Former City Councilor Jayme Fowler, from a multi-generational family of life-long educators, argues against the upcoming April 7th Tulsa Public Schools (TPS) bond package, which seeks $609 million in Tulsa Taxes. Fowler’s passionate plea is for voters to take this opportunity to get education right in Tulsa.
He asserts that the propositions fail to address deep-seated systemic issues, including poor academic outcomes, administrative bloat, underutilized facilities, and a destructive busing policy. This bond package perpetuates a failing status quo.
Fowler advocates rejecting the bond packages in total to compel TPS leadership and the community to publicly and collaboratively develop a comprehensive reform plan focused on rationalizing schools, revitalizing neighborhood schools, and improving educational fundamentals.
Deconstruction of the Four Bond Propositions
Fowler provides a sharp critique of the four bond propositions from Tulsa Public Schools.
- Proposition 1 (Educational Materials & Athletics): While framed as funding for educational materials like textbooks and STEM labs, Fowler highlights that $20 million is earmarked for athletics. He describes TPS athletics as an “absolute disaster” and among the worst in the nation, plagued by scandals and a lack of success. He questions the stewardship of this money, pointing out that TPS has six football stadiums for nine high schools, whereas a district like Frisco has only three stadiums for over fifteen high schools.
- Proposition 2 (School Construction & Repair): Fowler criticizes the plan for building and repair, noting, “In the late 60s, Tulsa Public Schools had 80,000 students and nine high schools. Today we have 34,000 students and we still have nine high schools open. Of our 45 elementary schools, there is somewhere in the range of 15 to 25 percent of those with less than fifty percent occupancy.
“TPS is asking in this bond package to build approximately ten million dollars’ worth of new facilities for free daycare in East Tulsa. The idea of asking taxpayers to provide free daycare to only one part of Tulsa, to me, “I have a deep philosophical objection. We are asking Tulsa taxpayers to subsidize someone else’s personal lifestyle & choices. This is full blown socialism at its worst,” Fowler said.
- Proposition 3 (Technology): While acknowledging this proposition is for purchasing technology, the core criticism is that it does not address the fundamental failure of the district to teach students basic skills. Fowler asserts that the district is failing to teach children how to read and do math, making technology purchases a secondary concern.
- Proposition 4 (Transportation Equipment): Fowler connects this proposition to the district’s long-standing busing plan, which he argues is a primary driver of the district’s decline and should not be perpetuated with new equipment purchases.
Ultimately, Fowler contends that all four propositions support “business as usual” and do not introduce the substantive change the district desperately needs.
Analysis of Systemic Failures and Administrative Inefficiency
Fowler identifies several deep-seated systemic failures within Tulsa Public Schools that he believes the bond package would only perpetuate. A central issue is the district’s severe academic under performance. He states that most students arrive in high school unable to read at grade level, a problem exacerbated by the long-standing practice of “social promotion” in neighborhood schools, where students are advanced regardless of academic achievement. Citing Oklahoma’s rank as 50th in the nation for education, he concludes that TPS, as the state’s largest district, is likely one of the worst school districts in the United States.
Operational and administrative inefficiencies are another major concern. Fowler describes the district as “very bloated” and “top-heavy,” with an organizational structure geared toward overhead and administration rather than the welfare of teachers and children.
He notes the Oklahoma Auditor and Inspector’s report found the school board was paying significant invoices without proof of work, and millions to “identity politics and equity, diversity, and inclusion” instead of students and teachers. This mismanagement, with a lack of accountability, demonstrates failed stewardship of local taxpayer money.
The Destructive Legacy of the Busing and Magnet School System
Fowler notes that the district’s voluntary busing plan, a holdover from the desegregation era of the late 1960s, is the “big crux” that has “hollowed out and destroyed our neighborhoods.” While TPS was unique in avoiding a federal court order for busing, it is one of the few districts that still maintains such a system today. He describes the policy as cruel, arguing that it has created a two-tiered system.
The bus plan funnels resources and students from across the city to a few “vibrant” magnet schools, while children from low-income backgrounds are left behind in “chronically failing” neighborhood schools with no transportation to access better options.
Fowler argues that TPS has spent “millions and millions of dollars” perpetuating this system, which effectively drains vitality and property values from local neighborhoods.
He declares that vibrant cities are built on vibrant neighborhoods, which in turn depend on vibrant neighborhood schools, something the current busing and magnet school focus actively undermines.
“If we’re going to have a vibrant city, we’ve got to have vibrant neighborhoods. The only way we’re going to have vibrant neighborhoods is that we have vibrant neighborhood schools, not magnet schools, not private schools, not suburban schools but vibrant neighborhood schools. Families move into neighborhoods for the schools,” Fowler said.
