logocapitol dome inside
Capitol News Update     

 

November 4, 2013


 

                 This whole controversy over the A-F grading system for schools would provide comic relief if it weren't so unfortunate.  With so many other things out there that could actually help public education, the grading system is wasted energy. 

 

                  I believe the first effort to hold schools accountable by issuing a performance report was initiated with HB 1017 in 1990.  "A Nation at Risk," a highly critical report of the nation's public schools had been issued in 1983 after President Reagan criticized public education.  This began the "accountability" movement.  Among the minor provisions of HB 1017 was establishment of an Office of Accountability that was required to issue the report each year.  HB 1017 contained major school reforms and a substantial tax increase to pay for them, and the office of accountability was an effort to help track the reforms and justify those expenditures. 

 

                  Since 1990 the accountability movement has grown and become more reliant on standards and testing.  The Office of Accountability is now the Office of Educational Quality and Accountability within the State Department of Education and has developed well beyond the 1990s era ideas of accountability. 

 

                  Most parents want to know if their kids are going to a "good" school.  But I doubt, when the history of this era of public education is written, it's going to be said that setting up a competition among schools and giving them letter grades by which to compare them was a good idea. As we are seeing it's nearly impossible to take into account all the factors that should go into grading a school and to balance and calculate them fairly.  So the grades rely heavily on student testing.  This would be like judging doctors by how long their patients live.  Too many factors other than the doctor's treatment go into how long a patient lives. 

                  Everyone has to be held accountable.  But it is doubtful school report cards are the best way to do it.    


JNC on trial: State's system of selecting judges debated at interim study

By M. Scott Carter

The Journal Record

OKLAHOMA CITY - Oklahoma's Judicial Nominating Commission selects candidates for the judiciary based only on facts and works to find the best possible judge, a former JNC member said Thursday. But others testified that a new system would benefit Oklahoma.

Speaking at a legislative hearing, Kimberly Fobbs, a former JNC member, said the organization thoroughly and fairly scrutinized candidates for judicial posts. Fobbs was one of three former members of the JNC who spoke to members of the House Judiciary Committee about the selection of judicial candidates. The interim hearing was held by House Speaker T.W. Shannon, R-Lawton, who criticized the Oklahoma Supreme Court earlier this year. He said the state's high court had become an activist judiciary.

Fobbs said she's watched lawmakers and critics of the JNC play Monday morning quarterbacks for the commission's selection process. She also criticized a presentation by Carrie Severino, the chief counsel and policy director of the Judicial Crisis Network, for its lack of data.

"I have listened to some experts today who have quoted a lot of studies and statistics and empirical evidence without backing it up with data," she said. "Where I come from, if you're going to quote something, you need to have a measurement we can all look at."

Fobbs also refuted claims that the JNC was a partisan group with a political agenda.

"Neither from the judge's prospective candidates nor any of the other commission members I served with did I ever at any time know their political affiliation or did they know mine," she said. "And yet, 13 to 15 reasonable people were able to make informed decisions for the state of Oklahoma."

The JNC, Fobbs said, made decisions based on fact and not assumption.

Wallace Jefferson, former chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court, urged lawmakers to keep the existing system.

"My perspective is the number one thing we're looking for is high-quality judges," Jefferson, who spoke to lawmakers through a video connection, said. "These are men and women who are willing to sacrifice for the public good."

Jefferson said he admired Oklahoma's system of having a commission review judicial candidates.

"I think that's the best that we can find and select judges," he said. "I would urge Texas to adopt a similar process. If I were governor, I would feel better about a professional commission looking at the credentials."

At least one conservative activist group disagreed. Severino urged lawmakers to consider changing the state's current system of selecting judges. She said moving to a federal-style advise-and-consent rule could provide an excellent check for favoritism.

"Governors and senators are political, obviously," she said. "But they are accountable for their decisions."

