During likely the last Senate Education Committee meeting of regular session, three more appointees to the Oklahoma State Board of Education — Michael Tinney, Ryan Deatherage and Becky Carson — saw their nominations advance Tuesday despite drama at past board meetings and a senator’s refusal to carry Tinney’s nomination.
Sen. Lisa Standridge (R-Norman) refused to support Tinney’s gubernatorial nomination owing to her friendship with his predecessor and fellow constituent Kendra Wesson. While Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton initially said he would not carry Tinney’s nomination over Standridge’s objection. Following the conclusion of budget negotiations with Gov. Kevin Stitt — who nominates SBE members — Paxton changed his mind and presented Tinney to the committee.
“We prefer the senator from that district do it,” Paxton (R-Tuttle) said Tuesday. “If a senator requests that they not be heard, that is certainly a request that we try to honor. This is not the case. This case, that Sen. Standridge had originally signed off on the nomination — that she would carry it — and then, I think my understanding is, that the person who the governor had removed off the board was friends with her, or had a relationship of some kind, and they knew each other. And so she decided she didn’t want to carry the replacement. So that’s all it was. And then after talking to the governor and Sen. (Adam) Pugh and talking to Mr. Tinney, we all thought it’d be good to go ahead and carry the nomination.”
Paxton also said the end-of-session deadline to confirm executive nominations gave lawmakers more time to observe Tinney’s participation in the two most recent state board meetings. During his introduction of Tinney, Paxton said he was “very well impressed” with Tinney’s performance and what he has been able to accomplish thus far.
Tinney spoke of his decades-long teaching experience and his time learning from others as a young educator.
“When I was appointed to the board, I kind of began my role as a sponge again, trying to understand, because looking at all the facets and shifting paradigms of education is complicated,” Tinney said. “It’s given me a new appreciation for the State Board of Education, for this education committee, and for the Legislature — the job they have to do — and I appreciate that. I take my role as board member very seriously. I’m honored to be on there. I will do the best I can and stand for following the law, following the truth, and doing the best we can for our children and teachers.”
Committee members voted to advance Tinney’s nomination 10-2, but only after grueling questions from legislators about how Tinney views his board role and how he explains potential conflicts of interest regarding his wife’s and son’s work with Professional Oklahoma Educators.
Ginger Tinney is the executive director of POE, which “serves the needs of teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, college and university education majors, retired educators and all public education employees in Oklahoma.” The couple’s son, Daniel Tinney, is also a lobbyist for the organization.
Most of the committee members’ questions centered around whether Tinney was capable of unbiased decision making given his family’s professions. Legislators also asked at what point Tinney would recuse himself from voting on matters related to members of the organization or the organization itself.
Tinney told committee members he had brought the concern up to Gov. Kevin Stitt during the nomination process, but that the governor said he does not consider the situation to be a conflict of interest.
“The first thing I did was — I was contacted by the governor, and I said, ‘You know that my wife is executive director of POE.’ He said, ‘Yes, we know that very much.’ I said, ‘Does that bother you or bother anybody?’ I said, ‘As an attorney, there’s no direct conflict. I’m not going to represent anyone against the Board of Education or have anything to do with them on a legal basis. But you guys feel free to run it by your attorneys. Anybody else who bothers you. The attorney general, whatever else.’ They said, they came back, ‘No, we have no problem.'”
Tinney went on to say he thinks POE is a “great resource” for himself and the State Board of Education.
“Some of the finest educators in the state of Oklahoma are members of POE, whether they’re administrators, teachers, retired teachers, and I can tap into that resource,” Tinney said. “I can go out, and, if there’s an education policy or statute that (is) enacted, I can see how that really plays out on the ground and the pros and cons, how it really works in real life. And I can take that back to the board. We can make better policies or amend them, or use what works well.”
Sen. Dusty Deevers (R-Elgin) asked the majority of the questions concerning the suggested conflict of interest and later debated against Tinney’s nomination.
“This is not a statement about POE as an entity or their efforts — that has nothing to do with them,” Deevers said. “I just am thoroughly convinced in my mind, in my conscience, that due to the the nature of this conflict of interest, that it’s too strong, it’s too severe. And I don’t believe that that’s what will best serve our children in our state, especially considering you do love your wife and you love your children appropriately so. And I think that, again, the things, the decisions that are put before you — that could, that will affect our state — and with POE being a union representing thousands of teachers in our state, there is too much, too great opportunity for it to have undue influence.”
Following Deevers’ comments, Sen. Carri Hicks (D-OKC) said she “just wanted to make sure that we’re being accurate” and clarified that POE is not listed as a teachers’ union in the state of Oklahoma.
In closing debate, Paxton admonished members’ claims of a potential conflict of interest.