“Just look at the suburbs. How vibrant they are. People don’t purchase homes there for the museums and parks, they go there for the vibrant schools and family safety. It’s very important that Tulsa gets this right. It’s not that we never again pass another bond issue. Far from it. I think we should just hit the pause button on this bond issue,” Fowler added.
Contrasting Educational Models and Lost Opportunities
Fowler highlights the deficiencies of TPS by comparing it to more successful educational models and lamenting the loss of effective programs. He contrasts the infrastructure bloat of TPS—with its nine high schools and six football stadiums—to the efficiency of Frisco public schools, which serve a larger high school population with only three stadiums.
He also points to the vibrancy of Tulsa Tech, which provides critical vocational training but primarily serves suburban students; for every four students, three are from the suburbs, while only one is from Tulsa Public Schools.
This occurs despite Tulsa taxpayers funding approximately two-thirds of Tulsa Tech’s ad valorem tax revenue, effectively subsidizing the “hollowing out” of their own city.
Furthermore, Fowler mourns the disappearance of fundamental educational practices and programs from TPS. He notes that vocational education, which once provided non-college-bound students with a pathway to a successful career, is no longer an option.
He also speaks passionately about the abandonment of phonics-based reading instruction. He recalls his personal involvement with the “Reading Partners” program, which successfully used phonics to teach children to read, and notes that his mother, a 35-year TPS teacher, considered phonics the “bread and butter” of her classroom. He argues that the district-wide shift away from this proven method is a primary reason so many students cannot read.
Proposed Path Forward: A Pause for Comprehensive Reform
Fowler said this is the first time in his life he has opposed a bond package, but he believes it is a necessary step to compel the district to address its fundamental problems.
He calls for a new, comprehensive reform plan developed through robust community engagement and collaboration, involving all stakeholders: the school board, the superintendent, city and civic leaders, and the public. He references a past successful reform effort under Dr. Keith Ballard in the early 2010s as a model for this type of collaborative process. A new plan, he insists, must focus on several key areas:
- Rationalizing Schools: Drastically reducing the number of school buildings to match the current student population. He suggests consolidating three or four high schools from the current nine.
- Revitalizing Neighborhood Schools: Shifting focus and resources away from the magnet school system to rebuild strong, vibrant schools that serve as anchors for their local communities.
- Restoring Core Education: Reintroducing foundational skills like phonics-based reading and bringing back vocational education programs, potentially in partnership with Tulsa Tech or OSU-Okmulgee.
Grounded in his family’s deep, multi-generational history with TPS and his wife’s burnout experience as a special education teacher overwhelmed by workload and classroom politics, Fowler stresses that his goal is not to be anti-public schools but to ensure every child receives a world-class education.
Fowler concludes, “So goes Tulsa Public Schools, so goes this city. We must get this right.”
Byrd’s personal takeaway from auditing Oklahoma’s two largest school districts is that attempts to fix education with “more programs, more services, more counselors, more technology” have not improved academic outcomes but have only added to rising costs.
The State Department of Education (SDE) has a $20 million operating budget, serving as a “highly legislated pass-through” for funds (0.26% of education dollars), suggesting that fraud, waste, and abuse are most likely found at the local level within the 546 schools.
- Tulsa Public Schools (TPS) Audit: Under Superintendent Dr. Gist, TPS contracted out $29 million on consultants and $37 million on vendors, totaling $66 million not directly benefiting teachers or students.
Audit teams reviewed hundreds of lengthy contracts containing vague, non-tangible concepts like $5.2 million for “system-level alignment to strategic priorities,” $1.2 million for “multi-tier wraparound services,” and $6 million for “behavior management.”
Byrd questions how taxpayers can know where their money is going if even auditors cannot comprehend what is being purchased. Due to the vague invoices and contracts, auditors reviewed emails and purchased materials to justify payments, revealing funds went to private companies, NGOs, nonprofits, and consultants for TPS restructuring.
To read the Tulsa School District Official Election Proclamation, click here: https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1765838179/tulsaschoolsorg/lvupvx1scuy0bp2gjimk/ElectionProclamationTPS2026Final.pdf
About the author: David Arnett’s beginning in print journalism was not planned in 1985 but covered by Rebecca Martin writing for the Columbia Journalism Review in 1987. After 11 years in print, he established TulsaToday online in 1996 and Straight Up on Substack in 2022 providing email subscriptions to the latest local news and opinion. Arnett is identified nationally as a “Veteran Oklahoma Political Journalist.”
Thank you for reading. Your comments are welcome below and/or by email.