She said Oklahoma could improve on the federal system by limiting debate to 90 days and allowing nominees to go to the bench by default, unless rejected by the state Senate. Severino also suggested that the state move to contested elections for the judiciary.

"The fact of the matter is, there is no empirical support for the idea that elected judges are any more corrupt or political than appointed judges," she said.

Mike Evans, the chief administrative officer for the Oklahoma Supreme Court, said changes were unnecessary because the state's appellate judges are required to face a judicial retention ballot every six years.

Evans defended the JNC, saying the commission was a diverse group of hardworking individuals who sought the best possible candidates.

"This notion that our system doesn't allow the input of the people of the state I find wrong," Evans said. "They have a very direct input into that process."

Evans said every judge in the state - if they are on the bench very long - is subject to the electoral process in one form or another.

"It's interesting to note that when you look at the 50 states across this country, not one state in this country uses the federal model to select judges - none," he said.

Lawmakers will return to the state Capitol in February.

Fast track to history: Colbert overcomes obstacles to lead state's high court

By M. Scott Carter

The Journal Record

OKLAHOMA CITY - You might say that state Supreme Court Justice Tom Colbert embraces history.

You might also say he has now become part of it.

A product of Sapulpa High School, Colbert speaks with passion about those who fought, struggled and pushed for racial equality during the first half of the 20th century. Colbert witnessed the poverty firsthand. He's seen the violence and he understands pain.

Still, Colbert has come far.

So far, in fact, that today, he is a central figure in the same history he has studied so passionately. Sixty-seven years after Ada Lois Sipuel went to court to be allowed to attend the University of Oklahoma's law school, Colbert has gone where no other African-American in Oklahoma has - serving as the vice chief justice and now chief justice of the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

But getting there, Colbert says, was not easy. The path from Sapulpa High School to the Oklahoma Supreme Court was twisted, long and filled with many hardships.

Finding inspiration

Colbert, who was born in 1949, and his three sisters were raised by a single mother and his grandfather.

"She worked very hard," he said. "She and my grandfather were my role models."

Yet inasmuch as Colbert drew strength from his family, it was an incident - an ugly one - that pushed him toward a higher education.

"It was my high school guidance counselor," he said. "She told me I wasn't smart enough to go to college."

The statement, Colbert said, left a scar.

"That's not something you want to hear as a kid," he said.

Colbert's track coach disagreed.

Instead of discouraging him, coach Glen Stone convinced Colbert to enroll at Eastern Oklahoma State College in Wilburton. Two years after graduating from high school, Colbert earned his associate of arts degree. In 1973, Colbert - now an All-American in track and field - would earn a bachelor's degree from Kentucky State University.

"It wasn't that I went to college to prove my guidance counselor wrong," he said. "But I went because I was inspired and encouraged by others in my life. I went because they encouraged me."

During that same time, Colbert was drafted and served in the military, married his wife, Doretha, and in 1976 earned a master's degree in education from Eastern Kentucky University.

Later, Colbert taught elementary school in one of the country's toughest school districts - on the east side of Chicago.

"That was a tough district," he said. "I saw lots of pain, lots of poverty."

Still, Colbert wasn't through with his formal education. In 1980 he returned to Oklahoma and began law school at the University of Oklahoma. But unlike the normal route most students take, Colbert didn't spend three years studying law.

He finished in two.

"My wife and son were still in Chicago," he said. "I didn't want to spend any more time away from them than necessary."

One of only four African-Americans at the law school, Colbert had a heavy class load, between 18 and 19 hours each semester. He said he had little time for anything else.

"I was on a mission," he said.

But not everything went the way he planned.

Despite the effort involved in getting his law degree in just two years, Colbert's plan clashed with rules from the American Bar Association, which frowned on his accelerated education. Unfazed, Colbert completed law school and, from 1982 until 1984, served as assistant dean at Marquette University Law School.

But Colbert said he wanted more than just a purely academic life.

"I enjoyed academia," he said, "but I wanted to be a trial attorney and I wanted practical experience."

