Featured Stories
USPOULTRY and Foundation Invest $465,000 for Five New Research Projects
TUCKER, Georgia, Sept. 16 -- The U.S. Poultry Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
USPOULTRY and Foundation Invest $465,000 for Five New Research Projects
September 14, 2026
USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation are continuing their longstanding investment in advancing poultry and egg industry research, approving $465,000 in funding for five new research projects at five institutions through the organizations' Comprehensive Research Program. The boards of directors of USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation approved the grants based on recommendations from the Foundation Research
... Show Full Article
TUCKER, Georgia, Sept. 16 -- The U.S. Poultry Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
USPOULTRY and Foundation Invest $465,000 for Five New Research Projects
September 14, 2026
USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation are continuing their longstanding investment in advancing poultry and egg industry research, approving $465,000 in funding for five new research projects at five institutions through the organizations' Comprehensive Research Program. The boards of directors of USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation approved the grants based on recommendations from the Foundation ResearchAdvisory Committee (FRAC). Comprised of professionals representing diverse segments of the poultry and egg industry, the FRAC evaluates research proposals for scientific merit, industry relevance and potential to deliver meaningful, real-world value.
For more than six decades, research has been a cornerstone of USPOULTRY's service to the industry. What began in the early 1960s with funding dedicated to poultry disease research has evolved into a comprehensive program supporting research across all aspects of poultry and egg production and processing. Since the program's inception, USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation have reinvested more than $40 million in research, supporting work at more than 50 universities and federal and state research facilities. The newly funded projects will address priority issues facing the poultry and egg industry, supporting research designed to generate practical knowledge, strengthen industry practices and help prepare the industry for emerging challenges.
"Investing in research is an investment in the future of our industry," said Bill Griffith, Peco Foods, USPOULTRY chair and FRAC member. "The challenges facing poultry and egg production continue to evolve, and it is important that our industry has the science and information needed to respond effectively. By supporting research driven by real industry needs, we can help advance practical solutions that strengthen our industry today while positioning it for continued success in the years ahead."
The research grants for each institution include:
Reducing Layout Times and Improve Heat Treatment During Windrowing Using a Low-Cost Covered Static Aerated Pile (CSAP) Approach
Auburn University
* * *
Repurposing FDA-Approved Animal Drugs to Control Histomonas meleagridis (Blackhead Disease) in Turkeys
Clemson University
* * *
Novel Vaccine-Based Approach for the Control of Avian Pathogenic E. coli (APEC) in Poultry Production
University of Georgia
* * *
New Generation Clostridium perfringens Vaccine Development
University of Florida
* * *
Characterization of Turkey Coronavirus Transmission Routes in the U.S. Turkey Industry
The Ohio State University
* * *
About USPOULTRY
U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) is the All Feather Association progressively serving its poultry and egg members through research, education, communications and technical services.Founded in 1947, USPOULTRY is based in Tucker, Georgia.
* * *
About USPOULTRY Foundation
The USPOULTRY Foundation's mission is to support the recruitment and training of the brightest students, seek and fund scientific research, foster student scientists and promote careers in the poultry and egg industry.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.poultryfoundation.org/news/pressRelease.cfm?pid=0AB3D16B23A92D01BF2B246572C82F57
Social Security is Critical Issue for Voters in Key US Senate Races
NEW YORK, Sept. 16 -- The Peter G. Peterson Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Social Security is Critical Issue for Voters in Key US Senate Races
*
Battleground state voters who will decide the balance of the U.S. Senate say that Social Security will be a deciding factor in their choice this November, according to a new survey released today by the nonpartisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation. Voters in Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas are far more likely to vote for a candidate who has a plan to reform Social Security.
According to the 2026 Social Security Trustees
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, Sept. 16 -- The Peter G. Peterson Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Social Security is Critical Issue for Voters in Key US Senate Races
*
Battleground state voters who will decide the balance of the U.S. Senate say that Social Security will be a deciding factor in their choice this November, according to a new survey released today by the nonpartisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation. Voters in Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas are far more likely to vote for a candidate who has a plan to reform Social Security.
