Tulsa Election 2024 Category

Originally posted 2024/03/20. Post-dated to stay at the top of the blog through election day

UPDATE 2024/03/26: Tulsa County Election Board has moved Thursday and Friday early voting back to their headquarters at 555 N. Denver. (Earlier information on the state election board website reported that Fair Meadows would be used again, as it had been for the March 5 presidential preference primary.)

If you live in central Tulsa, between Pine and 51st Street, between the river and Memorial Drive, there's a good chance you have the opportunity to change the direction of Tulsa Public Schools in the April 2, 2024, election. There are three contested seats on the ballot, a regular election where a veteran teacher is challenging an incumbent school board member, a regular election for an open seat, and a special election to fill a vacancy.

Over 68,000 people in a wide swath of central Tulsa (districts 2, 5, 6 in the map below) are eligible to vote. Incumbent John Croisant in District 5 hopes to be re-elected and joined by Calvin Moniz (District 2) and Sarah Smith (District 6) to continue to rubber-stamp an administration that has failed to educate our city's children and to continue to turn a blind eye to administrative incompetence, corruption, and bloat. Campaign ethics filings show that all three are backed by major Democrat donors, "progressive" Democrat elected officials, and an official Democrat party organization, and all three use Democrat campaign vendors. Some of their big donors are connected with the big foundations who treat TPS school children as their experimental lab rats.

Their opponents are KanDee Washington (District 2), involved in the schools for many years as a TPS parent, Teresa Pena (District 5), a veteran TPS teacher, and Maria Seidler (District 6), an attorney who represents parents in their dealings with the public schools. These three women represent a diversity of life experience, but all three are united in support of genuine education and an end to excuses for incompetence, corruption, and bloat.

Recent news stories about failing schools and illegal payments to TPS administrators underscore the imperative that Tulsa school district voters step up and elect board members who will right the ship.

The TPS Rescue Coalition has rated candidates in each of the three races based on an Independence Scorecard: Is the candidate beholden to special interests -- the same ones that have run TPS into the ground, to the benefit of consultants and philanthropocrats who see Tulsa as their personal social experiment -- or independent and focused on the best for students, teachers, and parents? Based on that information, and based on the responses 4 of the 6 candidates provided in the NorthStar questionnaire, I'm making the following recommendations:

District 2: KanDee Washington
District 5: Teresa Pena
District 6: Maria Seidler

I hope to say more about each race in the next few days.

All three election districts are fully within Tulsa County. Early voting will be held at the Tulsa County Election Board Headquarters at 555 N. Denver, but only on Thursday, March 28, 2024, and Friday, March 29, 2024, from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (No Saturday early voting because this is not a federal election.)

To confirm which district you're in and where your polling place is, use the Oklahoma Voter Portal at okvoterportal.okelections.us

MORE:

Here is the full map of TPS board election districts, as of the post-2020-census redistricting.

Tulsa Parents Voice Facebook page is a great place to keep up with the developing story of illegal payments to TPS administrators.

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.

ELECTION RESULTS: Tulsa County school district bond issues all passed by a wide margin, each proposition exceeding 80% in favor. School bond issues fell short of the 60% threshold in Canute, Krebs, Silo, and Tupelo. In Boswell, Tuttle, and Weleetka school districts, a majority of voters voted against the bond propositions.

Worst turnout: Nobody -- zero of 21 registered voters -- in the Billings Public Schools district in Garfield County showed up to vote on adding themselves to the Garfield County 522 Ambulance Service District in the Billings Public Schools district. According to the Enid News, there were four propositions across the county relating to the ambulance service: Voters in the existing ambulance district cast two separate votes to annex into the district the parts of the Billings and Pond Creek-Hunter school districts in Garfield County, approving by 132-6 and 128-7, respectively. Voters in the affected part of Pond Creek-Hunter voted 11-5 in favor. Presumably annexation needed approval from both the existing district and the area to be annexed; with a tie 0-0 vote, it appears that the Billings annexation (about 32.25 sq. mi. in the northeast corner of the county) will not go forward.

In the entire state of Oklahoma, with over 400 school districts, each with at least one seat up for election this year, there were only 22 seats that required a primary because more than two candidates ran. In 13 of those 22 seats, a candidate received more than 50% of the vote and was elected; a runoff between the top two candidates will held for only 9 seats.

This coming Tuesday, February 13, 2024, is Oklahoma's annual school board primary election. Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. A list of all of Tuesday's elections across Oklahoma can be found on the Oklahoma State Election Board website. You can access your sample ballot on the election board's Oklahoma voter portal.

As one of 10 election days authorized by law this year, Tuesday is also host to some municipal elections and special elections, including several school district general-obligation bond issues. As in all non-Federal Oklahoma elections, early voting is available the Thursday and Friday before election day from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. at designated locations; in Tulsa County and most counties, that's at the county election board headquarters.

Only a small percentage of Tulsa County voters will have a reason to go to the polls. The only school board races on the ballot this Tuesday are those that drew three or more candidates. If a candidate receives more than 50% of the vote this Tuesday, he or she will be elected; if not, the top two candidates will advance to the school board general election on April 2, 2024, which is where you will find school board elections that have only two candidates.

There are several contested school board seats in Tulsa County, including three in the Tulsa Public Schools district, but all of them drew only two candidates, so you will see them on the ballot in April.

In Tulsa County, there are general obligation bond issues in Bixby, Sand Springs, and Jenks school districts, and a single city council seat each in Collinsville and Sand Springs.

Bixby school bond issues:

• School district web page on the bond issue
• Bixby bond issue Bond Transparency Act disclosure: The district has $192,440,000 left to be paid off from the 2022 and 2016 bond issues.
• Proposition No. 1: $11,500,000 "for the purpose of constructing, equipping, repairing and remodeling school buildings, acquiring school furniture, fixtures and equipment and acquiring and improving school sites"
• Proposition No. 2: $500,000 "for the purpose of purchasing transportation equipment"

Jenks school bond issues:

• School district web page on the bond issue
• Jenks bond issue Bond Transparency Act disclosure: "The School District has 49,945,000 in unissued building bonds authorized at an election held on the 10th day of February 2015." The disclosure lists specific bond expenditures from each election going back to 2019.
• Proposition No. 1: $18,180,000 "for the purpose of constructing, equipping, repairing and remodeling school buildings, acquiring school furniture, fixtures and equipment and acquiring and improving school sites"
• Proposition No. 2: $820,000 "for the purpose of purchasing transportation equipment"

Sand Springs school bond issues:

• School district web page on the bond issue
• Sand Springs bond issue Bond Transparency Act disclosure: The disclosure lists specific bond expenditures from each election going back to 2009. Sand Springs district has $23,308,959 in outstanding bond debt, including principal and interest.
• Proposition No. 1: $111,875,000 "for the purpose of improving or acquiring school sites, constructing, repairing, remodeling and equipping school buildings, and acquiring school furniture, fixtures and equipment; or in the alternative to acquire all or a distinct portion of such property pursuant to a lease purchase arrangement"
• Proposition No. 2: $2,625,000 "for the purpose of acquiring transportation equipment and auxiliary transportation equipment; or in the alternative to acquire all or a distinct portion of such property pursuant to a lease purchase arrangement"

For each candidate, ballot name is followed by full voter registration name in parentheses, if different, then age, party of voter registration, social media profiles and websites.

Collinsville city council, Ward 1:

• Brad Francis (Orville Brad Francis), incumbent, 76, R. LinkedIn profile, Facebook profile.
• Gary Cole (Gary D Cole Sr), 68, R. Facebook profile.

(Larry Shafer was the only candidate for mayor and has been re-elected.)

Sand Springs city council, Ward 4:

• Brian Jackson (Brian Michael Jackson), incumbent, 41, I. LinkedIn, Facebook profile. Jackson ran in the Republican primary for State House District 66 in 2018. He finished 2nd in the primary then lost to Jadine Nollan in the runoff. He changed registration from Republican to Independent sometime between the primary and November 2.
• David B. Parker, 61, R. LinkedIn profile, real estate Facebook page, personal Facebook profile.

(Beau Wilson, Ward 5, and Jim Spoon, at-large, were the only candidates in their respective races and have been re-elected.)

Here's a brief introduction to the six candidates running for three seats Tulsa Public Schools Board of Education, drawing on public information, including filing information, voter registration records, and social media accounts. All addresses are in the City of Tulsa. Because there are only two candidates in each race, each seat will be decided on Tuesday, April 2, 2024. I will add links to this page as more social media accounts are discovered and campaign websites are stood up, and this page will have a link to detailed candidate profiles later in the campaign season.

A brief panic during the filing period suggests nervousness by Tulsa's educational establishment about the outcome of these elections, in the form of letters from Tulsa Mayor G. T. Bynum IV, City Councilors Vanessa Hall Harper and Lori Decter Wright, State Rep. Monroe Nichols, and others urging the school board to waive board policy requiring a national search and public input in hiring a replacement for ex-Superintendent Deborah Gist and to hire Interim Superintendent Ebony Johnson to fill the permanent position immediately. The letters claimed to be concerned about local control, which appears to mean foundation control, as opposed to control by a board where three members had been recently endorsed by the voting public.