In 1984, he joined the staff of Oklahoma County District Attorney Bob Macy, serving as an assistant district attorney until 1986.

After his tenure in Macy's office, Colbert teamed with a young attorney from northeast Oklahoma City - Vicki Miles-LaGrange. Colbert and Miles-LaGrange were partners until 1989, when he formed his own law firm, Colbert and Associates. Miles-LaGrange would go on to become a state senator and, later, a federal judge.

In 2000, Colbert was the first African-American to be appointed to the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals, named by then-Gov. Frank Keating. Four years later, on Oct. 7, 2004, Colbert became the first African-American to the named a justice of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. In January, after serving as vice chief justice for two years, Colbert was sworn in as chief justice of the high court.

During the ceremony, Colbert told the crowd that he wasn't worried about his opportunities, but the opportunities of future generations.

"Here I am on the doorstep of making it to the next level, and it would be very selfish for me to worry about my own opportunities when someone else may never get the opportunity to stand where I'm standing, being a minority," he said.

Waiting for his daddy

There are certain cases in the life of every attorney that act as defining moments. Intense, difficult and often long, like great friends or childhood trauma, these cases leave permanent marks. Colbert had one of those cases in 1996. It changed his life.

Tommy Lawson was a very religious man who was married, with three children. Lawson, a foreman for Manhattan Construction, believed in the value of hard work.

As the leader of a four-man construction crew, Lawson was working on a project in Muskogee when a rented crane buckled because it had been loaded with much cement. The crane swung toward Lawson and his crew. Lawson pushed several crew members out of the way, saving their lives, but Lawson was killed when he was struck by the crane.

Lawson's family was devastated.

"It was a difficult lawsuit," Colbert said. "In most cases an on-the-job lawsuit like that would have gone through workers' comp court. We had to walk a very fine line to keep it in district court."

Colbert would win that case, Lawson v. National Steel Erectors Corp., and a historic $1.7 million judgment for the Lawson family.

Four years later, in 2000, the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals upheld the award, despite claims by National that the damages were excessive and that the trial court improperly awarded attorney fees and costs. The case, many legal experts said, set a precedent.

"A verdict of a jury cannot be set aside as excessive unless it strikes mankind, at first blush, as beyond all measure unreasonable and outrageous and such as manifestly shows it was actuated by passion, prejudice, partiality or corruption," Justice John Reif wrote in his opinion for the majority. "We cannot conclude that a verdict supported by otherwise competent expert testimony is 'beyond all measure unreasonable and outrageous.'"

For Colbert, the award ensured that Lawson's three children would be OK.

"Those children lost their father," he said. "The littlest would stand and look out the window each day waiting for his father. I remember them telling that child that his father wouldn't be coming home. I wanted to make sure they were OK."

Truth and duty

Even though he's at the apex of his legal career and has left his mark on state history, Colbert has his critics. They are vocal.

Speaker of the House T.W. Shannon - the first African-American to serve in that position - has harsh words for the state's high court and its justices. On Thursday, Shannon, R-Lawton, conducted an interim hearing on the judiciary and the idea of term limits for appellate justices. That hearing followed a ruling by the state's high court that a package of tort legislation was unconstitutional.

In a Web posting, Shannon said the checks and balances of state government seemed out of whack to him.

"An activist judiciary is political by nature and that was never the intent," Shannon wrote.

In September, Shannon criticized Colbert and the other eight justices of the high court in a newspaper column.

"When unelected judges position themselves as a political superauthority over the other branches of government, it leads to confusion, economic uncertainty and constitutional questions of how the will of the people should be enforced," Shannon wrote.

Shannon went on to say the state Legislature was forced to undo the damage of a handful of activist judges, or some might even call a superlegislature of judges.

Colbert brushes off the criticism. He said such complaints don't bother him.

"When you serve in this position, you take an oath to support the United States and the Oklahoma Constitution," he said. "As a judge you are going to have difficult issues. There will be adversaries on both sides, but your responsibility is to the truth."