According to the 2026 Social Security TrusteesReport, Social Security's primary Trust Fund will be fully depleted by 2032. At that time, absent reforms from Congress, all beneficiaries will face automatic benefit cuts of 22%, immediately. All U.S. Senators elected this year, and the President elected in 2028, will be in office at the time that this key program reaches insolvency.
The results of this comprehensive survey of voters in states with competitive Senate races, jointly conducted by Democratic firm Global Strategy Group and Republican firm North Star Opinion Research, include:
* 81% of voters are more likely to support a candidate this election with a plan to prevent automatic Social Security benefit cuts over a candidate who promises not to touch Social Security (17%).
* 77% of voters say lawmakers who promise not to touch Social Security are making the problem worse and agree delaying makes the problem harder to fix.
* 91% support Social Security reforms. Notably, this level of support increases significantly from 49% in this survey, once respondents are made aware of the projected automatic cuts in 2032.
* 85% say it is more important than ever for lawmakers to fix Social Security, with the cost of living so high and rising every day.
* 88% of voters agree that current lawmakers should talk more about this problem.
Majorities of voters across party lines support potential reforms.
* 72% of voters support raising the payroll tax cap by an additional 1% on all income above $184,500.
* 66% support capping all annual Social Security benefits, so that no retired couple receives more than $100,000 per year.
* 65% support reducing the benefits that the top 20% of earners receive.
* 65% also support a balanced approach of gradual benefit adjustments and tax increases to preserve Social Security for the long haul.
* Voters overwhelmingly agree that government borrowing to prevent the automatic benefit cuts is unacceptable (29% support, ranking lowest overall and across each demographic group).
"The voters who will determine the balance of the U.S. Senate are calling on candidates to strengthen the future of Social Security," said Michael A. Peterson, CEO of the Peterson Foundation. "Senators elected this fall will be in office in 2032 when Social Security recipients will face immediate 22% cuts, so all candidates should be putting forth solutions in this campaign to prevent this catastrophic result. The good news indicated by this survey is that voters want this problem addressed, and there is strong bipartisan support for many available solutions that would sustain this essential program."
A recent analysis by the nonpartisan Committee for Responsible Federal budget illustrates how much voters in these five battleground states stand to lose, as set forth below:
This online poll surveyed 2,500 registered voters total across the five states (500 registered voters in each of the five states) between August 20 and August 27, 2026. It has a margin of error of +/- 4.4%. Click Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas for an analysis of results in each respective state.
***
Original text here: https://www.pgpf.org/press/social-security-is-critical-issue-for-voters-in-key-us-senate-races/ (TNSmrp)
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: Government Agencies Must Be Held Responsible for Negative Outcomes From Their Use of AI
LOS ANGELES, California, Sept. 16 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
Government agencies must be held responsible for negative outcomes from their use of AI
Government agencies must pair artificial intelligence deployment with clear rules, human oversight, and enforceable accountability for internal and vendor use.
Richard Sill
Technology Policy Analyst
September 15, 2026
Government agencies are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce administrative burdens and improve public services. When agencies apply AI to practical, well-defined tasks, it can
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, Sept. 16 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
Government agencies must be held responsible for negative outcomes from their use of AI
Government agencies must pair artificial intelligence deployment with clear rules, human oversight, and enforceable accountability for internal and vendor use.
Richard Sill
Technology Policy Analyst
September 15, 2026
Government agencies are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce administrative burdens and improve public services. When agencies apply AI to practical, well-defined tasks, it canspeed up routine work. This can free public employees to focus on complex cases and provide direct services.
