OPINION
THE MESA TRIBUNE | FEBRUARY 20, 2022
25
Share Your Thoughts:
Send your letters on local issues to: pmaryniak@timespublications.com TheMesaTribune.com
|
@EVTNow
/EVTNow
Legislature outdoes its usual nonsensical self with sex ed BY DAVID LEIBOWITZ Tribune Columnist
W
hen I was a kid, the fastest way to get me to read a book was to tell me it was too mature for my young eyes. I passed many nights sneaking peeks at my mom’s Harold Robbins novels to find the sexy parts. And there wasn’t a kid in my middle school who couldn’t recite by heart from Page 85 of Judy Blume’s teen lit classic, “Forever.” You know, the page where Michael introduces Katharine to his manhood, which he has inexplicably named … Ralph. Speaking of members, this brings us to the Arizona Legislature, which may have done more to encourage teen reading than any governmental body in America. Last year, it passed House Bill 2035, a racy little number that made Arizona the fifth state in America to mandate parents opt-in to sex education for their kids. Had the measure stopped there, I would have
been okay with it, but this being our Legislature – where common sense is not so common – they had to go just a bit further. HB 2035 also requires school governing boards to “adopt procedures to notify parents in advance and provide them the opportunity to withdraw their children from any instruction or presentations regarding sexuality” – even outside sex ed class. Which brings us to one local school district’s strenuous efforts to warn parents – about, among other things, kids cooking chicken breasts. Times Media reporter Ken Sain detailed The Great Poultry Alert last week. To comply with the state edict, the Chandler Unified School District Governing Board in December passed a new opt-in policy concerning materials that might be deemed sexual. Sain quoted Chandler High teacher Caroline Sheridan, who last week told the Governing Board: “I teach English and I teach criminal justice,” she explained. “Somehow I found out I need permission slips before I can teach,
“Of Mice and Men,” “Romeo and Juliet,” “Othello,” “To Kill a Mockingbird.” I can’t teach about Emmett Till without a permission slip. Of course, this makes no sense.” In January, the Permission Slip Police also sent home an opt-in form to parents of cooking students learning to prepare chicken breasts. District spokesman Terry Locke told Sain this was “a misinterpretation of the legislative statute” which “was corrected and did not apply to the context or content.” Thank goodness the curriculum didn’t include a recipe for sticky buns. Of course, the Legislature is hardly done with the issue. This new session has seen a number of sex education bills, including a measure to change the opt-in requirement back to an opt-out requirement. There’s a bill that will require a parent’s written permission before a student can participate in “any school student group or club involving sexuality, gender or gender identity.” And there’s a bill – no doubt dead on arrival – that not
only would make sex ed an opt-out class, but would also allow teachers to “discuss populations that historically have been more vulnerable to sexual abuse and assault, such as the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning community and the disability community.” Finally, there’s a bill that would forbid educators, restaurant workers and grocery store employees from “referring to certain foodstuffs and edible materials using language that may be construed to convey a sexual connotation.” Among the terms set to be joining “chicken breasts” as no longer be permissible, as spelled out in statute? Chicken “breasts.” Pork “butt.” Hot dog “buns.” The phrase “finger foods.” And Denny’s has been put on notice that diners will no longer be allowed to order the “Moons Over My Hammy.” Okay, I made that last bill up. But with this group of elected geniuses, it absolutely could have been real. They’re just that … nuts. ■
for construction materials, payroll and property taxes. The COVID-19 pandemic and the accompanying 18-month eviction moratorium also drove rent higher, with a majority of single-family rental homeowners reporting they suffered from the inability to collect rent – including 23 percent of property owners who were forced to sell off some or all their properties. How can we help Valley housing prices go down? We must build more housing at all price points, and do so quickly and costeffectively. If we fail to correct this shortfall in supply, Arizona’s renters, would-be homeowners, our workforce and economy will pay a heavy price. Economist Elliott Pollack, speaking at a Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce 2022 Economic Outlook event, framed this year as a pivotal moment. Pollack reports the Valley needs to build about 34,000 new housing units annually to keep up with the population surge. Be-
yond that, there’s a shortage of 25,000 homes and 15,000 apartments, the economist explained. “That’s a big hole and it’s going to take years to fill,” said Pollack. This shortage of homes creates enormous competition for the few rentals that are available. In 2021, there were 20 applicants competing for each vacant apartment in Phoenix, according to RentCafe. If this shortfall in the housing supply remains unaddressed or grows – while demand continues to rise, as expected – more people will be priced out of the market. The state’s economy is equally in peril if the new employers we count on to create jobs and revenue cannot find homes for their employees. As obvious as that may be, the reality has been anything but simple. Cities like Scottsdale, Gilbert, Surprise, Goodyear and Buckeye have been resistant to building new homes and apartment communi-
ties, while proclaiming the need for more affordable housing. In Scottsdale, Mayor David Ortega has been a formidable stumbling block, constantly playing politics in an effort to foil new housing. His opposition may play well with the “not in my backyard” NIMBY crowd, who oppose virtually every new home or apartment community, but it ignores the impact of constantly saying no or demanding costly changes to projects: This resistance forces the price housing higher by stifling the marketplace or raising overhead costs in a business already operating on razor-thin profit margins. Supply and demand says a price that goes up will keep going up until there’s enough of the product to go around. We must build accordingly.
Simple law of supply and demand driving rents BY COURTNEY GILSTRAP LEVINUS Tribune Guest Writer
T
he law of supply and demand is a basic principle of economics, seen in action daily at the grocery store and gas pump. When demand rises and products grow scarce, prices jump. When supply is high and demand is low, prices fall. That same principle governs the Valley’s housing market. On an average day in the Valley, nearly 300 people move in, according to Census statistics. Last year, the metro area added more than 106,000 new, pushing the Valley population to 5.1 million. Thousands of new residents require thousands of homes. Developers have not been able to build new rental housing and single-family homes quickly enough to match this surge in humanity. The population explosion has sent rent surging upward, along with rising costs
Courtney Gilstrap LeVinus is president and CEO of the Arizona Multihousing Association. ■
