OKLAHOMA CITY – Just before Thanksgiving, Reps. Tom Gann, R-Inola, Kevin West, R-Moore, and Rick West, R-Heavener, filed a new brief asking the Oklahoma Supreme Court to overturn a $127 million rate increase for OG&E as well as some $760 million of the utility’s ratepayer-backed bonds. Both were approved by the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) with votes by embattled Commissioner Todd Hiett. The rate increase has been in effect since July 2024. Payments for the bonds, issued to cover costs incurred by OG&E during February 2021’s Winter Storm Uri, have been collected as “Winter Event Securitization (WES)” charges on customers’ bills since July 2022. If not overturned, the rate increase will continue in perpetuity; the monthly WES charges are scheduled to continue for another 25 years. Wednesday’s brief was the second such request to the court last month. On Nov. 10, Gann filed a similar brief asking the court to overturn $250 million in rate increases and some $700 million in ratepayer-backed bonds the OCC had approved for Public Service Company of Oklahoma (PSO). To date, this brings the totals officially challenged to $377 million in rate increases and more than $1.4 billion in bonds. The appeals ask the court to order everything wrongly collected to be refunded to OG&E and PSO customers. Both briefs tell the court that the OCC failed to provide a required audit of the bonds in OG&E and PSO’s most recent rate cases. They also argue the utilities’ original 2021 Uri costs that were securitized into the bonds were never lawfully audited either. The briefs assert the audit failures make the OCC’s orders void. Oklahoma utilities OG&E, PSO, ONG and CenterPoint/Summit paid some of the highest natural gas prices in U.S. history during a two-week cold snap in February 2021, incurring some $2.8 billion in debt. Interest and other expenses added another $2 billion, bringing the total cost of the bonds being paid by Oklahoma utility customers close to $5 billion. The appeal briefs focus on a report by former Oklahoma Accountancy Board Chairman David Greenwell filed at the OCC in July 2024. In it, Greenwell said the OCC’s audit activities with respect to the winter storm costs and bonds “do not appear to comply with state law.” Former OCC Commissioner Bob Anthony also repeatedly criticized the one-page audits the OCC was putting forward to meet statutory requirements. “When Oklahoma law requires an audit, the Accountancy Act says it has to be done by independent, licensed CPAs following nationally recognized standards,” said Gann, who is a former internal auditor for Tulsa International Airport. “That did not happen.” “Although all three of us voted against the securitization legislation in April 2021, we do not believe that our colleagues who voted for it meant for the utilities to audit themselves, or for the Corporation Commission to make up its own definition of the word ‘audit,’” Kevin West said. “The apparently fraudulent audits are inexcusable. The law requires real audits, and the Accountancy Act defines auditing standards for a reason.” Gann, Kevin West and Rick West argue the effect of the OCC’s audit failures “has been to cover up significant wrongdoing during and after the 2021 Winter Storm.” The brief in the OG&E appeal (p.3) says the utility “unduly (and possibly unlawfully) influenced” the hiring of the OCC’s financial advisor in the bond cases, Hilltop Securities. It also questions how OG&E and PSO’s lender, RBC Capital, was hired to underwrite both bond deals, when RBC’s bid was 25% higher than JP Morgan’s. (Hilltop Securities advised the Oklahoma Development Finance Authority on the bond underwriters’ bidding process.) The OG&E brief (p.35) cites a January 2025 filing by then-Commissioner Anthony alleging that a representative of Hilltop was responsible for “fraudulent language surreptitiously inserted” into the OCC’s bond financing orders. Anthony said that fraudulent language made the bonds hundreds of millions of dollars more expensive for OG&E and PSO customers. The appeal brief says it also makes the OCC’s bond orders void. The state representatives also are challenging the rate increases based on OCC Commissioner Todd Hiett’s participation in the cases, saying he violated utility customers’ due process rights. “Hiett cast the deciding vote to approve all the rate increases, even though we believe state ethics rules say he should not have participated,” Rick West said. Both OG&E and PSO were represented in the appealed cases by attorneys who hosted a 2023 party where Hiett was publicly accused of alleged sexual harassment and drunk driving. Even though no charges were filed, the state representatives’ brief says Hiett’s behavior has made him subject to improper influence and possible extortion by those attorneys and others. In May 2025, the Ethics Commission dismissed a complaint against Hiett, citing the so-called “rule of necessity” and finding in this particular instance, state Ethics Rule 4.7’s prohibition against conflicts of interest was not an issue. The Ethics Commission stated at the time that their decision took into account the constitutional requirements for the Corporation Commission, the legislative nature of the rate hikes and Oklahoma case law, including the well-recognized Rule of Necessity. The appeal briefs argue the “rule of necessity” does not apply to conflicted OCC commissioners and asks the Supreme Court to say so. “Fundamentally, these appeals are about upholding the Constitution and the rule of law,” Rick West said. “State ethics rules say if a reasonable person would question Hiett’s impartiality in these cases, he must not participate. But Hiett continues to cast votes approving billions of dollars of increases for these utility companies without performing the required audits. We expect the court to overturn these votes and to order Hiett and the OCC to follow the law.” In addition to the cases against OG&E and PSO, a similar Supreme Court appeal was filed against ONG’s most recent rate increase by Reps. Gann and Kevin West in August. Their brief in that case is not due until April 2026. They also have filed appeals against four OCC orders approving annual fuel purchases for ONG, OG&E and PSO, the fourth filed just Monday. All told, Gann, Kevin West and Rick West's filed and pending appeals challenge more than $10 billion in utility charges for ONG, OG&E and PSO. The full OG&E appeal Brief in Chief can be read online here: https://oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=appellate&bc=1063629594&cn=CU-123021&fmt=pdf OG&E, the OCC and the Attorney General’s Office have 40 days to respond. The progress of all the appeals can be followed on the Oklahoma Supreme Court website: PSO rate case: https://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=appellate&number=122861 OG&E rate case: https://oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=appellate&number=123021 ONG, PSO & OG&E CY2023 fuel cases: https://oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=appellate&number=122991 ONG rate case: https://oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=appellate&number=123348 ONG CY2024 fuel case: https://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetCaseInformation.aspx?db=appellate&number=123588