Tulsa Election 2021 Category

POST-ELECTION UPDATE: While the winning percentage was lower than 2015, it was still 3-to-1 in favor. Turnout was only 17,599, a tiny increase over the 17,125 that voted in March 2015. That's about 11.5%. Most organizations require a quorum of the membership to be present to take any action; why shouldn't we require a quorum of 50% of eligible voters to cast a ballot in order for a proposition to be enacted into law?

The two municipal propositions in Lahoma and Spavinaw were franchise renewals for OG+E and PSO, respectively, and passed unanimously. Navajo Public Schools bond issue passed by 5 votes.

There's yet another election this Tuesday, June 8, 2021. The Tulsa Public School board scheduled a special election for four general obligation bond issue propositions totaling $414 million. TPS residents can express their lack of confidence in the TPS administration's stewardship of our tax dollars and our children's education by voting NO on all four propositions. Opponents of the bond issue will hold an Accountability Matters Rally Opposing TPS School Bond at 5:30 pm, Monday, June 7, 2021, at the Education Service Center, 3027 S. New Haven Ave.

Never mind that we had an annual school general election back on April 6. TPS decided to hold the bond election at a time when nothing else would be on the ballot, when most Oklahomans' minds would be on summer activities. In all of Oklahoma, only four places are having an election on June 8, 2021: The Town of Lahoma (Garfield County), the Town of Spavinaw (Mayes County), Navajo Public Schools (Jackson & Greer Counties), and Tulsa Public Schools, which requires four county election boards (Creek, Osage, Tulsa, Wagoner) to staff precincts.

A school bond issue requires a corresponding increase in property taxes in the district to repay the borrowed money. Even property owners (e.g., senior citizens) who enjoy a valuation freeze will see their taxes go up, because the bond issue increases the millage rate, not the valuation of the property.

Governmental taxing authorities like scheduling special elections, because it offers a great deal of control over who turns out to vote. School officials will be sure to remind teachers and administrative staff that there's an election, and they might target parents with an interest in a particular project slated to be funded by bond money. Otherwise they keep it as quiet as possible. There's unlikely to be an organized campaign against the bonds, because concentrated benefits motivate funding for the "vote yes" side, while diffuse costs mean that opponents don't have as strong a motivation to contribute financially to its defeat. The last bond election in March 2015 drew only 17,125 voters. As of March 29, there were 152,453 eligible voters in the TPS district. Under Oklahoma law, school bond issues require approval of 60% of those voting.

But such an election also is an unusual opportunity for parents and taxpayers to issue a vote of no confidence in TPS leadership. School board elections are seemingly set up to defeat democracy. In most districts, it is only possible to replace one of the five board members every year. As a large district, TPS has a seven-member board and four year terms, but in either situation, there is no way to "throw the bums out," to clean house, to elect a new slate of board members that will take the district in a different direction. Making matters worse, filing period is held in early December when everyone is thinking about Christmas, and the school board elections are often the only item on the ballot during the February primary and April general election.

A school bond issue offers every voter in the district a chance to vote at the same time. It is the perfect opportunity to let the school board know that you're unhappy with the superintendent, the board, curriculum, the COVID-19 response, school closures, and the district's too-cozy relationship with progressive philanthropic organizations.

None of a school district's operational funds come from bond issues, so defeating a bond issue does not jeopardize teachers' salaries or the day-to-day running of the schools. Defeating a bond issue just means that TPS will have to wait a bit longer to build another monstrosity like the new Clinton West Elementary (formerly Clinton Middle School), which was James Howard Kunstler's "Eyesore of the Month" in March of 2010.

Clinton West Elementary (formerly Middle School), Eyesore of the Month, March 2010.
James Howard Kunstler described the building as "a building that expresses to perfection our current social consensus about the meaning of education. It stares balefully at the street with the blank-faced demeanor of an autistic child preparing to explode in violent rage. It summarizes our collective aspirations about school as the unidentifiable contents of an inscrutable set of boxes."

This time around, there is an active campaign against the bond issue propositions. Both Tulsa Parent Voice and the Tulsa County Republican Party have announced their opposition to the bonds.

There are plenty of reasons that the administration and board of Tulsa Public Schools deserve a vote of no confidence. Here are just a few that come readily to mind:

1. Scheduling a bond issue election for the summer, when nothing else is on the ballot, is designed to discourage voter participation. A solid defeat of the bonds will discourage such anti-democratic behavior in the future.

2. TPS schools are failing. Out of 73 campuses receiving a State Department of Education report card in 2019, 57 received Ds or Fs (29 and 28, respectively). Only one school, Booker T. Washington High School, managed an A. (You can download grades and stats for every school in Oklahoma here.)

3. TPS is shrinking, but the demand for funds is unchanged. Since the 2015 bond, TPS enrollment has decreased by 6,500 students, but TPS is asking for as much as it did then, including money for new facilities. Ten schools that were promised 2015 bond money were closed instead: Jones, Park, Penn, Remington, Academy Central, Greeley, Grimes, ECDC Porter, Mark Twain & Gilcrease. Gilcrease was closed despite a petition signed by 2,500 residents.

3. The school board's 2020 decision to extend Superintendent Deborah Gist's contract through 2023 was timed to prevent newly elected school board members from participating in the decision, which shows profound disrespect for the voters.

4. TPS pushes progressive politics. Superintendent Gist's May 2021 personal statement about "equity" is filled with leftist jargon from the Critical Race Theory glossary, but the rot is by no means limited to Gist. The district's "Who We Are" page states that "living our values requires working actively to dismantle systems of racial oppression."

5. The information about the bond issue propositions on the TPS website is supportive marketing material, not neutral, just-the-facts information. This is in violation of state law.

6. TPS requires a formal request under the Open Records Act to release campaign contribution reports that, by state law, must be filed with the school district clerk. TPS does not respond to these requests in a timely fashion -- another anti-democratic policy.

7. TPS has a bloated administrative structure and spends millions on consultants.

8. TPS has continued to force children to wear masks and never returned to full-time in-person learning.

There are plenty of other reasons to revolt against the current TPS administration, many of which you'll see documented on the sos-tps.org website, which also has the specifics on the four propositions. A vote against the bond propositions is the simplest way to express a demand for change at Tulsa Public Schools.