Truth that Colbert finds wrapped in history.

Colbert still going the distance

OKLAHOMA CITY - Tom Colbert has spent a good portion of his life running for the law.

Not from the law, but for the law.

Like his predecessor, Oklahoma Supreme Court Chief Justice Colbert is a runner - a sprinter. His colleague, former Chief Justice Steven Taylor, is a long-distance runner.

Although men are as comfortable in tennis shoes as they are in polished tasseled loafers, for Colbert running was a way to attend college. During the 1970s, as a student at Kentucky State University, Colbert was named an All-American in track and field. Forty years later, he's still running.

"I'm more of a sprinter," he said. "Justice Taylor, he's the long-distance runner."

Trim and fit at 67, Colbert is still running, participating in the Track and Field Masters Level. When he's not running, Colbert says he also works out and, if the opportunity presents itself, fishes.

"I love to fish, but I haven't had the chance to do much of it lately," he said. "Right now, I run and work."

High court denies bond program rehearing

By M. Scott Carter

The Journal Record

OKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma Supreme Court denied requests to rehear arguments about a state bond program Monday.

The court, in a 7-0 ruling, denied rehearing requests by Oklahoma City attorney Jerry Fent and state Sen. Patrick Anderson, R-Enid. Both men had filed lawsuits over the state's master lease bond program, alleging that the way the program had been developed violated the Oklahoma Constitution.

In September, Fent said the court got it wrong when it upheld the master lease program.

"The court didn't order the Legislature to go back and re-enact the statute," Fent said. "The constitution clearly requires the Legislature to act again."

Fent had argued that the re-enactment provision was detailed in section 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution. In his petition he also questioned the court about how a law that is ruled unconstitutional can be amended.

"Unconstitutional legislation is wholly void and, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed," Fent wrote in his filing. "Generally speaking, unconstitutional legislation confers no right and affords no protection."

Designed to give a college or university the ability to pay for a building project through fees or funds, the master lease program has been the target of ongoing litigation since state lawmakers decided to use it to pay for the construction costs of a new medical examiner's building.

Anderson also questioned the authority of the program to fund the ME's building. Anderson filed a separate brief challenging the use of the master lease program to finance the construction of the medical examiner's office. Like Fent's complaint, Anderson's was also denied.

The high court's ruling apparently clears the way for a new medical examiner's office to build on the campus of the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmond.

On Monday, seven justices, including Chief Justice Tom Colbert, voted to turn back the rehearing request. Justice James Winchester was disqualified and Justice Yvonne Kauger was recused from the voting.

Okla. court: State law bans all medical abortions

By Sean Murphy

Associated Press

OKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma Supreme Court said Tuesday that a 2011 law it struck down as unconstitutional effectively bans all drug-induced abortions in the state, a finding that some legal experts said likely dooms the law's chances of being upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The nation's highest court had asked Oklahoma justices to clarify whether the state law applied to three specific drugs that can cause abortions - including mifepristone, more commonly known as RU-486. In all cases, the Oklahoma court answered yes.

Oklahoma's Supreme Court in December upheld a lower court ruling tossing out the law, saying it created an "undue burden" on the ability of women to obtain abortions. A Republican-dominated Legislature passed the bill, Republican Gov. Mary Fallin signed it and Republican Attorney General Scott Pruitt appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to review the case.

Pruitt and the bill's sponsor, state Rep. Randy Grau, said the court misinterpreted the bill's intent and that it wasn't as far-reaching as the justices said.

Enforcement of the law has been on hold since it was challenged by the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights. Oklahoma is among five states - the others Arizona, North Dakota, Ohio and Texas - that have sought to restrict medical abortions by limiting or banning off-label uses of drugs.

The Oklahoma court's interpretation of the law is significant because it is the last word on the law's intent for the U.S. Supreme Court, said Joseph Thai, a constitutional law professor at the University of Oklahoma.

