Representative Tom Gann

R

District 8

Hi, I'm Tom Gann and I represent the people of Oklahoma's 8th District.


representative

News & Announcements

Sep 30, 2024
Recent Posts

Legislators Respond to Hiett Brief in Prohibition Request

OKLAHOMA CITY – Reps. Tom Gann, R-Inola, Kevin West, R-Moore, and Rick West, R-Heavener, today issued statements regarding Oklahoma Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett's response brief to the writ of prohibition they filed against Hiett. Their writ asked the courts to intervene to protect the public interest. Hiett has been accused of sexual molestation and public drunkenness. The three argue that he should be disqualified from cases at the OCC involving the victims or witnesses to his alleged crimes saying he cannot be impartial or unbiased. “Todd Hiett’s response brief is most notable for what it doesn’t say. He doesn’t deny any of the criminal conduct allegations that have been publicly made against him," the lawmakers said. "He doesn’t deny that the utilities and other parties with direct knowledge of that conduct have leverage over him and his decisions in their cases at the OCC. He also doesn’t claim that he is somehow exempt from state ethics rules and the Code of Judicial Conduct. Instead, he argues that the petitioners haven’t proved that he’s guilty or biased. “But the law says we don’t have to prove it. The State Ethics Rule 4.7 makes it clear that an official should disqualify himself or herself if 'the circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his or her impartiality in the matter.' The Code of Judicial Conduct contains a similar provision. "That is clearly the case here. Yet, since Hiett refuses to disqualify himself, we have asked the court to step in and disqualify him to protect ratepayers. Even what Hiett’s response brief does argue is damning – especially where it says ‘the rule of necessity requires that Commissioner Hiett not be disqualified’ (Response, page 10). As mentioned in the Petitioners’ original brief (footnote 42), the ‘Rule of Necessity’ is a common law principle that says in effect that a biased judge is better than no judge at all, and allows a biased judge to participate in a case if the case cannot be heard without him.  “But before the ‘Rule of Necessity’ can apply, the judge either has to admit to being biased or be found to be biased. "To argue ‘the rule of necessity requires that Commissioner Hiett’ participate in these cases means that Hiett is admitting he is conflicted in these cases! If he’s conflicted, there must be a reason. It comes surprisingly close to an admission of guilt to the criminal conduct allegations themselves.”

Sep 30, 2024
Recent Posts

Gann Highlights Suppression of License Plate Scanner Evidence by State Court

OKLAHOMA CITY – Rep. Tom Gann, R-Inola, has taken notice of what he believes is the first of many actions by Oklahoma courts to suppress evidence obtained from license plate scanners. “The decision will place many cases against perpetrators of criminal acts in jeopardy,” Gann explained. According to Gann, the issue arises from local government entities entering into contracts with a nationwide big-tech firm, Flock, to install 24/7 vehicle scanning technology—despite such actions being prohibited by Oklahoma law. “When the government uses these devices to scan every passing vehicle, it is possible they are violating Oklahoma law. Earlier this year, Gann warned government entities involved in this practice that their actions are not authorized by law. His concerns were dismissed by politicians, including Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum. In September, a McClain County court, in State of Oklahoma v. Ifabiyi , suppressed the use of license plate scanner evidence, citing Oklahoma's legal prohibition of the technology. “When governments rely on unauthorized technology to surveil their citizens, policing methods become lazy,” Gann said. “They replace tried-and-true, constitutionally compliant, community policing tactics with unproven technologies that pose serious privacy concerns and offend the American public. This lazy policing is now putting many potential convictions at risk, as the motion to suppress will become the foremost tool of the competent defense attorney.” Gann does not believe the Legislature has any interest in approving the use of this technology in the near future. “The CEO of Flock has openly stated his intent to place a scanner on every street corner. Many legislators understand that Oklahomans do not want this Orwellian approach. They recognize it as a breach of the Fourth Amendment and foresee future courts continuing to rule it unconstitutional, placing many criminal convictions into question.” In the 2024 legislative session, a proposal to authorize the scanners, House Bill 3570, failed to receive a House floor vote, and a comparable measure, Senate Bill 1620, was defeated by a wide margin. Gann expects public opposition to grow as awareness of the specifics of the technology increases. “This technology has been presented to the public as a tool for local police to monitor their communities, but it’s becoming more apparent that these scanners are merely nodes in a much broader network shared among various government agencies. This allows distant governments to track the movements of Oklahomans, with no recourse against abuses by politicized agencies who may have access, such as the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives,” Gann warned. Gann is also concerned about the lack of transparency from some departments regarding the agencies with whom they share data. He pointed to the Edmond Police Department’s reported refusal to disclose this information to NonDoc, a journalistic service that investigated the matter earlier this year. “Government entities, such as Edmond, have a duty to be transparent with the people about what is happening. Their lack of transparency will not only prove futile in the long run, but it will erode the trust that people have in these government entities,” Gann concluded. Rep. Gann will lead a legislative study on this issue beginning at 8:30 a.m. Oct. 8 in room 5S2 at the State Capitol, 2300 N Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City. The public is invited to attend. The meeting also will be streamed online and can be watched through the House website, OKHouse.gov under the News & Media Tab. Click on Live Proceedings, and search Calendar-Day/Month for Oct. 8 then select the State Powers Committee. 

