Oklahoma Election 2026: April 2026 Archives

In addition to a lengthy primary ballot, Oklahoma voters will decide on June 16, 2026, whether to approve or reject a permanent and annually escalating increase in the minimum wage in Oklahoma. Oklahomans should reject this job-killer that is being pushed by socialists and other economic ignoramuses.

As economist Thomas Sowell says, the real minimum wage is always zero. If the economic benefit of a job is less than a mandated minimum wage, that job simply won't exist. The passage of higher state and local minimum wages has led to an increase in automation and elimination of jobs that provide young people a first step into the job market. From Sowell's Basic Economics:

Making it illegal to pay less than a given amount does not make a worker's productivity worth that amount -- and if it is not, that worker is unlikely to be employed. Yet minimum wage laws are almost always discussed politically in terms of the benefits on workers who receive those wages. Unfortunately, the real minimum wage is always zero, regardless of the laws, and that is the wage that many workers receive in the wake of the creation or escalation of a government-mandated minimum wage, because they lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force.

Pay for entry-level jobs has already been on the rise, above the statutory minimum wage, as employers face a shrinking labor pool.

And an entry-level job is not meant to support a family. It's meant to be a place where you learn the basic habits needed to work with other people and for other people, and to begin to learn and improve skills so that your labor can become valuable enough to support a family.

Oklahomans should vote no but probably won't, because a lot of money has been and will be spent to put sob-stories on TV commercials. Raising the minimum wage sounds like the "nice" thing to do, as long as you don't think about the people who will spend more time with no job at all, because employers (particularly the many small businesses that give young people their first shot at a job) will have to cut costs to stay in business, and because many small businesses just won't make it. If you actually want to understand the harm SQ 832 will do, read OCPA's articles on the topic or visit their website dedicated to the issue, www.sq832killsjobs.com.

We don't have to guess about this effect. The State of Washington's youth labor participation rate dropped as its minimum wage was on the same kind of inflation-indexed escalator created by 832. A targeted increase for fast-food workers in California killed jobs in that industry and stressed related industries.

Now to the details you won't see in the ads or on the ballot. Here is what voting yes on SQ 832 means in legal terms.

SQ 832 is a statutory initiative petition. Because a statute can be amended without a vote of the people, the number of signatures required to qualify for the ballot is lower than for a constitutional amendment.

If SQ 832 passes, it will amend Oklahoma's existing minimum wage law, originally passed in 1965, 40 O.S. 197.1-197.17. Specifically, passage would amend section 197.2, which currently sets the Oklahoma minimum wage equal to the Federal minimum wage, and section 197.4, which defines who is and is not covered under the law. SQ 832 would also repeal 197.5. After the jump, you can see exactly what language will be added and what will be deleted.

You might wonder why Oklahoma has a minimum wage law at all, given the existence of a federal minimum wage. The federal minimum wage only applies to businesses engaged in interstate commerce, under the constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce, the definition of which has been stretched to include just about every possible activity. The Oklahoma law acts as a backstop, covering any business that is outside the Federal Government's vast reach. There is currently a provision exempting employers who are covered under federal law, so that there is no potential conflict; that provision would be eliminated under 832.

There are exemptions under the existing law, many of which would be eliminated under 832. If SQ 832 passes, farm workers and feed-store employees, domestic servants (e.g. nannies, housekeepers), paperboys, part-time employees (less than 25 hours per week), high school students under 18 and college students under 22 would no longer be exempt from the state minimum wage. Exemptions would remain for federal employees, volunteers for charitable, religious, and non-profit organizations, truck drivers (regulated by the Interstate Commerce Commission), reserve deputy sheriffs, anyone in an executive, managerial, or professional job, and outside salesmen. There will remain an existing exemption for businesses who have 10 or fewer full-time-equivalent employees at any one location and generate gross revenues of $100,000 or less, but that exemption level will not be indexed to inflation.

Under SQ 832 the Oklahoma minimum wage would immediately increase from $7.25 to $10.50 per hour, then to $12 in 2027, $13.50 in 2028, and $15 in 2029. From that point forward, it would be indexed to CPI-W, the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, a measure that, according to the US Department of Labor, reflects the spending of about 30% of the US population.

