Tulsa Election 2024: March 2024 Archives

Monday, March 25, 2024, was the deadline for candidates for school board in the April 2 election to file their pre-election contributions and expenditures report with the clerk of Tulsa Public Schools. While the Tulsa City Clerk automatically posts received ethics reports, the school board clerk does not do this. One must file an Open Records Request through the tulsaschools.org website and then hope for a timely response. My request was filed on Monday, March 25, 2024, at 11:43 a.m.:

Records requested

All campaign ethics reports filed by Candidate Committees from March 31, 2023, to the present, to include:
* Statements of Organization
* Contributions and Expenditures Quarterly Reports
* Contributions and Expenditures Pre-Election Reports
* Continuing Reports of Contributions

All campaign ethics reports filed by Political Committees from March 31, 2023, to the present, to include:
* Statements of Organization
* Contributions and Expenditures Quarterly Reports
* Electioneering Communications and Independent Expenditures Report

Reason for the request

For a published report to voters and the general public in advance of the April 2 election. Because early voting begins on March 28, it is essential to have these records no later than close of business March 26. PDFs by email are preferred.

I received an automated acknowledgement but no further communication. I sent a follow up email to TPS Clerk Sarah Bozone on Thursday, March 28, at 3:28 p.m.

Dear Ms. Bozone:

I have yet to receive a reply to a time-sensitive open records request for pre-election campaign filings. Attached below is the automated acknowledgement of my request from Monday.

State law establishes a deadline of 8 days before an election for filing reports of campaign contributions and expenditures. This deadline exists so that voters inform themselves about the people and organizations seeking to influence an election. Failure to make these filings readily available to public scrutiny may be interpreted as bad faith on the part of TPS administration. Early voting is already underway.

Thank you,
Michael Bates
BatesLine.com

I received a reply with the requested information later that day at 8:24 p.m., with an 18.7 MB zip file attached.

The zip file contained one PDF for each candidate in Tuesday's election. There were no reports for Political Committees. I ran each PDF through optical character recognition and optimization. John Croisant's filing is large, because it was filled in sloppily in almost illegible handwriting. Below you will find the original zip file, unmodified, followed by the OCRed and optimized PDFs:

• Original zip file of campaign reports for 2024 Tulsa Public Schools board candidates in response to open records request
• District 2: Calvin Moniz (I) campaign contribution and expenditure reports
• District 2: KanDee Washington (I) campaign committee statement of organization. (She did not file a contribution and expenditure report, possibly an indication of not raising or spending more than the minimum threshold.)
• District 5: John Croisant (D, incumbent) campaign contribution and expenditure reports
• District 5: Teresa Peña (R) campaign contribution and expenditure reports
• District 6: Maria Seidler (R) campaign contribution and expenditure reports
• District 6: Sarah Smith (D) campaign contribution and expenditure reports

I have not had the opportunity, and I don't have time right now, to do a full analysis. I did notice that the insider candidates -- Croisant, Moniz, Smith -- are much better funded than the grassroots candidates, that each are using Democrat fundraising systems (ActBlue), Democrat consultants (Little Giant), and have received hefty donations from big Democrat donors. If someone feels like transcribing Croisant's reports or organizing the contributions in descending order of amount, or if you just notice something interesting, you can email your findings to blog at batesline dot com. I may post some of that here and will give you credit (unless you would prefer to be anonymous).

Major and noteworthy donors:

Calvin Moniz, District 2, establishment: major donor to Democrats George Krumme, $3,300; philanthropocrat Lynn Schusterman, $2,900; Carolyn Wheeler, $1,000; major donor to Democrats and polo player Reed Oppenheimer, $1,000; developer John Bumgarner, $250; former Democrat mayor Kathy Taylor, $250; Chapter of the Oklahoma Federation of Democratic Women, $250. (Moniz filed only the schedules, but not the required reports which summarize receipts and expenditures.)

John Croisant, District 5, establishment: Major donor to Democrats Burt Holmes, $3,300; major donor to Democrats George Krumme, $3,300; philanthropocrat Lynn Schusterman, $2,900; Steve Mitchell, CEO of Argonaut Private Equity (George Kaiser's private equity firm), $1,000; former Tulsa World publisher Robert and Roxana Lorton, $1,000; former Democrat mayor Susan Savage, $750; former Democrat State Rep. Judy Eason McIntire, $600; American Federation of Teachers Oklahoma (union), $500; Tulsa Chapter of the Oklahoma Federation of Democratic Women (Heart of the Party), $250; developer Bruce Bolzle, $250; former Democrat county chairman and congressional candidate Tim Gilpin, $250; Educare executive director Cindy Decker, $250; Democrat state representative John Waldron, $100.

Teresa Peña, District 5, reform: Alan Staab, $3,300; Fran Fleming, $3,300; Republican state representative Mark Tedford, $500; former Republican Oklahoma Attorney General John O'Connor, $250; former Republican state representative Carol Bush, $100;

Sarah Smith, District 6, establishment: Major donor to Democrats Burt Holmes, $3,300; Ross Swimmer, $3,300; major donor to Democrats George Krumme, $3,300; philanthropocrat Lynn Schusterman, $2,900; George Kaiser-affiliated attorney Frederic Dorwart, $1,000; major donor to Democrats and polo player Reed Oppenheimer, $1,000; former Democrat county chairman Keith McArtor, $500; former Democrat State Rep. Judy Eason McIntire, $500; Tulsa Forward PAC, $250; Democrat state representative Suzanne Schreiber, $250; former Democrat mayor Kathy Taylor, $250; developer John Bumgarner, $250; Tulsa Chapter of the Oklahoma Federation of Democratic Women (Heart of the Party), $250; Schusterman Interests program officer Randee Charney, $250; former Democrat congressional candidate Doug Dodd, $250.

