Tulsa Public Schools 2026 bond issues: No on all four

Tulsa Public Schools is asking voters to approve four bond issue propositions, totalling $609 million, on the April 7, 2026, ballot. Every voter registered within the boundaries of Tulsa Public Schools is eligible to vote, regardless of party registration, whether or not you have children in TPS, whether or not you directly pay property taxes. The breakdown and ballot language is here.

Proposition No. 1: $200,985,000, due in 5 years, "to provide funds for the purpose of purchasing or acquiring textbooks, library books, electronic media content, computer software, perpetual or continuous district software license agreements and web-based software subscriptions, along with programs and facilities for early childhood, Montessori, stem labs, post-secondary readiness, fine arts, and athletics including the construction, equipping, repairing and remodeling of those facilities, acquiring and improving school sites, and purchasing or acquiring school furniture, fixtures, and equipment...."

Proposition No. 2: $276,000,000, due in 15 years, for "repairing, remodeling, constructing and equipping school buildings, purchasing or acquiring school furniture, fixtures and equipment and acquiring and improving school sites...."

Proposition No. 3: $104,785,000, due in 5 years, for "purchasing or acquiring technology equipment including computer hardware and software and web-based software subscriptions along with repairing and remodeling school buildings to accommodate technology equipment...."

Proposition No. 4: 27,230,000, due in 5 years, for "purchasing or acquiring transportation equipment...."

There's a further "breakdown" of each proposition into "specific projects" at the link, but it doesn't get into specifics as to which school sites will receive the specified improvements. The term "district wide" gets used a lot. The grouping is puzzling, and there seems to be overlap between Prop 1 and Prop 3 when it comes to computer equipment. The phrase "including but not limited to" applies to each list of spending line items. There really isn't a way for a voter to choose traditional bond issue items like building repairs, without also voting for computer software. It's a violation, in spirit, of the single-subject rule in the Oklahoma Constitution.

The biggest line items in the breakdown, everything over $10 million, in descending order:

• $119,095,000 in Prop 2: Remodeling of various school facilities district wide; furniture purchase or acquisition for school facilities district wide; painting flooring service contracts for school facilities district wide; window repair and replacement for school facilities district wide; foundation and paving repairs for school facilities district wide; and LED lighting replacement for school facilities district wide.
• $68,324,000 in Prop 3: Student & Teaching Technology
• $67,760,000 in Prop 2: HVAC repair and replacement for school facilities district wide
• $61,292,000 in Prop 1: Instructional learning materials; textbooks; instructional electronic media content and software; exceptional and special needs equipment and curriculum
• $42,192,000 in Prop 2: Safety and Security, Entries, Fencing and Radios including secure entry and security improvement for school facilities district wide; fencing at school facilities district wide; radios district wide and alarm panels and sensor replacements for school facilities district wide
• $40,900,000 in Prop 1: Post-secondary readiness and career academies district wide
• $40,567,000 in Prop 1: Wellness and physical education equipment purchase or acquisition; and constructing, equipping, repairing and remodeling school facilities district wide including sports fields, turf, and facilities
• $33,730,000 in Prop 3: Cybersecurity, data storage, and network systems and software
• $22,000,000 in Prop 2: Roof replacement or repair for school facilities district wide
• $14,020,000 in Prop 4: Buses
• $12,804,000 in Prop 1: Fine arts facilities district wide including improvements to auditorium stage, sound, and lighting; fine arts uniforms, equipment, and instruments
• $12,250,000 in Prop 2: Dining, kitchen improvements and kitchen equipment purchase or acquisition for school facilities district wide
• $11,550,000 in Prop 1: Site project funding for repairing, remodeling, constructing, and equipping school facilities district wide along with the purchase or acquisition of equipment
• $10,860,000 in Prop 1: Early childhood and Montessori programs district wide

The money for "post-secondary readiness and career academies" and "early childhood and Montessori programs" looks like mission creep. Is this money for new buildings? It can't be used to pay salaries. Will it be used to pay consultants? Are these projects that the philanthropocrats are pushing for?

Former Tulsa City Councilor and financial analyst Jayme Fowler urges a no vote on all four propositions. He points out that the TPS cost per student is 25% more than the cost of private school and has increased 56% since 2018, with a 73% increase in non-instructional costs and a 21% drop in student achievement in that same time frame. Fowler notes that TPS had about 80,000 students and 9 high schools in 1969. 57 years later, TPS still has 9 high schools but only about 34,000 students. (Granted, TPS opened a high school, Mason, and closed it a few years later in the 1970s.) Fowler wants TPS to consolidate programs to fewer campuses and sell off surplus properties.

TPS Per Pupil Expenditure is $14,415.28. That's twice the amount per student spent by Tulsa Classical Academy ($7,115.67) and higher than the state average of $11,962.54.

Fowler writes:

This $609 Million bond package is business as usual on auto-pilot. The bonds continue the long history of zero accountability and the inevitable waste of tax-payer money. But far worse, they rob our children of the future they deserve and reward the system and the people responsible for that theft. The proposals are entirely out of sync with the TPS 5-year plan. The Pathways to Opportunity plan is a commitment made to students and families that TPS must keep.

Fowler reminds us that TPS was audited on a small portion of their spending, and the audit found massive fraud:

[The State Auditor] Investigated $37.7 million in spending, 2015 - 2023. Only included 90 vendors and 900 invoices. That's less than 1% of the $4.1 Billion spent by TPS in that timeframe. [The audit] Uncovered wire fraud, misappropriation of funds, illegal no-bid contracts & payments, and coordinated attempts to hide spending related communications in violation of the open records act. A single person, Devin Fletcher was charged for misappropriating $824,000. TPS Illegally paid over $500,000 in bonuses to 35 administrators and 5 other employees through a third-party, Foundation for Tulsa Schools. It's time to audit the other 99% of TPS spending!

Not all conservatives are opposed to the bond issues. Bob Jack, former Tulsa County Republican Party chairman, served on the TPS Bond Development Committee and urges voters to support it. He claims that concerns of lack of financial control are outdated. "...[U]nder the leadership of a new CFO and the addition of internal auditor, patrons of TPS can be assured that the problems of the past are no longer an excuse."

Oklahoma's use of long and rotating board terms, with elections happening at an odd time of year, mean that our public school boards don't have much in the way of effective accountability from the voters. Unfortunately, at most two Tulsa board members are up for election every year, and it takes four years for each seat to come up in turn. Voting down bond issues are an excellent way for voters to get the attention of the board and the administration.

I could make an argument for voting for Propositions 2 and 4, which are more in line with traditional bond issues for facilities and transportation, but against 1 and 3, which includes new programs and more money for non-facility items. Even so, TPS's record of financial irresponsibility makes me wonder about how much fluff and padding is in the numbers for those "non-controversial" line items. It would be reasonable to expect the board to commit to truly specific projects, naming the schools that will receive new roofs or the specific sports and fine arts facilities that will be upgraded. That would also be a way for the voters to ensure that there isn't favoritism in the allocation of improvement money to schools. Without those specifics, there's nothing to hold TPS to.

I encourage TPS residents to vote no on April 7, 2026, on all four Tulsa Public School bond issues.

MORE:

The Bond Transparency Act of 2017 requires public school districts to report annually on their outstanding bond issues -- how much was approved, how much has been bonded, how much has been spent and on what specific items. These reports do delve into which specific school buildings received which upgrades and at what cost.

• 2015 Tulsa Public Schools Bond Transparency Report
• 2021 Tulsa Public Schools Bond Transparency Report
• Tulsa Public Schools 2026 Bond Website
• Tulsa Public Schools 2021 Bond Website