The proponents could have chosen an inflation index that better reflects Oklahoma's economy. They chose the option that increases the fastest. A broader measure, CPI-U, reflects about 90% of the US population. Here's an article from 2014 explaining the distinction between CPI-W and CPI-U and why both measures are maintained. CPI-U is also calculated for Census Bureau regions. CPI-U for the West South Central region (Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana) has been tracked since 2017. Over the last 8 years, CPI-U West South Central has increased by 27.470%, while CPI-W has increased by 31.800%.

But any indexing strategy risks an inflationary doom loop: Increasing prices trigger increased wages which increase business costs which increase prices. There's no provision to stop the escalator in response to a local recession.

After the link, the changes to the law that will be enacted if 832 passes.

Postdated to remain at the top of the page until the polls close on Tuesday, April 7, 2026.

Tuesday, April 7, 2026, is general election day for K-12 school board seats in Oklahoma. Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Seats on technology center boards (what we used to call vocational-technical, or vo-tech, schools) are also on the ballot. Some cities (Sapulpa among them) have city council runoffs, and there are some municipal and school district propositions up for a vote as well, including four school bond propositions in Tulsa and seven general obligation bond issues and a sales tax increase in Broken Arrow. The Oklahoma State Election Board's online voter tool will let you know where to vote and will show you a sample of the ballot you'll see.

Here is the complete list of offices and propositions up for election today statewide.

Not everyone will have a reason to go to the polls today, but TPS, Broken Arrow, and Tulsa Tech District 7 cover a lot of area and a lot of voters between them, so double-check, just to be sure.

The following are my recommendations in the April 7, 2026, election, for races and propositions in the Tulsa and nearby cities and school districts. The name of the office links to the article I wrote on that race or proposition; the candidate's name leads to the candidate's website. Although party affiliation doesn't appear on the ballot for school and most municipal elections in Oklahoma, I've noted it below for those candidates I'm recommending.

School board elections:

Tulsa Public Schools, Office No. 4: E'Lena Ashley (R)(i)
Tulsa Public Schools, Office No. 7: Michael Phillips (R)
Tulsa Technology District, Office No. 7: Jim W. Baker (R) (i)

Justus-Tiawah Public Schools, Office No. 1: Ted King (R)
Liberty Public Schools, Office No. 1: Timothy Brown (R)
Mannford Public Schools, Office No. 1: Clayton Paslay (R)
Verdigris Public Schools, Office No. 1: Alicia Nees (R)

School propositions:

Tulsa Public Schools, Propositions 1 through 4 (Bond Issues): No
Inola Public Schools, Propositions 1 & 2 (Bond Issues): No
Central Tech, Proposition (2 mill permanent increase): Yes

Municipal elections:

Bixby, City of, Ward 4: Brad Girard (R) (i)
Sapulpa, City of, Ward 1, Seat 1: Mike Harris (R)
Sapulpa, City of, Ward 3, Seat 1: Alexander Hamilton (R) (i)
Sapulpa, City of, Ward 5, Seat 1: Davood Mortazavi (R) (i)

Municipal propositions:

Broken Arrow, City of, Propositions 1 through 7 (Bond Issues): Yes
Broken Arrow, City of, Proposition 8 (0.5%, five-year sales tax increase): No
Oologah, Town of, Proposition (5% hotel tax increase): No

Three municipalities in the Tulsa metropolitan area have council seats and a proposition on the April 7, 2026, ballot. Here is a brief account of each with my recommendations.

Oologah, Town of, Proposition (5% hotel tax increase): No. There is nothing about this election on the town's website or Facebook page, which suggests an intent to slide this past the voters unawares. The town has an existing lodging tax, but no hotels or motels. Taxes shouldn't be on an April ballot where voters have no other reason to go to the polls, and for that reason alone it should be defeated.

