Mesa Public Schools (MPS) won’t allow military stoles to be worn by graduating students this year.
According to information provided by board membership, MPS defended the rule as a means of honoring their desire to maintain uniformity during graduation ceremonies. MPS policy does not explicitly bar military stoles from being worn, but it does not make an allowance for them, either.
However, MPS policy does allow students eligible to belong to or belonging to a federally recognized Native American tribe to wear traditional tribe regalia or “objects of cultural significance” at their graduation ceremony. The policy noted regalia could include eagle feathers or eagle plumes.
Additionally, students may wear pins or other “small symbol[s]” denoting their accolades related to scholastic or academic honors. These little accolades were allowed to be from “a city, county, state, or tribal government or its representative,” so long as they wouldn’t “detract from the unity achieved by graduates” uniformed in a common cap and gown. The district also drew the line at decorating caps and tassels, unless given permission by their school’s principal.
Governing Board member Rachel Walden opposed the policy and pledged to request Board President Courtney Davis to agendize graduation policy for amending.
“Military students at Mesa Public Schools must be allowed to wear their Military stole at graduation! Yet, students are forbidden to wear this symbol of commitment and achievement for their high school graduation. The community went through this last year and was able to get the ban lifted, yet here we are again,” said Walden. “I’m disappointed that this even needs to be said. To quote our enlisted National Guard student, not wearing the stole ‘disregards the values of honor and achievement that our school purports to uphold.’ There is also a link to his petition in the comments.”
Military students at Mesa Public Schools must be allowed to wear their Military stole at graduation! Yet, students are forbidden to wear this symbol of commitment and achievement for their high school graduation. The community went through this last year and was able to get the… pic.twitter.com/fcmbiHbxhy
As of this report, the petition to allow military stoles at Mesa graduations has reached 250 signatures. The student who launched the petition, Daniela Rascon-Rivas, is a student at Mesa High School and a National Guard member. Rascon-Rivas is also petitioning for the allowance of her to wear cords denoting her accomplishments through the East Valley Institute of Technology (EVIT), a trade school in the area.
According to Walden, last year Red Mountain High School attempted to bar military stoles from their list of allowable graduation attire. Walden advised the board was able to overturn that policy.
The district’s policy on the display of military-related accolades caught the attention of state leaders.
Congressional candidate and former Arizona House Speaker Travis Grantham said allowing graduates to wear their military stoles was a “no brainer.” Grantham is a lieutenant colonel and commander within the Arizona Air National Guard.
“Hopefully the district does the right thing and changes their policy ASAP!” said Grantham.
👇🏻This is a “no brainer” and Mesa Public Schools should let these students wear their military stole. Hopefully the district does the right thing and changes their policy ASAP! https://t.co/gVWmsZDEaN
It was just about 2 years ago that a fury ran through the Mesa Public Schools community over a controversial document that had gone largely unnoticed. That document is titled “Support Plan for Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students” (also called “Guidelines for Support of Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students.”) This plan allows a student who “consistently asserts at school a gender identity that is different from the student’s sex assigned at birth” to “participate in such activities and access such facilities consistent with their gender identity.” (Notice there’s no mention of a parental consent requirement.) This means restrooms, locker rooms, and showers.
There were multiple concerns raised to district leadership regarding the plan. How would non-transgender students be protected and affirmed when someone of the opposite biological sex is now allowed to enter their private spaces such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers?
Numerous stories surfaced reporting females were not eating or drinking during the day to avoid having to use the restrooms, which they were now compelled to share with biological boys. Why was their “safe space” suddenly being violated? Why were they suddenly denied any expectation of privacy that matched their values? Why is there allowance in the document for the district to conceal a student’s transgender ideation and the district’s course of action affirming that ideation from their parents? Does this concealment violate ARS 1-601, Parents Rights Protected? Does this plan amount to providing behavioral health services as defined by the Arizona Behavioral Health Board? District leadership has successfully danced around providing clear, unambiguous answers to these questions. Why? What are they trying to hide from parents?
Even though Superintendent Dr. Andi Fourlis issued carefully worded, yet vague assurances to the contrary, there still remains within the plan/guidelines, allowances to NOT notify parents of their child’s transgender ideations as the district personnel provide “gender affirming care” for the child. A Public Records Request in early 2023 exposed a school counselor who was maintaining a spreadsheet of trans students along with notation as to whether parents knew.
