|
|
Enron Mail |
Don't mean to keep the chain of emails going, but given the cameras and the
grand-standing politicians (who seem to have an abundance of rhetoric and capacity for scape-goating, and a paucity of constructive solutions or the will necessary to do what needs to be done), seems worth considering the pros and cons of throwing anyone in front of any legislative committees. We may decide that the pros outweigh the cons and that there's discernable value having our outside counsel speak to the issues of supply and demand in California and the West, but seems worth spending 5 or 10 minutes on. Best, Jeff Paul Kaufman@ECT 01/11/2001 01:30 AM To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Special Oversight Committee What the heck are you doing awake at 2:00 a.m. Re: the hearing. I'm really not sure that this hearing is worth spending alot of time worrying about--at least given my understanding of the scope of this Committee's responsibilities during the special session (i.e, the lack of responsibilities). Although, Sandi may know more about the importance of this hearing based on discussions with the Committee folks, from our discssions over the past couple of days in Sacto it really seems like the hearing will be informational in nature. In any event, I don't see the downside to having Mike do the testimony. Mike knows enough to be helpful to the Committee. He's easy to insert in the process. While I have absolutely no problems using Robert Michaels, the hearing is on Tuesday--less than one week from today--and somebody would have to vet his testimony and work with him to prepare the document. If we can make this work, I'm all for it. It just seem a lot easier to use Mike. Re: why can't we just say no. From my standpoint there is an upside in participating--we continue to support Wright. Wright has become the voice of reason on energy issues. Susan J Mara@ENRON 01/10/2001 10:48 PM To: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Special Oversight Committee Can't we just say "no"? I know Rod thinks highly of Mike, but I'm having a hard time seeing what he can add on the stated topic. Mike Day is certainly no expert on supply and demand. I can understand our reluctance in putting an Enron person on the stand, so maybe we shouldn't. Why not pay an economics consultant, like Robert Michaels to represent us? He's been in the media lately and has the right type of expertise. ALso, he's just joined TCA, so we could easily use him. Paul Kaufman@ECT 01/10/2001 10:19 PM To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Special Oversight Committee The invitation is to participate in a meeting before the Utilities and Commerce Committee of the regular session. The oversight committee is an entirely different matter--as of yesterday no schedule for its meetings had been set (timing may follow the release of the CPUC auditor's report on the utilities). As for the invitation to speak, my thought is that we ask Mike Day to speak on our behalf. The issue we have been asked to address is, very generally, supply and demand. Day has a lot of credibility with Wright and it's Wright's committee. Just be sure, this afternoon, Sandi was following up with the Wright's office to get a better picture on scope of the hearing. With regard to this subject, I asked Alan Comnes to look through the Mary Hain presentation to FERC (from last summer) and pull out the slides that were relatively current (or not too awfully out of date). From what we have seen so far, I don't think we need to get to worked up over this particularl hearing before the regular Utilities committee. All the action will occur before the special session committees. If the need to discuss the hearing continues to be an issue, let's talk further. Sandi please follow up with Sue on what we've discovered through Wright's office re: the Tuesday hearing. ---------------------- Forwarded by Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT on 01/10/2001 10:18 PM --------------------------- Susan J Mara@ENRON 01/09/2001 10:50 PM To: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Special Oversight Committee We need to discuss our response to this invitation ----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 01/09/2001 09:22 PM ----- Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com< 01/09/2001 03:15 PM To: Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com<, Bruno Gaillard <bgaillar@ees.enron.com<, Mike Day <MDay@GMSSR.com<, Mona L Petrochko <Mona_L_Petrochko@enron.com<, Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com<, Susan J Mara <smara@enron.com<, Paul Kaufman <pkaufma@ect.enron.com< cc: Subject: Special Oversight Committee There will be an oversight subcommittee of the new committee formed to shape energy policy in the Special Session. In a meeting today, Assembly Member Darryl Steinberg, who will Chair the subcommittee, told us he expects to hold two hearings to "track the money" between utilities, geneators and wholesalers. He hopes to wait until after the completion of the PUC audit, unless that audit drags on longer than the next week or so. He is planning a "constructive investigation" and pledges to be fair. The subcommttee will be staffed by the Speakers Office of Oversight. Also, Enron has been invited to testify at an informational hearing of the Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee on January 16, 2001. The general topiic is how supply and demand affect the California market and what options are available for new or repowered generation in California.
|