City of Bixby, Ward 4: Brad Girard (R) (i). I haven't found any complaints about eight-year incumbent Girard, currently the councilor serving as mayor. His opponent is Jake Rowland, also a registered Republican, who has filed for state representative and school board in the past. Rowland has posted about running for office, but hasn't posted anything about his reasons for running.

Sapulpa City Council:

Sapulpa has elections for three seats on its City Council. In Ward 1, appointed incumbent Democrat Elizabeth Reeder-Nicolas is challenged by Republican Mike Harris, pastor of Beams of Light Church in Sapulpa. There was a third candidate, Brandon Mull, owner of Water Street Tattoo, but he was eliminated in the February primary, just 10 votes behind the second-place candidate. (Nicolas got 74 votes, Harris 71, Mull 61.) Mull has endorsed Nicolas.

In Ward 3, Republican incumbent Alexander Hamilton faces Republican challenger Charlie Leroy Harrison, owner of Beverly Fine Jewelry. In Ward 5, Republican incumbent Davood Mortazavi, owner of Steak & Eggs restaurant, has a Republican challenger in Kent Glesener, a professional engineer, owner of Paradigm Construction and Engineering and co-founder of Shofar International Foundation.

Sapulpa Firefighters IAFF Local 194 has endorsed Nicolas and Mortazavi. The Sapulpa FOP has also endorsed Nicolas and Mortazavi. They did not make any endorsements in Ward 3.

There has been a huge ruckus in the Ward 5 race. A troublemaker printed off copies of an article about sharia law by Christie Glesener, co-founder of Shofar International Foundation, and then stapled a slip of paper to it calling attention to Mortazavi's exotic name, implying that there was a danger that he might impose Islamic law on Sapulpa.

(Here is a four-page, text-only version of Christie Glesener's article on sharia law from 2011.)

Mortazavi came to America from Iran as a child in 1983, one of many Iranian families that came to the United States after the 1979 Islamic Revolution to take refuge from the tyrannical regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini. Steak and Eggs restaurant, owned by Davood and his brother Jerry, features Veterans Hall, a separate dining room decorated with portraits of local veterans and available for free as a meeting place for local civic groups.

Christie and Kent Glesener have denounced the distribution of the article and insist that they were not involved in any way. Christie Glesener directly denied involvement in response to a Facebook post by a relative of Mortazavi.

Micah Choquette of the Sapulpa Times reported on the controversy in the Monday episode of the newspaper's podcast, but also reported on the recent final determination in a U. S. Department of Labor case against Paradigm Construction and Engineering, the firm owned by the Gleseners. The company has been debarred from federal contracts for three years because of violations of the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage act, misclassification of employees, and failure to pay overtime. The Gleseners made a final appeal to refer the case to the Secretary of Labor for review, but that appeal was denied on March 6, 2026. The DOL Wage and Hour Division (WHD) case number is 16-01093/94, and the Office of Administrative Law Judge case number is 2017-DBA-00010, and the Administrative Review Board case number is 2023-0054. Running a case search with any of those numbers will turn up a docket report tracing the case's history from 2017 to 2026. Here are links to the Administrative Law Judge's denial of summary judgment from August 27, 2020, the Administrative Law Judge's Decision and Order from August 28, 2023, Administrator's Response Brief from May 10, 2024, and the Decision and Order from January 30, 2026. However much one may disagree with the Davis-Bacon Act, if you're going to be a federal contractor, you had better obey the law and adhere to all the federal regulations that apply and are spelled out in your contract. If you screw up, best to admit fault and bring your practices into compliance.

Sapulpa Times has a playlist of interviews with candidates for Ward 1 and Ward 5. (Ward 3 candidates declined to be interviewed.) Included in the playlist is an interview with Central Tech Superintendent Kent Burris discussing the proposed permanent millage increase for the Career Tech district, which also appears on the April 7 ballot.

Here is a map of Sapulpa council districts. Ward 1 is the oldest section of Sapulpa, mainly between Main and Mission. Ward 3 is the southernmost district. Ward 5 covers mainly newly annexed areas east of Polecat Creek or north of Hilton Road.