This counselor was informing other staff how to avoid “outing” students to parents when speaking with them. The plan originally included a checkbox for the student to indicate if their parents were to be told.
Additionally, the plan expressly states that although changes to the student’s “preferred name/pronouns” may be made in district records, “parental consent is not required.”
At the governing board meeting on May 9, 2023, (begin at 3:35:25), board member Rachel Walden asked leadership, “What is the criteria for a student to be put on this Transgender Support Plan?”
District general counsel, Kasey King, responded “…there’s not specific criteria. It’s a student who’s requesting to use the restroom of their choice or to designate the pronouns or names of their choice. Also, as a tool to help the student and the school process how that information is going to be shared, IF AT ALL!”
It is student-initiated, primarily. Notice the complete absence of any parental involvement or even notification here.
Mrs. King continued, “I’m thinking at the younger grades, it might be a situation where the student simply starts asking for some accommodations. And as a way to make sure everybody is on the same page, their teacher or counselor might suggest they put it into writing.”
Are you following this? A student at the “younger grades” might ask for transgender accommodations from the school, and the teacher or counselor will suggest putting that student on a Transgender Support Plan! No parental consent or notification required. Mrs. Walden continued to press for transparency into what is occurring: “There’s nothing in these guidelines about notifying the parents. Isn’t there an opportunity for parental notification process in this?”
Mrs. King: “Parents always have the right under FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) to inspect and review their child’s education records.”
Mrs. Walden responded, “How would they know to ask that?”
Then-board President Marcie Hutchinson chimed in, “I guess they would ‘check in’ with the school.”
So, moms and dads, the only way to know for sure if your child has been placed on a Transgender Support Plan at Mesa Public Schools is for you to “check in with the school.” Since you don’t know the day that this might happen, I suggest you “check in” every day. Don’t expect to be notified otherwise. This is akin to child abuse in many people’s minds, yet the district refuses to make suitable provisions for parental notification, even to this day.
There is, in the old version of the plan/guidelines, a provision for parental notification “if changes are made in Synergy.” But apparently otherwise, mum’s the word.
OLD VERSION
The district has since revised the wording to make sure staff inform students “…that IF they request to change information in Synergy, parent(s) will be notified.”
When I see this, I read “SHHHH! Nobody has to know. Just don’t request a change in Synergy, and it’ll be our secret.”
The other concerning change explicitly states that parental/legal guardian consent “is not required” for a student to request district personnel provide gender affirming care to them.
These changes occurred in July 2024.
NEW VERSION
In a further assault on parental rights, the district has modified the guidelines from the verbiage previously, which stated, “Disclosing confidential student information to others may violate privacy laws” to a more intimidating and yet ambiguous, “Disclosing confidential student information to…parents…may violate privacy laws.”
Are teachers or counselors more likely or less likely to notify parents with this threat of violating privacy laws looming over their heads? I say less likely.
OLD VERSION
NEW VERSION
Then, as if that is not sufficient means for the district to usurp parental authority, Dr. Fourlis and Kacey King have now decided that the transgender plan/guidelines, which have for years resided on the Legal Services webpage on the district website, should be moved to a private internal location, away from public/parent access. When I asked the Governing Board President, Courtney Davis, why the district would make such a move as to lessen transparency, her answer allayed no concerns. “It was moved because it is a tool for school personnel to use to work with transgender students.”
It was always that Mrs. Davis! The only difference is, the public, and more importantly parents, no longer have access to documents describing what could potentially be happening to their child at Mesa Public Schools without their knowledge or consent.
After calling them out on this, Dr. Fourlis and Mrs. King have restored the document to the website, with an interesting change in title. They went from “Guidelines” to “Guidance.” Why that subtle change? For the record, contrary to the wording of Dr. Fourlis’ email, I did not request anything. I simply noted that hiding the document from public view was a “terrible decision.” Apparently, she agreed.
Interesting to note, since this document is considered a “guideline,” or now “guidance” and not a policy, it has not gone before the governing board for approval.
In an attempt to restore parental rights as defined under ARS 1-601, board member Sharon Benson proposed a policy at the April 8, 2025 board meeting which would require parental notification anytime a student indicated to a district employee any transgender ideations. During public comment (starts at 1:59:30), dozens of trans activists showed up in protest. Their overarching message was along the lines of, “If you ‘out’ students, they will be victims of abuse from their parents,” and “School personnel are much better equipped to deal with these issues than parents,” and “It’s not necessary for parents to know about their child’s mental distress.” All patently false statements.