However, AI can also produce errors or unfair outcomes when government agencies use it to influence decisions about people's rights, benefits, or safety without adequate testing and oversight. For example, a system used to screen benefit applications could incorrectly identify a person's application as suspicious or incomplete, delaying assistance while the case is reviewed. A law enforcement system could incorrectly connect a person or vehicle to an investigation, leading officers to question or investigate someone who is not involved. These actions can also be difficult for residents and agency staff to understand or correct. AI can magnify these existing government failures by applying the same flawed rules, inaccurate data, or biased patterns across many cases in a short period.
AI can also create privacy and security risks when government agencies or vendors collect, retain, share, or expose sensitive government information without adequate controls. A breach or unauthorized use of agency data can reveal personal information or allow data to be used beyond legal or agency-approved limits.
To minimize these harms, government agencies must pair AI deployment with clear rules, human oversight, and enforceable accountability for agencies and vendors.
Streamlining government work
AI can help public employees complete repetitive, high-volume tasks more quickly. For example, it can prepare a first draft of a routine letter, summarize an authorized case file, or pull information from a standardized form. Agencies should begin with defined, low-risk tasks and measure whether a tool is accurate, secure, and worth its cost before expanding its use.
Governments are already showing how AI can support routine work at every level of the public sector. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses its internal Elsa platform to assist with scientific review and operational tasks. Elsa helps staff review clinical protocols and summarize reports of harmful side effects. It can also search large document collections, compare labels, analyze data and generate code. Subject-matter experts verify the inputs, analytic processes, and implementation of AI-supported outputs.
The North Carolina Department of State Treasurer uses ChatGPT in its Unclaimed Property Division and related offices. The tool helped employees locate businesses that may hold unclaimed assets, summarize regulations and lengthy materials, analyze financial information, and draft clearer communications for businesses and residents. Pilot participants reported saving 30 to 60 or more minutes each day.
Cities are also moving beyond small-scale testing. San Francisco expanded Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat from a pilot of more than 2,000 employees to nearly 30,000 staff members. The platform helps employees analyze data, assist with project planning, and conduct research. For public servants such as social workers, these time savings can mean more time for direct services. By sharing results and lessons from these pilots, governments can build on effective practices and avoid repeating mistakes as they expand AI use.
Testing and correcting AI errors
Before a government agency uses AI to support decisions about benefits, rights, employment, education, healthcare, or access to government services, it should test whether the system is accurate for the task. The agency should compare its results with reliable information and check for patterns of error across communities and case types. For example, before using AI to flag benefit applications or generate law enforcement leads, agencies should compare its results with actual outcomes and check for false flags.
Agencies should not treat AI recommendations as a final decision or treat an AI-generated match, risk score, or investigative lead as proof that a person committed wrongdoing or is connected to an investigation. A trained employee should be required to review the relevant facts, be able to disagree with the system, and document the reason for a significant decision.
Agencies should also monitor systems after deployment, investigate recurring errors, and pause or change a tool if it produces unreliable or unfair results. They should track how often staff overrides the system, whether errors cluster in particular types of cases or among particular communities, and whether residents are experiencing delays, denials, or other harmful outcomes.
Protecting sensitive data and government records
Government agencies hold sensitive information about their residents, including health, tax, criminal justice, personnel, and investigative records. AI does not change the government's duty to protect that information. It requires agencies to apply existing privacy, security, confidentiality, and records-management obligations to new tools, vendors, and workflows. These obligations apply to other government and contractors as well, but AI deserves added attention because it can process and reuse large volumes of government information quickly, allowing a single weak control to expose more data or affect more cases. Data safeguards help prevent these harms by protecting sensitive information and preserving records that agencies may need to investigate misuse, security incidents, or problems with an AI system.
Before a government employee uses an AI tool, the agency should know where the information will go, who can access it, whether the vendor will keep it, and whether the vendor may use it for another purpose. Without those controls, an employee could enter sensitive case information into a public AI tool and expose it to a system the agency cannot audit, secure, or delete. Generative AI systems can also create privacy risks through the leakage, unauthorized disclosure, or de-anonymization of sensitive personal information.
