Oklahoma Solicitor General Garry M. Gaskins, II, contends Rep. Tom Gann had his chance to intervene in a Public Service Company rate hike request and didn’t take it, thus his lawsuit against the Corporation Commission in the State Supreme Court should be dismissed.
Rep. Gann’s lawsuit, filed in February 2025, made two basic claims: that the Corporation Commission erred by not complying with the Oklahoma Accountancy Act regarding PSO’s securitization case involving the 2021 Winter Storm bonds, and that approval of PSO’s rate hike was invalid over Commissioner Todd Hiett’s participation. The Republican legislator from Inola charged that Hiett should have recused himself from “unlawfully participating in a matter from which he should rightly have disqualified himself according to State Ethics Rule 4.7 after he allegedly committed criminal acts on June 21, 2023 in the presence of an attorney who represents PSO in this matter.”
In a challenge filed late last week, Gaskins, representing the State Attorney General, informed the Supreme Court that Rep. Gann had opportunities to take part in PSO’s case before the Corporation Commission and chose not to participate.
“At no point in the entire procedural history of the administrative hearing—did Appellant enter an appearance or particicpate in the proceedings himself,” argued Gaskins in his request for dismissal.
He also claimed that Gann used some of the opinions of former Corporation Commissioner Bob Anthony as the basis for his filing. Gaskin even said Anthony “filed a toothless “dissenting opinion” in January regarding the audit issue.
When PSO filed an application for a general rate change in January 2024, “Appellant never filed any documents with the Commission seeking permission to intervene as an interested party, much less within the ninety-day stautory time frame.”
Ganskin argues the Court should decline to consider Rep. Gann’s “tardy and out-of-scope comments.” He further contended that Gann should not be permitted to “bootstrap Anthony’s unsworn comments into a preserved issue on appeal.” Ganskin took another swipe at the former commissioner.
“To allow former Commissioner Anthony to interrupt the proceeding–with issues he singularly believed to be relevant, and then allow Appellant, a non-party, to raise those issues on appeal over-extends the proper definition of the “administrative record.””
Gaskins’ filing was in the Gann lawsuit case No: CU-122861 before the Supreme Court.
file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/1060853696-20250213-131717-%20(4).pdf
