Santa Rosa Junior College was just supposed to be a stepping stone for Madison Shaw. Instead, she stepped right into a transgender athlete scandal that is now being investigated by the federal government.

With her graduation coming up, she has to move forward without being able to chase her dream of playing NCAA volleyball, which was the whole reason she went to Santa Rosa in the first place.

“It was the only plan I had,” Shaw told Fox News Digital of transferring to an NCAA program.

“I was planning on going to Chico [State University] and transferring, and getting set up through the recruiting process in that. And I wasn’t even able to upload any film or have a coach come out for my sophomore year. Because that year I was forced to be off the team.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM

Shaw had to step away from her volleyball team in the fall because she didn’t want to share a locker room with a biological male, and felt her Title IX rights to privacy, safety and equal opportunity were being violated. She had to throw away her plans for her sophomore season, and any chance of making it to an NCAA program.

Because Santa Rosa, as a junior college and not affiliated with the NCAA, and did not have to comply with the NCAA’s updated policy to prevent biological males from competing in women’s sports, Madison and her teammates ended up on the same roster as a trans athlete.

The California Community College Athletic Association (CCCAA) allows transgender athletes to participate based on their gender identity. Biological males can compete on women’s teams after one calendar year of testosterone suppression treatment.

Santa Rosa and the CCCAA as a whole have been under Title IX investigations by the U.S. Department of Education, and the federal Title IX task force, since January, after Madison and two teammates sent an S.O.S.

SANTA ROSA WOMEN’S VOLLEYBALL PLAYERS OPEN UP ON TRANS TEAMMATE’S ALLEGED SPIKES TO THE HEAD

Madison, and her freshman teammates Brielle Galli and Gracie Shaw, Madison’s sister, filed a Title IX complaint last September that brought attention to what was going on with their team.

Once the complaint became public, and garnered national media attention, multiple tense on-campus incidents allegedly occurred.

The three women allege Santa Rosa President Dr. Angélica Garcia led a pro-trans rally before a volleyball game, handed out packets to attendees.

“The president of our school had a rally to support our male athlete and had packets that were being hand handed out that said that our school is a gender inclusive closet,” Gracie Shaw alleged, with Madison Shaw and Galli corroborating the allegations.

INSIDE GAVIN NEWSOM’S TRANSGENDER VOLLEYBALL CRISIS

Teammates who had once been friends began distancing themselves, and in some cases, they said, actively excluded them.

“We were completely ostracized,” Gracie Shaw said. “We were left in the dark.”

They said teammates created separate group chats without them and held meetings they were not invited to, effectively cutting off communication.

The players said they received backlash on social media and, at times, felt uncomfortable on campus. In one instance, they recalled being recorded and photographed by other students after being recognized in connection with the complaint.

The incident occurred when two other students set up a table with a sign that read “We are Christians, ask us anything.”

The women claim that the two men at the table were being told by other students that they were “hateful people.”

And soon, the anti-Christian crowd realized who the three women were, and two other students allegedly began to record Gracie Shaw and Galli, non-consensually.

The women say the only time the college and its administrators expressed concern for their well-being was in an investigative interview after news of their Title IX complaint had gone public.

“Those interviews really rubbed me the wrong way,” Galli said.

“They kept pushing the same questions on us trying to get a different answer and trying to make us say something that wasn’t true. They kept stating that or they wanted us to state that it was our choice when really we were left with no choice with the way that we were made to feel uncomfortable and unsafe…

“They kept in bringing up the fact that there are so many resources available to us, so many counseling options and just so many resources that are just the school will provide for us. And that was a little ridiculous to me because throughout the whole season when we were participating, we had made it clear to our coach that we didn’t feel safe coming to the games.”

Santa Rosa Junior College provided a statement to Fox News Digital responding to the three women’s statements.

“Santa Rosa Junior College is committed to fostering an inclusive and supportive environment for all students and employees. The District complies with California Community College Athletic Association regulations, which govern student eligibility and participation in our athletic programs,” the statement said.

“We respect the legal privacy rights of all students and cannot discuss individual circumstances. What we can affirm is that SRJC takes all reports seriously and responds through established procedures.”

But there were some moments when the women felt they were being supported, not by administrators, but male athletes at a competing school.

When Santa Rosa Junior College faced Sierra College in Rocklin, California, weeks after the complaint was filed, a “save women’s sports” protest broke out outside of the gym.

