CUSD80 Bond Request Raises Serious Ethical Red Flags
- Valley Telegraph
- Aug 5
- 3 min read
This opinion piece explores serious ethical red flags connected to the $271 million bond the Chandler school district is requesting from voters.
As voters in the Chandler Unified School District (CUSD80) prepare to weigh in on yet another multi-million dollar bond request in a school district with falling enrollment, massive administrative overhead, DEI infiltration and a legacy of reckless spending, forced masking and school closures, led by a far-left politician, it’s crucial to take a hard look at who is bankrolling the campaign to pass it—and why. The latest financial disclosures from the “Yes for Chandler Students” political action committee (PAC), which supports the bond, paint a troubling picture of insider influence and potential conflicts of interest.
Headed by none other than CUSD80 Board Vice President Barb Mozdzen, the PAC has raised nearly $60,000 as of June 2025. But this isn’t grassroots fundraising from concerned parents or community stakeholders. The vast majority of donors are construction firms, architects, mechanical contractors, and other vendors—the very companies that stand to directly benefit from the passage of the bond.
Among the donors are:
Chasse Building Team – $9,800
Procon Professional Concrete – $5,000
EMC2 Group – $5,000
Progressive Services – $5,000
DLR Group – $3,000
Rytan Construction – $3,500
Multiple others contributing between $1,000–$2,500, including electrical and HVAC contractors.
The message is clear: this is not about the kids. It’s about business.This bond, if approved, will likely fund new school construction, renovations, and infrastructure—projects that will require bidding and contracting. It is deeply problematic when companies who could be awarded these lucrative contracts are also the ones greasing the wheels of the campaign to secure the funding.
Even more troubling is that this effort is being led by a sitting board member, Barb Mozdzen, who helps oversee district decisions—including procurement. While there may not be a direct quid pro quo, the optics and ethics of this setup are indefensible. Voters are being asked to trust that bond dollars will be spent wisely, while the campaign pushing for the bond is being financed by those hoping to cash in on it.
This is not transparency. This is not accountability. This is a closed loop of mutual back-scratching between public officials and private contractors.
Supporters will argue that bonds are necessary for school improvements, and perhaps in some cases, they are. But even necessary funding must be pursued with integrity and impartiality. When the funding mechanism itself is tainted by conflicts of interest, public trust erodes—and rightfully so.
At a time when the cost of living continues to rise and taxpayers are already burdened, residents deserve a bond campaign rooted in the public good, not one propelled by construction firms looking for their next big contract.
CUSD80 must do better. And voters should demand it—by saying no to this bond request until clean, community-centered advocacy replaces what currently looks more like a pay-to-play scheme.
How to make your voice heard
Voters can make their voices heard having their opposing arguments included in the pamphlet that will be given to voters in November. The landing page for this is here. The individual form for submitting arguments can be found here. Arguments have to be submitted by mail or in person to:
Maricopa County School Superintendent
4041 North Central Avenue, Suite 1100
Phoenix, AZ 85012
or by email to: schoolelections@maricopa.gov
The argument form must be signed and notarized.
The deadline for submitting an argument for or against a school district election issue for the November 4, 2025 General Election is 5:00 PM on Friday, August 8, 2025.
The images below document the funding for the pro-bond PAC "Yes for Chandler Students"
Comments