AI can create records that agencies must retain, manage, or disclose under existing public-records law. A prompt submitted to an AI tool, the tool's chat histories, and its output may all qualify as government records depending on how they are used. For example, an AI-generated summary used to support an agency recommendation may document official business and need to be preserved. Agencies should therefore use only approved tools and prohibit staff from providing sensitive information to unapproved systems. Contracts should limit data retention, restrict access, and require deletion when the contracts end. Agencies should also use encryption to protect sensitive information, maintain audit logs to identify improper access or misuse, and establish procedures for responding to a breach or other failure. Federal guidance also cautions agencies to protect government information from unauthorized disclosure and to restrict vendors from using it to train or improve commercial products without agency permission.
Accountability for government AI use
Government agencies must remain accountable for how they use AI and for the effects of AI-supported decisions. Using AI does not excuse agencies from civil rights, anti-discrimination, privacy, or due-process obligations. When an AI-supported action affects benefits, employment, licensing, healthcare, education, or public safety, residents should be able to seek an explanation, correction, and meaningful human review.
AI can also change the scale of agency action. A mistake in a vendor's system, an inaccurate AI model, or an access setting that lets the wrong people see or use the data can affect many records, decisions, or residents at once. Agencies need controls that can detect and stop these failures before they spread.
Vendor-operated systems can also create accountability problems. For example, automated license-plate-reader systems allow police departments and other public agencies to collect and search vehicle and location information at scale. Agencies set the rules for access, retention, sharing, and auditing, but a vendor's system design and configuration can determine whether those rules are carried out as intended.
Concerns about broad data sharing, potential access by federal immigration authorities, and improper searches have led some jurisdictions to reconsider or cancel contracts for automated license-plate-reader systems. In Ventura, Calif., the police department found that a vendor-based configuration error had allowed unauthorized out-of-state law enforcement agencies to query local license-plate-reader data, even though the department's settings were intended to limit access to California partners. The city said the queries occurred without its knowledge or authorization.
The Ventura incident shows why government contracts cannot simply assume that a vendor's technical settings reflect an agency's legal and policy limits. Agencies should set rules for data access and sharing, then use audit logs to regularly test whether those rules are being followed. Contracts should require vendors to configure systems to enforce approved access limits, provide usable audit logs, promptly disclose misconfigurations and breaches, and cooperate with independent audits. They should also define who owns the data, prohibit unauthorized commercial reuse, and allow agencies to suspend or terminate a contract when safeguards fail. This would give agencies a clear way to stop using a system that does not meet required protections.
Government must always be accountable for how it uses its power, including when it uses AI. AI can improve services and reduce administrative burdens at scale, but it can also magnify errors, privacy violations, and surveillance. Strong safeguards and enforceable oversight can help ensure that governmental use of AI serves the public without allowing the government to evade responsibility for the harms it causes.
* * *
Richard Sill is a technology policy analyst at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/government-agencies-must-be-held-responsible-for-negative-outcomes-from-their-use-of-ai/
Foundation for Economic Education Issues Commentary: Japan's Reflationist Bet Is Running Out of Road
DETROIT, Michigan, Sept. 16 -- The Foundation for Economic Education issued the following commentary:
* * *
Tuesday, September 15, 2026
Japan's Reflationist Bet Is Running Out of Road
Jake Scott
Takaichi's economic agenda faces a new reality.
-
On Monday, September 7, in Tokyo, an economist who has spent a year arguing that the Bank of Japan (BoJ) should wait to hike interest rates published a note saying it no longer can. Takuji Aida, who advises Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, sits on her flagship growth-strategy panel, and 10 months ago he warned that a December rate rise would be quite
... Show Full Article
DETROIT, Michigan, Sept. 16 -- The Foundation for Economic Education issued the following commentary:
* * *
Tuesday, September 15, 2026
Japan's Reflationist Bet Is Running Out of Road
Jake Scott
Takaichi's economic agenda faces a new reality.
