Subject: RE: ABX2 9
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 11:41:22 -0700 (PDT)

Just so we're clear.  To say that it would not be a problem for very large tranches of customers to leave the system as part of "community aggregation,"  and then say it WOULD be a problem for individual customers to do the same, is, well, ridiculous.  In short, if you can work out the terms and conditions under which potentially huge tranches can go DA, then it is certainly feasible to do the same thing for individual customers. Finally, we're checking, but it seems that it will be be extremely difficult to say that its legally kosher for the PUC to permit DA under 9X, but suspend all other DA.  Very interesting.

Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Govenar [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:29 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich; Susan J Mara
Cc: Hedy Govenar; Bev Hansen
Subject: ABX2 9

According to Assembly Member Migden's office, if enacted, they believe ABX2
9 does provide the CPUC with adequate direction to address community
aggregation separate from other forms of direct access.  They have also had
conversations with the Treasurer's office who informed them that as written,
the Treasurer does not believe ABX2 9 would pose a problem for the bonds.
That said, they have still not received any indication from the Governor's
office as to whether or not he will sign the measure into law so they have
not had conversations with the CPUC.