Paula Lewis wins reelection as OKCPS school board leader
Paula Lewis on Tuesday decisively won reelection to another four-year term as the school board chairperson in Oklahoma City Public Schools. (Photo by Nuria Martinez-Keel/Oklahoma Voice)
OKLAHOMA CITY — An incumbent school board leader in Oklahoma City Public Schools won reelection in dominant fashion Tuesday.
Paula Lewis secured another four years as board chairperson in the Oklahoma City district by earning 53.54% of the vote, crossing the 50% threshold needed to win the seat without continuing to a general election.
She defeated Niah Spriggs, who earned 29.69% of the vote, and Jan Barrick with 16.76%.
Lewis, 54, ran on her record of leading the school board through a transformative era in the district's history since she became chairperson in 2017, a period that includes carrying out a massive school consolidation plan in 2019, weathering the COVID-19 pandemic and securing a historic $955 million bond issue in 2022.
'We have really smart kids,' Lewis said as the final results rolled in Tuesday night. 'They weren't able to get the resources they needed soon enough, and we're getting them there. We've right-sized the budgets. We've passed the bond. We've done all the things, and now our kids are ready to go. We're going to really change lives in the next four years.'
She fended off Spriggs, 50, and Barrick, 73 — two first-time candidates who campaigned for change in a district that has chronically suffered from low reading and math scores.
Barrick did not return a request for comment Tuesday night.
Spriggs, an educator and former businesswoman, said the results were 'sad for the children of Oklahoma.' She said the state has 'allowed the system to fail for so long, it's going to be very difficult to pull ourselves out of this hole.'
'Hopefully we can make some impactful change, hopefully starting the conversation,' Spriggs said when reached Tuesday night. 'Because before Jan (Barrick) and I started talking about this, everything was the status quo.'
Spriggs also lamented the large amount of money poured into the race.
Lewis raised $66,640 for her reelection campaign, public records show. Spriggs raised $4,250 and loaned her campaign $1,200, according to campaign finance records.
Barrick, the former owner of the curriculum and testing provider Alpha Plus Educational Systems, hasn't filed any documents detailing her campaign fundraising or spending.
Lewis, an occupational therapist, pledged to continue steady leadership as the board develops a new strategic plan focused on student outcomes. She said the goal is for the board to spend 50% of its meetings discussing academic results and student achievement.
This will be her final term on the school board, she said. Her son, Reign, will be in the final months of his senior year of high school when her term comes to a close in 2029.
'I won't run again because I feel like being a parent has been a game changer,' Lewis said. 'Sitting in this seat, it has allowed me to see the decisions we take votes on from a parent's view and how that affects me at my house and my children, as well as from a district policy level.'
Two other board incumbents, Carole Thompson from District 1 and Vice Chairperson Lori Bowman from District 2, automatically were reelected to four-year terms after not drawing opponents.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ari Aster's ‘Eddington' Sharply Divides Cannes: Star Pedro Pascal Defends a Western About ‘Our Worst Fears' Amid Lockdown
When writer/director Ari Aster stood up for the ovation after the Cannes premiere of his divisive 2020-set Western 'Eddington' (July 16, A24), he said, 'I feel very privileged to be here. This is a dream come true. Thank you so much for having me. And, I don't know, sorry?' Indeed, festival attendees have been fiercely divided by his 145-minute portrait of a fictional New Mexico town wracked by COVID, BLM, ACAB, you-name-it-2020-buzz-concept during the darkest season of American lives in recent memory. Joaquin Phoenix (Aster's 'Beau Is Afraid') plays a conservative sheriff who decides to run against his Gavin Newsom-esque, pro-masks-and-testing adversary, Ted Garcia (Pedro Pascal), in the local mayoral election. More from IndieWire The Cannes 2025 Films So Far Most Likely to End Up in the Oscar Race 'Imago' Review: Chechen Documentary Explores a Filmmaker's Conflicted Return to His Roots Meanwhile, at home, Phoenix's character Joe Cross is in a quarantine bubble with his hysteria-addled wife Louise (Emma Stone) and her far-right conspiracy-obsessed mother Dawn (Deirdre O'Connell), the type for whom hydroxychloroquine was presumably a panacea. But Joe's campaign is all anti-masks, anti-vax, with the threat of cult leader Vernon Jefferson Peak (Austin Butler) also posing a challenge to his political and personal life. The film has sparked massive debates up and down the Croisette since premiering Friday night, with the starriest red carpet thus far and a press conference Saturday afternoon featuring Aster with his actors Phoenix, Pascal (in a sleeveless top), Stone (in a pixie haircut, her hair growing back presumably after shaving it off for Yorgos Lanthimos' upcoming 'Bugonia'), and Michael Ward, who plays Phoenix's next-in-command. IndieWire has talked to people who loved or hated the film, with rarely any opinion in between and certainly never without a strong response of some kind from anyone — whether out of boredom or raptures over Aster's in-your-face replay of our worst COVID-times memories. 