Queen Creek High School staffer complains of toxic district culture
A Queen Creek High School staff member expressed her concerns about the district during its April 8 board meeting's call to the public.
Calling herself a 'whistleblower,' Jeanette Schade spoke of the toxic culture. Staff is discouraged from asking questions, and when they do, they are subject to retaliation.
'The district has a disease,' Schade said. 'And what do we do with diseases? We find the root cause and heal them, but this one is perpetuated by those at the top. It is called the culture of fear.'
Many of these comments arise from disputes between the district and the community regarding its management of recent incidents related to social media posts. Former Queen Creek Unified School District Governing Board member James Knox resigned from his position in early January. Knox faced criticism for sharing explicit and potentially offensive content on his social media accounts. He blamed his resignation on a lack of community support and issues board leadership.
'I am unwilling to continue in this fight as it appears I no longer have community support,' Knox said.
Irene Mahoney-Paige, the district's director of marketing and public relations, said QCUSD has since adopted a new social media policy for its governing board.
'We want to be clear: QCUSD does not condone the content of the social media statements,' she said via email.
'The district remains committed to providing a safe and secure learning environment for all students. Our hiring practices are conducted without discrimination and do not include routine review of personal social media accounts.'
Parents and community members have voiced similar complaints about Queen Creek High School principal Scott Lovely, who has been criticized for social media posts before he was hired.
'Since then, I have been targeted by Mr. Scott Lovely, a man with a documented history of racist views through his social media posts,' Schade said. 'Was seemingly tasked with silencing me through false accusations and threats after inquiring about my political views.'
Most of Schade's criticism was aimed at the Queen Creek School District and its handling of the situation.
In a Queen Creek Tribune letter to the editor, community said they were disappointed with the QCUSD board's response.
It pointed out that Lovely allegedly made posts that were allegedly 'clearly biased and racist views of white Republican people.'
'A community member, Mr. Quarter, brought up some disparaging and disgusting social media posts Scott Lovely made, the new principal at QCHS, and it received no media attention,' said community members in a letter to the editor. 'Why would one only focus on one person and pressure him to resign and not another for the same sin?'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
14 minutes ago
- Newsweek
John Fetterman's Name Booed at Pennsylvania 'No Kings' Rally
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senator John Fetterman was booed when his name was mentioned during a rally in his home state of Pennsylvania on Saturday. Newsweek reached out to Fetterman's office for comment via email on Sunday. Why It Matters Mediaite reported that the rally was part of the "No Kings" protest movement, one of many held nationwide on June 14. Demonstrations took place in hundreds of U.S. cities, according to Reuters, with large-scale gatherings reported in major hubs such as Philadelphia; Los Angeles; Austin, Texas; Portland, Oregon; and New York. The demonstrations aligned with both the president's 79th birthday and the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary celebration in Washington D.C. What To Know In a clip from C-SPAN, Leah Greenberg, co-founder of the progressive nonprofit Indivisible, told the crowd in Philadelphia: "Now, this is not a rally for one party. We've got Democrats here today. We've got Republicans and independents here today. "We are looking to the leaders who will fight for us because even today, there are folks among the Democratic Party who think we should roll over and play dead. Anyone seen John Fetterman here today?" This remark was met with audible boos from the attendees. U.S. Senator John Fetterman on June 2, 2025, in Boston. U.S. Senator John Fetterman on June 2, 2025, in a Democrat, has voiced support for the military parade—which according to White House director of communications Steven Cheung was attended by some 250,000—in a Saturday post on X, formerly Twitter, writing that it was "appropriate to celebrate the 250 years of sacrifice, dedication and service." The senator was criticized earlier this month in an opinion piece published by the editorial board of The Philadelphia Inquirer—Fetterman's home state newspaper—which accused him of neglecting his political duties. Fetterman has often broken with his party on key issues such as the Israel-Hamas war and border security. His views prompted speculation that he was leaving the Democratic Party to join the Republicans—rumors he dismissed earlier this year. During a January appearance on ABC's The View, he said he has "been on record" saying that "I am not going to become a Republican." He added: "I would make a pretty terrible Republican because, you know, pro-choice, pro really strong immigration, pro-LGBTQ… I don't think I'd be a good fit. So, I'm not going to change my party and if I am… I'll give you the exclusive." What People Are Saying Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman on X: "This parade is comprised of our sons, daughters, mothers and fathers—the very best of us. Regardless of your politics, it's appropriate to celebrate the 250 years of sacrifice, dedication and service." What Happens Next Fetterman is up for reelection in 2028.