“On the issues of conflict of interest, if legislators abstain from votes every time there was some conflict of interest similar to what we talked about today, you would never get a quorum of a number of votes cast,” Paxton said. “You start talking about conflicts of interest, better look at the mirror and see what applies to us as well. I mean, it’s part of what we do. This situation is not a conflict at all. This is a situation where family members are involved in the same industry that this board kind of regulates, as far as from the standpoint of they get to look at what’s going on out there and decide what’s important and decide what’s the right policies moving forward, this is not a conflict. So make sure that’s clear that if we are going to start pointing the conflict finger, we can point at ourselves first thing.”
‘Is it good for kids?’
State Board of Education appointee Ryan Deatherage was the third executive nominee to be considered Tuesday, and he was met with a similar line of questioning — mainly from Deevers — about how he views his role.
Deevers asked what Deatherage believes is the statutory obligation of the SBE, which is outlined in Title 70, Section 3-104 of Oklahoma statutes. Deatherage replied with an analogy he believed summed up the roles of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters and the State Board of Education. He expounded upon the concept after his nomination was advanced.
“Think of the state superintendent like a team captain and the State Board of Education like the coaches,” Deatherage said after the meeting. “The team captain helps run practice and lead the team, but the coaches make the game plan, choose what plays the team will run, make sure that the captain is doing a good job, helping the team learn and grow. The captain is important, but the coach, the board, helps guide and check how things are going to make sure the team — all Oklahoma schools — is winning.”
Deatherage’s characterization of the relationship between the board and the superintendent is noteworthy given his recent conflict with Walters. Deevers seemed to disagree on what the role of a board member is, suggesting the role is focused on curriculum development and educational standards.
“Looking at [Title 70, Section 3-104], it says here, I’ll just give you a quote, ‘Formulation and adoption of curricula, courses of study and other instructional aids necessary for the adequate instruction of pupils in the public schools of the state,'” Deevers said. “And then it goes on and says this includes the powers to prescribe and adopt curriculum standards for public schools, approve textbooks and instructional materials in alignment with those standards, establish and implement uniform standards of accreditation and ensure compliance with state and federal education laws. Would you agree with that?”
Deatherage did not say whether he agreed or disagreed with the statement, but he decided to read another quote from the law that he had printed out in advance.
“Under Oklahoma law, Statute 70 (Section) 3-104 and 3-108, the State Board of Education is a governing body that supervises public education in the state,” Deatherage said. “The state superintendent of public instruction is a constitutional officer and also serves as the chair of the state board. But the board as a whole holds legal, statutory authority to set educational policy. (The) superintendent must follow set educational policies.”
Committee members approved Deatherage’s nomination 9-2. Deevers and Sen. Kendal Sacchieri (R-Blanchard) voted against him.
“I’m glad to serve the state of Oklahoma and its 4 million people and citizens and a little over 700,000 students in Oklahoma,” Deatherage said after his advancement. “I take this responsibility very seriously, and [I am] excited to be pushed forward to the Senate floor now to be voted on.”
Stitt’s nomination of Becky Carson to the State Board of Education also advanced through the committee Tuesday.
A former educator of 30 years, Carson spoke about her experiences teaching, the current state of education in Oklahoma and some possible changes she believes should be made in the state’s public school system. Carson said issues surrounding teacher support, chronic absenteeism and teacher recruitment and retention are some of the most important issues facing this state.
Responding to one of Sacchieri’s questions, Carson told committee members what she believes her role on the state board is.
“All of my emails when I taught stated at the bottom of my tagline, said, ‘Becky Carson. Is it good for kids?’ And if it wasn’t good for kids, then I wasn’t going to do it,” Carson said Tuesday. “And I stood up for children within my four walls of the building. I stood up for children at our administration center, because I have to say, and I say this not only to the board, but I say that to you as lawmakers, our students, our children in the state, they’re watching us. They’re seeing the decisions that we’re making, and I have to propose it to the board, but also to you is, what message are we sending them?”
Carson went on to say that the only role of the SBE is to make sure all students can access a quality education and to make sure students are prepared to start their own endeavors when they leave the public education system.
“The goal of any board is to make sure that they are being able to fulfill whatever their organizational duties are,” Carson said. “And so in this case, the board of education, they are responsible to answering to the 4 million Oklahomans that live in this state. They’re responsible to the parents that have children in public education. They’re responsible to the 700,000 students that we have in our educational system and to the 3,000 teachers that are here in this state.”
Stitt appointed Carson, a retired Edmond Public Schools special education teacher, on April 28 to fill the the board position representing Congressional District 5, which had remained vacant for almost two years. If approved, Carson would succeed former board member Trent Smith, who resigned in May 2023 after what he described as “four years of war” on the board under the governance of former State Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister.
Earlier this month, State Board of Education nominee Chris VanDenhende’s nomination also was advanced by the Senate Education Committee. Executive nominations must receive full approval on the Senate floor before the end of session Friday, May 30.
