their roles to promote LGBTQ-related content and activities in the face of new district policies restricting teacher involvement in non-academic clubs. Activities cited by Not in Our Schools also reveal that Mrs. Tami Staas engages in “grooming” students for sexual behaviors and gender transitioning without parental knowledge, using platforms like Synergy to hide information from parents. Mrs. Staas is said to introduce pronouns and LGBTQ+ symbols in her classroom, causing concern among parents.
Not in Our Schools also reports that the AEA prioritizes social agendas over academic achievement and influences school board elections to further these goals. Allegations are made about the AEA’s involvement in supporting abortion access and pushing for laws that promote gender transitioning in schools. Parents must be cautious about the school system and the influence of organizations like the AEA, and should thoroughly research candidates before voting in the upcoming school board elections.
Another concern involves the social-emotional learning (SEL) framework, which is used to push LGBTQ agendas. Programs like “Everybody Matters” indoctrinate students into LGBTQ lifestyles, further eroding parents’ influence in the education system. Additionally, the involvement of organizations like GLSEN and the Arizona School Board Association (ASBA) promotes LGBTQ content and obscures it from parents. Finally, the Mesa Public Schools Governing Board has been called out for supporting programs that weaken family structures and increase LGBTQ influence in schools.
Not only are teachers identified as using sexualizing materials in school, but just a few years ago a flurry of news called out Aaron Dunton, a former teacher at Higley High School in Gilbert, Arizona, who was arrested after a months-long investigation revealed his alleged inappropriate relationship with a 14-year-old student. Dunton resigned after the allegations surfaced, having taught at the school since July 2021. During the investigation, another victim accused Dunton of inappropriate incidents in 2019 when he was a teacher at Power Ranch Elementary. The second victim was 11 years old at the time. Dunton was facing multiple charges, including aggravated assault, witness tampering, and contributing to delinquency and dependency, until the Maricopa County District Attorney dropped the charges. Speculation is that there was no law to convict Dunton at the time. Now, there is hope that the anti-grooming law will be implemented soon.
Dunton is just one teacher among many seeking to mistreat students sexually. The Arizona Department of Education 2023 Enforcement Action Report indicates an 184% increase in sexual teacher discipline-related cases from 2012 to 2023. Those are cases that were recognized and resulted in the discipline of perpetrators. Imagine how many more teachers, coaches, and other school officials may go unrecognized as sexual predators of students.
Some consider HB2310, referred to as the Child Enticement Bill or the anti-grooming bill introduced by Representative Travis Grantham, as a tool to prosecute sexual predators like Dunton. HB2310, which will go into effect next month, strengthens protections for children against enticement and grooming. Going into effect next month, the bill makes it a fourth or fifth-degree felony to intentionally lure, solicit, or entice a minor into committing illegal sexual acts or actions that could lead to sexual exploitation or abuse. It also includes provisions for offenses committed through electronic communications. The legislation increases penalties for these crimes, providing better legal protection for children in Arizona.
Beyond respect for this prosecutorial law, the governing boards in Arizona school districts and the Arizona Department of Education are responsible for ensuring guardrails and accountability in schools to protect children. But it doesn’t stop there. Parents are vital in guiding their children to make safe and responsible decisions at school and online. Parents can encourage their children to protect themselves and others, understand harmful behaviors, and report incidents to parents and school officials immediately.
Here are suggested steps parents can advise their kids to take at school:
1. Understand Consent and Boundaries: Encourage your child to be aware of the power they have not to consent and the legal consequences of inappropriate sexual conduct by an adult. Ensure your kids understand that boundaries matter in physical and digital communication. Reinforce this by having regular conversations about consent and why respecting their personal space and boundaries is essential.
2. Be Mindful of Online Behavior: Advise your child to think critically about how they interact online, particularly with social media or text messaging. Teach them never to share personal or explicit content with others and to be cautious when interacting with people they do not know well. They should also understand that even consensual acts, such as sharing inappropriate images, can have severe legal consequences. Parents can support this by discussing the real risks of digital communication and the importance of privacy.
3. Report Suspicious Behavior: Make sure your child knows that if they encounter inappropriate behavior, such as an adult or peer asking them to send inappropriate images or engage in risky sexual acts, they should report it immediately to a trusted adult at school, such as a counselor or teacher, or use an anonymous reporting tool if available. Reinforce that reporting these incidents is crucial for their safety and protecting others from potential harm.
