Fort Smith Public Schools announce new Zone IV board member following Richardson's exit
According to a press release, Carthon works as the Chief Civil Rights Officer for Fort Smith Transit and has lived in the city for more than 20 years.
'We are excited to welcome Mr. Carthon to the Board of Education,' said FSPS Board President Dalton Person. 'His passion for education will be a great asset as we continue to provide high-quality learning opportunities for all students.'
The previous occupant of the Zone IV seat, Talicia Richardson resigned following the board's response to the grievance process with former Northside High School football coach Felix Curry.
Curry's lawyer, Joey McCutchen, presented to the school board what he claims is a copy of the grievance that was filed, asking for an official, written response to explain the decision.
McCutchen contends that the termination of Curry was premature and claims the grievance process was not properly followed.
Richardson believes race may have played a role in Curry's reassignment. She addressed her concerns at a school board meeting on Dec. 16.
'We have never had a Black head football coach. I'm going to state the elephant that is in the room. It's called color. And I think that there comes a certain level of obligation of the individual who has that complexion to do the best they possibly can on the backs of their own community. Some people will never understand that – the toll that it takes to make sure that you are doing the best that you can for every student, every young man and woman that you touch,' Richardson said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Ending LGBTQ+ health research will leave science in the dark
In recent months, the Trump administration has terminated thousands of federally funded medical research grants, gutting $9.5 billion in critical health science efforts. More than half of those cuts — 1,246 grants worth $5.5 billion — targeted studies focused on LGBTQ+ health. These cuts don't just reflect shifting policy priorities. They also risk limiting the scientific insights that inform clinical care and support the health of all Americans. Beginning in February, thousands of scientists received abrupt notices terminating funding for vital research involving LGBTQ+ populations. The justification? Their research was deemed 'based primarily on artificial and nonscientific categories, including amorphous equity objectives.' One letter even claimed that 'research programs based on gender identity are often unscientific, have little identifiable return on investment, and do nothing to enhance the health of many Americans.' The grants that were terminated underwent stringent peer review prior to funding and covered a wide range of important issues — from Alzheimer's disease and breast cancer to caregiver well-being and school safety. In many cases, the common factor cited in their termination was simply the inclusion of LGBTQ+ populations within the research scope. When groups of people are excluded from research, it sends a message about whose health is prioritized. The disproportionate elimination of LGBTQ-focused research is more than a policy decision or political maneuver. It weakens the foundation of evidence-based care. Research is essential to understanding health risks, evaluating treatments and improving care for people who need it most. When research funding is withdrawn, medical care falls behind, and collectively we all suffer. LGBTQ+ people make up nearly 10% of the U.S. population, and long-standing research shows they face significant health disparities. Many of these gaps remain poorly understood because of limited studies. For example, lesbian, gay and bisexual populations experience higher rates of substance use disorders, often beginning in adolescence. LGBTQ+ adults are three to six times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual, cisgender counterparts. The incidence of several cancers is also higher, but we don't have a comprehensive understanding of why. Crucial studies investigating possible causes and risk factors were among those recently terminated. We've seen the consequences of neglecting health disparities before. For decades, medical problems unique to Black Americans were understudied and unsolved. For example, the false assumptions that hypertension can be managed the same across racial groups delayed important insights and limited the development of tailored treatment. These delays resulted in worse cardiovascular outcomes for Black patients compared with their white counterparts. Another historical example of the dangers of excluding subpopulations from research is the Food and Drug Administration's 1977 decision to ban women of childbearing age from clinical drug trials. This guideline created a selection bias against women across the research world and slowed progress in understanding their unique health needs. Though the ban was lifted 16 years later, we remain behind in our understanding of cardiovascular disease management in women, and closing that gap will require decades of focused research. And now the Trump administration is repeating this pattern by deliberately excluding a subgroup of the population from research. The neglect of health disparities among LGBTQ+ patients will continue, to their great detriment. The withdrawal of grant funding specific to this group risks condemning millions of people to dangerous health disadvantages for years to come. This move diminishes the pool of researchers dedicated to solving health problems that affect the LGBTQ+ community, as they are forced to follow other funding lines. Lack of research attention to communities with unique needs, such as the LGBTQ+ population, risks increased marginalization and exacerbates stigma. Stigma has long shaped how public health crises are recognized and addressed. In 1981, U.S. health officials became aware of an emerging disease they called Gay-Related Immune Deficiency. Contracting this disease came with both a death sentence and the stigma of having the 'gay plague.' The condition was eventually understood to be a serious public health issue affecting a broad range of people and was renamed HIV/AIDS. Yet it took nearly five years before President Reagan made major funding available for HIV/AIDS research. Delays in funding, in part because of stigma, slowed scientific progress and contributed to the spread of the epidemic. To ignore the issues facing any one population is to risk potential harm to all of society. All people deserve quality, evidence-based healthcare that addresses their unique physical, psychological and social needs. That is precisely why medical research is a foundational pillar of a functioning healthcare system. Without it, our understanding of diseases and treatments is dependent on outdated, extrapolated or incomplete evidence — which causes harm. By withholding funding for research that includes LGBTQ+ participants, the Trump administration is sending a message that the health of nearly 32 million Americans simply isn't worth the investment of federal dollars. The cost of that decision will be measured in suffering, inequity and lives lost — not just within the LGBTQ+ community, but across the entire healthcare system. Haley Stepp is the research program manager at the George Washington University School of Nursing. Kathleen Griffith is a professor at the George Washington University School of Nursing and School of Medicine and Health Sciences.