-
On Monday, September 7, in Tokyo, an economist who has spent a year arguing that the Bank of Japan (BoJ) should wait to hike interest rates published a note saying it no longer can. Takuji Aida, who advises Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, sits on her flagship growth-strategy panel, and 10 months ago he warned that a December rate rise would be quiterisky. He now expects a rate rise from 1% on September 18, followed by three more rate hikes after that.
Aida's forecast is, in itself, unremarkable: markets seem prepared for such a shift, having nearly fully priced a quarter-point move to 1.25%, the highest rate the BoJ has risen to since 1995. What is remarkable is the source of the rise. Aida is a reflationist, the doctrine upon which Takaichi's government was built--cheap money, proactive fiscal policy, and the conviction that tightening belts will return Japan to deflation. Inflation in Japan currently stands at 1.9% in July, having risen from 1.6% in June. This was the policy that Takaichi's landslide win in February ratified, but, seven months later, the prime minister's own adviser is laying out a roadmap away from this flagship policy.
The main cause of this change of course is the historic fall of the yen in late July 2026. Falling to about Yen164 to the dollar, the weakest the currency had reached in nearly 40 years, Tokyo scrambled to address the problem and spent an estimated $85 billion over the course of two days buying it back. Assisting the Japanese government, the US Treasury joined in, selling euros from its reserves to buy yen--the first coordinated operation to support the yen since 1998.
It worked, but not permanently, because it could not address the interest-rate differential that produced the weakness in the first place, and selling off reserves is, definitionally, a finite instrument against a potentially infinite problem.
The reflationist approach is the direct casualty of this currency collapse, as the weaker yen raised the price of imported food and energy, with food inflation the exact target of Takaichi's signature policy: a cut in food consumption tax from 8% to 1%, for a period of two years beginning in April 2027. The currency collapse has started undermining the policy before the legislation has even hit the parliamentary floor.
But while the currency is the cause, the timing is political. Aida has brought his forecast forward because September offers a narrow window before an extraordinary session of the Diet convenes in October. Aida, however, is not the only driver behind the change--Bloomberg reported on August 13 that the government already favored a rise in the immediate term, while BoJ Governor Kazuo Ueda has said that the Bank will debate a move in September:
From the perspective of conducting policy with a risk-management approach as the underlying inflation rate approaches 2%, we have come to believe that we need to pay greater attention than before to upside risks in our policy conduct.
What would this rate rise lead to? The first consequence is fiscal: Japan's 10-year bond yield came within reaching distance of 3% on September 1, a level unseen since 1996, and the government's current debt is already above 200% of GDP. Maurice Obstfeld, for the Peterson Institute for International Economics, put it starkly and plainly: "...the Japanese authorities face a dilemma between raising interest rates--to strengthen the yen and dampen inflation pressures--and worsening fiscal sustainability. At best, intervention can paper over these conflicting forces for a short time." It is a zero-sum trade-off, and there is no configuration available to the BoJ in which both problems improve.
Moreover, this is not a preemptive move on the Bank's behalf, with its own April 2026 projection already forecasting core inflation between 2.5-3% for the current fiscal year, driven by crude oil and firms passing wage increases into prices. September 18 is, in many ways, a Bank making a decision to catch up with its own projections from six months earlier.
The second consequence ripples beyond Japan itself as the impact is felt regionally. As Brad Setser, who worked on currency policy at the US Treasury, notes: "A weak yen tends to put pressure on other Asian currencies, and it could make it harder for China to continue to allow a slow appreciation of its currency."
But the third consequence may be the most significant. Japan is the world's third-biggest creditor nation (behind China and Germany), and for a generation, since the beginning of the Lost Decades, Japan's institutions have exported savings in an attempt to offset the poor economic outlook at home. This all looks set to change now. Banks, insurers, and pension funds can now meet yen liabilities with yen assets, without paying to hedge or gambling on the currency, and the global consequences would be far-reaching. A tightening cycle that encourages Japanese money to stay in Japan could be a withdrawal of one of the deepest pools of funding in the global system.
