Editor’s Note: Phone numbers and email addresses have been redacted from the public filings shown in this article. This information is part of the public record but is not being published here in order to prevent unsolicited contact toward private individuals. All other information, including names, addresses, and financial account details as filed, is shown unaltered.
TULSA, Okla. — A newly formed North Tulsa political action committee may be able to raise and spend money during Tulsa’s District 1 City Council race without publicly identifying its donors before the August 25 election.
North Tulsa For Change PAC filed its statement of organization with the Oklahoma Ethics Commission on August 4. The commission accepted the registration on August 14, according to records reviewed by The Black Wall Street Times.
The PAC registered as a limited municipal committee. It described its purpose as supporting “principled leaders” and advocating for policies intended to strengthen North Tulsa.
The filing does not identify any candidate the PAC intends to support or oppose. It also does not disclose whether the committee has received contributions or made expenditures.
Those details could remain unavailable until October 31 under Oklahoma’s regular quarterly reporting calendar. That would leave voters without a complete picture of the PAC’s finances before the August 25 election.
Oklahoma requires additional disclosure when a PAC spends at least $5,000 on independent expenditures or qualifying electioneering communications before an election. Such spending during the final two weeks before an election generally must be reported by the next business day, according to the Oklahoma Ethics Commission’s 2026 PAC calendar.
The PAC could potentially collect more than $1,000 without identifying its donors until its first quarterly report. But it could not spend $5,000 or more on covered independent campaign communications without triggering an earlier report. However, the reporting requirement would be triggered by payments made on invoices, and there is no guarantee that vendors will submit invoices promptly or that the PAC will pay them immediately.
PAC shares personnel with Wilson campaign
Public records show significant overlap between North Tulsa For Change PAC and the campaign committee for District 1 candidate Dr. Corinice Wilson.
Sharmien Watkins serves as chair of the PAC. She is also listed as chair and treasurer of Friends to Elect Dr. Corinice Wilson–2026 in two Guardian filings submitted August 4 and August 6.
Signee Bland, the PAC’s treasurer, appeared as deputy treasurer on Wilson’s original municipal statement of organization.
The PAC and Wilson’s committee also reported the same North Main Street address. Both listed Bank of Oklahoma accounts connected to the same South Lewis Avenue branch.
Those connections are relevant and should be disclosed to voters. They do not, by themselves, prove or disprove that the PAC and Wilson’s campaign coordinated political spending or violated Oklahoma law.
An independent expenditure cannot be made in coordination or consultation with a candidate, candidate committee or its agents. Political advertising financed through an independent expenditure must also identify the PAC that authorized and paid for it, according to the commission’s limited-committee guide.
BWST has not obtained evidence showing that North Tulsa For Change PAC has purchased advertising, funded phone banking, produced mailers or coordinated expenditures with Wilson’s campaign.
Dr. Corinice Wilson says she was unaware of the PAC
During a brief telephone conversation with The Black Wall Street Times, Dr. Corinice Wilson said she was unaware of North Tulsa For Change PAC. Public filings list Sharmien Watkins as an officer of both Wilson’s candidate committee and the PAC, with the same address and telephone number appearing on both forms.
“I don’t know anything about that,” Wilson said.
Wilson said she had not reviewed the questions BWST emailed approximately two hours earlier. When asked whether she could answer them during the call, Wilson said she was leaving class and needed time to review the information. She said she would respond later by telephone, text message or email but did not provide a specific time.
As of publication, more than three hours after BWST’s email and following separate phone calls to both Wilson and Watkins, neither had answered whether she or anyone acting for her campaign participated in creating the PAC. Wilson also had not addressed whether her campaign communicated with the PAC about political strategy, voters, advertising, phone banking or expenditures.
Wilson also had not answered whether her campaign received any monetary or in-kind contribution from the PAC, whether she would support disclosing its donors before August 25 or whether her campaign had filed every report required since registering in April.
Watkins does not answer questions about PAC funding
BWST also reached Sharmien Watkins, who is listed as chair of North Tulsa For Change PAC and as chair and treasurer of Wilson’s candidate committee. Watkins said she was helping move students into dormitories and asked to return the call. BWST informed her of its 2 p.m. Central publication deadline.