Following the process set out in board policy would have placed the hiring of a new superintendent after the seating of two or three new board members, resulting in a board that could well have a majority of four or five members who are independent of the private foundations that steered TPS policy during Gist's tenure. As Tulsa Parents Voice has documented, nearly all of the alumni of the Broad (rhymes with "road") Center for the Management of School Systems that populated the upper levels of the TPS org chart have departed this year. (The Broad Center involvement in public education has received criticism across the political spectrum; see these two 2018 articles by Betty Casey in Tulsa Kids. Eli Broad's controlling approach to "venture philanthropy" strongly resembles that taken by certain Tulsa philanthropists.)

Those executive vacancies would have been filled by a new superintendent under a new board majority, but now they can be filled by a long-time TPS administrator with a board majority of four favorable to Gist's failed policies and private foundation direction. Letters from community leaders allowed the current board majority to pretend to be responding to public demand in discarding board policy, bypassing public input and a thorough search for a new district leader. The two elected African-American women on the board, Rev. Jennettie Marshall and E'lena Ashley, voted against making Johnson permanent superintendent. Ms. Ashley commented after the vote on Facebook:

As I commend and congratulate our Dr. Ebony Johnson for her new 'permanent role' as TPS Superintendent, I am conflicted. I consider Dr. Ebony an excellent communicator and she certainly appears to have what it takes to make change.

It also saddens me that we now as the Tulsa Public Schools board have...

• set precedent for Tulsa Public Schools by throwing away the rules in which the board established to ensure we performed our due diligence and ensured we in fact did all in our powers to find the best, most qualified person to lead TPS as Superintendent.
• set precedent to 'Circumvent the Rights' of the very students we are promising to Teach and Protect.

What we're teaching our young children is that when the rules don't fit our needs or agenda, we simply ignore them or find the best most expedient solution to get around them.

That's not how our students should expect their life's decisions to be made and they most certainly shouldn't see the leaders of their schools acting in such nefarious ways.

Here are brief profiles of each of the TPS school board candidates:

TPS Office No. 2:

This is a special election to fill the seat for the remaining year of an unexpired four-year term. Judith Barba Perez was elected to this seat in 2021, winning a three-way primary with 201 votes out of 379 cast. Barba Perez resigned in 2023 after she moved out of Oklahoma, and Diamond Marshall was appointed by the board to replace her until a special election could be held. Diamond Marshall declined to file for election.

Calvin Michael Moniz, 38, 2607 E. 6th St., Independent, Voter ID 720718072. Voted 11 times in the last four years. Did not vote in the February 2021 school board election. Social media: Campaign website, LinkedIn, personal Facebook profile, campaign Facebook page, campaign Instagram, personal Instagram (private, with 1,850 followers and 2,382 posts), campaign Twitter. A personal Twitter account @CalvinMoniz is no longer online. Moniz supported bypassing board policy to make Ebony Johnson permanent superintendent without the required nationwide search and public input.

KanDee N. Washington, 56, 2211 N. Xanthus Ave., Independent, Voter ID 720570162. Voted 5 times in the last four years. Did not vote in the February 2021 school board election. Social media: Campaign Facebook page.

TPS Office No. 5:

This is a regular election. John Croisant won the open seat in 2020, finishing first in the February primary with 44% in a field of five, then narrowly winning the postponed general election in June, 52% to 48% over Shane Saunders, thanks to an 834-vote advantage in absentee ballots and early voting.

John Thomas Croisant, 62 E. Woodward Blvd., Democrat, Voter ID 720699462. Voted 12 times in the last 4 years. Voted in the 2020 primary and general school board elections. Social media: Campaign website, LinkedIn profile, campaign Facebook page, personal Facebook profile, business Facebook page. Croisant voted to bypass board policy and make Ebony Johnson permanent superintendent without the required nationwide search and public input.

Teresa Ann Peña, 1127 S. College Ave., Republican, Voter ID 720206476. Voted 4 times in the last 4 years. Voted in the 2020 general school board election. Social media: Campaign website, LinkedIn profile, campaign Facebook page, personal Facebook profile.

TPS Office No. 6:

This race is for a full four-year term for the open seat currently held by Jerry Griffin, who is not running for re-election. He defeated long-time establishment incumbent Ruth Ann Fate in 2020.

Maria Mercedes Seidler, 7057 E. 52nd St., Republican, Voter ID 801571311. Voted 10 times in the last 4 years, including the 2020 general school board election. Social media: LinkedIn profile, personal Facebook profile, personal Twitter account. Seidler spoke at the December 11 TPS board meeting in favor of following board policy and conducting a nationwide search with public input for a new permanent superintendent.

Sarah Adrianne Smith, 5431 S. 67th East Pl., Democrat, Voter ID 720429536. Voted 9 times in the last 4 years, including the 2020 general school board election. Social media: Campaign website, LinkedIn profile, campaign Facebook page, personal Facebook profile, campaign Twitter account. Smith applauded the school board's decision to bypass board policy to make Ebony Johnson permanent superintendent without the required nationwide search and public input.