This puts the Bank of Japan in a position to make a decision that is increasingly uncomfortable, because there is no easy answer. The government, having pursued reflationary policies and signaling its preference for restraint, has now indicated a course-correction--whether it will do so remains to be seen, but the consequences are real and reach beyond Japan's coastline.
* * *
Dr Jake Scott is a political theorist specialising in populism and its relationship to political constitutionality. He has taught at multiple British universities and produced research reports for several think tanks.
* * *
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/japans-reflationist-bet-is-running-out-of-road/
FFRF Halts Clergy-Led Graduation Prayers in N.D. School District
MADISON, Wisconsin, Sept. 16 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
September 14, 2026
FFRF halts clergy-led graduation prayers in N.D. school district
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has persuaded a North Dakota school district to end its longstanding, unconstitutional practice of including clergy-led prayer during high school graduation ceremonies.
A concerned student informed the state/church watchdog that the Lidgerwood Public School district had a years-long tradition of beginning high school graduation ceremonies with a Christian prayer
... Show Full Article
MADISON, Wisconsin, Sept. 16 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
September 14, 2026
FFRF halts clergy-led graduation prayers in N.D. school district
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has persuaded a North Dakota school district to end its longstanding, unconstitutional practice of including clergy-led prayer during high school graduation ceremonies.
A concerned student informed the state/church watchdog that the Lidgerwood Public School district had a years-long tradition of beginning high school graduation ceremonies with a Christian prayerdelivered by a clergyperson. The student has personally witnessed this school-sponsored graduation prayer at the past four graduations, and their understanding is that the district's graduation prayer practice had been going on far longer. A program from the most recent graduation ceremony indicates that an invocation was indeed delivered at the May 17 event.
The student, who belongs to a minority religion, told FFRF that the Christian prayer made them uncomfortable and pressured students to participate. "No one wants to be the only person not standing with their head bowed," the student explained. The student was particularly concerned about facing the same religious exercise at their own future graduation, telling FFRF that they might skip the ceremony entirely rather than endure the discomfort of a school-sponsored prayer.
FFRF took action, urging the district to comply with court precedent to ensure that future high school graduation ceremonies do not include school-sponsored prayer, which have been ruled unconstitutional.
"School officials may not invite a clergymember, student, community member, teacher, administrator, or anyone else to give any type of prayer, invocation, benediction, or sermon at a public high school-sponsored event," FFRF Staff Attorney Sammi Lawrence wrote to the superintendent.
High school graduation is a once-in-a-lifetime event that students spend over a decade working toward. As our student-complainant explained, the school's shoehorning prayer into graduation made them so anxious about their graduation that they considered not attending it in order to avoid having their constitutional rights violated by their school. Including prayers at graduation puts many students and families in the difficult position of choosing between exiting or foregoing the ceremony or violating their conscience. The First Amendment forbids public schools from coercing students to make this choice. And making prayer part of graduation ceremonies and other school-sponsored events needlessly marginalizes students and families who are nonreligious or members of minority faiths, such as our complainant. Thirty-eight percent of the American population is non-Christian, including nearly 30 percent who are nonreligious. More than half of Generation Z (those born after 1996) is non-Christian, including a whopping 43 percent who have no religious affiliation.
FFRF is pleased to report that the district took appropriate corrective action. In a letter to FFRF, Ian R. McLean, the district's legal representative, wrote: "The district will not sponsor or organize a clergy delivered prayer as part of future graduation programs. The district will continue to treat private religious and nonreligious expression neutrally and in accordance with applicable First Amendment law."
FFRF welcomes the district's commitment to ensuring future graduations are inclusive of every student -- regardless of their religious or nonreligious beliefs.
