As Arizona’s largest public school district, Mesa Unified School District is a critical case study for the future of K-12 funding, particularly in a state that champions competition and choice for its families. Despite headlines boasting of population growth across the state, the nationwide decline in childbirths and cost-of-living increases will weigh heavily on district enrollment and balance sheets for years to come.
While solving these policy issues is admittedly outside the scope of superintendents and governing boards, how districts adjust to these changes remains within their control. In the case of Mesa USD, the district faces an existential crisis in enrollment that will almost certainly require consolidation and closure among its 78 schools over the next 10-20 years. Furthermore, the district’s statewide assessment performance leaves much to be desired, with just 38% and 31% of Mesa USD students achieving proficiency in English Language Arts and Math, respectively.
Next month, Mesa taxpayers will have an opportunity to make their voices heard and rein in the district’s spendthrift ways by rejecting a $500 million bond and an override continuation that, if passed, would allow the already overstretched district to exceed its revenue control limit by 15% for another seven years.
When voters last approved a bond for Mesa USD in 2018, they did so with a margin of <1% and at a cost of $300 million to taxpayers. A year later, the district was beset with allegations of financial impropriety and steep administrative costs, leading to the resignation of the district’s superintendent. The poor transparency on the part of the school board in communicating the issue to the public further underscores the lack of taxpayer accountability. Furthermore, over the last three years, Mesa USD received over $245 million in federal pandemic relief funds, with hundreds of millions still unspent.
Nevertheless, Mesa USD’s pitch to taxpayers remains unchanged, and approval of the bond and continuation of the override will result in little more than throwing away hundreds of millions of dollars in costly capital projects for underutilized campuses and unsustainable personnel costs.
Demography Is Destiny
In the early 2000s, Mesa boasted a population of over 400,000 residents. During the same period, Mesa USD reached its peak enrollment at over 87,000 students during the 2002-2003 school year. Today, the city is home to nearly 510,000 people, yet the city’s population growth over the last 20 years never trickled down to Mesa USD’s enrollment. Today, the district serves fewer students than it did in 1990 when Mesa had just 290,000 residents.
An additional cause for alarm comes from the pronounced decline in Mesa USD’s Kindergarten-6th grade enrollment. For large, comprehensive school districts like Mesa, enrollment in feeder schools is an important signal of a district’s future headcount. Over the last 20 years, 16 of Mesa USD’s elementary schools have lost over 40% of their students. In the same period, the district’s junior high schools saw an average decline of 50% of their enrollment.
Source: Mesa Public Schools – Demographics Report 2021-2022
As another signal of its unpopularity, Mesa USD is one of the state’s largest sources of ESA students, which has its most substantial adoption rates in the elementary grade levels. Given the expansion of ESAs and charter schools, Mesa USD will continue competing for a depleting student pool. In turn, a decline in enrollment necessitates a reduction in operational expenses, which Mesa USD has rebuffed in favor of taxpayer-funded bailouts.
Around 77% of school districts in Maricopa County have one or more overrides in effect. While East Valley voters have typically displayed enthusiasm for K-12 bonds and overrides in the past, the powerful impact of free market principles via ESAs makes the decision different today. With nearly 70,000 Arizona families using ESAs today, enthusiasm for the program has made it larger than any school district in the state, with the additional benefit of not requiring bonds or overrides.
To realize the substantial cost savings from ESAs, a corresponding change is required from public schools in rightsizing their districts by adjusting their property and personnel costs. In preparing for the inevitable, Mesa USD must take steps now to address under-capacity and explore the sale of its real estate before requesting additional funds from taxpayers. In rejecting this bond and override, Mesa voters sidestep a lousy deal and send a clear message about taxpayer accountability.
Arman Sidhu is a lifelong Arizona resident and previously worked in K-12 education as a principal and teacher. He currently leads a nonprofit microschool.
Amid the passage of historic school choice legislation in Arizona, the educational opportunities available to students and families today are unparalleled with the state’s universal ESA program. In addition to providing Arizona families with voice, choice, and agency in their child’s education, the ESA program has the potential to save Arizona taxpayers considerable funds from future school district bond and override measures.
However, to realize these savings, a long overdue conversation about rightsizing Arizona’s public schools is necessary. Despite significant population growth within Arizona, the enrollment forecasts for most school districts anticipate a period of long-term decline due to lower childbirths, affordability, and alternative options. This demonstrates a pressing need to review the budgets and assets of public school districts and align them with future enrollment projections.
