|
|
Enron Mail |
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/19/2001 07:50 AM -----
Christie Patrick@ECT 03/15/2001 10:02 AM To: Alice Weekley/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENt, Jordan Hunter/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Veatch/Enron@EnronXGate, Frank S Wang/Corp/Enron@Enron, ricardo_n_calvo@urscorp, roger_w_gunther@ursc cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Calypso Tribal Letters Friends, The statute should be reviewed by whichever lawyer is supporting the project. As I mentioned to Alice Weekley, I am unfamiliar with the recent amendments referenced requiring the notice for projects that do not actually cross reservation property. The amendment does not surprise me though. In the past, for example, during the Transwestern expansion in '91, we developed a comprehensive NAGPRA plan with tribes whose reservations we crossed, yet neighboring tribes were included--the thinking by the various State Historic Preservation officers was that unearthed remains (bones, funerial objects, pottery pieces, holy objects, etc) may have belonged to tribes other than those from whose reservation they were ultimately unearthed. It made for a VERY VERY long and complicated plan and consultation process....not only when objects were unearthed, but simply putting the required anticipatory plan and procedures in place PRIOR to construction. (It gives me a chuckle: my late husband, Leonard Hilton, who was in charge of the TW project, is likely rolling in his own grave at the mere thought of Enron having to put another of these plans together..Haha!!) As I said, I've not read the amendment , but hopefully it only legally requires 'notice'---yet, in my nearly 20 years of practicing law, I've rarely seen a 'notice' that didn't crack the door or sound the alarm of further buerocratic opportunity! For your further information, I have met Billie Ray Cypress personally and he's a decent and seemingly reasonable guy with a huge casino on the rez ; yet these personal attributes frequently go by the wayside when it comes to 'perceived economic opportunity'. Chief James Billie,[chief of the Seminoles, 2nd largest/2nd wealthiest tribe in North America] on the other hand, is shrewd in business, dictitorial in management, and personally , has an ego bigger than Texas, behavior to match, and is proud of it!! --which makes him a ton of fun to be with if he likes you--he wrestles alligators, writes rock and roll and "plays"in whatever stage opportunity is presented him--as long as he can be the center of attention. The Seminoles have not only a tribal web site, James Billie has his own!! Check it out--it's a hoot!! He has been chief for about 25 years (and I'm guessing he's maybe in his early 50's). The Seminoles have recognized significant economic development under James, but he is definitely a "My way or the highway" kind of guy--he loves you, hates you, or ignores you--and he has a tribal council that is respectfully terrified of him. If any activity smacks of anything James Billie doesn't like, he'll know no limits in stopping it...remember, this guy wrestles alligators!! No Joke! I don't recognize the other names on the list, but I think it's clear from both the beurocratic issues, as well as the specific tribal issues incident to each affected tribe, everything associated with the process should be executed with all of this in mind. I'd be happy to speak with the project's lawyer to discuss this further, if information beyond that set forth above would be helpful. Thanks! --Christie. ----- Forwarded by Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT on 03/15/2001 08:53 AM ----- roger_w_gunther@urscorp.com 03/15/2001 08:32 AM To: alice.weekley@enron.com cc: jordan.hunter@enron.com, stephen.veatch@enron.com, frank_s_wang@enron.com, christie.patrick@enron.com, ricardo_n_calvo@urscorp.com Subject: Calypso Tribal Letters Alice: Janus Research sent the enclosed letters to me; I understand that they have been modified per your discussions with them. Also enclosed is a summary document outlining recent revisions to Section 106 (National Historic Preservation Act). Regards, Roger (See attached file: Section 106 regs (1).doc)(See attached file: Fred McGhee 3-7-01.doc)(See attached file: James Billie 3-7-01.doc)(See attached file: Jerry Haney 3-7-01.doc)(See attached file: R. Perry Beaver 2-7-01.doc)(See attached file: Billie Cypress 3-7-01.doc) - Section 106 regs (1).doc - Fred McGhee 3-7-01.doc - James Billie 3-7-01.doc - Jerry Haney 3-7-01.doc - R. Perry Beaver 2-7-01.doc - Billie Cypress 3-7-01.doc
|