"As interpreted, the sheer breadth of the state law makes it a huge target for the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down for unconstitutionally restricting access to abortion," said Thai, who served as a law clerk to former U.S. Supreme Court Justices John Paul Stevens and Byron White. "Because the state law has been interpreted as broadly as possible, its chances of survival at the U.S. Supreme Court have slimmed considerably."

Priscilla Smith, a senior fellow at Yale Law School and a former attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, described the Oklahoma law as "barbaric" and said it serves no possible state interest. She said she was hopeful the U.S. Supreme Court would just let the state Supreme Court decision stand.

In a separate ruling Monday, a federal judge partially blocked the provision of a law requiring Texas doctors to follow an 18-year-old U.S. Food and Drug Administration protocol. The judge found that the state could regulate how a doctor prescribes an abortion-inducing pill, but the Texas law failed to allow for a doctor to adjust treatment in order to best protect the health of the woman taking it. A similar North Dakota law also has been ruled unconstitutional by a state judge.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, which sued to block the Oklahoma law from taking effect, praised the Oklahoma court's findings, saying it recognized that doctors needed flexibility with their patients' medical options.

"Today's decision from the Oklahoma Supreme Court strongly reaffirms that this blatantly unconstitutional law was designed to not only rob women of the safe, legal, and effective option of medication to end a pregnancy at its earliest stages, but also threaten the health, lives, and future fertility of women suffering from ectopic pregnancies," the group's president and CEO, Nancy Northrup, said in a statement.

Pruitt issued a statement saying he believes the court again misinterpreted the meaning of the bill, which he says is to protect Oklahoma women from "harmful outcomes" that could result from off-label uses.

"We took the extraordinary step of asking for a review by the U.S. Supreme Court because we believed the Oklahoma Supreme Court erred in striking down the law," Pruitt said. "We believe they have erred yet again by interpreting the law more broadly than the Legislature intended."

ORWP calls for focus on science in water policy

By Sarah Terry-Cobo

The Journal Record

WILBURTON - Charlette Hearne wants to take the politics out of water in Oklahoma. The president of the citizen advocacy group Oklahomans for Responsible Water Policy said she thinks science should guide the state's decisions on how to allocate water use. At its annual board meeting Thursday, the group decided to focus on advocating for more scientific studies of the state's aquifers to promote water conservation, she said.

She points to the Oklahoma Water Resources Board's recent decision to reduce water allocation from the Arbuckle-Simpson aquifer as a step in the right direction. The state agency voted Oct. 23 to reduce the annual allocation to about 64,000 gallons of water from about 651,000 gallons of water. The decision was due in part to a recent study on the aquifer, which took nearly six years and $3 million, and cooperation of state and federal agencies, state universities and landowners, said Brian Vance, OWRB spokesman.

"If we did it with Arbuckle-Simpson, those studies should be done for other reservoirs," Hearne said. "That decision was driven by science; it isn't a political issue."

But for several years, the decision to transfer water from the Arbuckle-Simpson has been the heart of a debate on whether to transfer water out of state. The underground reservoir is the main water source for Ada and Durant and lies beneath Carter, Cole, Garvin, Johnston, Murray and Pontotoc counties. Hearne said the study helped to identify the right amount of water needed to replenish the aquifer so it can be sustained through drought.

She said the second-largest group of members in her organization is from Norman and Oklahoma City, so they are concerned about utility rates and sustaining the Garber Wellington aquifer. The aquifer provides water to more than 20,000 homeowners and industrial, municipal, commercial and agricultural customers. Thanks to some annual appropriations from the Legislature, Hearne's group is getting its wish.

The Legislature gave the OWRB $2 million to study the aquifer, working with the United States Geological Survey to put 1,800 monitoring wells and sensors in central Oklahoma. The appropriations fund recommendations from the OWRB Water for 2060 plan, which helps the agency conduct aquifer and stream studies, Vance said.

"Now with more funding, we are able to apply better science to get more accurate information, which leads to more accurate allocation," he said. "That enables us to use those water resources more wisely."