Given the significant competition from the rise in homeschooling, as well as charter and private schools, public schools are no longer the only game in town. As a result, greater scrutiny from local taxpayers is needed in holding school districts fiscally accountable by questioning their need for additional funds through bonds and overrides.
What Are School Bonds & Overrides?
School bonds are loans that school districts sell to investors, who are repaid through the district’s future property taxes. These bond funds have specific limitations on their use and cannot be used to increase staff salaries. In most instances, these funds are leveraged for infrastructure projects involving the construction of new facilities or upgrades to existing ones. In contrast, overrides go directly to school districts and can be used for staff salaries and various programs outlined by the district requesting the override.
This November, a total of 23 school districts in Maricopa County will have bond and/or override measures on the ballot. Among these 23 districts, at least 4—Kyrene Elementary School District, Mesa Unified School District, Gilbert Unified School District, Scottsdale Unified School District—are in dire need of rightsizing before requesting additional funds from taxpayers based on their pronounced decline in enrollment.
In particular, Mesa USD, the state’s largest school district, enrolls fewer students today than it did in the fall of 1990. Yet, the district’s real estate portfolio somehow contains 78 schools, in addition to various non-instructional facilities and offices throughout the city. Mesa USD, as well as surrounding districts in similar positions, need to do right by taxpayers in exploring the sale of underutilized real estate before passing the buck to taxpayers.
As seen in the table below, only Gilbert USD has shown an increase in enrollment since the fall of 2000, and none of the districts can report an increase in enrollment in the last 10 years. Given the growth in ESA adoption and charter school enrollment, the pragmatic move is to respond to these declines now by rightsizing these districts, pursuing the sale of district assets, and removing administrative bloat.
Among the clearest signs of waste and inefficiency can be found in the amount of unspent federal pandemic relief funds provided to schools around the country. In the case of the 4 school districts requesting additional funds from taxpayers, they collectively still have access to tens of millions in unspent, flexible funds that are set to expire in a year.
What this experiment in “helicopter money” confirms is that the problem ailing local school districts is not a lack of funds, but rather their inability to direct funds efficiently. In the absence of a public monopoly, this decline in public school enrollment will continue to eat into taxpayers’ wallets with the additional forces of demographic shifts, affordability, and competition from the growing number of viable and efficient alternatives in the form of charter schools, private schools, microschools, and homeschool co-ops.
In adjusting to this historic era of school choice, the need for fiscal accountability remains essential on behalf of public school districts that have been reluctant to change and control their costs. To avoid perpetually funding buildings and bureaucracy, local taxpayers and residents must ensure their voices are heard.
Arman Sidhu is a lifelong Arizona resident and previously worked in K-12 education as a principal and teacher. He currently leads a nonprofit microschool.
Depravity abounds in Arizona’s public education system. From Buckeye, to Phoenix, to Tucson—and many school districts in between—the Valley is infested with radical board members, sleazy administrators, and predatory educators. All of these are working overtime to usurp parental rights and corrupt the next generation.
When creating the following list, I took into consideration cases of child sexual exploitation, race- and gender-based curricula, dangerous bathroom policies and failing test scores. Readers are cautioned against ranking these districts from “worst” to “best.” The list is purely based on the volume and severity of complaints I’ve personally investigated—seven is a very modest number!
Without further ado, here is my top seven list of Arizona’s worst school districts:
1. Mesa Public Schools. In 2015, MPS adopted a secret transgender support plan to aid in the social and sexual transition of minor students without parental knowledge. Shout out to Board Member Rachel Walden for exposing the plan. In the summer of 2023, a majority of the board, led by President Marcie Hutchinson, approved contracts for an unvetted suicide prevention program as well as Brain Solutions—a network of psychiatric clinics that appear to have no medical physicians on staff. In an alleged attempt to bypass public discussion, Hutchinson violated Open Meeting Law 7.7.5 by arranging both contracts under the Consent Agenda. Parents are in danger of losing their children to the LGBTQ+ agenda that’s overtaking this district.
2. Washington Elementary School District. In an unprecedented display of bigotry and lawlessness, WESD board members voted 5-0 to terminate student-teacher contracts with Arizona Christian University (ACU). Despite an 11-year, incident-free partnership with the college, Board Member Tamillia Valenzuela—a cat ear-wearing individual who spurns the Pledge of Allegiance—motioned to cancel ACU due to the organization’s stance on traditional marriage. Valenzuela and her vile counterpart, Board Member Nikkie Whaley, also spontaneously erupt into racist rants against their colleagues, including the night Whaley was unseated from the presidency. While the fully reinstated student-teacher contracts offer a degree of hope, past and present board members have resolved to highlight and celebrate alternative sexualities in prepubescent children. Therefore, WESD remains an unsafe and morally corrupt district.
