{"id":35490,"date":"2023-01-16T15:28:57","date_gmt":"2023-01-16T21:28:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/?p=35490"},"modified":"2023-01-16T15:29:58","modified_gmt":"2023-01-16T21:29:58","slug":"lawyers-allege-improper-handling-of-access-turnpike-project-payments-ota-appeals-open-meeting-act-violation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/2023\/01\/16\/lawyers-allege-improper-handling-of-access-turnpike-project-payments-ota-appeals-open-meeting-act-violation\/","title":{"rendered":"Lawyers allege improper handling of ACCESS turnpike project payments, OTA appeals Open Meeting Act violation"},"content":{"rendered":"

A new suit filed in Cleveland County District Court alleges the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority improperly remedied its Open Meeting Act violation and owes about $42 million.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

In December, the OTA was <\/span>found in violation of the state\u2019s Open Meeting Act<\/span><\/a> because of vague wording in its January and February meeting agendas, which authorized key engineering and design contracts for its controversial <\/span>ACCESS Oklahoma project<\/span><\/a>. The agency subsequently <\/span>paused all operations<\/span><\/a> for the ACCESS project on Dec. 8.<\/span><\/p>

But lawyers Stan Ward, Alexey Tarasov and Richard Lebarthe \u2014 the team that won the Open Meeting case \u2014 said contract payments that had already been made can\u2019t be ratified because the contracts themselves were voided by the court\u2019s decision.<\/span><\/p>

\u201cHow could one ratify payments that were made pursuant to contracts that have been invalidated? If there is a defect in contract formation and a contract is null and void, there could not be any payment under that contract,\u201d said Tarasov. \u201cThey should have entered into brand new contracts with companies in compliance with the Open Meeting Act.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Tarasov said the OTA\u2019s defense that payments to contractors were done \u201cin good faith\u201d \u2014 that is, relying on advice from an organization\u2019s legal counsel \u2014 may absolve the officers involved with giving away agency funds. But during the Open Meeting Act case\u2019s discovery period, Tarasov said OTA officials testified in depositions there was no reliance on legal counsel\u2019s opinion.<\/span><\/p>

\u201cFor the OTA to say that there was reliance [on legal counsel] now would go against what they disclosed to us in the previous lawsuit,\u201d Tarasov said. \u201cWe directly asked whether there was any reliance on the opinion of the legal counsel in voting on those agenda items.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Regardless, the \u201cgood faith\u201d defense doesn\u2019t apply to outside entities like engineering firms, so they\u2019re liable for the funds, Tarasov said.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u201cNo amount of good faith can overcome the fact that the contracts were, for all practical purposes, invalidated,\u201d Tarasov said. \u201cIf you invalidate the vote of the board that authorized the entry into those contracts, then this amounts to an invalidation of the contracts themselves.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

A spokesperson for the OTA said it cannot yet comment on the details of that case, but points to a legal move it made last week as well: the OTA <\/span>filed an appeal<\/span><\/a> with the state\u2019s supreme court to re-decide whether it had indeed violated the Open Meeting Act.<\/span><\/p>

The appeal challenges several of the court\u2019s findings, including that it had \u201cwillfully\u201d violated the Act, and that its agenda items lacked sufficient details.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

The email cites an <\/span>attorney general decision from<\/span><\/a> 1981:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cIf a public body concludes that it may have violated the provisions of the Open Meeting Act in a willful manner, the public body must fully reconsider those manners acted upon in violation of the Act. Such reconsideration, of course, must be done in compliance with the Act.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

That decision also reads, \u201cthe word \u2018willful\u2019 in [<\/span>state law<\/span><\/a>] does not require a showing of bad faith, malice or wantonness, and includes unintentional violations.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

\u201cOTA\u2019s Board complied with Attorney General opinion <\/span>1981 OK AG-214<\/span><\/a> when it fully reconsidered and voted to approve the contracts pursuant to OMA-compliant agenda items at its Jan. 3 regular meeting,\u201d the email reads.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

The spokesperson said the OTA\u2019s ratification action at its January 2023 board meeting \u201csufficiently rehabilitated what the Court found to be deficient.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u201cPlaintiffs\u2019 new demand is an abuse of the judicial system in order to improperly threaten and pressure public officials and its consultants to stop a much-needed public transportation improvement and expansion project,\u201d the spokesperson said.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A new suit filed in Cleveland County District Court alleges the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority improperly remedied its Open Meeting Act violation and owes about $42 million.\u00a0In December, the OTA was found in violation of the state\u2019s Open Meeting Act because of vague wording in its January and February meeting agendas, which authorized key engineering and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":216,"featured_media":34898,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1459],"tags":[1404,1396,1395,1500],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35490"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/216"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35490"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35490\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":35491,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35490\/revisions\/35491"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/34898"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35490"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35490"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/oklahoma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35490"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}