-- SUMMATION --

• Voting Record: Gress has voted for legislation that critics and advocacy groups describe as targeting transgender individuals.

• Preferred Pronoun Bill: He publicly defended a bill that would have barred teachers from using a student's preferred pronouns without parental consent. Gress argued that the bill did not stop students from discussing issues with teachers but rather regulated classroom references.

• Lack of Support for Protections: Democratic colleagues and organizations like Equality Arizona have noted that Gress has not supported recent bipartisan or Democratic-led efforts to pass non-discrimination laws protecting LGBTQIA+ Arizonans in employment and housing.

• Endorsements: He has received endorsements from organizations such as the Center for Arizona Policy, which has a history of opposing LGBTQIA+ non-discrimination ordinances.  (ref 1)  (ref 2)  (ref 3)

• Opposition to Non-Discrimination Protections: In the 2023 and 2024 legislative sessions, Gress did not support any of the three Democratic-led bills aimed at protecting LGBTQIA+ people from discrimination. He reportedly did not respond to requests for bipartisan support on HB 2625, a key anti-discrimination measure.

• Low Advocacy Ratings: On the 2025 Secular AZ Legislative Scorecard, Gress received a rating of 13%, a score that accounts for votes on bills identified by the organization as threatening LGBTQIA+ and transgender equality.

• Voting Record on Targeted Bills: Advocacy groups like Progress Arizona and Children's Action Alliance have tracked his votes on measures they define as "attacks on LGBTQ youth". While Gress focuses his own platform on education and infrastructure reform, his consistent alignment with Republican majority votes has included measures to restrict transgender rights and curricular content.

• Contradictory Voting Record: While publicly championing a repeal of the Civil War-era ban, Gress was caught on video voting with fellow Republicans to recess and adjourn the House session, effectively blocking immediate debate debate and voting on the repeal.

• Admission of Deception: After initially denying his votes, Gress eventually admitted to lying about them when confronted with video evidence, leading to intense criticism from Democrats who labeled him a hypocrite.

• Retaliation from GOP Leadership: Because he eventually broke party ranks to vote for the repeal, House Speaker Ben Toma booted Gress from the influential House Appropriations Committee.

• Fetal Personhood Sponsorship: Critics have pointed out that despite his "pro-choice" branding during the 1864 ban debate, he previously sponsored House Bill 2427, which would have established "fetal personhood," potentially threatening IVF and other reproductive care.  (ref 1)  (ref 2)  (ref 3)  (ref 4)  (ref 5)  (ref 6)

• Broken Campaign Pledge: In 2022, Gress publicly stated he would not accept lobbyist donations during the legislative session. However, finance reports later revealed he accepted $13,000 from 24 registered lobbyists during that exact timeframe.

• Tolleson Union Records Dispute: Gress accused the Tolleson Union High School District of refusing to provide financial transaction records related to a $25 million property leaseback deal with another district.

• Accusations of Misconduct: He used his platform on the House Education Committee to allege fraud and misconduct within the district, leading to a fiery Joint Legislative Audit Committee hearing.  (ref 1)  (ref 2)  (ref 3)  (ref 4)

• Conflict of Interest Allegations: Gress works for Americans for Fair Treatment, a national nonprofit focused on "workers' rights" and anti-union legislation.

• Alignment of Agendas: Critics point out that Gress's legislative actions—such as a 2026 proposal to ban school districts from deducting union dues from paychecks and a bill to prohibit teacher strikes—directly mirror the top policy priorities of his employer.

• Superintendent Notice of Claim: The superintendent of the Tolleson Union High School District filed a notice of claim—a precursor to a lawsuit—seeking $150,000 in damages from Gress.

• Corruption Accusations: The claim alleges Gress made defamstory statements by implying the superintendent's consulting firm received improper payments from another district, which Gress publicly described as "reeking of corruption".

• Grounds for Recall: Supporters of the recall cited his support for legislation they deemed harmful to his constituents and his alleged refusal to fund vital services for the Division of Developmental Disabilities (DDD).

• Constituent Disconnect: The petition claimed Gress had ignored pleas for dialogue from local families in crisis while prioritizing partisan or ideological bills.

• Diverting Safety Funds: Gress proposed using 10% of school safety grant funds to create a new oversight center instead of using general funds, leading to bipartisan disappointment that money meant for physical security at schools might be repurposed.

• Anti-Strike Penalties: He introduced legislation that would not only ban teacher walkouts but also impose harsh penalties on educators who participate in organized work stoppages.  (ref)