UPDATE: At the close of the filing period, we have three contested races for Tulsa school board, and contests for single seats in Berryhill, Owasso, and Union. The remaining 13 seats (including two each in Keystone and Liberty and the Tulsa Tech Center seat), are uncontested. Maria Mercedes Seidler filed for TPS Office No. 6, making that a two-woman contest for the open seat. Alan Staab filed but withdrew for TPS Office No. 5, so there are no Tulsa County contests with more than two candidates, and there will be no February 13 primary; all of these races will be settled on April 2, 2024. (Backup copy of candidate filings.candidatefilings_12082023.pdf)

Today, Wednesday, December 6, 2023, is the final day of filing for school board races in every public school district across Oklahoma. Candidates may file at the county election board until 5 p.m. today.

K-12 school districts will have a single seat, Office No. 4, up for election to a five-year term. K-8 dependent districts (Keystone is the only one in Tulsa County) have three seats that rotate through three-year terms, and also have a single seat on the ballot. Each year one of 7 Technology Center seats is on the ballot for a 7-year term; this year that is Office No. 1.

Tulsa, with 7 board members, has two seats up for a four-year term (No. 5 and No. 6) and the one-year unexpired term of Office No. 2.

After the second day of filing in Tulsa County, 13 seats have drawn only one candidate, 2 seats (Berryhill and Owasso) have drawn two candidates, and in Tulsa Office No. 5, incumbent John Croisant has drawn two challengers. No one has filed for Liberty Office No. 4.

Nor has any candidate filed for the Tulsa Technology Center Office No. 1, not even incumbent Rev. Dr. Ray Owens, pastor of Metropolitan Baptist Church and a board member of several non-profit organizations. This district mainly covers North Tulsa, from 11th Street South to 86th Street North, mainly west of Yale, plus Gilcrease Hills and neighborhoods just west of downtown.

Filing is also open for a number of municipalities; candidates have filed for city office in Collinsville, Owasso, and Sand Springs.

(Here is the a link to the latest list of candidates for Tulsa County school board and city council seats.)

School board filing always comes at a busy and distracted time of year. As I've written before, it's almost as if school board elections were deliberately scheduled to escape the notice of potential candidates and voters.

The school board primary election will be held on February 13, 2024, for those seats where there are three or more candidates. If no one wins a majority of the vote in the February election, a runoff will be held on April 2, 2024. If a seat draws only two candidates, the election will be held on April 2, 2024.

The Tulsa district, largest in the state, has two out of seven seats up for election to a four-year term, Offices No. 5 and 6, plus the remaining one-year term of Office No. 2, previously held by Judith Barba-Perez, who resigned earlier this year. As mentioned, incumbent John Croisant, first elected in 2020, is being challenged by retired TPS teacher Theresa Pena and Alan Staab. The Board appointed Diamond Marshall to serve District 2 until this year's school elections; the winner of this election will serve just one year. Marshall has not filed for election, but Calvin Michael Moniz has, and Candee Washington is expected to file as well.

Jerry Griffin, the incumbent in District 6, is not expected to run for re-election; he upset 24-year incumbent Ruth Ann Fate in 2020. So far Sarah Smith is the only candidate for that seat. Based on the age (45) listed on the filing, this is Democrat Sarah Adrienne Smith, registered to vote at 5431 S 67 E PL. (I don't know why the filing list omits addresses, which help to disambiguate names. There are 21 Sarah Smiths in Tulsa County, 9 in the Tulsa Public School District, 2 in Election District 6.) Her campaign kickoff was co-hosted by former Tulsa County Democratic Party chairman Keith McArtor. Here is Sarah Smith's personal Facebook profile. She is using the left-wing ActBlue platform for campaign donations.

You'll find a map of Tulsa Public Schools board districts here. District 2 is mainly between Admiral and Pine, with a bit of territory south to 11th Street around TU and Will Rogers High School. Booker T. Washington High School is also within District 2's boundaries. District 5 is mainly midtown west of Yale, around Edison High School, and District 6 is midtown from roughly Yale to Mingo.

Back during the 2019 filing period, I wrote at length about why school board races are so important, why they deserve much more attention than they receive, and why it's a shame that so few candidates run and so few voters turn out. During the pandemic school closures of 2020, parents and the general public began to learn more about what their children were being taught (and often how little they were being taught). More people are alert to what's at stake, and Tulsa has had some very contentious elections in recent years. We're hoping that trend will continue, but with more victories for school board members who will ask tough questions of the administration, who will represent the community's values and priorities, and who will stop the use of schools as missionary outposts for the Gramscian Left.