Oklahoma Corporation Commissioner Bob Anthony told the State Supreme Court it should ignore what former Commission chairman Todd Hiett claimed in his request to stop Anthony from investigating alleged corruption in commission cases.
Responding to Commissioner Hiett’s request for a writ of prohibition filed last month with the court, Anthony filed his answer this week.
“Respondent respectfully submits that all the facts and materials presented by the Petitioner in his Brief and in Petitioner’s Appendix should be disregarded, since they do not relate to or demonstrate the exercise or potential exercise of judicial or quasi-judicial power by the Commission or by Commissioner Anthony,” he stated in his filing.
He further said Hiett’s original writ request to the Supreme Court was filled with inaccuracies and that Hiett offered no evidence in his accusations that Anthony waged a “personal vendetta,” was “bullying,” and “pressuring” investigators or “tainting” the investigation by the law firm hired to look into sexual and drunkenness allegations against Hiett.
Hiett’s writ came in response to Anthony’s filing of a Notice of Inquiry, GD 2024-000003, which has the purpose to “conduct an examination of past corruption and improper conduct involving the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, its staff and individual commissioners.”
Anthony said it appears Commissioner Hiett believes Anthony has no authority to issue a fact-finding Notice of Inquiry relating to Commission functions. In his filing, Anthony pointed out an individual Commissioner “does indeed have the constitutional right to inspect the books and papers of any railroad company or other public service company and to examine their officers, agents or employees regarding the business affairs of those companies.”
He further explained to the Court that the Notice of Inquiry does not contemplate any enforcement actions unilaterally by him but that he might issue a written report upon completion and “may recommend new legislation.”
Anthony added “the only function that is contemplated is the gathering of information” and there will be no weighing of evidence, drawing of conclusions as a basis for official action “or exercise of discretion of a judicial nature contemplated against Commissioner Hiett.”
Hiett maintained that Anthony’s request or filing for the NOI represented an exercise of judicial power. Anthony replied, “The mere filing of public comments by a Commissioner in a Commission docket is not the exercise of judicial power. Merely asking questions in a memo is not the exercise of judicial power.”
Click following link to read Anthony’s filing
file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/1059562108-20240911-104412-%20(1).pdf
