By Andy Marso, Topeka Capital-Journal
An attorney representing the former executive director of the Kansas Corporation Commission has sent a letter to The Topeka Capital-Journal disputing the way his client was portrayed in a recent editorial and intimating possible legal action.
In a letter received this week, Timothy Sipe, of the Topeka law firm of Hamilton, Laughlin, Barker, Johnson and Jones, said a newspaper editorial that ran on the Opinion page erroneously described the process of "pink-sheeting" in a way that unfairly tied his client, Patti Petersen-Klein, to the procedure that is being challenged as a possible violation of the state open meetings act.
"Please be advised that future publication of the practice of 'pink-sheeting' as described in the July 1 article will be knowingly false or with a reckless disregard to the truth or veracity of the statement," Sipe wrote, referencing the legal standard for a libel lawsuit filed by a public official.
Mike Merriam, an attorney who represents The Capital-Journal, said Petersen-Klein "has no cause of action for reporting by the CJ on her public duties."
"Published statements on the subject are true and fair," Merriam said. "Posturing by counsel does not intimidate the newspaper, and it will continue to serve the public by truthful reporting."
The KCC is charged with regulating Kansas’ oil and natural gas, telephone, transportation, and electricity industries.
Petersen-Klein was removed as executive director in June after an audit outlining an irreparable rift between her and KCC employees was leaked to the public.
Sipe's online biography says he does employment litigation, including wrongful termination work. When reached by phone Thursday, he said he couldn’t comment on whether Petersen-Klein is preparing a lawsuit against her former employers.
Shortly before Petersen-Klein was ousted, a consumer advocacy group brought an unrelated complaint against the KCC challenging "pink-sheeting," a longtime practice in which an agency attorney would individually poll the KCC's three appointed commissioners on utility rate changes or other actions. The orders produced by those meetings, once approved by the commissioners, were signed by the executive director.
Sipe's letter takes issue with a July 1 editorial that describes the process as follows:
"The practice involved the former executive director of the agency and its three commissioners meeting individually with a KCC attorney and providing their thoughts on rate increases and other issues."
Sipe, in his letter, interprets that sentence as asserting that Petersen-Klein met with the commissioners one-on-one to discuss rate hikes, which he said she didn’t do.
Sipe wrote that Petersen-Klein's participation in pink-sheeting was limited.
"The executive director's signature on any order drafted under this practice was placed as the secretary of the commission, and only attested to the signatures of the commissioners themselves," Sipe wrote.
The KCC's website includes eight publicly available "precedential orders" that date to July 12, 2011. All eight are signed by Petersen-Klein using her full name, "Patrice Petersen-Klein" and the title "executive director."
Sipe declined to answer questions about his letter. His office later released a prepared statement saying Petersen-Klein is "a zealous advocate for open and transparent government" who never met with commissioners or the KCC staff in a manner that would have violated the Kansas Open Meetings Act. Sipe said Petersen-Klein, who served as a KCC attorney for six years before she was named executive director in June 2011, wouldn’t be available to answer questions.
Sipe said Thursday he couldn’t answer the question of whether Petersen-Klein had ever objected to pink-sheeting during her tenure, but he would ask her if she wished to comment on that.
Sipe's letter also requests a retraction of the July 1 editorial, clarifying that Petersen-Klein "never took part in any private meetings with commissioners under the practice of 'pink-sheeting.' "