3. Tucson Unified School District. TUSD is an unforgivable case of sexual perversion and abuse that should send every loving parent over the edge. Notwithstanding one Tucson Magnet High School (TMHS) counselor who organized the first student-led drag show on campus—and was later arrested for sexually assaulting a minor—Superintendent Gabriel Trujillo sought legal advice from Michael Areinoff to host a second event in April 2023. Another counselor and drag show organizer, “Sunday” Hamilton, serves as the point of contact for TMHS’s Q Space club. Board President Ravi Shah, who referred to drag shows as “art,” bragged about attending with his minor children and encouraged community support in the exploitation of gender confused students. Meanwhile, TUSD students are testing below 40% proficiency in math and reading across all grade levels.
4. Catalina Foothills School District. Sadly, this entire board of education, led by President Eileen Jackson, continually proves to be anti-parent, anti-student safety, and anti-common sense. In matters of sex and gender, CFSD has side-stepped parental rights at least since 2021, and in March 2023, Jackson banned all bathroom policy discussions from future agendas. One month later, several concerned CFSD citizens were locked out of the board meeting as radical activists occupied at half capacity to protest the permanent, binary reality of human sexuality. CFSD educators also feel at liberty to bypass parental consent and privately discuss gender ideologies with minor students. Shout out to the Center for Excellence in Public Schools for standing firm amid the onslaught of debauchery in this district.
5. Scottsdale Unified School District. SUSD is a never-ending nightmare of agenda-driven, moral violations. From covert gender-identity student clubs to hidden pronoun surveys, students are constantly bombarded with perversion and secular humanism. Superintendent Scott Menzel—who infamously called white people “problematic”—is the mastermind behind the leftist ideologies and corruption that appear as a recurring theme on the Scottsdale Unites media page. Board President Julie Cieniawski and Board Member Libby Hart-Wells are known to display a lack of decorum as they bully, interrupt, and chastise their colleagues…and anyone else they can’t control. What a shame that Scottsdale’s next generation is being raised by wolves.
6. Chandler Unified School District. During the CUSD board meeting on July 12, 2023, the CFO’s report revealed a steady decline of student enrollments, prompting Board Member Kurt Rohrs to ask:“Why don’t parents want to send their kids to our schools?” The superintendent astutely pointed to parental choice while Board President Jason Olive—in an apparent case of narcissism and willful ignorance—stated: “It sounds like there’s a lot of parents who just don’t know any better…” Perhaps Olive slept through CUSD employees encouraging minors to attend gender utopia workshops, and the district’s alleged cover up of a teacher who reportedly sexually assaulted multiple students. Of course, only the best school district promotes immorality and graduates half its students without basic math and reading skills.
7. Peoria Unified School District. This anti-parental rights district is the epitome of corruption and subversion. Since my last op-ed, interim Superintendent Kevin Molino is now overseeing plans for a third bathroom—an open concept, transgender-friendly facility that offers biological females no protection. Rather than announce the plan, Molino is conducting private meetings with select parents, administrators, and constituents (my meeting with him was a waste of time). Molino acts as if he’s listening but assures community members there’s “nothing he can do” to help during his short-term appointment. Well, at least he’s not lying. Meanwhile, the biological boy—with unrestricted access to female spaces on campus—allegedly assaulted a fellow student. Most parents also don’t know that Chief Student Service Officer Jason Nuttall is researching how to effectively profile children and report data to the federal government via MTSS (“multi-tiered system of support”).
Honorable mention:One-n-ten. While this technically isn’t a school district (yet), One-n-ten is the parent organization of the “Queer Blended Learning Center” in Phoenix. With a mission to “provide LGBTQ and Straight Allied Youth a welcoming and safe space to earn their high school diploma,” QBLC now accepts ESA vouchers to cover tuition for gender-confused middle school students. When One-n-ten hosted sex and gender spring break activities this year, teachers and counselors in Chandler Unified School District gladly made recommendations. At best this is moral kidnapping, at worst our tax dollars are financing the emotional, mental, and sexual exploitation of minors.
