OKLAHOMA CITY – State Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett has been cleared by the Oklahoma Ethics Commission of some of the allegations made against him by three state legislators.
The allegations stemmed from claims of public drunkenness and sexual abuse that led to Hiet t resigning last summer as chairman of the three-member commission but not from the commission itself.
The Oklahoman reported about the Ethics Commission’s May 1 vote to clear Hiett of the accu sations made about a conflict of interest rule.
Hiett issued a comment to the newspaper, stating, “I appreciate the Oklahoma Ethics Commis-sion’s thorough review of this matter and its commitment to transparency and fairness.” The clearance came on a 3-0 vote by the commissioners while two members of the body recused from voting because of reported conflicts of interest.
In what was described by The Oklahoman as a rare public comment, the Ethics Commission explained the dismissal was because of an exemption in state case law known as the rule of necessity. It was Hiett’s argument that he had to v ote on commission rate cases because a “concurrence” of a majority of the commission is needed f or a decision.
Upon hearing about the Ethics Commission’s vote, state Rep. Tom Gann (R-Inola) said their decision was “baffling.”
The Ethics Commission read Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Dana Kuehn’s opinion in a lawsuit which stated, “The Ethics Commission has the power to investigate the complaint, gather evidence, hold hearings, and give respondent an opportunity to be heard before resolving the ethics claim.”
However, Gann continued, the Ethics Commission “completely miss[ed] Justice [Doug] Combs’ lengthy assessment in footnote 1 of his concurring o pinion,” which concluded that, “Thus, we now know that the rule of necessity need not be utilized to maintain a quorum of three [Corporation Commissioners] in every case…”