4. Stay Informed About Friendships and Relationships: Parents should encourage their children to surround themselves with friends who respect boundaries and engage in safe, responsible behavior. Advise them to avoid risky situations or peer pressure and to feel confident in saying “no” to uncomfortable requests, whether in person or online. By fostering open communication with your child, you can help them navigate complex social situations and ensure they understand their rights and responsibilities in relationships.
5. Learn About the Law: Encourage your child to become familiar with the legal consequences outlined in the amended Arizona statutes, particularly regarding age differences in relationships and digital safety. Understanding the law can empower them to make responsible choices. Parents can help by discussing the specific legal consequences of child enticement, age proximity laws, and what qualifies as inappropriate behavior.
6. Practice Digital Safety: Advise your child never to share personal passwords, account details, or private information online. Reinforce that they should never engage with unknown people online, especially if the conversation turns inappropriate or uncomfortable.
By teaching children about consent, online safety, reporting suspicious behavior, and advocating for themselves, parents can help them align their actions with appropriate behavior and relationships and create a secure school environment that is in accordance with Arizona’s laws to protect minors.
Tamra Farah has twenty years of experience in public policy and politics, focusing on protecting individual liberty and promoting limited government. She has worked at the senior director and advisor level for Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Moms for America, and pregnancy centers. Tamra currently directs SMART Families Network at Arizona Women of Action.
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Aug 20, 2024 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
Every election cycle, out-of-state special interest groups spend millions of dollars in Arizona to buy their initiatives onto our ballot. It often takes just a couple million dollars—pocket change to California billionaires—to pay a few hundred circulators to collect signatures. And they usually flood the streets with paid circulators in just Phoenix and Tucson, stripping all other Arizonans from having a voice in the process.
Not every state has a citizen initiative process. In fact, less than half (20) allow for citizen initiative amendments to state law. Arizona is even more unique because in 1998, the Arizona voters amended the constitution with the “Voter Protection Act,” preventing the legislature from amending any measure passed on the ballot unless they obtain a ¾ majority and the amendment “furthers the purpose” of the initiative. In effect, this means that anything passed on the ballot must go back to the ballot for future changes, much like a constitutional amendment.
Of those 20 states with a citizen initiative process, 11 have a signature distribution requirement. This means that in those states, the signatures cannot all be collected in just one city or major county, like they currently can here in Arizona. Instead, initiative proponents need to gain support from diverse regions of the state.
It’s time for Arizona to join them, and we can by adopting a Geographic Distribution requirement for signatures…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by Paul Parisi | Aug 19, 2024 | Opinion
By Paul Parisi |
A modern-day example of voter integrity is the picture of an Iraqi woman holding up her finger colored in purple indelible ink, indicating that she voted. In 2005, an Iraqi woman posed for an iconic picture after leaving a polling station in Southern Iraq in the country’s first free election in over a half-century. She did so in defiance of deadly suicide bombings and mortar strikes at polling stations.
The recorded history of democracy dates back to the 5th century in ancient Greece. The word democracy is derived from two Greek words – demos, which means people and kratos, which means rule. In the first elections in Athens, only the ruling class could vote.
Even though the United States of America is a democratic country, the path to “one person, one vote” has been a checkered one. In 1789, when the US Constitution was ratified, most states only allowed white landowners to vote.
The 15th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1870, gave Black men the right to vote. It wasn’t until 1920 when the 19th Amendment was passed that women in all states were allowed to vote. The passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 put teeth in prohibiting racial discrimination when voting.
Though we have come a long way since the concept of democracy was born, voter integrity is still on the forefront. The recent phenomena of widespread mail-in ballots have created a whole new potential of voter fraud. Ballot harvesting, which is legal in many states, puts the concept of the secret ballot into question. Is the person filling out the ballot actually the person registered to vote?
Congress has recently passed the Safeguard American Voters Eligibility Act (SAVE). This bill is waiting to be heard in the Senate. The act requires that all people registering to vote provide proof of citizenship in federal elections. Though it’s already against the law for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, the National Voter Eligibility Act of 1993 prohibits states from confirming citizenship status in federal elections.
On August 1, 2024, the 9th Circuit Court put a stay on a recent Arizona law that required showing proof of citizenship in all elections including federal. In 2020, 11,600 individuals voted in Arizona on federal only ballots without showing proof of citizenship. The 9th Circuit Court decision is now being appealed to the US Supreme Court.
With the recent influx of undocumented individuals entering the United States, the importance of citizens only voting is a front burner issue that the SAVE Act might resolve. Just showing ID when registering to vote and casting your ballot at the polls will bring back a level of confidence in our elections.
With stronger legislation addressing voter integrity, Americans may have even more trust in our elections—akin to the Iraqis proudly holding up their purple-stained fingers.