Now, self-proclaimed members of the Communist and Socialist parties weighed in, trying to advance the narrative that children belong to the state, not parents (i.e. parents have no need to know about their child’s mental or emotional distress because the school is taking care of it). This is happening in Mesa folks! Are you paying attention?
It’s time to get involved. Attend district governing board meetings and make your voice heard. It’s critical that we stand for students and for parents.
Ed Steele is a husband, father, grandfather, and Mesa resident with a passion for helping the younger generation succeed in education.
School board elections in Arizona are a non-partisan race, by law. In an ideal world, candidates should be focused on the well-being of students, academic achievement, and facilitating as much parental involvement as possible. That’s definitely true in Mesa, where the school board should be comprised of members who want to ensure that students are educated rather than indoctrinated.
But a recent news item by the local NBC affiliate chose to highlight partisan political party affiliation instead of focusing on how each candidate views their role as a potential Mesa school board member.
The story focused on three candidates running for the Mesa School Board as a slate: Courtney Davis, Josh Chilton, and Lacy Chaffee. Courtney Davis, in particular, is a current board member who was appointed by Steve Watson to replace Laura Ellingson in August 2023. The night she was sworn in was the first time she had ever attended a Mesa School Board meeting. The legacy media conveniently left this out. But that’s not all they left out.
In a typical biased move that’s become commonplace for the legacy media, the two opposing candidates—Sharon Benson and Ed Steele—were not offered an opportunity to be interviewed for the story. On top of that, they were given only a few hours to respond before the segment aired.
But here’s the truth about the three slate candidates. Davis, Chilton, and Chaffee have focused their campaign on social issues rather than actual student achievement. All three candidates have endorsements and stated positions that run counter to the values that are expected of elected school board officials. They all support males in female spaces, special transgender rights, Critical Race Theory, and eliminating school choice.
Davis, Chilton, and Chaffee have also been endorsed by Legislative District 9 Democrats, the anti-school choice group “Save Our Schools,” and the teachers’ union, Mesa Education Association.
Digging deeper, the Arizona Education Association endorsed legislative candidate Lorena Austin who promotes drag show fundraisers for her campaign. They have also endorsed Proposition 139, which will allow abortion up to fetal viability and would allow minors to get an abortion without any parental involvement, including notification.
Right now, the Mesa School District faces some significant headwinds with declining enrollment, reduced funding, and competition for students and teachers from charter and private schools. Shouldn’t that be the top priority rather than radical social issues?
Fixing Mesa’s problems requires new board members like Sharon Benson, who brings both a teaching background and small business expertise, and Ed Steele, who brings a wealth of business expertise and problem-solving ability to tackle the problems facing the Mesa district. Both Sharon and Ed have had children enrolled in the Mesa district and have a vested interest in keeping the district at the forefront of educational excellence.
Their goal is to support academic excellence, parental involvement, fiscal responsibility, teachers, safety, transparency, and accountability.
For this election, voters need to decide what they want: a radically aligned slate that is more interested in indoctrinating rather than educating students, or Sharon Benson and Ed Steele, who have the expertise, conservative values, and vision to keep Mesa Public Schools a leader in public education.
Dennis Liles is a Mesa resident and Precinct Committeeman in Legislative District 10.
I’ve consulted with several Maricopa County constituents and learned very few of us understand the role and responsibilities of the Superintendent of Schools. One thing’s for sure, we cannot allow a simpleton to remain in office. For those unaware, Maricopa County Superintendent Steve Watson—who was elected in 2016 and re-elected in 2020—is currently under heavy scrutiny for fraud.
The “May 2024 Maricopa County Regional School District Performance Audit” cites multiple findings of budget mismanagement and suspicious financial activities. MCRSD, which includes the Juvenile Detention Education Program and the Maricopa Accommodation Schools, are directly under Watson’s governance. Below are a few highlighted results from the performance audit:
“District administration and plant operations costs for the last two full fiscal years exceed the state average for school districts…Recommendations: Establish an expenditure budget for the Schools that include budget balance carry forward for which cash reserves are on deposit…Obtain training on school district budget and finance.”
“Budgeting practices are ineffective and do not prevent overspending and cash deficits. Lack of understanding and communication regarding the District’s budget have led to excessive expenditures and cash deficits…Recommendations: Ensure the correct budget is uploaded to [the Arizona Department of Education]…Monitor cash levels to prevent interest charges assessed on line of credit usage.”
