|
|
Enron Mail |
Michele & Rick --
Please see the note below. It is critical for you to call your clients (Ja= ck in the Box/Burger King and Wendy's) to try and convince them to push the= ir industry lobbyist to ask for a change in the date. Call me at 713-853-7673 or 713-851-2499 (cell) to discuss. =20 Thanks, Jim -----Original Message----- From: =09Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com<@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Hedy+2= 0Govenar+20+3Chgovenar+40govadv+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]=20 Sent:=09Wednesday, September 05, 2001 4:50 PM To:=09Steffes, James D. Cc:=09Mara, Susan; Dasovich, Jeff; Kaufman, Paul; Mike Day (E-mail); Bev Ha= nsen (E-mail); Scott Govenar (E-mail) Subject:=09Re: California Strategy - 9.5.01 12:00 PM Rick Simpson from the Speaker's office, said there will be no amendments to= the bill prior to its passing the Assembly. They are still scrambling for= votes and sent the Chamber and WSPA lobbyists out to shore up a few while = I was in the office. I talked to Mike Kahl, WSPA lobbyist, whose firm also= represents the restaurant assn. He argued that the 24th was in the bill f= or awhile and he called all of their clients to tell them to sign up by the= 24th. He said Enron should have done the same. I argued that Enron did t= he best it could, but that negotiations with many entities take varying amo= unts of time. So long as the date is past, and customers still have to pay= exit fees, what was the relevant policy debate. There can't be a gold rus= h now. Scott pointed out to me that bothWendy's and Burger King probably b= elong to the restaurant assn., so our suggestion is that those entities con= tact Jot Condie at the assn to instruct his lobbyists to change the date to= Sept. 1st. This is time sensitive. The Chamber lobbyist would love to se= e a Sept. 1 date, but was not optimistic that they could move the Governor'= s office. Rick agreed to ask the Speaker to call Jeff Brown and ask for a delay until= the Legislature has time to act. He will say the bill is expected to pass= his House tomorrow and changes will occur in the Senate which will give th= em direction. Rick also expressed pessimism that Bowen's attempts at legis= lation will have a fruitful result. I have been unable to speak to Burton = directly about calling Brown, but hope to see him before the day is over. Also I have a call in to Mayor Willie Brown, but so far I haven't heard bac= k. Jim, re the list of customers signing after July 1 - which ones would be af= fected by the Aug. 24th date? "Steffes, James D." wrote: < Per our conversation today -- < < 1. Sue Mara is working with AReM to (a) work on an alternative < vehicle for DA - the Bowen bill, (b) get the "taking" argument for < retroactive CPUC action to Norm Plotkin and Richard Katz, © call APS < Energy Services to motivate Boeing, (d) getting AReM active on the date < issue. < < By the way, Sue Mara heard that the CPUC has received "hundreds" of < letters related to the CPUC decision. < < 2. Everyone should be working to get customers focused on messaging < to the (a) Governor's office and (b) trade associations. < < KEY MESSAGES: 1. Don't have the CPUC Make Wrong Decision Tomorrow < 2. SB78 can work if DA Suspension Date =3D < Sept 1.01 or Later < 3. Setting this DA Suspension Date Does NOT < Mean that Customers Will Escape Fair Surcharges < < I am putting together a gameplan right now for who to call and the < messages. < < 3. I called Sandra Yamane (at Marathon Communications) re: CEO < contacts. Once I receive the list, we'll make a decision on how to < proceed with that group. < < 4. Hedy is working to get Hertzberg (and any others) to call the < CPUC and seek another delay. < < 5. Mike Day - can you please draft language to use on the Assembly < floor to "fix" SB78 per our interests. Hedy & Bev, who should support < the amendment? Don't we need a member to carry the provision? Wouldn't < it be better if we had CMTA or the CA Restaurant Association? Is this < possible? < < 6. Scott Govenar is calling Boeing's lobbyist to get them < "interested". < < Thanks everybody. Keep up the great work!!! < < Jim < < ********************************************************************** < This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate = and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of th= e intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by ot= hers is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or auth= orized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to= Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all cop= ies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intend= ed to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a bindin= g and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) a= nd the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by a= nyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. < **********************************************************************
|