Vance said the study began in 2012 and is under scientific review at the USGS, so it is nearing conclusion. Once the Garber Wellington aquifer study is complete, the OWRB can determine the allocation, likely in 2014. Vance said he agrees with Hearne's group that better science leads to better resource use, whether for commercial or residential purposes.

"We want people to be interested in water," Vance said. "They are a virtual case study of what happens when you have a group of citizens concerned about the future of water, how to pull together and work in concert with the state, to improve policy and bottom line of protection and the best possible use of our finite water supplies."

Hearne said water conservation is important, especially during droughts.

"We want to determine what is available now and for future generations," Hearne said. "We should make these decisions wisely, based on science."

Terrill guilty of bribery

By M. Scott Carter

The Journal Record

OKLAHOMA CITY - Former state Rep. Randy Terrill was found guilty of bribery by an Oklahoma County jury Tuesday evening. The jury recommended a one-year prison sentence and a $5,000 fine. Jurors deliberated for more than four hours before reaching their decision.

Terrill, dressed in a dark suit and a bright tie, sat quietly while Oklahoma County District Judge Cindy Truong read the verdict.

"The defendant is guilty with fixed punishment set at one year and a $5,000 fine," Truong said.

The judge then polled the jurors, asking if they supported the verdict. Each juror answered yes.

After the verdict was read, Terrill was taken from the court in handcuffs by Oklahoma County Sheriff's Office deputies. However, Terrill, 44, will be back in court Wednesday to determine the amount of his appellate bond.

Asked what his next step was, Terrill said, "Ask me tomorrow at 1:30," a reference to the time of his appearance for the setting of his appellate bond.

Terrill was charged in December 2010 with offering a bribe to a candidate to withdraw from an election, a felony under Oklahoma law. Prosecutors said Terrill, a former Republican state representative from Moore, created an $80,000-per-year job at the state medical examiner's office so then-state Sen. Debbe Leftwich, a Democrat, would not seek re-election.

Prosecutors said Terrill wanted Leftwich out of the race so his friend, state Rep. Mike Christian, R-Oklahoma City, could seek the post. Both Terrill and Leftwich denied any wrongdoing.

The eight-day trial - which featured many of the state's political notables - became, at times, a lesson in the legislative process. Along with questions about which lawmaker carried what piece of legislation, jurors heard many hours of testimony about how bills were developed, written and moved through both houses of the Oklahoma Legislature.

On Tuesday, Terrill testified in his own defense. Terrill told jurors that he did not offer a bribe to Leftwich. He also testified that Tom Jordan, former chief administrative officer of the ME's office, was misremembering facts. Jordan testified that Terrill told him to hire Leftwich.

Terrill said Cherokee Ballard, who served as spokeswoman for the ME's office in 2010, also had misunderstood and misremembered conversations she had with him.

Both Ballard and Jordan testified earlier that Terrill told Jordan he wanted him to hire Leftwich.

Terrill also testified about a meeting at Moore's Warren Theatre between Leftwich, Jordan and himself. He told jurors the purpose of the meeting was to direct Jordan to seek an attorney general's ruling on how the failure of an emergency clause would affect the bill that created a transition coordinator position.

Jordan said the meeting had been held so Terrill could push Jordan to hire Leftwich.

Terrill's attorney Chris Eulberg questioned the former legislator about his role in the development of the bill that created a transition coordinator position for the ME's office. Eulberg also asked Terrill if officials from the district attorney's office ever spoke with him during their investigation.

"Absolutely not," Terrill said.

Eulberg said prosecutors had not proven that Terrill had committed a crime and evidence in the case was merely an illusion.

"You might as well get up here and talk about Bigfoot being alive or the second gunman on the grassy knoll," Eulberg said.

Oklahoma County Assistant District Attorney Jimmy Harmon said Terrill's actions affected the integrity of state government.

"This was about honesty and integrity," Harmon said. "These are not evil people, but they used your government for their own gain."

