Mental health competency settlement rejected, attorney general fired as counsel

Gov. Kevin Stitt speaks at a Contingency Review Board meeting Oct. 8 at the state Capitol in Oklahoma City. Senate President Pro Tem Greg Treat, far left, attended with House Speaker Charles McCall, third from left, Office of Management and Enterprise Services director Rick Rose, center left, and Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Commissioner Allie Friesen, right. (Photo by Emma Murphy/Oklahoma Voice)

OKLAHOMA CITY — A board chaired by Gov. Kevin Stitt rejected a landmark mental health settlement, pushing back against the opinions of the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office and a federal judge.

The Contingency Review Board met Tuesday despite Attorney General Gentner Drummond calling the meeting “premature.” One hour before the meeting began, the commissioner of the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services announced she had terminated Drummond as counsel because he wasn’t prioritizing her or her agency.

The settlement was unveiled in June and given preliminary approval by a federal judge in September. It’s intended to settle a lawsuit alleging that the mental health department is failing to provide timely court-ordered competency restoration treatment and violating the rights of defendants, who are mostly indigent, declared incompetent to stand trial, and being held in county jails.

Drummond has represented the defendants of the lawsuit, Allie Friesen, the mental health commissioner, and Debbie Moran, Oklahoma Forensic Center interim executive director.

Stitt and Oklahoma Speaker of the House Charles McCall, R-Atoka, voted to reject the decree while Senate President Pro Tem Greg Treat, R-Oklahoma City, abstained.

Treat voiced his hesitation to take action on the consent decree because Drummond was not able to attend the meeting. Treat was also hesitant to vote as he, along with other attendees of the meeting including Friesen and her counsel, had not yet read the final version of the settlement agreement.

But both Friesen and Stitt were adamant against adopting the consent decree.

Friesen said she would “resign before signing an agreement like this.”

“The Governor’s Office was never going to agree to a consent decree the state agency or the commissioner of mental health says is not good for the citizens of Oklahoma,” Stitt said. “I would never agree to an open-ended contract to cost taxpayers, conservatively over five years, $100 million with no end in sight.”

Drummond had issued a statement Monday that said Stitt’s call for the meeting was premature and that more steps needed to be taken before the consent decree was considered by the board or Legislature. He said Stitt’s resistance to it was “bewildering.”

Drummond said that 244 people continue to “languish in jails” waiting for necessary mental health services. He said 35 have waited more than a year, while seven have been waiting for over two years.

Drummond said Tuesday that his client is “the state of Oklahoma, not the government agency that put us in this indefensible position.” He said the commissioner “did not hire” him, and therefore could not fire him.

He also issued a statement Tuesday evening that called the board’s vote “perplexing, if unsurprising.

“I understand the governor and speaker are afraid of the political optics of remedying this predicament in which ODMHSAS has put Oklahoma,” Drummond said. “But shirking responsibility is not an option when it will cost taxpayers untold millions of dollars. We will review our options going forward.”

During Tuesday’s meeting, Friesen repeatedly said the consent decree, as written, would prevent the Mental Health Department from providing competency restoration treatments in jails.

Paul DeMuro, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said the meeting was “sophomoric political theater” that “would be humorous if it wasn’t so serious.”

“That meeting itself was a sham and a circus and will have no effect on the conduct of this litigation,” he said. “Nothing that the Contingency Review Board has done is going to affect the ultimate outcome of the litigation.”

He said Stitt previously warned the judge that the board might reject the decree, and the judge has said he’d allow objections to be submitted to the court, which would be resolved at the final hearing. A final hearing is set for Jan. 5.

DeMuro also questioned how the board members could hold a vote on a document they seemingly have not read.

“That’s a disgrace,” he said. “That’s disgraceful leadership.”

DeMuro said it’s easy to see that Stitt and Friesen are “intentionally peddling false narratives about this consent decree.”

Nothing in the decree prevents jail-based competency restoration, in fact three provisions legally require competency restoration services and allows them to be provided in jail, he said.

The consent decree simply requires state mental health officials to stop telling people that they have a statewide program because they don’t, DeMuro said. He said that’s a “lie propagated” by the prior administration who had contended that nobody was waiting for competency restoration services in the state and “magically” eliminated 300 people from the waiting list.

“We wanted to make it clear that we’re not saying you can’t treat people in jail,” DeMuro said. “We’re just saying you can’t lie to the public and to the courts and to defense attorneys and the victims’ families that you have some statewide program because you don’t.”

There’s fines for noncompliance, but those don’t phase in for seven months after the decree is adopted.

“A well run department would be able to avoid the fines,” he said.

Editor Janelle Stecklein contributed to this report.

Editor’s note: This story was updated Tuesday night to include reaction on the vote from Gentner Drummond.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE