Recent filings show Mesa City Councilwoman Julie Spilsbury raising $94,207 for her November 4 recall defense, including several Democratic donors and aligned figures.
Spilsbury, a two-term council member, entered the reporting period with a remaining balance of $1,631 from January filings before piling on over $90k in donations. Her total raised now exceeds her 2023 re-election campaign by nearly $30,000. She has reportedly spent $32,866 during the period, including $28,700 on consultant services.
Among Spilsbury’s donors are Tim Stringham, a Tempe Navy veteran and unsuccessful Democratic candidate for Maricopa County Recorder; Jennifer Pawlik, former Chandler Democratic state representative; and other individuals with Democratic ties.
Stringham contributed an unspecified amount, Pawlik gave $100, and former Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer gave $1,000, as reported by The Mesa Tribune.
Spilsbury also received $1,500 from the John Giles for Mayor Committee. Giles served as Mesa mayor for a decade before leaving office in January 2024 and has vocally supported both former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris in their presidential campaigns.
In addition to the others named, Councilwoman Spilsbury’s donor list includes: Colleen Wheeler, a Mesa healthcare executive ($4,250); Yasser Sanchez, a Gilbert immigration attorney ($3,500); David Johnson, a Mesa real estate broker ($2,500); David Stahle, a Mesa financial consultant ($2,500); Mary “Marcie” Hutchinson, Mesa Public Schools Governing Board member ($1,000); Stan Barnes, Mesa Republican political consultant ($500); Sean Lake, Mesa land-use attorney ($500); Dennis Kavanaugh, former Mesa councilman ($100); Dr. Andi Fourlis, former Mesa Public Schools superintendent ($100); Lacy Chaffee, Mesa Public Schools Governing Board member ($100); and Richard Humpherys, husband of Gilbert Public Schools Governing Board member Jill Humpherys ($50).
The councilwoman also received $17,300 from political action committees, including $6,750 from United Mesa Firefighters, $6,750 from Moms Fed Up, and $2,500 from Country First.
Taylor, a political newcomer, reported expenditures of $5,717, including $4,072 to Mesa Sign Shop and $900 to Moir & Associates for consulting.
Taylor’s donors include: Earl Taylor, a Mesa retiree and founder of Heritage Academy charter school ($3,200); Scott Grainger, a Mesa forensic engineer ($2,000); David Winstanley, a Mesa retiree ($1,042); David Cummard, a Mesa insurance CEO ($1,000); Joseph Hughes, a Gilbert retiree ($1,000); and Melody Whetstone, who ran against Spilsbury in the 2023 primary ($105).
Taylor received $5,500 from PACs, including $5,000 from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club and $500 from the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona.
The recall petition, initiated by a resident with assistance from Turning Point USA, gathered 5,235 signatures, of which Maricopa County verified 3,858. The petition accuses Spilsbury of using her office to advance private interests, citing her votes in favor of a temporary homeless shelter in District 2, a council pay raise, and increases in residential and commercial utility rates. The shelter vote passed 4-3; the pay raise and utility rate increases passed unanimously 7-0.
The @TPAction_ East Valley #ChaseTheVote team is in your local neighborhood to FINISH what we started.
We RECALLED Spilsbury, and now we’re going to REPLACE her.
Spilsbury’s support for an anti-discrimination ordinance extending protections to groups, including gender identity, has also been referenced in the recall effort. Taylor has connected Spilsbury’s shelter vote to homelessness issues in Mesa.
In December 2023, residents at a council meeting criticized Spilsbury and former Mayor John Giles for supporting Vice President Kamala Harris and other Democratic candidates in the presidential election. The Republican committees of Legislative Districts 9 and 10 passed resolutions censuring Spilsbury for campaigning on behalf of multiple Democrats.
In the July 2023 primary for District 2, Spilsbury received 8,120 votes, or 65.91%, out of 12,322 total votes cast. District 2 has 49,329 registered voters, according to the Mesa City Clerk.
Spilsbury and her supporters have canvassed neighborhoods every Saturday since early September. Taylor has conducted door-to-door outreach and met with voters in the district.
The city estimates the special election will cost at least $104,577. The winner will take office the day after the vote count. If Spilsbury retains her seat, she will serve through January 2029; if Taylor wins, she will complete the remainder of the term.
K-12 superintendents are the CEOs of public schools, spearheading a cabinet of professionals who manage district resources and implement safety and academic programs. Superintendent qualifications may include a doctorate of philosophy (Ph.D.) or education (Ed.D.) and some experience in finance, communications, and organizational leadership.
Superintendents are paid exorbitant salaries topping close to $1 million, depending on the district size. This amount does not include performance bonuses, work vehicles, mobile devices, or lavish vacation packages—er, I mean, “out-of-state professional development conferences.” Whether superintendents do good or evil, employment agreements stipulate that they receive full compensation and benefits, largely at the taxpayers’ expense.