"No student should have to choose between participating in a religious exercise that violates their conscience and feeling like an outsider at their own graduation," says FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. "We're especially grateful to the courageous student who spoke up. Because they did, future Lidgerwood graduates will be able to celebrate this important milestone without a school-sponsored religious exercise."
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional principle of separation between state and church and educating the public on matters relating to nontheism. With more than 40,000 members across the country, including members in North Dakota, FFRF is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics and humanists) in North America. For more information, visit ffrf.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/ffrf-halts-clergy-led-graduation-prayers-in-n-d-school-district/
[Category: Religion]
Colo. School District Stops Coach-directed Prayer Following FFRF Complaint
MADISON, Wisconsin, Sept. 16 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
September 15, 2026
Colo. school district stops coach-directed prayer following FFRF complaint
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has convinced Colorado's second-largest school district to address a constitutional violation involving school-sponsored prayer at an official athletics event.
A concerned Jeffco Public Schools system parent reported that the May 12 Bear Creek High School annual track team awards banquet included a student-led prayer directed by the track team coach. The
... Show Full Article
MADISON, Wisconsin, Sept. 16 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
September 15, 2026
Colo. school district stops coach-directed prayer following FFRF complaint
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has convinced Colorado's second-largest school district to address a constitutional violation involving school-sponsored prayer at an official athletics event.
A concerned Jeffco Public Schools system parent reported that the May 12 Bear Creek High School annual track team awards banquet included a student-led prayer directed by the track team coach. Theparent stated that the coach selected a student to lead approximately 50 students and guests in a Christian prayer before the meal. Everyone at the banquet was reportedly told to stop what they were doing for the prayer.
The parent, who is an atheist, told FFRF that the prayer left them "shocked that it was so casually done" and expressed concerns about other non-Christian attendees as well, including Muslim guests. Although the parent wanted to object, they stayed silent because they "didn't want to somehow jeopardize [their child's] standing in the community."
FFRF asked Jeffco Public Schools to investigate and ensure that the coach ceases ordering students to lead prayer at school-sponsored events.
"School officials may not direct students to give any type of prayer, invocation, benediction, or sermon at public school-sponsored events," FFRF Staff Attorney Sammi Lawrence wrote to the superintendent.
Here, the coach crossed the line by asking a student to lead all fellow students and guests in prayer at the official annual awards banquet. The school-sponsored prayer coerced everyone in attendance, including our complainant and their student, to observe and participate in a religious exercise. By allowing a coach to direct a student to lead prayers at an official school-sponsored event, Bear Creek High School, and thus the Jeffco Public Schools district, abridged that duty. School-sponsored prayers needlessly marginalize students and community members (such as our complainant and their students) among the 47 percent of Coloradans who are non-Christian, including the 44 percent of Generation Z members who are nonreligious.
The district replied positively -- verifying that it investigated FFRF's complaint and addressed the matter with its employees.
"I can confirm that Jeffco followed up on the concern raised," the district responded in an email. "Follow-up included speaking with multiple employees who were present at the banquet. In response to that inquiry, the matter was addressed as appropriate with our team members."
FFRF welcomes the district's answer and expects that future school-sponsored events will respect the rights of students and families of all religious and nonreligious backgrounds.
"Students should be able to celebrate their accomplishments without being subjected to a religious exercise orchestrated by their public school or coach," says FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. "Public school athletics should bring students together -- not place them in the unconstitutional and uncomfortable position of being prayed at or participating in someone else's religion."
