Just FYI.  These guys did a great job on the polling here, but I can't speak 
to their other qualifications or their California ties.
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 11/09/2000 12:13 PM -----

	"Michael D. Baselice" <mikeb@baselice.com>
	11/09/2000 09:03 AM
	Please respond to "mikeb@baselice.com"
		 
		 To: "Ken Lay (E-mail)" <klay@enron.com>, "Steve Kean (E-mail)" 
<skean@enron.com>
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Arena and Electric Dereg.

1. Thank you for all your support on the Arena Proposition.
2. The following article reminded me to pass along a note about a PR/PA 
firm in California who Baselice & Associates worked with this year in 
passing Prop 35 (a contracting out initiative).  The firm is a full service 
firm named Woodward & McDowell.  They have been active in California 
legislative and initiative battles for some 20 years and I highly recommend 
them if Enron is in search of support with the electric deregulation fight 
out there.  Dick Woodward or Dave Fogarty can be reached at 650-340-0470.

If you have any questions, please call.

Mike



MICHAEL BASELICE
Baselice & Associates, Inc.
4131 Spicewood Springs Road
Suite O-2
Austin, TX  78759
Phone: (512) 345-9720
Fax: (512) 345-9740
email: mikeb@baselice.com




November 8, 2000
Calif Regulators,Grid Oper In Turf War Over Generation By JASON LEOPOLD Of 
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES LOS ANGELES-California's electricity regulators and 
power-grid operator are locked in a turf war over who has the authority to 
order new power plant construction next summer to ensure the state has 
enough juice on hand when demand soars.
The California Public Utilities Commission says it can bring emergency 
power on line at a fraction of the cost that the Independent System 
Operator is expected to pay independent power producers for the same 
service.
Under it's plan, PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Edison 
International's (EIX) Southern California Edison unit and Sempra Energy's 
(SRE) San Diego Gas & Electric Co. were ordered to submit documents by the 
end of November stating whether they can build and operate "peaking" plants 
by June 1.
The utilities weren't immediately available to comment.
On the other hand, the ISO - which is on the verge of signing contracts for 
440 peaking units with between 20 and 91 megawatts of electricity - says 
the commission's meddling could endanger any chance of additional resources 
coming on line in time.
"Any further interference on the state level could destroy the plan 
altogether," said an ISO source close to the issue. "There is no guarantee 
the utilities will be able to pull this off by next summer. And if the 
whole project is scrapped, you can expect there will be blackouts."
Interference by federal regulators has already cost the ISO two 
participants and nearly 600 megawatts in its peaking program.
Calpine Corp. (CPN) and Enron (ENE) initially agreed to build peaking 
plants for the ISO next summer, but withdrew their offers after the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission proposed capping the clearing price for 
California's wholesale electricity market at $150 a megawatt-hour.
The ISO, which operates one of the state's wholesale power markets and 
manages most of the high-voltage transmission grid, has already solicited 
and received bids from merchant generators for 1,800 megawatts of new 
peaking power for next summer.
Burned by the summer's power crisis and facing an 8,000-MW shortfall next 
summer, the ISO put out a request for bids in August. The ISO's board voted 
Oct. 30 to enter into the contracts, which it estimated would cost about 
$250 million a year for three years.
The state's Electricity Oversight Board, which oversees the performance of 
the ISO, and the Public Utilities Commission protested the decision on the 
grounds that the contracts were too expensive.
The commission is also questioning whether there is even a need for peaking 
power next summer and, if there is, whether the ISO should handle the 
solicitation.
"The question also arises as to whether the ISO - which is empowered only 
to operate the state's transmission system and which does not represent the 
state or its consumers - is the appropriate organization to plan, solicit 
and pay for the construction of new power plants across the state," the 
commission wrote in its Nov. 2 order.
Ind the end, the decision is up to state regulators. If utilities can come 
up with a cheaper alternative and if the regulators determine that 
additional generation is needed by next summer, then they will follow 
through with the utilities proposal.