Arizona public schools are home to some of the most ethically challenged and morally questionable high-level administrators. K-12 superintendents across the Valley primarily care about aesthetics and the “business of the district.” Below is an incomplete list of superintendents with controversial reputations, alongside the elected officials who bow to their almighty paper-pushing agenda.
Newly hired Higley USD Superintendent David Loutzenheiser now sits on the dais with governing board members, leaving his cabinet on the floor. This arrangement was approved by the purple-haired board president, Amanda Wade, who once advocated for striking the word “immoral” from teacher-student communication policies. Radical board member Tiffany Schultz—who once declared that professional dress codes “sexualize children’s bodies”—backed Wade’s decision to disrupt the chain of command. No one but Loutzenheiser benefited from this stunt. He set a bad precedent for what’s to come. Read more in AZ Free News.
Earlier this year, a resident in the Cartwright Elementary School District sued two board members for nepotism, citing A.R.S. 15-421. Cassandra Hernandez (elected at age 19) is the daughter of board president and state representative Lydia Hernandez (D). Despite using different addresses on their campaign applications, constituents cried foul and called for their resignations. The Hernandezes led a charge to install the disgraced former Maricopa County Superintendent Steve Watson as district superintendent. Watson is accused of fraud and leaving behind an infestation of financial deficits, lawsuits, and dysfunction in the county office. Cartwright residents have no reason to expect Watson will leave their district any better than he found it.
Deer Valley USD residents constantly complain across social media about Superintendent Curtis Finch’s dismissive “leadership” style. Residents are also suspicious of Finch’s camaraderie with board president Paul Carver, who once told a room full of conservatives that Finch is the best superintendent in the state. Both men support a twice-failed ballot measure that would allow the district to exceed its budget. Finch defended the 15% override, stating: “The anti-public school movement is growing here in Arizona, which is a crime against humanity.” Whether or not good things are happening in DVUSD is up for interpretation, but declining enrollment numbers are the telltale sign of a district in freefall. Go Parents!
No list of sketchy superintendents is complete without Scottsdale USD’s Scott Menzel. He is a freak show in his own right, accounting for the majority of the district’s media exposure. Menzel is widely known for shaming white people who don’t feel guilty about their skin color. Before vacating their seats, debased board members Zach Lindsay, Libby Hart-Wells, and Julie Cienawski extended Menzel’s contract through 2025. Under his “leadership,” SUSD chartered more student-led sexuality clubs, adopted an anti-police curriculum, and circulated hundreds of pornographic books in school libraries. As a result, in 2024, the Arizona School Administrators organization proudly named Menzel the National Superintendent of the Year (this title must be reserved for clowns).
Peoria USD has a slightly better handle on its administration problem since board president Heather Rooks removed Superintendent K.C. Somers from the dais. This establishes a clear separation of employer and employee while respecting the expertise each brings to the district. Unfortunately, though, Somers is developing a reputation for operating in subtle forms of manipulation and subversion, as if he’s trying to sabotage the board members he can’t control. I once attended a meeting where Somers yowled at board members when they ripped off the COVID-19 funding band-aid. Interestingly, before coming to Arizona, Somers was the superintendent of a Colorado school district steeped in scandal and cover-up. He would do well to note that PUSD residents won’t sit for that.
(Dis)honorable Mentions: Tolleson Union HS Superintendent Jeremy Calles morally and financially bankrupted his district. Former Mesa Public Schools Supt. Andi Fourlis oversaw an untold number of social gender transitions without parental knowledge. Tucson USD Supt. Gabriel Trujillo encouraged and attended a student-led drag show on campus, even after one teen was sexually abused by a high school counselor who organized the opening event. Chandler USD Supt. Frank Narducci declared a “week of kindness” and distributed 9-1-1 stickers after unchecked bullying led to one student’s murder and another student’s suicide. There’s more, but we’re out of time.
Those who can’t get elected apply for high-power jobs. Most K-12 superintendents have no campaign grit and no winning personality. Thus, they depend on compromised board members to execute their agenda. Superintendents don’t represent the whole community—they represent the educated community. They may be intellectual experts, but they don’t swear an oath to the U.S. Constitution, and they are not the final governing authority.
The board of education—elected officials who report to taxpayers (that’s you!)—hires the superintendent, and they ultimately decide what to approve or reject. No one is demanding perfection. Arizona families simply want integrity, transparency, and common sense. K-12 community members who experience dissatisfaction with bloated, overcompensated administrative teams should call, email, request meetings, alert the media, and speak at school board meetings. When superintendents refuse to operate within the scope and ability of their job description, expose them.
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.