'Eddington' could be a tough sell for audiences unwilling to be submersed again in summer 2020 and all the chaos and anxieties it erupted. Other pundits I've spoken to defend 'Eddington' as a necessary social satire that mocks and derides the panic of that year, while encapsulating it all into one movie as never before. IndieWire critic David Ehrlich wrote in his rave review that 'few other filmmakers would have the chutzpah required' to pull this movie off, 'and we should probably all be grateful that none of them have tried.' 'It's very scary to participate in a movie that speaks to issues like this,' Pascal said at the press conference. 'It's far too intimidating a question for me to address. I'm not informed enough. I want people to be safe and protective. I want very much to be on the right side of history.' 'Eddington' indeed takes shots at both sides of the aisle, roasting liberal posturing in the form of social justice youth like Sarah (Amélie Hoeferle), who posts TikToks about James Baldwin and rants about having any position at all on 'stolen land.' Phoenix's sheriff character, meanwhile, could only be wrought from the era of Trump, as he rails against mask mandates and is suspicious of the George Floyd-inspired protests shaking up his community. At one point, he swaggers into a grocery store with the pompousness of Western's most classic, gun-on-the-hip cowboys. Pascal added, 'I felt like [Aster] wrote something that was all our worst fears as that lockdown experience was already a fracturing society. This was building toward an untethered sense of reality. There is a point of not going back. I was overwhelmed by that fear, and it's wonderful that it was confirmed by Ari.' Aster, whose latest feature is a hairpin departure from the genre thrills and chills of films like 'Hereditary' and 'Midsommar' and is far from the spirit of intrusive-thought-induced weirdness of 'Beau Is Afraid,' added, 'I wrote this movie in a state of fear and anxiety. I wanted to try and pull back and show what it feels like to live in a world where nobody can agree on what is real anymore.' 'Eddington' is his first feature to premiere at Cannes. 'I feel like we're on a dangerous road, and we're living in an experiment that hasn't gone well,' Aster said (via Deadline) about his MAGA- and liberal-skewering Western. 'I feel there is no way out of it… Mass liberal democracies always had this fundamental agreement we agree what we're arguing about, that system was coming from power. So it's not like suddenly there's this bad power out there. It's always been there, but right now it's chaos.' Stone, who connected with Aster amid his 2024 'Beau Is Afraid,' said that her research into the conspiracy theories that turn her character against her husband even ended up modifying her personal social media algorithms (via Variety). 'The only additional thing that scared me a little bit in the algorithm system was looking into some of the things that are in this film that haven't been in my algorithm, unfortunately, added them to my algorithm,' she said. 'Because once you start Googling it, you start seeing more and more things. So it's a real rabbit hole, very quickly. Unfortunately, I'm still getting fed some crazy shit.' 'Eddington' is still the most conversation-starting Competition premiere at Cannes, with critics split over its social message and pacing (it's currently at 63 on Metacritic, where you can find reviews all over the map). How A24 will market this movie — only one teaser has been released so far, showing Phoenix doom-scrolling through familiar images of the deepest COVID era — is an intriguing question in the lead-up to its July theatrical release. Alex Garland's 'Civil War,' another post-COVID story of national conflict, did well for A24 last year, grossing more than $127 million by tapping into a fascination factor over a divided United States. Who will 'Eddington' appeal to? Either way, it's pitting Cannes audiences against each other — Screen Daily called it a 'wan satire,' while Variety deemed it 'brazenly provocative' — and will no doubt continue to stoke debate into the summer. Best of IndieWire Guillermo del Toro's Favorite Movies: 56 Films the Director Wants You to See 'Song of the South': 14 Things to Know About Disney's Most Controversial Movie The 55 Best LGBTQ Movies and TV Shows Streaming on Netflix Right Now
