Delayed open records request raises questions about ambiguous timeline for fulfillment

One Lawton resident is looking for transparency after she says records from District 3 County Commissioner Josh Power’s office are being kept from release despite being reviewed and returned by the District Attorney’s office. Matina Davis, a Lawton advocate, filed an open records request for information about Powers’ intercommunications, voting proxies, and contracted service agreements. Davis said that she filed the request after hearing some concerns from others in the community.

Davis expressed that her experience with this request and interaction with Powers and his assistant raised concerns over accountability, transparency, and who the Open Records Act is designed to serve.

The original request was submitted to the County Clerk’s office on April 30, 2026. County Clerk Carrie Tubbs responded with the available information around a week later on May 7, with a few documents, but added that others would need to be paid for. However, Tubbs informed Davis that while copies would be costly, she was more than welcome to come in person and inspect said documents. Additionally, Tubbs kept a document that held the “basic information” that Davis might have been searching for.

Davis explained that this response wasn’t exactly what she was expecting, which then led her to reword her request and send it to Krystal Chiddix, Powers’s Commissioner Assistant. She later explained that this was because she heard that Powers handled a lot of his county business through her. One change this new request had was the addition of email exchanges regarding Powers’ absences.

A couple of weeks after that request was submitted, Davis received an email on May 27 from Chiddix, which stated:

“The response to your request has been completed and is currently in the process of being reviewed by legal staff. Once the review process is complete, I will send it to you.”

Davis responded to the email on June 1. In the response, she asked if the records would be available to review in person, as she didn’t want the review process to impede the fulfillment. In addition, she decided to call Chiddix. In their recorded phone conversation from June 1, Davis asked about the potential timeline of completion for her request.

Chiddix informed Davis that they were waiting for the review process and that once they received the records back, she wouldn’t have a problem sending them over. However, a few more days passed, which led Davis to reach out to the District Attorney's office, as they were the ones in charge of legal review. In a voicemail from the DA’s office, it was stated that the records were already sent back to the commissioner on May 29, a few days before the phone call with Chiddix.

To get a better understanding of the open records process within the county, Dark Roast reached out to the County Clerk, Carrie Tubbs. During the conversation, Tubbs explained that the release of records when it pertains to elected officials really boils down to their discretion. She said that for her, when she gets something back from legal review, she will typically get it sent to the requesting party within the week. 

“It’s our responsibility to serve that up to legal. Then, when legal approves it, it’s our responsibility to complete that task,” Tubbs said.

Tubbs stated that it’s a relief to mark those off her to-do lists so they don’t pile up. Although she did bring up Oklahoma state law, which doesn’t give a specific time frame to complete open records requests, which is why she stated it goes back on the elected official. Tubbs’s insight and Davis’ situation raise questions about the effectiveness of Oklahoma’s open records laws.

It has been over two weeks since Powers received the legal review, according to the DA’s office, and Davis said they have not yet received any records. Davis expressed confusion over the fact that legal has already reviewed the records and is not sure why they haven’t been released yet.

“I believe he is holding them to after the election,” Davis stated.

Dark Roast also reached out to Commissioner Josh Powers over the open records request and its release. During the phone call, Powers also brought up the lack of specific timelines in fulfilling requests and that he wasn’t withholding anything. He explained that he has been busy as elections are right around the corner and hasn’t gotten around to reviewing what legal sent back.

Davis raised a question about the purpose of needing to review something that was already reviewed and sent back. According to Tubbs, she herself would review any records that legal returned if any comments were made that needed correction or redaction. On the other hand, she did clarify that the second review isn’t required. 

The delay and interactions with officials highlight a gap in Oklahoma’s Open Records Act. The state is one of the few states that doesn’t require specific deadlines for completion. This often leaves requests on the table and fulfillment completely in the hands of the agency's definition of “reasonable time”. There is also a question of accountability in who is ensuring that records are completed. Dark Roast asked Tubbs if it was the DA’s responsibility, to which she restated that it was up to the elected official. One initiative that launched toward the end of 2025 was a compliance portal for open records. This was created by the Attorney General and allowed people to file complaints when government agencies either deny or ignore open records requests. This came about after House Bill 2163 was passed. That said, even the portal has a time limit to resolving complaints, stating that within 60 days, the counselor will work with both parties to ensure compliance with state law.

Due to the length of time it has taken to receive the records, Davis filed a complaint with the Sheriff’s Office in hopes of speeding up the process.