I can appreciate the frustration that many Sapulpans have, particularly Sapulpans with businesses on Dewey Avenue (Route 66), with city decisions that have blocked access to their businesses, and the feeling that city government cares more about a few blocks of downtown while neglecting the rest of the city.

My recommendations:

Sapulpa, City of, Ward 1: Mike Harris (R)
Sapulpa, City of, Ward 3: Alexander Hamilton (R) (i)
Sapulpa, City of, Ward 5: Davood Mortazavi (R) (i)

Broken Arrow voters will face eight propositions on the Tuesday, April 7, 2026, ballot. The first seven are 20-year general obligation bond issues which will be repaid by higher property taxes. Proposition No. 8 is a half-cent, five-year sales tax for sports facilities.

Here is the sample ballot.

All seven bond issues are for 20-year terms. Below are the amounts and purposes listed in the gist for each proposition as listed on the ballot, stripped of the bond issue boilerplate:

Prop 1, Transportation Projects, $205,000,000: constructing, reconstructing, repairing, improving, and rehabilitating streets, roads, bridges, and intersections in the City (including lighting, sidewalks/bikepaths, landscaping, related drainage improvements, driveway reconstruction, and other related improvements).

Prop 2, Public Safety Projects, $65,000,000: acquiring, constructing, expanding, renovating, repairing, and/or equipping public safety buildings, facilities, and equipment, all to be owned exclusively by the City.

Prop 3, Quality of Life Projects, $74,000,000: constructing, expanding, repairing, which may also include improving, renovating, acquiring and equipping parks and recreational facilities, all to be owned exclusively by the City, or in the alternative to acquire all or a distinct portion of such property pursuant to a lease purchase arrangement.

Prop 4, Public Facilities Projects, $65,000,000: acquiring, constructing, expanding, renovating, repairing, and equipping municipal buildings, facilities, and equipment, all to be owned exclusively by the City.

Prop 5, Stormwater Projects, $6,000,000: constructing, expanding, repairing, which may also include improving, renovating, acquiring and equipping stormwater facilities on property owned exclusively or in part by the City.

Prop 6, Drainage Projects, $5,000,000: drainage improvements to property owned exclusively or in part by the City.

Prop 7, Library Project, $4,000,000: economic and community development including a new South Broken Arrow library. According to Broken Arrow officials, the current library has outgrown its space. Some of the funding for the new building will be provided by the Tulsa City-County Library system from the property tax revenues from its existing millage.

Prop 8, Sports Facilities Sales Tax, 0.5% for 5 years: sports facilities benefitting the City, including but not limited to Indian Springs Sports Complex, Arrowhead Softball Complex, Nienhuis Sports Complex, and Challenger Sports Complex.

The Bond Transparency Act of 2017 (God bless State Rep. John Paul Jordan and State Sen. Nathan Dahm for getting this in the statute book) disclosure lists the specific projects for each bond proposal, along with an estimated cost for each. Unlike the "district wide" fudge in the Tulsa Public Schools' list of bond projects, Broken Arrow names specific intersections and subdivisions. For example:

Widen and/or improve Tucson Street (121st Street) from Aspen Avenue (145th E. Avenue) to Olive Avenue (129th E. Avenue) including, but not limited to, design, construction of required appurtenances, and acquisition of easements and right-of-way. $15,600,000

The biggest single item in the seven bond propositions is $42 million for a new community center at Elam Park, near Aspen and Florence behind Aspen Creek Elementary, plus an additional $4 million for outdoor facilities at the park. That money is in Proposition 3.

Proposition 4 for Public Facilities includes renovation and expansion of the Senior Center, Rose District Plaza, the BA History Museum, and Arts@302, and moving the Military History Museum to near Veterans Park.

The Bond Transparency Act disclosure goes all the way back to the 2004 Bond Issue, listing projects funded with past bonds, percent complete, and which bonds are still outstanding.

The bond issue vote-yes website states that bonds will be sold over an 11-year period as current bonds expire to keep the overall millage rate from rising. If the bond issues fail, property taxes on a home worth the median value in Broken Arrow of $229,300 will drop gradually, reaching a savings of $110.98 per year by 2030 and $324.37 per year for 2038 and thereafter (if no other bond issue is approved).