Whether readers agree or disagree with my picks on this list, it’s obvious that district representatives and government employees are coming after our children. As long as parents and fearful teachers remain ignorant and silent, mayhem and perversion will increase its presence and influence across the Valley. It’s time to wake up, pay attention, show up, and speak at board meetings. Don’t stop asking questions. Never go silent. Confront the perpetrators and issues that threaten your child’s safety and well-being on school grounds.
Finally, where alternative and private education options exist, every parent is without excuse for not exploring them to the fullest extent.
For nearly two decades, Tiffany Benson’s creative writing pursuits have surpassed all other interests. When she’s not investigating the Kennedy assassination and other conspiracy theories, she enjoys journaling and contributing to her blogBigviewsmallwindow.com. Join her and other engaged citizens at WestValleyParentsUniting.com.
In November 2023, there will be 23 districts within Maricopa County that are asking voters to approve a new Bond Issue, Budget Override, or District Additional Assistance.
One of the constant themes from the Educational Industrial Complex is that schools are underfunded and teachers are woefully underpaid. However, in the Arizona state 2024 budget, 50% of the total budget is allocated to education which includes K-12 schools, community colleges, and universities.
According to the Arizona Joint Legislative Budget Committee, per student funding at the state, local, and federal levels in fiscal year 2024 is an estimated $14,673 per student. This is up from 2023 funding at $14,025 per student. Contrast that with 2015 which was $9,124 per student.
To put the spending issue into perspective, Mesa Unified, the state’s largest district, is asking for an approval for $500 million in new bonds as well as a 15% budget override. However, the district has $182 million in unspent funds from the 2018 Bond initiative as well as $173 million in unspent COVID relief funds. Couple this with the $863 million the district will receive from the state in fiscal year 2024 and that’s roughly $1.2 billion dollars. Why is the district asking for more?
Despite this funding, the academic achievement for Mesa schools districtwide is abysmal. In 2022, only 38% of students were proficient or highly proficient at English Language arts, and only 31% of students are proficient or highly proficient at math. In addition, the 2022 graduation rate was 76%.
Some might argue that the recent steep inflation devalues the increased education spending by the legislature. But this is a two-way street. After all, taxpayers are also subject to inflation and asking them to keep increasing funding for an obviously broken system is not sustainable.
Finally, history shows that Mesa taxpayers are not anti-education. In 2018, they passed a $300 million dollar bond to increase funding. Fast forward to 2023 and the financial picture for Mesa schools is much healthier. Why are they asking for more money despite the fact that academic scores have remained flat for the last four years? The answer is not additional funding.
Enough is enough. The people of Arizona should reject all bond and override initiatives.
Nancy Cottle is a longtime East Mesa community resident. You can follow her on X here.
At the August 8th governing board meeting for Mesa Public Schools (MPS), conservative board member Rachel Walden was attacked and silenced. Apparently, her line of questioning and discussion of agenda items did not fit the approved district narrative and ruffled the feathers of fellow board member Kiana Sears.
Two of the items pulled from the consent agenda by Mrs. Walden were for the renewal and expansion of non-competitive contracts for mental health services to be provided by A New Leaf and Empact on campus at two district schools. In discussion on the first item, the contract with A New Leaf, Mrs. Walden was questioning the wisdom of giving A New Leaf space in schools to provide mental health services rather than simply referring students in need to mental health services available in the community.
“As difficult as the mental health crisis is, we need to stay in our lane and do everything that we can to improve student outcomes. So where are the afterschool tutoring programs? That’s something I’ve been asking for a long time,” said Mrs. Walden. She continued, “We should focus on what we’re tasked with doing and then we can refer out the other services.”
The reasoning behind this discussion was to point out that by bringing mental health services into the schools, the district would be diluting its resources with activities other than the one that is statutorily mandated, which is education. Mesa Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Andi Fourlis remarked, “When we talk about bringing partners into our school system, we use partners only when we have exhausted all of the resources available at the school. That is counselors, social workers, psychologists…that are working to solve the many challenges of children. So, when we have run out of all of our skills and assets, that’s when we would rely upon a community partner.”
Mrs. Walden questioned how the district could be exhausting all resources when it has more than the state average of school counselors. The district has 2.5 times the number of school counselors as the state average on a per student basis.