One of the protesters, local women’s sports activist Beth Bourne, handed out protest signs to students who attended the game and said it was the first time she’d seen college students protest the issue in person.

Sierra’s men’s athletes even joined in on the protesting. 

“There were men that were college students… that were holding those signs in support of us. Even though they probably didn’t know who we were. They knew that this was something that, that they could, even if it’s a small thing, just like just holding a sign up, they knew that it would make an impact,” Galli said.

It was a rare bright moment in an otherwise grueling school year. But now the summer is coming.

The women can at least move forward knowing their activism caught the attention of the federal government, as the Title IX investigations into the college and the entire CCCAA press on.

And as the three women look to regroup and determine the next step in their education, they each expressed gratitude for President Donald Trump’s administration for having their backs.

But they’re still dealing with the irreversible effects on their futures, and are now navigating life after missing a chance at their NCAA dreams.

Madison Shaw said she is currently working three jobs as she tries to save up for tuition.

“Coming from a very athletic family, we all played sports,” she said. “For them to see this opportunity taken away was very hard on them, knowing that I wasn’t going to get the same opportunities they had when they played sports. And even just financially, this was a way for me to move on past the JC, so it was hard for them to watch.”

Galli found herself in the same situation.

“I saw it as my opportunity to pursue [NCAA sports],” Galli said of her decision to play at Santa Rosa. “I wanted to reach out and try to get recruited, and like Madison said, we didn’t really get the opportunity to play so we didn’t have any film that we could send to the coaches.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Gracie Shaw did not step away from the team right away, and continued practicing, but wouldn’t play in games as a form of protest. But eventually she just couldn’t take it anymore. she stepped away from the team as the situation progressed, and more national attention befell the team.

“I always wanted to get recruited and play at the next level, that was the plan,” Gracie Shaw said.

Madison Shaw continues to work her jobs and explore opportunities outside of playing sports, while Galli and Gracie Shaw are currently set to do another year of junior college.

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Budget gaps in cities across Colorado have made it more difficult to experiment with basic income programs despite their benefits, and experts argue that lack of municipal support could stifle the growth of programs intended to give unconditional payments to people to help pay for basic needs. 

Last week, the Colorado legislature approved a spending package of more than $46.8 billion, and it includes deep cuts to Medicaid and other state services to cover a $1.5 billion budget shortfall. Cities like Denver, Boulder and Colorado Springs have also had to pare back services and programs to cover budget shortfalls. 

Even so, Colorado’s economic conditions appear ripe for experimenting with basic income programs as the cost of living continues to soar. The Colorado Polling Institute’s April statewide poll shows that many voters agree with that assessment — more than 90% identified the cost of housing, healthcare, food and insurance as problems, with more than 44% calling each category a “very big problem.” 

“In a world of finite budgets, we need to figure out what works and move away from what doesn’t,” said Kaitlyn Sims, an assistant professor of public policy at the Josef Korbel School of Global and Public Affairs at the University of Denver. She and other experts convened for the Basic Income Programs in Denver and Beyond panel during Colorado SunFest 2026 on Friday.

What is basic income?

“Basic income” is most commonly known as a periodic, unconditional cash payment to all members of a community. 

That is different from “guaranteed income,” which refers to an unconditional cash payment to members of a specific group, such as students, new mothers or people who are homeless, even though the two programs are commonly confused for one another. 

Basic income is not a new idea, but it has gained steam since the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 1970s, former President Richard Nixon floated the idea of instituting a national basic income program to replace federal spending on social services. 

Today, there are more than 80 basic income pilot programs either active or planned, according to the Income Movement, a nationwide coalition of lawmakers advocating for basic income pilots. More than 75,000 participants across 35 cities have received cash through these programs. 

The idea behind the programs is that if people have help with basic income, it can bring stability in the workforce because people can afford to get to work and have childcare, housing stability, food security and better overall health with less stress about finances.

There are basic income-esque programs already in place across the country. In Colorado, the Family Affordability Tax Credit pays qualifying households $3,200 per child under age 6 and $2,400 per child between ages 6 and 16. 

Another example is the Alaska Permanent Fund, a public program that pays state residents an annual dividend from oil sales.  

Michigan’s Rx Kids program also fits the basic income mold. The program offers households an unconditional payment of $1,500 during pregnancy and $500 a month during the first year of a child’s life. 

How does basic income work?