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
OPINION - The City wanted Labour to succeed, but the goodwill has been rapidly squandered
In April 2024 the boardrooms in the City of London and some from industry and commerce were buzzing with excitement at the prospect of Labour taking over from a rudderless Conservative administration. In the previous four years, the Tory government never recovered from the damage inflicted by Covid, coupled with indolent leadership from three Prime Ministers in double quick time. This was Labour's time. The mood was upbeat. 'Fear initially knocked at the door, faith answered; no one was there.' The smoked salmon bagel breakfasts hosted for combinations from Messrs Starmer, Reeves, Reynolds and Siddiq were very encouraging. The PM in waiting and his colleagues had charmingly reassured their board table hosts that Labour was the party for business and growth. Business had nothing to worry about. Labour was very much 'on-side' and knew unequivocally that to achieve growth, incentives to invest must be encouraged. All Labour's ducks seemed to be set up cleverly in a row. It took only six months for the reassured to start having considerable doubts, such was the damage inflicted on business by an increase on employers' share of National Insurance Contributions. There were also very little in the way of incentives to encourage inward investment, despite the formation of the National Wealth Fund and the British Business Bank to support Labour's ambitious plans for massive infrastructure projects. Confidence in the new government started to fall like a stone. Global investors seemed very reluctant to support some of our aspiring SMES, especially the fin-tech operations. Many market activists have blamed Brexit, which had only been delivered in name only. What was so frustrating was the ineptness of the Conservatives, which failed to deliver a gold-plated certainty – the increased prosperity of the 'City' – the quintessential cash cow. The financial sector in the UK was already delivering £75 billion of revenue per annum to the HM Treasury's coffers and there could have been so much more to come. The previous Government failed to capitalise on the value of the City. Brexit should have been a 'slam-dunk' for the City. Sadly, no exciting tax incentives for companies to set up in the UK were put into place. Regulation was far too onerous and cumbersome. Also, if the UK aspired to be the world's leading financial centre, charging stamp duty on trading shares was unrealistic financial nonsense. Also spiteful legislation towards 'non-doms' just exacerbates the negative perception of the UK's ability to create growth. The '80's were the halcyon years for the City, triggered by the abolition of exchange controls in 1979, followed up in 1986 by 'Big Bang', which saw international investment banks such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank and UBS rub shoulders and then usurp many of the grand old merchant banks of the day such as SG Warburg, Morgan Grenfell, Schroders, Samuel Montagu and Barclays Capital. The introduction of the LIFFE futures market in 1984 and the explosion of derivative trading triggered the expansion of capital markets and a tsunami of IPOS and privatisations. London still remains a major financial hub. However, there is some alarming unappetising data to reckon with. In 2007, the UK had 252 Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) on the London Stock Exchange. This represented a decrease from the 367 IPOs the previous year, with overseas IPOs attracted 86 companies from 22 countries. Last year was a poor year for IPOS, mainly due to a dip in confidence and geopolitical issues – just 17 in total here in London and 18 so far this year. There have been 58 IPOS in New York since January 2025. What is very worrying is that in the last year 88 companies have delisted in London. The delisting started with ARM, which left London supposedly valued at $32 billion, is now valued at $138 billion! Flutter and DarkTrace - fallen to US private equity- plus many others have followed. It is generally acknowledged that US fund managers have access to many more investors and consequently greater liquidity has contributed to a 25% valuation premium there. A lack of confidence and enthusiasm in the UK economy have encouraged moves to New York. Recently, Revolut served notice to establish a new Western Europe HQ in Paris and earlier last week 'Wise' said it will be delisting in London and heading for New York. It is alarming to note that only 4% of the LSE'S annual income is derived from stock exchange business. The rest comes from technology (Refinitiv). The LSE needs to raise its game, as does AIM. Aquis Exchange have hosted 4 IPOS so far this year and the outlook, under fresh ownership of 'Six' looks encouraging. Monzo, Starling Bank, Virgin Atlantic, ASDA and Boots are in the mix of companies that may seek public quotations this year, but much depends on market conditions. Hong Kong's Shein's IPO remains in doubt. If the Government believes in growth, then its emissaries, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, Economc Secretary Emma Reynolds and investment minister Baroness Poppy Gustafsson need to wake up and smell the coffee? Business's risk appetite is at a low ebb. Confidence and sentiment are stagnant. Investors are vital. They must be encouraged with incentives! Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - How Democrats can win back male voters: start by respecting them