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional principle of separation between state and church and educating the public on matters relating to nontheism. With over 40,000 members and several chapters across the country, including more than 1,400 members and two chapters in Colorado, FFRF is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics and humanists) in North America. For more information, visit ffrf.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/colo-school-district-stops-coach-directed-prayer-following-ffrf-complaint/
[Category: Religion]
Boston Foundation: New Report Highlights How Local Permitting Delays or Derails Much Needed Housing in Massachusetts
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Sept. 16 (TNSrpt) -- The Boston Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
New report highlights how local permitting delays or derails much needed housing in Massachusetts
Statewide zoning reforms can be undermined by process delays, negotiations, and the threat of litigation, says urbanist Jonathan Berk
September 15, 2026
-
Boston - A new report from renowned urbanist Jonathan Berk and Boston Indicators, the research center at the Boston Foundation, suggests Massachusetts' efforts to reshape zoning and spark housing construction are running headlong into
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Sept. 16 (TNSrpt) -- The Boston Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
New report highlights how local permitting delays or derails much needed housing in Massachusetts
Statewide zoning reforms can be undermined by process delays, negotiations, and the threat of litigation, says urbanist Jonathan Berk
September 15, 2026
-
Boston - A new report from renowned urbanist Jonathan Berk and Boston Indicators, the research center at the Boston Foundation, suggests Massachusetts' efforts to reshape zoning and spark housing construction are running headlong intolocal permitting processes that can delay or stop projects entirely. Delayed by Design: How Discretionary Permitting Stalls Housing in Massachusetts, explores the gaps between what zoning allows on paper and what permitting makes possible in practice, drawing lessons from middle-housing projects in six Massachusetts communities, and makes a series of recommendations that protect review processes while reducing uncertainty and delays.
"Statewide zoning reforms like the MBTA Communities Act have created the opportunity to build more needed 'missing middle' housing, but this report reminds us that is just one step in a longer process," said Luc Schuster, Executive Director of Boston Indicators. "Jonathan highlights how the complicated local processes and the lack of administrative capacity can drive up costs and sidetrack projects that in the end could create much- needed homes."
In the report, Berk looks at the lessons that can be drawn from the experiences of six projects, demonstrating the systemic challenges of navigating discretionary review, fragmented local regulations, and prolonged timelines that put pressure on developers and builders to reshape or even abandon projects at multiple points in the permitting process.
"These projects are just examples of some of the ways that the 351 cities and towns across the state administer the local permitting process," said Jonathan Berk. "Because each community sets its own rules, the result is hundreds of different standards and timelines, and a significant amount of administrative overhead that taxes not only permit applicants but also those in each community who must manage and weigh in on the permitting process. The result is slower development and greater friction, even in places where zoning rules would suggest real opportunities for needed housing development."
The case studies, which explore the progress of developments in Salem, Marblehead, Newton, Melrose, Arlington and Lexington, highlighted how individual communities' processes and decision-making play central roles in whether or how projects get built.
In the two examples cited as "cautionary tales," the report tracks the progress of a proposal to build a 20-unit building on the site of a closed auto repair shop that has met five years of slowdowns and appeals, and an assisted living and memory care facility in Marblehead that required more than six years of hearings and appeals before opening as the Mariner in 2023.
The cases are not outliers, but rather examples of the challenges facing those trying to build new housing in a fragmented system of governance that effectively creates 351 separate sets of rules that could apply to a single proposal depending on the city or town of its location.
The researchers suggest the most lasting way to reduce permitting timelines, lower costs, and expand production is to substantially reduce, and place tighter guardrails on, discretionary review through a package of zoning, permitting, and process changes. The report lists out 18 potential recommendations to do so, including liberalizing underlying zoning rules to reduce the need for variances and special permits, rightsizing review processes and criteria to take project scale into account, measures to reduce delays and accelerate appeal processes, and state-level reforms to encourage and support more streamlined processes.
The full list of recommendations is available as part of the interactive report at bostonindicators.org.
* * *
REPORT: https://www.bostonindicators.org/-/media/indicators/boston-indicators-reports/report-web-pages/delayed-by-design/delayedbydesign.pdf
* * *
Original text here: https://www.tbf.org/news-and-insights/press-releases/2026/september/indicators-permitting-reform-report-20260915