Denver was home to one of the nation’s largest basic income experiments. Between 2022 and 2025, the Denver Basic Income Project distributed more than $10.8 million to over 800 people experiencing homelessness who were categorized into three groups. 

Group 1 received $1,000 per month for 12 months; Group 2 received $6,500 up front and $500 per month for a year; and Group 3, also known as the “active comparison” group, received $50 a month. Every participant also received a cellphone and a bank card. 

The funding was pooled from a variety of sources, including capital gains realized by program founder Mark Donovan’s investments and a $4 million investment from the city of Denver, funded by the federal American Rescue Plan Act. 

The results of the program were “mixed,” according to Daniel Brisson, another Colorado SunFest panelist and the director of DU’s Center for Housing and Homelessness Research, but not in a “good or bad” kind of way. 

“There is so much happening in so many different directions,” Brisson said. 

All three groups improved housing outcomes, reduced the number of days they spent in hospitals and jails, and improved self-sufficiency, according to the program’s randomized control trial data. 

Perhaps most significantly, Brisson noted several subjective findings that point to the power of basic income. For instance, participants reported in surveys that they felt trusted, a rarity in traditional social services, which are often paternalistic. 

Some participants also reported spending their money to help friends and family in need, which speaks to how basic income can repair or strengthen relationships and foster a sense of belonging. 

“Many people took it as a sign that this meant something, and they were supposed to make something of it,” Brisson said. 

Despite the impact, the Denver Basic Income Project stopped issuing cash payments in September 2025 after Denver’s government decided not to reinvest in the program due to budget constraints. 

Other challenges

Basic income pilots also face headwinds outside of funding. 

The Foundation for Government Accountability, which advocates adding work requirements to social services, has urged local governments to ban basic income programs, arguing that they “discourage work and are a drag on the economy.”

Some state officials have also successfully used the courts to shut down basic income programs. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton convinced a local court in 2025 that Harris County’s basic income pilot violated the Texas Constitution’s prohibition on giving public money to individuals. The lawsuit forced the Harris County program to reallocate its funding.  

Some studies have also suggested that implementing basic income programs could increase poverty, since some proponents view them as a replacement for social services, thereby reducing the government workforce. Other studies suggest basic income could increase inflation by giving people more money to spend, similar to the pandemic stimulus checks. 

Sims noted that the potential disruptions to the government workforce are “concerning” and could lead to a significant increase in unemployment. She added that concerns about inflation are likely overblown unless a basic income pilot is paying participants a living wage. 

Right place, right time

Despite the challenges, basic income could help Coloradans navigate some budding economic issues, according to Scott Wasserman, a panelist and founder of the political consulting group Thinking Forward. 

Wasserman pointed to the latest Colorado Polling Institute data showing that 68% of Coloradans are concerned about artificial intelligence replacing their job. That’s compared with 63% of voters nationally who share the same concerns. Those pressures are being felt by high-income earners, like lawyers and doctors, and low-income earners in jobs like manufacturing. 

Meanwhile, Wasserman said many Coloradans support basic income programs that provide a “big dose” of help, especially for those living in poverty. He cited a privately funded poll that found 56% of voters support paying new parents, people experiencing homelessness and low-income households $500 per month. 

“There is political will,” Wasserman said. “I was a little shocked.”

HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) – One of the world’s premier adaptive surfing events is getting underway in Waikiki.

AccesSurf Hawaii is hosting the 2026 Hawaii Adaptive Surfing Championships this week, with competition beginning Tuesday, May 5, and running through Friday, May 8, at Queen’s Surf Break.

Now in its 18th year, the championships are part of the Adaptive Surfing Professionals World Tour and bring together more than 90 adaptive surfers from around the world competing across multiple divisions.

Organizers said the championships highlight not only elite competition, but also community, culture and inclusion.

“The Hawaii Adaptive Surfing Championships is a powerful gathering of athletes, community and purpose,” said AccesSurf Executive Director Zoe Lewis. “We are proud to host this in Waikiki, where adaptive surfers can compete at an elite level while also experiencing the culture, community and spirit of Hawaii.”

Events began Monday with an opening ceremony at the Duke Kahanamoku Statue, kicking off a week of competition and activities.

In addition to the surf competition, the week includes special events such as the Hawaiʻi premiere of The Incredible Paulk on May 6 and a community pau hana gathering on May 7.

Surf competition runs daily from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. and will also be streamed live online.

The public is invited to attend and support the athletes, with the week wrapping up Friday with an awards ceremony.