Sep 5, 2024
Recent Posts

Legislators Consider Writ of Prohibition over Concerns about Hiett’s Impartiality

OKLAHOMA CITY – Reps. Kevin West, R-Moore, and Tom Gann, R-Inola, today issued statements regarding Oklahoma Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett, who has been accused of sexual molestation and public drunkenness. The two said they are considering filing a writ of prohibition against Hiett, asking the courts to intervene to protect the public interest. "Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett’s admission of public drunkenness, alleged sexual assault, alleged harassment and his alleged drunk driving should be enough for any decent individual to disqualify himself from cases at the OCC involving the victims or witnesses to his alleged crimes," the lawmakers said in a joint statement. "Multiple news articles report that these complaints include employees and representatives, including attorneys, of public utility companies the OCC regulates. "Hiett should have removed himself from voting in the August 27 meeting, but instead he cast the deciding vote to approve a $31 million rate increase for Oklahoma Natural Gas customers," they continued. "The victim and witnesses to Hiett's June 9, 2024, sexual assault at a Minnesota conference are allegedly ONG employees. If that is not enough, ONG is being represented by the law firm that hosted a reception in Oklahoma City, where Hiett is alleged to have sexually harassed two female OCC employees and to have driven home drunk. Hiett has not publicly denied any allegations made against him." West questioned Hiett's impartiality. "Oklahomans deserve better," West said. "Corporation commissioners are considered quasi-judicial in some of their cases, like utility fuel cases that require a state officer to rule, and legislative in others, like utility rate cases. Under Ethics Rule 4.7, an officer must disqualify him/herself in any case, legislative or judicial, in which 'a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts [would] question his or her impartiality.'" Gann said, "I spent 15 years in internal auditing, and I can tell you this conflict goes beyond mere appearance—it's a clear conflict in fact as well. Hiett obviously used poor judgement by not disqualifying himself in ONG’s recent rate case as he should have." There are four fuel cases worth over $1 billion for public utilities currently pending at OCC. They involve ONG (PUD2024-000047), Public Service Company of Oklahoma (PSO) (PUD2024-000040), Arkansas Oklahoma Gas Corporation (PUD2024-000046) and Summit Utilities of Oklahoma (PUD2024-000042). Fuel adjustment cases, also known as purchased gas adjustment cases, are judicial. The lawmakers assert that when cases are judicial, commissioners must behave like judges and follow the  Code of Judicial Conduct . "The OCC is supposed to examine the utility’s fuel purchases and determine whether they were fair, just, reasonable and prudent before allowing those costs to be passed on to customers," West said. "We need commissioners who can use sound judgement and are free from bias. How can Commissioner Hiett make such judgements when his actions allegedly involving people in these cases prove otherwise?" Similar to State Ethics Rule 4.7, Title 5 O.S Section Rule 2.11 of the Code of Judicial Conduct requires Hiett to disqualify himself in judicial cases in which "the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Instead, Hiett voted on July 31 to approve three procedural orders in ONG’s judicial fuel case. On Aug. 27, Hiett voted to approve seven more orders in the judicial fuel cases for PSO, AOG and Summit. "Like ONG, PSO is also represented in its $554 million fuel case by the same law firm that hosted the reception," the representatives said. "Both State Ethics Rules and the Code of Judicial Conduct are laws, and failure to follow them is a violation of state law." OCC has hired outside counsel to perform a "confidential fact-finding" investigation into the commissioner's misconduct, but instead of handling "behavior of a criminal nature," like violations of state law, this firm instead promises to refer the latter to the state attorney general's office. "This seems like a way to slow play the investigation, allowing Hiett to continue voting on these matters in which he cannot remain objective. How convenient," the representatives said.  "Any party to an OCC case with direct knowledge of illegal conduct by Commissioner Hiett who has not yet officially reported it or filed a civil lawsuit against him has leverage over Hiett in their cases before him at the OCC," they said. "The threat always exists that if he doesn’t rule in their favor, the illegal conduct could be reported, or a civil lawsuit could be filed. His impartiality is unquestionably tainted." West added, "The victims of this disgrace and bias in these judicial cases are not the utilities, but the millions of Oklahomans who are being unfairly disadvantaged in the votes in which Hiett has a perverse and legally prohibited incentive to give the utilities what they want. If Commissioner Hiett continues with this reckless behavior, it may become necessary for legislators to file a writ of prohibition requiring the courts to determine whether intervention is necessary to protect the public interest."