Let me start with a confession. A few years ago, when I was mayor of Ithaca, New York, I climbed onto the roof of City Hall and caught one of my interns vaping. He froze. I froze. We both knew the moment was loaded. I could've scolded him — I was the boss, the elected official, the health policy nerd. But instead, I just said, 'Well… better than actually smoking.' He exhaled (literally), and we had a real conversation about risk, addiction and choices. That, my friends, is harm reduction. And if Democrats are serious about winning back male voters — and winning back the majority — we need a whole lot more of that energy. Unfortunately, too often, Democrats sound like that one nosy Ned Flanders type of neighbor you would avoid at the block party as a teenager. 'Pull up your pants. Pull up your mask. Fix your posture. Stop vaping. Stop swearing. Did you know football causes concussions? Mixed martial arts is bad. Cars are bad. Stoves are bad. You're bad. Everything is bad.' COVID pandemic public health measures were necessary, but the heavy impact of broad restrictions alienated voters and made Democrats seem overbearing. We're supposed to be the party of compassion, progress and personal freedom, but somewhere along the way, we got saddled with the vibe of a hall monitor with a clipboard. And voters, especially men, have noticed. In 2024, Trump won 54 percent of the male vote. Among Latino men, he flipped a 23-point deficit from 2020 into a 10-point lead. Ouch. We didn't just lose them on policy. We lost them on attitude. If we want to reconnect, we need to stop trying to parent grown men. Nobody wants to be told what to do — they want to be understood. That's where harm reduction comes in. Harm reduction says, 'Hey, we get it. People aren't perfect. Let's keep them alive, healthy and safe anyway.' It's cooler, and it works. Let's talk facts. Drugs: Syringe exchange programs are wildly effective. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says they cut HIV and Hepatitis C transmission, connect people to treatment and don't increase drug use. Tobacco: Nicotine pouches like Zyn aren't risk-free, but they're way safer than cigarettes. If every cigarette smoker in America switched to vaping or Zyns tomorrow, we'd save hundreds of thousands of lives. Environmental Policy: Environmental harm reduction means helping people transition to cleaner energy without punishment or shame. Instead of banning gas stoves, we should subsidize heat pumps and electric vehicles, like the Inflation Reduction Act does, making low-carbon choices more accessible. It's not about moral purity, it's about practical progress that meets people where they Harm reduction in housing starts with Housing First, a model that provides people experiencing homelessness with stable housing without requiring sobriety or treatment first. It's proven to reduce chronic homelessness and lower public costs by cutting emergency room visits and jail time. It's simple: People can't recover if they're sleeping on concrete. Stability comes first — everything else follows. I have watched Democrats fall into the same trap over and over again: we know the data, we know what's safest, we know what people should do — and then we tell them. Loudly. Sometimes a little smugly. The intention is good, but the effect? Too often, it sounds like scolding. Let's trade the wagging finger for the open hand. Let's be the party that says: 'We want you healthy and happy — even if you mess up sometimes.' Let's be the party of second chances, not second guesses. Most people, in my experience, especially men, don't want to be preached at. They want to be respected. They want to be safe. They want freedom to make their own choices as long as they aren't harming others. They want to know the people in charge are practical, not paternalistic. By embracing harm reduction, we can shift the Democratic posture from one of judgment to one of care. We can be the party that doesn't say 'do as I say,' but says, 'we've got your back.' That's how you win elections. And more importantly, that's how you govern well. Svante Myrick is president of People For the American Way. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