Tuesday evening Assistant District Attorney Gayland Gieger said prosecutors were pleased by the verdict. Gieger said he was hesitant to make other comments because Leftwich's trial is set for December.

Terrill will be sentenced Dec. 5.

Abortion restrictions, license hike take effect

By Sean Murphy

Associated Press

OKLAHOMA CITY - Further abortion restrictions, DNA tests for criminals and a $12 increase for a driver's license are among the more than 240 new laws that take effect Friday.

Other bills deal with expanding the practice of noodling, or hand fishing, and topics including criminal penalties, pensions, elections and the regulation of various professions.

Three separate laws place new restrictions on abortions. Two measures place new requirements for parental notification when minors seek an abortion. One law prohibits any abortion for a minor until at least 48 hours after a parent receives written notice, except in cases of medical emergency or abuse by a parent.

That law and a second measure further restrict the process of judicial bypass, which allows girls younger than 18 to ask a judge's permission to get an abortion without parental consent. The second measure requires that a minor must seek a judicial bypass in her home county, a move abortion foes say will prevent "venue shopping" for a judge willing to grant the bypass. Supporters of abortion rights have argued that the judicial bypass is rarely used but necessary in cases where a pregnant teen might face abuse from upset parents.

A third new abortion law adds more than a dozen questions to the list that abortion providers must answer for each abortion performed, including several that are related to measures that have passed in recent years.

The nearly 50-percent hike in the cost of a standard driver's license, from $21.50 to $33.50, along with a $10 increase for a commercial license, is expected to generate about $8.7 million annually for the Department of Public Safety, said Lt. Randy Rogers, a legislative liaison for the agency. Much of the funding will be used to hire new driver's license examiners across the state, especially in metropolitan areas where long lines have been the norm for those taking driving tests.

The agency currently is conducting a school for 16 new license examiners and eight new commercial examiners who will be dispatched mostly to Oklahoma City, Tulsa and Lawton.

"We've had those staffed before, but we're trying to add personnel to each of those locations to help us improve customer service," Rogers said.

The funds from the fee hikes, which narrowly passed the Republican-controlled House, also will be used to upgrade the agency's communication system and help with increased costs for its digital driver's license contract and other technology upgrades, Rogers said.

Another new law will end Oklahoma's dubious distinction as the only state in the nation without a program to allow some convicted criminals to seek DNA testing in an effort to fight a conviction. The Postconviction DNA Act allows those convicted of violent felonies or who have been sentenced to 25 years or more in prison to file a motion in court to request forensic DNA testing of any biological material in the case that may help them assert their innocence.

Meanwhile, Oklahomans who enjoy noodling, the type of hand fishing where an angler puts an arm into an underwater hole and tries to get a fish to bite it, will soon be able to go after blue catfish and channel catfish under another law that takes effect Friday.

Bill Hale, assistant chief of law enforcement for the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, said Oklahomans have traditionally noodled for flathead catfish, which is considered a nongame fish. Hale said noodling typically picks up in the late spring when catfish begin nesting in shallow water.

Oklahoma House speaker examines use of fees

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - House Speaker T.W. Shannon has conducted a legislative hearing on the use of various fees agencies use to pay for state services, and is urging the Legislature to use caution when raising fees.

The Lawton Republican held the study Tuesday before the powerful House Appropriations and Budget Committee.

According to a presentation by House staff, state licenses, permits and fees generated nearly $600 million of the $17 billion in total state revenue received by the state in 2012. Shannon says legislators need to ensure fees aren't being raised to "increase the wealth of state agencies."

Shannon's study comes just days before a new law scheduled to take effect on Friday that increases the cost of a driver's license by $12. Shannon voted for the bill.

Gilliland, Engle appointed to Workers' Compensation Commission

OKLAHOMA CITY (JR) - Oklahoma City attorney Robert H. Gilliland and Denise Engle, a deputy insurance commissioner, have been appointed to the Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Commission.