So well done to Broken Arrow officials for listing specific projects and grouping them according to subject matter, unlike Tulsa Public Schools and Inola Public Schools. That earns them some trust. If I lived in Broken Arrow, I would be inclined to vote for most or all of the first seven propositions.

Still, it's worth asking whether a new, bigger South BA library (Prop 7) is a better idea than an additional branch to serve the growing neighborhoods south of the Creek Turnpike, or whether the Military History Museum needs to move into a new facility (Prop 4).

Even infrastructure projects like streets and drainage deserve scrutiny: One BA reader wrote to question the length of time it takes to make the improvements and whether some of them make enough of a difference to be worth the cost and disruption. He notes how often these projects seem to fall massively behind schedule.

And putting the propositions on the ballot in April, when there is nothing else on the ballot for most Broken Arrow residents, is a bad-faith move. It indicates an intention to minimize turnout in order to allow those who have a direct interest in passage to dominate the electorate.

Even worse is putting a significant sales tax increase for questionable sports facilities expenditures on the same ballot as far less controversial bond issue proposals that won't raise tax rates over current levels. Proponents have been careful to avoid mentioning that Proposition 8 raises the sales tax rate, and in the Wagoner County part of the city, the total rate (state, county, city) will be over 10%. You have to be tuned in to the fact that they don't give the usual reassurance that your sales tax rate won't go up, as when one temporary tax replaces another. It looks like they're hoping that voters won't distinguish between the propositions, and they'll keep voting yes out of momentum.

The package of propositions has generated some opposition. Fox 23 (or 8.2 or whatever it actually is now) covered Thursday night's protest by Taxed Enough Already (TEA), and Brent Watson has posted his reasons for opposing Proposition 8:

Why TEA opposes the Broken Arrow 2026 Sales Tax Increase

EXTREME

• If passed this increase will place us in the top 1% of sales tax rates imposed on citizens. The combined tax rate for Broken Arrow citizens living in Wagoner County would be 10.1%. There is something very wrong with a double-digit sales tax rate! This is higher that most folks tithe to their churches.
• The ONLY major ***cities in the US with higher rates are Chicago at 10.25% and Seattle at 10.35%. Citizens of BA do not want to live in Chicago, and we don't want to be taxed like that! Don't Chicago our Broken Arrow! ***Population >500,000
• For those living in Tulsa County, the combined rate will be nearly 9% - 8.917% This is far above the average US sales tax rate of 7.53.

EXPENSIVE

• For a family of four, this tax will cost over $1,760. This regressive, anti-family tax would cost approximately $441 per person over the 5-year life. Styling this as a "half-penny" is disingenuous.

UNNECESSARY

• This is an unnecessary tax to replace sports facilities. This is not for necessary provisions like roads, police, or fire protection. The City should live within its budget. Alternate funding, including raising user fees, redirecting other spending or obtaining private donations can be used to make improvements.

ENDURING

• This will probably become a permanent tax. Despite the City's assurance that this is a 5-year tax, history shows that most temporary taxes are rolled over into other permanent taxes - as was the Vision 2025 tax. Also, all 7 bond proposals are rollovers of previously imposed property taxes - just now designated for other usages. This is how temporary taxes become permanent taxes.

IMPROPERLY PURSUED

• City leaders scheduled this as a special election instead of placing it with a primary or general election. Special elections are often decided by less than 20% (sometimes less than 5%) of registered voters. Officials know that they can count on those with vested interests to vote for these taxes. This is how our taxes continue to be raised incrementally to very high rates. Additionally, the City has spent a huge amount of money on billboards and expensive mailers promoting this tax increase. They have omitted disclosing the true cost per person and family and that this would raise part of Broken Arrow to a sales tax rate over 10%. This would mean that every time someone spends $100 at WalMart, they would pay over $10 in tax.

SUMMARY:

We are taxed enough already. In the spirit of the Boston Tea Party, we are rising to oppose oppressive taxes. Please vote for family and common sense values and vote NO April 7 to this tax grab. We need to tell our city leaders: "Don't Chicago my Broken Arrow!"