Superintendent Fourlis commented that having the resources on campuses alleviated logistical issues with parents getting their children to the outside service. She said, “Providing services closest to the student to reduce the amount of instructional time is very important…. Often times, there’s just not enough services available, and so bringing them to school where they can take students out of class for a 30-minute time perhaps versus having to take a half a day out of school, drive, get to an appointment, and so on. It becomes access and convenience for the families.” Mrs. Walden nullified that justification by correctly noting that mental health care providers will come to a student’s home.
In the middle of this exchange between Mrs. Walden and Superintendent Fourlis, otherwise disinterested board member Kiana Sears interrupted the conversation and called for the question essentially silencing Mrs. Walden’s inquiry into the details of the agenda item. The call for the question was seconded by Dr. O’Reilly, thereby ending the discussion and forcing a vote on the agenda item. To his credit, Dr. O’Reilly recognized that seconding the call to the question was a mistake and later apologized to Mrs. Walden for silencing her voice. Mrs. Sears has yet to acknowledge such contrition.
After silencing Mrs. Walden and moving to the vote on renewal and expansion of the contract with A New Leaf, President Hutchinson proceeded to carry water for A New Leaf, lauding its 52 years of service “to our families and our kids” and that it is “very well respected for the decades of work that they have done to keep this community whole.” She went on to say, “A New Leaf has been there, and this is an amazing organization that is local, and they are embedded in our community and in our schools and have been for years, decades as a matter of fact. So, let’s move on to the next agenda item…”
The next agenda item pulled by Mrs. Walden was similar to the first one—the approval of the contract for Empact to provide on-site mental health services on campus. During the discussion, Mrs. Walden questioned how these providers (A New Leaf and Empact) were chosen. Superintendent Fourlis responded, “I will tell you that this is an interesting question. As needs have arised (sic), throughout our community, we have responded, and community partners have responded differently. There is a scarcity of resources available, and so when our schools and our parents are asking for the help, we are grabbing the help that we can. And so there is not a plethora of services…and so to answer your very specific question, we did not do an RFP process.”
Did you catch that? “Community partners responded differently”? Responded to what? Community partners have never received a notice to respond to.
And what does Superintendent Fourlis mean by, “we are grabbing the help where we can”? While she’s making it sound like a desperate grasp for services of a couple of randomly selected organizations, it is actually closer to a pre-arranged preferred selection.
Consider this. Mesa Public Schools and A New Leaf have shared a cozy relationship for years. A New Leaf’s CEO, Michael Hughes, previously served on the governing board of MPS for 20 years from 1994-2014. No doubt, he made lots of close friends in the district during his tenure. In 2021, the MPS Governing Board, including President Hutchinson, approved what appears to be a very favorable lease agreement to A New Leaf for district owned office space. (See image below)
Then, in 2022, no less than 3 members of A New Leaf’s management, including Michael Hughes, donated to President Hutchinson’s re-election campaign. Now in 2023, the governing board, including President Hutchinson, has voted to renew and expand a non-competitive contract for A New Leaf to provide services on MPS campuses. And the narrative the superintendent is pushing is that A New Leaf was chosen because they responded to some non-existent public call for services and that there is a scarcity of services in the community.
As Mrs. Walden was challenging Superintendent Foulis’ claim of scarcity of services, again, disinterested Mrs. Sears interrupted the conversation to express her “outrage” at Mrs. Walden for her line of questioning and discussion. But questions and discussions based on Mrs. Walden’s interactions with her constituents are how a representative government is supposed to operate. She is seemingly the only board member acting as the representative of the community by engaging in such questioning and discussions rather than just rubber stamping every agenda item that is presented.
But that didn’t stop Mrs. Sears from fabricating a false narrative toward the end of the meeting that Mrs. Walden believes the district should just “turn our backs on our parents and our kids.” Mrs. Sears expressed anger at Mrs. Walden based on that false narrative, and this dangerous and dishonest behavior incited community anger toward Mrs. Walden. You would think President Hutchinson, who was presiding over the meeting, would have stopped this unfounded attack on Mrs. Walden. But instead, she allowed it to continue without calling the meeting back to order and telling Mrs. Sears that she was violating the district code of ethics.
Not only is President Hutchinson complicit in Mrs. Sears’ dangerous and dishonest behavior, but it has become clear. Conservative voices in Mesa Public Schools are not welcome. And any conservative who dares to challenge the preferred narrative will be bullied and silenced. It once again goes to show you: elections have consequences, especially at the local level.
You can watch the portion of the meeting discussing A New Leaf below.
Ed Steele is a husband, father, grandfather, and Mesa resident with a passion for helping the younger generation succeed in education.
