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.
The Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) nixed a faith-based advisory committee following pushback from parents.
The initiative originated from TUSD’s Equity, Diversity & Inclusiveness (EDI) department early last month, in an attempt to promote cultural diversity through inclusiveness of different religious faiths.
Kinasha Brown, the assistant superintendent for EDI, advised the TUSD community in an email that the faith-based advisory committee would partner with the district to weigh in on TUSD initiatives, programs, policies, and projects; coordinate K-2 literacy activities; support TUSD enrollment and registration drives; develop service-based learning opportunities; and offer an annual faith-based symposium.
“Our community prepares all students to become responsible, ethical and engaged global citizens by creating relevant, dynamic and joyful educational experiences that embrace cultural diversity,” read the email.
Following parental outcry over the committee, TUSD Superintendent Gabriel Trujillo issued a statement via email that the committee gave the impression that TUSD wasn’t secular and religiously neutral. Trujillo further clarified that the committee wouldn’t have decision-making power.
“This advisory committee is not going to have any decision-making power in any area of curriculum, instruction, programming, policy-making in schools, but we would like to at least reach out to the faith-based community in terms of where they can contribute with the overall needs of TUSD kids,” Trujillo said.
Trujillo’s email followed parents’ statements of opposition to the proposed committee during last week’s special governing board meeting.
One mother, Kate Goldman, said she was “really upset” by the proposed committee. Goldman questioned how TUSD would “equitably” ensure that all religious and non-religious groups would be represented.
“My child we intentionally put in a public school where I felt there would be a safe difference, a distinction, between church and state,” said Goldman. “I just don’t see the need, for a secular institution that I thought prided itself on critical thinking to be advised in any way by any faith whereas the evidence advisory committee that’s stupid, that’s school I thought. You are the evidence advisory, I thought. Why are we having a faith-based one?”
Goldman expressed worry that a faith-based group would squash all other equity efforts.
Goldman also testified that she attempted, unsuccessfully, to sign up to join the group, claiming that the signup links and emails wouldn’t go through.
Arnie Bermudez, a father, challenged the legality of the committee.
“Why are we trying to shoehorn religion into our school district since there are already private schools all over Tucson that can fill this gap?” asked Bermudez.
Watch the TUSD governing board meeting remarks against the faith-based advisory committee here:
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) is violating state and federal law by making it too difficult for its employees to leave a labor union, according to a Jan. 18 letter sent to district officials by the Goldwater Institute.
Parker Jackson, staff attorney with the Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation at the Goldwater Institute, advised TUSD Superintendent Dr. Gabriel Trujillo that a review of five collective bargaining agreements revealed “alarming restrictions” which infringe on the rights of district employees.
“We request that the District immediately act to bring these agreements and policies and practices made pursuant to them into compliance with federal and state law,” Jackson wrote to Trujillo and the district’s governing board.
At issue are memoranda of understanding (MOU) which TUSD has entered into with four labor organizations: the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Local 449, AFL-CIO (“AFSCME”); the Communications Workers of America (“CWA”); Educational Leaders, Inc. (“ELI”); and the Tucson Education Association (“TEA”) with which there are two agreements.
TUSD employees may freely join a union at any time, but an employee covered by one of the five agreements must receive authorization from union bosses before district officials will process a request to resign from the union. This is unlawful, Jackson wrote, as it restricts when an employee may terminate their union membership and halt union dues deductions from their paychecks.
And then there is the issue of deduction revocation windows and/or deadlines which Jackson’s letter says do not comport with federal or state law. District policies and practices further exacerbate the unconstitutional activity.
For instance, the MOU with AFSCME—which Jackson calls “the worst of the five agreements”—restricts membership cancellation and dues deduction revocations to only two weeks per year, from May 1 to May 15. Similarly, the CWA agreement only permits cancellation of membership and dues deductions in July, while the other MOUs have comparable revocation restrictions.
This often results in an employee revoking their consent to union membership, only to have TUSD continue to deduct dues from each paycheck until the next opt-out period commences or the current membership year ends.
“This is not only unfair and predatory—it is also unconstitutional,” Jackson contends. “An employee revocation is obviously evidence that an employee does not affirmatively consent to pay union dues.”
Jackson’s letter to Trujillo cites Arizona’s Right to Work laws, the U.S. and Arizona constitutions, and various court cases in making its arguments.
“In order to prevent ongoing and future unconstitutional activity, the District must immediately revoke or revise any MOU provision that includes a union dues opt-out period and any requirement that a labor union must approve an employee’s request to stop the deduction of union dues,” Parker wrote. “The District must also revise any policy and procedure that imposes these unconstitutional conditions.”
The Goldwater Institute, which is dedicated to upholding the constitutional rights of all citizens, is a public policy and public interest litigation organization. It frequently initiates lawsuits when government entities do not voluntarily change conduct.
“The Goldwater Institute will always defend the constitutional right of all citizens to associate—or not associate—with whatever private organizations they choose,” Parker said after making the TUSD letter public. “Restrictive dues deduction revocation windows and deadlines, of course, are designed to make it difficult for people to leave powerful labor organizations. Fortunately, the U.S. and Arizona constitutions protect workers and prohibit the school district and the unions’ money grab.”
Terri Jo Neff is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or send her news tips here.