NOTES:

As of early 2026, the nationwide population-weighted average combined state and local sales tax rate in the United States is approximately 7.53%. Tax Foundation

Calculation of cost per capita: The City states collections will total about $53M, divided by current population of 120,000 = $441.67/person.

If I lived in BA, I would vote Yes on Propositions 1 through 7 (bond issues), NO on Proposition 8 (sales tax).

Some information on other school board races and school propositions in the Tulsa area.

Keep in mind that I don't live in these communities, and so my information is limited, but what I've found, I present below, and hopefully you'll find it helpful. I'd welcome any additional information readers could offer. I will tell you how I would vote based on what I've presented, but treat it as a very tentative recommendation, particularly in the school board races.

Inola school bond issue:

Inola Public Schools has two propositions, each for $29,900,000, over 18 years, with very similar lists of specific projects on each. The Bond 2026 page has a pretty detailed explanation and a response to Frequently Asked Questions, such as the impact of the expansion Sofidel facility on the Net Assessed Value of property in the district, which is the basis for calculating property tax increases to repay the bonds. They acknowledge that property taxes will increase if either or both propositions pass, while a more recent 2023 bond issue will expire in 2028. The Sofidel plant expansion will not benefit the school district for 7 years because it is in a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) district and any taxes resulting from the increase in property value will be captured for TIF district improvements. Proponents state that the taxes are necessary to address overcrowding in schools, as new housing developments are being built and modular buildings are already being used to house the 1st Grade. The expansion would also allow 5th graders to move out of the middle/high school campus and back to elementary school.

The Inola Bond Transparency Act statement lists the spending on the much smaller 2023 bond issue propositions, $2,075,000.00 for building improvements and materials, and $510,000.00 for vehicles for pupil transportation.

As in Tulsa, the Inola bond propositions are a hodgepodge of different types of projects. There's no way to vote for air conditioning for the secondary gym or additional elementary classrooms without also voting for giving out Chromebooks to all the students. Districts and municipalities consistently violate the state constitution's single-subject rule, and they get away with it, because someone would have to pay for the lawsuit to enforce it, with no guarantee that a judge would handle the suit fairly.

I noticed a few Vote No signs around Inola, including the two planted at the intersection of Broadway and Commercial next to two Vote Yes signs (photo above). One of the signs claims that 37% of the money raised by the property tax increase will leave the district to pay banks and investors. Given the amount being raised and the long term of the bonds, that is not surprising.

My inclination would be to vote no and then ask the board to try again, with different propositions to allow voters to pick and choose which spending they deem necessary (more classrooms, air conditioning for the old gym) and which (Chromebooks) they deem harmful. Whittling the propositions down to the most essential would also make it easier and less expensive to finance the projects.

Central Tech 2-mill property tax increase:

Central Tech is the Career Tech district covering nearly all of Creek County, plus parts of Osage, Pawnee, Payne, and Lincoln Counties. The district is seeking a permanent tax increase of 2 mills, to be added to the current levy of 10 mills for general fund and 3 mills for the building fund. The district has no bonded indebtedness. The website for the tax increase says, "Many long-term career programs are at capacity, and there are more than 400 students currently on wait lists." The district's Estimate of Needs lays out Central Tech's revenues and expenditures from 2024-2025 and the forecast numbers for 2025-2026. The additional 2 mills would generate an estimated $3.3 million per year in addition to the roughly $22 million in taxes currently generated. An extra 2 mills is an extra $20 per year on a $100,000 house with a homestead exemption. That would be 15 mills total; compare that with 13.33 mills for Tulsa Technology Center.

A yes or no vote would depend on how confident I was in the stewardship of the Central Tech board and administration. I could see where a district with a lower net valuation would need a higher millage than Tulsa Tech to generate sufficient revenue to meet program demand. You can read the most recent two years' audits on the State Auditor's website: 2023-2024, 2022-2023. I don't see any adverse findings. I'd lean towards voting yes.

After the jump, a look at school board races in Liberty, Verdigris, and Mannford.