Positive education experiences from the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s are dwindling away. Today, students are facing unprecedented onslaughts of inappropriate attention and criminal behaviors at the hands of district representatives and staff members. Public schools are no longer safe for children. These government indoctrination camps now exist to create and perpetuate cycles of crises while producing a victimized citizenry that’s controlled by fear.
Child abuse is increasing at alarming rates as a growing number of educators and administrators commit atrocious acts against their students. These incidents range from emotional to psychological to illicit sexual encounters. In some cases, predators are impregnated by their victims and vice versa. If that’s not enough, Biden’s new Title IX regulations effectively remove privacy and safety barriers between males and females on school campuses.
According to a report from The Federalist, one in 10 students are sexually abused by teachers. These findings agree with a 2017 case study from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service that revealed 10% of K-12 students will fall prey to sexual impropriety by a school employee. Furthermore, CBSNews quoted an estimate from the Department of Education (DOE) that said “12% of all public school students in the United States experience sexual misconduct by the time they graduate high school.”
The Federalist declared:
“Every day millions of parents put their children under the care of public school teachers, administrators, and support staff. Their trust, however, is frequently broken by predators…in what appears to be the largest ongoing sexual abuse scandal in our nation’s history. Given the roughly 50 million students in U.S. K-12 schools each year, the number of students who have been victims of sexual misconduct by school employees is probably in the millions each decade…For a variety of reasons…elected or appointed officials, along with unions or lobbying groups…have fought to keep the truth hidden from the public.”
For clarification: Out of 50 million children enrolled in public schools each year—between five and six million are sexually abused by a teacher or district staff member! Unfortunately, these statistics most likely represent a mere fraction of sex crimes that are never reported or investigated.
According to CBS, Redlands Unified School District (RUSD) paid out over $45 million to settle multiple cases of child sexual abuse dating back to the late 1990s. The report said the district repeatedly failed to take action against predators on their payroll, opting instead to relocate these criminals to different schools or nearby districts. The CBS documentary “Pledge of Silence” further exposed RUSD’s cover up of rape and sexual abuse that occurred between 1999 and 2022.
The DOE is still investigating hundreds of sex crimes and Title IX violations that allegedly occurred on school campuses across the nation.
District policies and school libraries are breeding grounds for sexual grooming and child abuse. Parents Defending Education compiled a list of U.S. school districts that actively implement “transgender support plans” and similar gender-based practices. These programs serve as de facto policies and guidelines that enable government employees to engage minors in intimate conversations without parental knowledge or consent. Many students also have access to pornographic reading materials during educational hours.
Mesa Public Schools (MPS) Board President Marcie Hutchison and Superintendent Andi Fourlis have overseen an unknown number of social gender transitions via the district’s secretive transgender support plan. The plan—which was implemented in 2015 and includes a student’s choice of bathrooms—resulted in a recently dismissed lawsuit. Furthermore, a general search of the MPS virtual library reveals numerous LGBT-themed texts including:
Under the leadership of Superintendent Scott Menzel and a radical majority governing board, Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) supplies students with novels that depict young people as victims of rape, incest, sex trafficking, and graphic homosexual activities. The reality of these situations is irrelevant to the fact that parents/guardians have the authority to decide at what age or maturity level their children are introduced to these topics. The existence of such nasty books in K-12 schools draws attention to the motives of district officials who enable and entertain discussions about multiple sexuality disorders, sodomy, and prostitution among children.
The screenshot below features several titles with an “adult” interest level that appear available on SUSD’s virtual library page.
These examples don’t scratch the surface of what’s being forced on children through public education. We are witnessing a federally funded, trauma-infused, demoralization of the next generation. Not nearly enough parents are outraged by this tragedy. Not nearly enough students have been pulled from government indoctrination camps, though some promising trends are starting to emerge.
According to the Heritage Foundation’s “State Report Card,” Arizona ranks #1 for education choice and #2 overall in education freedom. The Washington Post said, “ESAs provide an average of $7,143 for parents of children leaving traditional public schools…Arizona spends about $13,500 per public school student; if everyone opted for ESAs, the state would save money.”
As leftist politicians work hard to demonize and destroy parents’ choice, it’s not recommended that families solely rely on ESAs. There may be more suitable and secure funding alternatives that can withstand volatile election cycles. Any amount of time spent researching this topic will be worthwhile. Still, as the door of opportunity stands wide open, we should do everything we can to intervene in the lives of our youngest, most vulnerable, and innocent members of society.
Parents: it’s not only your right, but also your responsibility to proactively defend your kids against the evil that’s manifesting in our education system. Use your authority to seize control of your child’s mental and physical health by removing them from dangerous, predator-infested public schools. You won’t regret the sacrifices you make to spare your sons and daughters from becoming the prey of wolves in teachers’ clothes.
