Oklahoma City, OK – Governor Kevin Stitt is standing firm on his decision to fire several staff members from the Oklahoma Forestry Service following the deadly wildfires in March. However, his stance has sparked a fierce backlash from local fire officials and lawmakers, who are calling for an independent investigation into the state’s handling of the crisis.
The controversy began after Stitt’s administration came under fire for its response to the wildfires, which led to the deaths of multiple individuals and significant property damage. Fire crews have since voiced their concerns, with several departments questioning the effectiveness of the state’s response and whether proper resources were deployed in a timely manner.
Jason Dobson, Fire Chief of the Olive Volunteer Fire Department, voiced his frustration, stating that it is difficult to trust the information coming from the governor’s office. “It’s tough to believe anything – he’s been fact-checked several times by fire departments and the media, and his facts have been incorrect. Right now, you just can’t believe anything that comes out of the governor’s office,” Dobson said. His department was one of the first to circulate a petition on Change.org calling for the governor’s impeachment, though Dobson acknowledged that while impeachment is unlikely, they hope the petition will prompt Stitt to reconsider his decisions.
Governor Stitt has maintained that the firings were necessary, arguing that accountability is crucial in ensuring the effectiveness of the state’s fire response. In a recent statement, Stitt said, “If the governor can’t fire the head of the forestry, who can?” Despite growing criticism, the governor has shown no sign of reversing his decisions, although this week he did back off his previous suggestion of eliminating the Forestry Department altogether.
In response to Stitt’s statements, House Speaker Kyle Hilbert (R-Bristow) expressed concerns that the governor was misinterpreting the data related to the fires. Stitt, however, dismissed these claims, defending his position. “When you’re not sending half of your resources to those fires, you’re doing something wrong,” Stitt said. “I don’t know how anybody can argue with me, maybe the media will, but I don’t think Oklahomans will. If you have assets and they weren’t deployed to these fires, that’s the problem.”
The governor’s handling of the situation has also drawn criticism from Cherokee Nation Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr., who voiced his opposition to Stitt’s decisions during a speech on the House floor. “We have got to keep the Oklahoma Forestry Department alive and well, we need it, and you need it,” said Chief Hoskin Jr., highlighting the importance of maintaining a strong forestry service for the state’s future fire response.
Amid the fallout, questions have also been raised about the governor’s failure to implement preventive measures before the fires broke out. When asked why he didn’t act sooner, such as instituting a statewide burn ban or implementing a Public Safety Power Shutoff (which other states have used during high-risk fire conditions), Stitt responded by acknowledging his ultimate responsibility but maintaining that such actions were not practical. “Yeah, ultimately the governor is responsible, that’s why I’m taking action now,” Stitt stated. “And I don’t think it’s practical for the governor to say, ‘Hey, I’m going to shut off your power.’”
As the controversy continues, the calls for an independent investigation grow louder, with many in the fire service urging the state to reevaluate its disaster preparedness and response strategies. While Stitt remains resolute in his defense of his actions, it is clear that the tension between the governor’s office and those on the front lines of Oklahoma’s fire response is far from resolved. The outcome of this ongoing debate may have lasting implications for how the state handles future fire seasons and its relationship with the vital agencies responsible for protecting its residents.