Paul Parisi is the Arizona Grassroots Director for Our America.
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Aug 17, 2024 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
The people of Arizona deserve elections that are free, fair, transparent, and lawful. As the top election official in our state, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes should be working every day to ensure this happens. And he should be providing an Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) that gives impartial direction to county recorders to ensure uniform and correct implementation of election law.
This shouldn’t be that hard…or controversial.
But Adrian Fontes took it upon himself to produce one of the most radical EPMs in Arizona’s history. In fact, several of the “rules” in his EPM even go as far as to criminalize activity that is protected under the First Amendment—creating an unconstitutional chilling effect on protected political speech. Apparently, Adrian Fontes hasn’t read the United States Constitution or the Arizona Constitution.
Because of this illegal EPM, we sued him. And last week, a Maricopa County Superior Court ruled in our favor, finding that Fontes’ EPM contains speech restrictions that violate the Arizona Constitution, misstatements and modifications of statutes, and failures to identify distinctions between guidance and legal mandates.
So, how did Fontes respond? Did he realize the error of his ways? Will he now properly understand his role and amend the EPM to align with the law? No. Instead Adrian Fontes has responded how you would expect someone to respond when he knows he can’t win. He’s resorted to maligning our organization in the media…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | Aug 15, 2024 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
America’s athletes once again excelled at the 2024 Olympic games. Without the benefit of massive government-controlled sports programs enjoyed by many of their competitors, they proved their superiority while representing their homeland with sportsmanship and respect.
It’s not jingoistic to point out that America, in spite of some worrisome decline, is still number one in many other spheres. In terms of military might, industrial capacity, and technological innovation, we enjoy preeminence.
Yet our educational system, which in the long run may matter most, is below mediocre. We consistently score below average in math and literary achievement tests versus students from other developed countries.
Worse, we are producing graduates with scant knowledge of their own history, ignorant of the political and economic principles that created their privileged world. Many seem emotionally fragile, enthralled with identity politics and unable to tolerate those with opinions different from their own.
The reason for this is no mystery. American education policymaking is dominated by the federal Department of Education (DOE). The department was created by President Jimmy Carter in gratitude to the teachers’ unions for their support in the 1976 election. It has been the gift that keeps on giving as the DOE has faithfully represented the unions’ interests ever since.
Unfortunately, the union/DOE priorities are more directed to sweeping left-wing political agendas than the education of America’s school children. For example, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona enthusiastically supports radical gender ideology.
At this year’s “Trans Day of Visibility,” he advised children that choosing and changing their own gender is expressing the “gift to see things as they could be.” Our chief educator would better serve children by encouraging them to see things as they are and avoid life choices they may bitterly regret later.
Cardona also has strong feelings that teachers, not parents, should direct children’s education, even where values and morals are concerned. “Teachers know what is best for their kids because they work with them every day,” he assured us in a since deleted tweet.
The two largest teachers’ unions, the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), exposed their near total disregard for the educational progress of their charges during the recent Covid epidemic. They refused to provide in-person teaching long after the scientific evidence was clear that no harm came to children from school attendance.
AFT President Randi Weingarten, in her address at its recent annual conference, didn’t bother to address the enormous educational deficiencies caused by the lockout or exhort her members to focus on the needs of students struggling to catch up academically. Instead, she ranted hysterically about the “violence and fascism” looming if Trump were to win the presidential election. The main obstacle to educational success she perceived was those who question the resource materials that her unionized teachers select for their students of any age.
These unions’ all-purpose remedy for academic shortcomings is more funding. Yet decades of funding increases have produced no positive results.
For example, the Chicago Teachers Union, holding that testing is “junk science rooted in white supremacy,” argued against reopening schools on the grounds that resuming teaching was mere “sexism, racism and misogyny.” Instead, they demanded a $51,000 salary increase, 45 additional days off, and more annual LBGTQ training.
The result: the district now spends $29,028 per student, a 97 percent increase since 2012. Yet during that time, proficiency in math has dropped 78 percent from an already low level and reading proficiency has declined 63 percent. In other words, Chicago public school students are being sent into the world illiterate and mathematically incompetent. But their teachers are well paid.
America has no prospect of improving our educational system until the DOE and the unions are stripped of their influence. It won’t be easy. Realistically this is totally impossible under a Democrat administration, given the strong bonds between the unions and their captive party.
In its 60 plus years of existence, the DOE has failed to provide any academic benefits for our students. The consequences are now becoming apparent. Somehow, we must find the will to eliminate the Department and move forward.
It’s for the children. And the future of America.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