5 hours ago
Nevada governor's race shaping up as a marquee battle in a state carried by Trump
LAS VEGAS -- Setting the stage for what is expected to be a highly competitive fight for Nevada governor, Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford announced Monday he will challenge Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo next year. Ford represents the highest-profile Democrat to enter the still-emerging contest in a battleground state carried by President Donald Trump in 2024. In the election, Trump made gains among younger voters, voters without a college degree and Black and Hispanic men. 'Nevadans are suffering in an economy that is rigged against those trying their hardest to stay afloat,' Ford said in a statement. "I will work to lower the crushing cost of housing and prescription drugs, strengthen our public schools and ensure every community in Nevada is safe.' The Better Nevada PAC — which supports Lombardo — called Ford a 'radical' who has pushed a 'dangerous woke agenda' on Nevada families. Even with the primary election nearly a year away, the race is widely seen as a toss-up, in part because Nevada is narrowly divided between Democrats and Republicans. As in many parts of the country, residents continue to be stressed by the cost of living and a lack of affordable housing. The race will unfold during an unsettled time nationally, with Democrats still trying to recast their brand after 2024 losses in Congress and the White House. Meanwhile, recent polling found only about one-quarter of U.S. adults say that President Donald Trump's policies have helped them since he took office. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found underwhelming marks for the president on key issues, including the economy, immigration, government spending and health care. Lombardo, who is expected to run for reelection, would come to the race with the advantages of incumbency. Not surprisingly in a swing state, he has sought to fashion a generally middle-ground Republican reputation at a time when Americans are deeply divided by partisan politics. Last month, Lombardo unexpectedly vetoed a bill that would have required voters to show a photo ID at the polls — a conservative priority across the country and something that has been on Lombardo's legislative wish list. The bill came together as a compromise between the governor and the top Democrat in the state Assembly, who wanted to add more drop boxes for mail ballots in the days leading up to an election. In his veto message, Lombardo said he 'wholeheartedly' supports voter ID laws but felt the final version fell short on addressing his concerns about ballots cast by mail, because such ballots could still be accepted 'solely on the basis of a signature match' under the bill. If elected, Ford would be Nevada's first Black governor. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, political scientist David Damore said Democrats have lost ground in the state. But there is a path for Ford if the party can make the election a referendum on the Trump economy — including cuts for Medicaid and green energy programs and declining Las Vegas tourism — while avoiding identity politics issues that have cost Democrats with voters. 'A caveat is there is no U.S. Senate race in 2026, which typically injects lots of Democratic resources into the state,' he added in an email.
San Francisco Chronicle
13 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Nevada governor's race shaping up as a marquee battle in a state carried by Trump
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Setting the stage for what is expected to be a highly competitive fight for Nevada governor, Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford announced Monday he will challenge Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo next year. Ford represents the highest-profile Democrat to enter the still-emerging contest in a battleground state carried by President Donald Trump in 2024. In the election, Trump made gains among younger voters, voters without a college degree and Black and Hispanic men. 'Nevadans are suffering in an economy that is rigged against those trying their hardest to stay afloat,' Ford said in a statement. "I will work to lower the crushing cost of housing and prescription drugs, strengthen our public schools and ensure every community in Nevada is safe.' The Better Nevada PAC — which supports Lombardo — called Ford a 'radical' who has pushed a 'dangerous woke agenda' on Nevada families. Even with the primary election nearly a year away, the race is widely seen as a toss-up, in part because Nevada is narrowly divided between Democrats and Republicans. As in many parts of the country, residents continue to be stressed by the cost of living and a lack of affordable housing. The race will unfold during an unsettled time nationally, with Democrats still trying to recast their brand after 2024 losses in Congress and the White House. Meanwhile, recent polling found only about one-quarter of U.S. adults say that President Donald Trump's policies have helped them since he took office. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found underwhelming marks for the president on key issues, including the economy, immigration, government spending and health care. Lombardo, who is expected to run for reelection, would come to the race with the advantages of incumbency. Not surprisingly in a swing state, he has sought to fashion a generally middle-ground Republican reputation at a time when Americans are deeply divided by partisan politics. Last month, Lombardo unexpectedly vetoed a bill that would have required voters to show a photo ID at the polls — a conservative priority across the country and something that has long been on the governor's legislative wish list. If elected, Ford would be Nevada's first Black governor.
