Oklahoma Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett has until Friday, Sept. 27 to respond to a legal move made by three state legislators to remove him from voting on rate cases involving PSO, ONG and OGE in light of allegations of public drunkenness and sexual assault made against him.
The Supreme Court issued an order this week against granting Hiett, a Republican, more time to respond to the motion for a writ of prohibition filed against him by Republican Representatives Tom Gann, Kevin West and Rick West. The Court’s determination came after the legislators responded to Hiett’s request and in it, they were critical of Attorney General Gentner Drummond as well as Commissioner Hiett.
The legislators argued they sought the writ to protect the public interest generally from the severe-injury of further-tainted public utility cases at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, “collectively worth billions of dollars.”
The three say since the male victim of the alleged sexual assault that reportedly occurred in a hotel bar during a June national convention came before the Commission representing one of the three utilities, Hiett should not be voting on the cases for ONG, PSO and OG&E. They argued the Court should not approve the commissioner’s request because it would be giving Hiett more time to persist in acting with his intent t o participate in the cases, as Hiett stated in July.
In response to calls for him to step down from the Commission, Hiett said at the time, “it would be a detriment for me to step aside from my responsibliity to balance the interests of ratepayers to those of the utilities.”
The Representatives also were critical of the Attorney General who refused to offer a legal Opinion they sought regarding their believe Hiett was violating not only ethics rules but a judicial Conduct Rule.
“Consequently, not only will the Attorney Genereal’s Office not be issuing an official opinion in this regard, it appears the A.G. also will not take any position against Hiett’s ongoing participation in the utility cases pending at the OCC,” the three informed the Supreme Court. They also indicated the Attorney General has remained silent about the potential impact of Hiett’s alleged criminal conduct on the integrity of the cases.
“The implication is that the A.G.’s “representation” of ratepayers includes (or, in this case, leaves in the lurch) fuel case complaintants like Petitioner Gann’s (in)ability to insist on lawful treatment of their complaints,” stated the legislators.
In a final slap at the Attorney General, the Representatives declared, “in short, although the A.G. and the OCC recognize the significance of Petitioners’ Petition to the Court of a Writ of Prohibition to protect ratepayers’ due process rights in these utility cases, neither have given any indication they intend to do anything to protect those rights in the meantime. In fact, their posture is quite the opposite.”
The three GOP legislators asked the high court to refuse to grant more time to Hiett to “mitigate the potential injury to Petitioners and millions of other utility ratepayers that suh an extension could facilitate.”