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 blogBigviewsmallwindow.com. She encourages everyday citizens to take an active role in defending and preserving American values for future generations.
Mesa Public Schools (MPS) faces a lawsuit for policies resulting in the secret transitioning of children’s genders and tracking their gender transition journeys while restricting parental knowledge or consent.
The amended lawsuit, filed on Tuesday by America First Legal (AFL) on behalf of MPS Governing Board member Rachel Walden and the mother of one alleged victim, accused MPS of unlawfully hiding policy and evidence of their transitioning of children from parents. Arizona’s Constitution and Parents’ Bill of Rights acknowledge that it is the fundamental right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children.
The amended complaint contained new information revealing that at least one MPS school maintained a “parent concealment cheat sheet”: a spreadsheet tracking the gender journeys of over a dozen students as well as information on which of their parents were supportive or needed to be kept in the dark.
/1 🚨BREAKING – America First Legal Sues Mesa Public Schools in Amended Lawsuit, Adding Mother Whose Daughter’s Gender Was Transitioned Without Parental Knowledge or Consent, and After Obtaining New Evidence Proving Scale of Deception
MPS policy of transitioning children without parental knowledge or consent, the Transgender Support Plan (TSP), dates back to 2015, according to the lawsuit. The policy asks the children for permission to notify their parents of their gender transition: should the child decline, MPS requires its employees to keep the transition hidden from parents.
MPS has long denied the allegations that TSP occurs without parental notification. Last June, MPS Superintendent Andi Fourlis dismissed the allegations in a public letter.
According to a once-public document students were made to fill out to initiate a TSP, the Support Plan for Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students, students were given the option to deny permission of disclosure of their gender transitions to their parents. MPS removed that support plan from public view following community outcry in 2022. The district then issued an updated version of the support plan with a loophole to parental disclosure: name and gender changes were to be requested through Synergy — the district’s online database — in order for parents to be notified. Should Synergy not be updated, parents would not be notified.
AFL noted that this loophole contradicted Fourlis’ claim, which ultimately resulted in the gender transition of the eighth-grade girl at the heart of AFL’s lawsuit, Megan Doe, to a male by school staff without the knowledge or consent of Doe’s mother, Jane.
“[S]chool employees encouraged Megan to lie to her parents and helped her to do so, which harmed the parent-child relationship and delayed Megan from receiving needed mental health counseling,” stated AFL.
Per the lawsuit, Jane’s attempts to learn of what had happened to her daughter were rebuffed by school staff and leadership in 2022. The principal at her daughter’s school refused to disclose further records or information about the conversations school staff had with her daughter, and refused to comply with Jane’s demand to cease referring to her daughter as a boy and by a boy’s name.
“The principal admitted that school personnel intentionally had not changed Megan’s name in the [Synergy] system to avoid any notification being sent to Jane and that there were no plans to change Megan’s name in the system,” stated the lawsuit. “The principal told Jane that even if Jane had asked to be notified about any name changes, pronoun changes, or other choices related to a transgender identity by her child, it was official MPS policy not to tell parents and that school personnel would not notify Jane about any further developments related to these issues.”
It was only after this ordeal that Jane discovered Megan’s struggles and, reportedly, was able to resolve them through conversations with her mother and a psychotherapist. The lawsuit stated that this maternal intervention resulted in Megan’s issues being “completely resolved” within a month.
“[Megan] is now very comfortable presenting herself as a female and using her given name and is thriving in high school,” stated AFL.
AFL claimed to also have discovered, upon information and belief, that MPS employees regularly ignored the requirement to notify parents after students began transitioning genders in school.
AFL further issued evidence of a school counselor, Emily Wulff at Kino Junior High, instructing school staff in an email last March to not disclose gender transitions to anyone outside those allowed within the support plan. Wulff’s email made no mention of parental notification.
In a follow-up email, Wulff clarified that the purpose of the nondisclosure policy was to “protect outing students who are not ready to come out to peers or family members.” Wulff specified that the support plan was designed to keep gender transitions a secret from certain families.
“The main takeaways would be to make sure when contacting home to use their preferred name home,” wrote Wulff. “For example, if I have a student that goes by Emily and she/her pronouns that I need to call home for, and in their plan it says to use their birth name and biological pronouns home, [be] sure you do not out the student by using their preferred name and pronouns they use at school.”
Last March, Wulff also directed school employees to keep up a spreadsheet tracking the gender transition journeys of 17 students, titled “Pronoun Preference,” with notes declaring whether a student’s parents and family were aware of their transition.
For three students whose parents were documented as “unaware,” Wulff’s spreadsheet directed school employees to hide their preferred names and pronouns. For another seven students whose parents were documented as somewhat aware or partially supportive, the spreadsheet instructed staff to use the students’ birth names and gender to mask the extent of their transition.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