Maria Seidler, District 6, reform: Christie Glesener, $3,250; Dan Hicks, $1,365. (Both of these were in-kind contributions of campaign mailers.)

Significant expenditures:

Calvin Moniz, District 2, establishment: Little Giant Consulting, $6,000; DemLaunch (campaign lists), $76.37; Gibson Universal LLC (campaign mailings), Henrico VA, $2,745.13; ActBlue (fundraising platform), $131.03.

John Croisant, District 5, establishment: Camelot Consulting (retainer, mail, digital ads) $26,110.24; Little Giant Consulting; Hardesty Press.

Teresa Peña, District 5, reform: Marcus & Company (campaign consulting), $5,620; Phame Marketing (billboard), $4,200; Tulsa Direct Mail, $3,836.41; Edge One Signs (yard signs), $1,115.31.

Sarah Smith, District 6, establishment: Calculated Strategies (campaign services compliance reporting), Bethany, OK, $4,450; Little Giant Consulting (fundraising service), $4,000; A. R. Clinton (campaign management), $1,500; Signs on the Cheap, Austin TX, $1,450.21; ActBlue (fundraising platform), $659.14.

Previous items on the 2024 Tulsa school board election:

• Links to 2024 Tulsa school board candidate websites and social media profiles
• Overview of 2024 Tulsa school board election with map of districts and recommendations
• ACTION Tulsa, the Alinskyite-leftist organization seeking to influence the election under a non-partisan guise

On Twitter (X), a random reply from a "Progressive Democrat, native born Oklahoman. ELCA Lutheran" condemned my endorsement of KanDee Washington in the Tulsa Public Schools District 2 election, because she didn't attend ACTION Tulsa's "Accountability Session":

KanDee Washington is the only candidate not to accept ACTION Tulsa's invitation to it's Accountability Session. What does she have to hide. The other two candidates you support showed at the session that they are wrong for TPS.

Who is ACTION Tulsa and why is it a good thing for a school board candidate to disagree with them?

ACTION stands for Allied Communities of Tulsa Inspiring Our Neighborhoods. The website lists the following member institutions, most of which are left-wing "churches," which long ago abandoned a Biblical worldview and Biblical standards of morality.

• All Souls Unitarian Church
• Church of the Restoration Unitarian Universalist
• Church of St. Mary - Outreach Program
• Dan Allen Center for Social Justice
• Fellowship Congregational United Church of Christ
• Hope Unitarian Church
• Kansas Oklahoma Conference - United Church of Christ
• Saint Aidan's Episcopal Church
• St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church
• Together Oklahoma
• Tulsa Lutherans in Action
• ACTION United Tenants of Tulsa

Together Oklahoma is another innocuously named left-wing group, a branch of Oklahoma Policy Institute, a big-government and higher-taxes think tank. Tulsa Lutherans in Action is connected with Fellowship Lutheran Church, a congregation of the liberal ELCA, another shrinking mainline denomination that has abandoned its commitment to Biblical truth.

ACTION Tulsa is an affiliate of the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF), which was founded in 1940 by Saul Alinsky, notorious for his book Rules for Radicals, which was formative in the community organizing career of Barack Obama.

Shamefully, mainstream media reports on the "Accountability Session" held on January 27 ignored these radical leftist connections and took at face value ACTION Tulsa's claims to be "non-partisan" and just concerned about good schools. The Facebook event posting says that the group "will ask candidates to make public commitments to work with us on specific, actionable requests" but that list of requests does not appear anywhere on their website or Facebook page. ACTION Tulsa wants pledges of obedience but doesn't want public scrutiny of its agenda.

Groups like ACTION Tulsa hide behind neutral language because they know their true aims and values would be rejected by the voters. It's a badge of honor that KanDee Washington had the sense not to show up to their accountability session and that Teresa Pena and Maria Seidler were willing to voice their dissent from ACTION Tulsa's agenda.

UPDATE: I was sent a copy of ACTION Tulsa's demands (ACTION TPS Acountability Session Candidate Packet FINAL.pdf). It's a nice touch to misspell accountability.

As we have indicated previously, ACTION leaders will ask you to respond to the ACTION Agenda of Issues which we have developed through meetings in the community. We organize within institutions to develop an agenda of issues and work to ensure political capacity is marshaled to successfully resolve community concerns. At this session the organization will launch its nonpartisan GOTV efforts....

There were 5 questions, and candidates were told to give only Yes or No answers. They were limited to 3 minutes and 15 seconds total to cover all five answers. This was not an invitation to discuss weigh one priority against another, to discuss the costs and benefits of any particular policy. ACTION Tulsa was asking one question of each candidate: Will you be our female dog? Croisant, Moniz, and Smith all answered, "Yes!"

Conservative candidates would be wise to refuse any involvement with this group.