“The District did not comply with State procurement guidelines when executing purchases in excess of required thresholds…Recommendations: Comply with [Arizona Administrative Codes] and [Uniform System of Financial Records] prior to executing purchases…Ensure curriculum is approved by the District Governing Board.”
In 2022, the Accommodation School District spent $2 million over its budget. Also, on July 17, 2024, ABC 15 Arizona politely reported, “Maricopa County school districts are needing to shell out about $150 million after a judge says a group of property owners were improperly taxed…that money needs to be returned as part of a lawsuit.”
What good is a county superintendent who refuses to comply with state laws and regulations? Not only is Watson fiscally incompetent, he’s also a Republican hack who cannot be trusted to appoint conservative candidates to school boards.
Many constituents have mentioned to me that Watson’s strategy as a follower of Mormon religion is to deliberately select Mormons to serve in office. I will say this appears to be the case with Courtney Davis in Mesa Public Schools (MPS) and Rebecca Proudfit in Peoria Unified School District (PUSD). And, like Watson, they identify as conservatives while governing as liberals.
When the time came for Watson to fill an MPS Governing Board vacancy, he intentionally bypassed candidate Ed Steele—a strong conservative, community leader and runner up during the 2022 midterm elections. Before administering the oath of office to Davis, Watson told constituents:
“This is really hard because when I say good and nice things about somebody who I hold in high esteem, other people think that’s umm — they might feel like I’m putting other people down. And that’s not the case. Here in [MPS], we had 49 people initially apply for this vacancy…and so, Courtney is great. She’s going to do a terrific job. And that’s not to say that the other people were terrible…In choosing Courtney, I had to pick somebody, right? Somebody has to get this position…Just understand this isn’t putting anybody else down.”
Seriously!? What public official talks like this!?
Watson gave a social-emotional speech instead of telling the people exactly who Courtney Davis is. What qualifications put her above the other 48 applicants? Did she attend and speak at any MPS board meetings before the appointment? Are her kids even enrolled in Mesa’s public schools? What are her core values? What leadership experience does she possess? Surely, religious affiliation wasn’t Watson’s only prerequisite for appointing her…right?
Well, it’s been a year and Mesa constituents now know where Davis’ values truly lie. From seconding the reelection of corrupt Marcie Hutchinson for MPS board president, to campaigning alongside Democrats, Davis—who coincidentally registered as “nonpartisan”—is decidedly left. Make no mistake, Ed Steele and Sharon Benson are the trustworthy conservatives running for Mesa Board of Education.
In PUSD, Watson intentionally bypassed several qualified, conservative candidates (namely Jeff Tobey) to appoint Proudfit. Over the past nine months, she has wittingly veered left.
Despite all this and more, some LD leaders in the West Valley have forfeited wisdom and discernment. There are talks of tainting the so-called “golden ticket” by promoting Proudfit as a conservative PUSD candidate. And for no other reason than she’s a nice person and she’s well-liked by affluent Establishment Republican types (a.k.a. RINOs). This is asinine. We only need to fill two seats for a conservative majority. Make no mistake, Jeff Tobey and Janelle Bowles are the only trustworthy conservatives running for Peoria school board.
For the record, I don’t vote for people because they’re nice or popular. I’m highly suspicious of representatives who claim to align with one party but are constantly praised by the opposition. I also refuse to cast a vote for anyone who doesn’t have time to run a campaign. Furthermore, if I were a respected public servant, I would not waste my endorsements on Democrats (a topic for another day). This foolishness is not a strategy. Just because you like someone and they have an “R” behind their name doesn’t mean throw away the Constitution and common sense.
This November, I’m calling on Arizonans to vote policies over personalities; vote for deep-rooted values over shallow virtues. Don’t just check a box because the person’s name is familiar. Do your research, increase your voter IQ, and vet the candidates, regardless of your relationship with them.
Join the conversation with two conservative candidates for Maricopa County Superintendent on Sunday, July 28 @ 3pm.
Tiffany is the Founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education, a grassroots advocate for families, educators, and school board members. For nearly two decades, Tiffany’s creative writing pursuits have surpassed most interests as she continues to contribute to her blog Bigviewsmallwindow.com. She encourages everyday citizens to take an active role in defending and preserving American values for future generations.
