Tolleson Union High School District Superintendent Jeremy Calles has hauled state Rep. Matt Gress into civil court, accusing the lawmaker of defamation, false-light invasion of privacy and intentional interference with business expectancies. Calles is seeking money damages along with a formal declaration that Gress's public statements about him are false.
The lawsuit, filed earlier this month, ties Gress's public comments to a political push for an audit of Tolleson after the district's $25 million lease-leaseback arrangement with the Isaac Elementary School District. Those remarks allegedly spooked other school districts and contractors into cutting ties with Calles' consulting firm, costing him contracts and referrals, according to ABC15. The outlet also reports that Gress told the station he has not yet reviewed the lawsuit and that ABC15 reached out to both sides for comment.
The deal that set off the fight
The clash centers on a spring 2025 lease-leaseback deal in which Tolleson advanced $25 million to the financially struggling Isaac Elementary School District to keep its schools open. That lifeline quickly drew the attention of lawmakers and the Auditor General. FOX 10 Phoenix covered the legislative hearing over Tolleson's finances, while Arizona Capitol Times reported lawmakers raising questions about Calles' consulting company, True Professionals, and potential conflicts of interest.
Gress's response and next steps
Gress, who co-chairs the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, has repeatedly pushed Tolleson for more transparency and used the controversy as a springboard for a broader education-oversight push. In a press release from the Arizona Legislature, he outlined a package of education-transparency bills he says were prompted by the Tolleson saga, including a proposal that would require superintendent contracts to be posted online.
What Calles says the suit proves
Calles' complaint argues that Gress's public comments "falsely implied" that Calles and his firm had "improperly obtained or misused public funds." It goes on to list several instances in which school districts or consultants allegedly walked away from existing or potential business relationships after Gress's public accusations, according to ABC15. The lawsuit asks for compensatory damages and a court declaration that Calles hopes will help restore his reputation.
Legal angle: Anti-SLAPP in play
Because many of the challenged statements were made in or about legislative proceedings, Arizona's anti-SLAPP statute, A.R.S. § 12-751, could become a key factor in the case. The law allows a defendant to seek early dismissal of lawsuits that target protected petitioning activity or speech and can trigger expedited hearings and a pause on discovery. The statute text details how courts evaluate prima facie proof that a case was brought to chill public participation; see the statute at A.R.S. § 12-751 as published on Justia.
What comes next
The case will now move through the civil docket, which could mean anti-SLAPP motions, discovery fights and other pretrial skirmishes before anything reaches a jury. No court date has been publicly reported, and the lawsuit is likely to draw close attention as the Auditor General's review and Gress's legislative proposals continue to unfold in the background.