Watkins had not responded to BWST’s questions by the deadline. Those questions included how much the PAC had raised or spent, who had contributed, which candidates it intended to support or oppose and what safeguards were in place to prevent coordination with Wilson’s campaign.
BWST attempted to contact Signee Bland, the PAC’s treasurer, using the telephone number listed on the committee’s public filing. The number was not in service.
BWST will update this story if Wilson or the PAC provides additional information.
District 1 Voter Guide
Hall-Harper calls for PAC donor disclosure before Tulsa voters cast ballots
District 1 Councilor Vanessa Hall-Harper, the incumbent in the race, told BWST the questions surrounding North Tulsa For Change PAC reflect a broader weakness in campaign-finance disclosure laws.
“Voters deserve to know who is funding efforts to influence their vote before they cast their ballot, not weeks or months afterward,” Hall-Harper said. “If our disclosure laws allow an organization to form, raise or spend money to influence an election, yet the public may not know who is behind that money until after Election Day, then I believe there is a transparency gap that needs to be addressed.”
Hall-Harper said the overlap between the PAC and Wilson’s campaign raises legitimate questions. However, she stopped short of alleging unlawful coordination.
“I am not going to make allegations about coordination without evidence, but I absolutely believe the public deserves timely disclosure of who created the PAC, who is funding it, how much is being raised and spent, and what relationships exist between those involved and any candidate’s campaign,” Hall-Harper said.
She called on those involved to provide that information before the August 25 election.
“If money is being spent to influence the people, the people have a right to know where that money is coming from before they vote,” Hall-Harper said.
New PAC faces lower contribution limits
Because the North Tulsa For Change PAC was organized less than one year before the election, it appears to qualify as what Oklahoma calls a “1/25 PAC.”
Such committees may receive contributions from individuals and qualifying limited liability companies or partnerships. Corporate and labor-union contributions are prohibited.
A new 1/25 PAC can contribute no more than $2,500 to a candidate for each election in which the candidate appears on the ballot. That is half the $5,000 limit applicable to an established limited PAC, according to the Ethics Commission guide. A direct PAC contribution should also appear in the candidate committee’s applicable campaign-finance report.
The PAC may spend unlimited amounts through genuinely independent expenditures. Such spending cannot be coordinated with Wilson’s campaign.
Filing transition creates additional confusion
The discovery comes during a troubled transition in Oklahoma’s local campaign-finance system.
The Ethics Commission moved local candidates into its Guardian reporting system during the 2026 election cycle. However, earlier filings remain in a separate Local Campaign Finance Transparency Portal.
The commission now advises voters to search both systems because records may appear in either location.
Wilson’s original statement of organization identified the correct August 25 election date and listed Pamela Jones as committee chair. Guardian records filed in August list Watkins as chair and treasurer but incorrectly describe the election as the November 3 general election.
Other Tulsa candidates have encountered the same election-date problem because Guardian reportedly did not provide the August municipal election as an option. Therefore, the inaccurate date alone should not be portrayed as evidence that Wilson’s committee intentionally attempted to evade disclosure.
The original filing and later Guardian records should nevertheless be treated as one continuing committee history. The Ethics Commission has not yet publicly determined whether Wilson’s committee missed a second-quarter report or whether the system transition affected its reporting schedule.
Notably, the current incumbent councilor in District 1 and other districts filed their campaign finance reports on time, and those reports are publicly available.
Article Update: 08/20/2026
Wilson campaign acknowledges relationship with PAC
In a statement published on Wilson’s campaign Facebook page after BWST’s report, the campaign acknowledged that “individuals working with the campaign are also registered with the PAC.”
The statement said the campaign was “not attempting to obscure that relationship.” It also asserted that the PAC had received no contributions, made no expenditures, purchased no advertising and funded no campaign activity.
The statement did not identify its author or explain how Wilson’s campaign verified the finances of what it described as a separate committee. It also did not answer whether Wilson, her campaign or its representatives participated in creating the PAC.
The public acknowledgment does not establish unlawful coordination. However, it confirms the personnel relationship reported by BWST and raises additional questions about how information passes between the two committees.