USA Today
35 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Not a big fan': GOP lawmaker criticizes Trump military parade, says it 'glorified weapons'
'Not a big fan': GOP lawmaker criticizes Trump military parade, says it 'glorified weapons' Show Caption Hide Caption Army 250th anniversary parade marches on despite weather worries President Donald Trump's controversial military parade kicked off 30 minutes early to avoid inclement weather. WASHINGTON - Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul criticized the military parade backed by President Donald Trump, arguing the grand event was too expensive for the country and 'glorified' weapons. The June 14 parade, featuring heavy tanks and thousands of troops parading through the streets of Washington, marked the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, which coincidentally fell on Trump's 79th birthday. Paul told NBC News' Kristen Welker on 'Meet the Press' that he 'never liked the idea of the parade.' 'I grew up in the 70s and 80s, and the only parades I can remember are Soviet parades for the most part, or North Korean parades. And the parades I remember from our history were different,' he said, referencing the iconic photograph of a sailor kissing a woman in New York City's Times Square at the end of World War II. 'We were rejoicing the end of war and we were rejoicing our soldiers coming home, and that absolutely ought to be commemorated…but we never glorified weapons so much. And I know he means well. I don't think he means for any of this to be depicted in another fashion, but I'm just not a big fan,' Paul added. Paul also knocked the cost of the parade. 'We're $2 trillion in the hole and just an additional cost like this, I'm not for it,' he said. An Army estimate for its commemoration totaled $40 million, USA TODAY previously reported. Trump defended his decision to stage the parade, saying in remarks on June 14 that, "Every other country celebrates their victories. It's about time America did, too." It's not the first time Paul has bucked Trump in recent weeks. He's also voiced opposition to the president's sweeping tax and domestic policy bill, arguing that it would only balloon the country's budget deficit. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that it would add roughly $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. The legislation would also have major impacts on Medicaid, taxes, food programs and more. Paul told Welker that he spoke with Trump on June 14 after the parade, and he's not an 'absolute no' on Trump's bill. 'I don't have as much trouble with the tax cuts. I think there should be more spending cuts. But if they want my vote, they'll have to negotiate,' he said.
CNBC
40 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump administration weighs adding 36 countries to travel ban, memo says
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is considering significantly expanding its travel restrictions by potentially banning citizens of 36 additional countries from entering the United States, according to an internal State Department cable seen by Reuters. Earlier this month, the Republican president signed a proclamation that banned the entry of citizens from 12 countries, saying the move was needed to protect the United States against "foreign terrorists" and other national security threats. The directive was part of an immigration crackdown Trump launched this year at the start of his second term, which has included the deportation to El Salvador of hundreds of Venezuelans suspected of being gang members, as well as efforts to deny enrollments of some foreign students from U.S. universities and deport others. In an internal diplomatic cable signed by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the State Department outlined a dozen concerns about the countries in question and sought corrective action. "The Department has identified 36 countries of concern that might be recommended for full or partial suspension of entry if they do not meet established benchmarks and requirements within 60 days," the cable sent out over the weekend said. The cable was first reported by the Washington Post. Among the concerns the State Department raised was the lack of a competent or cooperative government by some of the countries mentioned to produce reliable identity documents, the cable said. Another was "questionable security" of that country's passport. Some countries, the cable said, were not cooperative in facilitating the removal of its nationals from the United States who were ordered to be removed. Some countries were overstaying the U.S. visas their citizens were being granted. Other reasons for concern were the nationals of the country were involved in acts of terrorism in the United States, or antisemitic and anti-American activity. The cable noted that not all of these concerns pertained to every country listed. "We are constantly reevaluating policies to ensure the safety of Americans and that foreign nationals follow our laws," a senior State Department official said, declining to comment on specific internal deliberations and communications. "The Department of State is committed to protecting our nation and its citizens by upholding the highest standards of national security and public safety through our visa process," the official said. The countries that could face a full or a partial ban if they do not address these concerns within the next 60 days are: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cote D'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Ethiopia, Egypt, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, South Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. That would be a significant expansion of the ban that came into effect earlier this month. The countries affected were Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The entry of people from seven other countries — Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela — has also been partially restricted. During his first term in office, Trump announced a ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations, a policy that went through several iterations before it was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018.