Their appointments are effective Wednesday.

The Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Commission was created this year with the passage of Senate Bill 1062.

The bill calls for the governor to appoint all three members, with one appointment recommended by the speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives. House Speaker T.W. Shannon, R-Lawton, recommended Engle.

The governor earlier appointed Troy Wilson to serve as commission chairman. Confirmation of each is required by the Oklahoma Senate.

SB 1062 changes the workers' compensation system from a judicial system to an administrative system. The three commissioners will develop emergency rules for the system, which will start up Feb. 1.

Gilliland has been an attorney with the McAfee and Taft law firm in Oklahoma City for 40 years. After his admission to the Oklahoma Bar Association in 1966, Gilliland served four years as a captain in the Judge Advocate General's Corps of the U.S. Army.

Gilliland earned a bachelor's degree at Texas Christian University and his law degree from the University of Oklahoma.

Engle, of Canadian County, will step down as a deputy insurance commissioner at the Oklahoma Insurance Department to accept the appointment to the Workers' Compensation Commission. She also worked 14 years for Express Services Inc., where she served as risk manager and directed a $31 million workers' compensation program.

Engle, before being named deputy insurance commissioner in 2011, served as president of Engle Risk and Insurance Services, an insurance and risk consultancy that managed large loss litigation and liability claims adjustment. She is a chartered property casualty underwriter.

Engle is a graduate of Oklahoma City University.

Gilliland will serve a four-year term and Engle will serve a two-year term. Wilson, appointed in August, is serving a six-year term.

Judge refuses to dismiss blackmail case

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - A judge has refused to dismiss blackmail charges filed against the co-founder of the Sooner Tea Party who's accused of sending a threatening email to a state lawmaker.

The ruling clears the way for Al Gerhart to go to trial in January on charges of blackmail and violating the Oklahoma Computer Crimes Act. Prosecutors allege that Gerhart sent an email with the intent to intimidate Republican state Sen. Cliff Branan of Oklahoma City, who is chairman of the Senate Energy Committee.

Oklahoma County District Judge Ray Elliott rejected a request from Gerhart's attorneys to dismiss the charges. The defense argues that Gerhart's email was political speech protected by the First Amendment.

Gerhart has acknowledged that he sent an email to Branan on March 26 urging him to schedule a hearing in his committee on a bill favored by conservatives that would have prohibited state organizations from following a United Nations plan that helps cities and countries become more environmentally sustainable.

Branan refused to give the House-passed bill a hearing, saying the legislation was based on a fringe conspiracy that the U.N. wanted to use its Agenda 21 plan to encroach on the private property rights of Americans.

Gerhart's attorneys argued that part of the state's blackmail law is overbroad.

"To express anger, dissatisfaction or frustration with a public official is legal," defense attorneys wrote in a legal brief. "To tell a public official how he should do his job is legal. To attempt to persuade and even verbally pressure a public official is legal. To express an ultimatum to a public official is legal. To 'dig up dirt' on a public official is legal. To publicly expose said dirt is legal."

Prosecutors countered that Gerhart is free to criticize public figures but he cannot threaten to expose negative information to control a senator's actions.

"Far from contributing to healthy, public discourse, using such threats to control legislation and legislators is every bit as corrupting to the body politic as bribes in the form of money," prosecutors told the judge in a legal brief.

A jury trial is set for Jan. 13.

Have a good week.  Give me a call at 918.671.6860 if I can be of help in any way

                  Steve Lewis


 
 
This Week's Meetings


 

 

 
This Week's News
JNC on Trial
Fast Track to History
High Court Denies Bond Program Rehearing
Okla. Court: State Law Bans Medical Abortion
ORWP Calls for Focus on Science
Terrill Guilty of Bribery
Abortion Restrictions Take Effect
House Speaker Examines Use of Fees
Gilliland, Engle Appointed
Judge Refuses to Dismiss Blackmail Case
 

INTERIM STUDIES