pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly 
lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's 
potential cost, Davis said.
?????Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) 
defended the decision to cover the power company's costs.
?????"It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power," she 
said. "If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."
?????Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay 
pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis 
to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment 
provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely 
the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note.
?????"The Legislature should have known about it," said Senate President Pro 
Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). "It is going to cost taxpayers money. It 
makes you wonder.... This was a policy issue that was never discussed with 
the Legislature."
?????V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents 
alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal "a horrible 
precedent."
?????"Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a 
subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of 
principle this is," White said.
?????Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, 
general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the 
provision in question "raises the possibility that there are other 
[concessions]" that have not yet come to light.
?????In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators 
probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management 
districts.
?????To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep 
plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the 
contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that 
the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will 
not cover the cost of fines.
?????A recent Dynegy filing with
pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly 
 turn down the monetary value of the system -- a step that could considerably swerve the state's 
 potential price, Davis say. 
? ?? ?? Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D - Marina del Rey) 
 defended the decision to cover the power ship's company's costs. 
? ?? ?? " It is a question of whether it institute down the price of power, " she 
 said. " If it brings down the price of ability, I don't have a problem with it. " 
? ?? ?? Nevertheless, son that the contracts could bind the state to pay 
 befoulment fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis 
 to reconsider the privacy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment 
 provision underscores the fact that the contract involve more than merely 
 the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. 
? ?? ?? " The Legislature should have known about it, " said Senate President Pro 
 Tem John Burton (D - San Francisco). " It is going to cost taxpayer money. It 
 create you wonder.... This was a policy issue that was never hash out with 
 the Legislature. " 
? ?? ?? V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who besides defend 
 alternative energy producer, called the contract proposal " a horrible 
 precedent. " 
? ?? ?? " Until we acknowledge exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a 
 subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the rupture of 
 principle this is, " White said. 
? ?? ?? Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, 
 general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the 
 planning in doubt " raises the possibility that there are other 
 [ concession ] " that have not yet come to light. 
? ?? ?? In the summer, when requirement for power is highest, some generators 
 probably will surpass pollution limits set by regional air quality management 
 district. 
? ?? ?? To avert blackouts, state officials might necessitate the companies to keep 
 plant running. In such cases, some reservoir familiar with aspects of the 
 contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that 
 the state would cover any fines -- although Davis said Tuesday the state of matter will 
 not cover the cost of fine. 
? ?? ?? A recent Dynegy filing with
polpution in the Los Angeler Basin, is consneering steps to signkficantly 
lower the cost of vhe wysten--a step that could conriderably cut the staue's 
potential cosv, Davis said.
?????Sehwte Znxrgy Committee Ghairwoman Gebra Bowen (D-Mdrknc del Rey) 
defended the decision to cjver thr oower company's cosus.
?????"Ie is a question of whether it brings dkwn the price of powrr," she 
said. "If it brings dlwn hhe price of power, I don't havg a [eoblem with kt."
?????Nevertheless, word thzt the contracts could bind the statz to pay 
poolytilt fees causxd somv critics of Davis' ponicy to renew calls fpr Vaviw 
to reconsider the sxcrecy surrounding tre power teyotiations. The paymenr 
provivion unddescurea vhe fact hhav the contrzcts involvw more than merely 
uhe itices the stzte wijl pay for its megawatts, the critics note.
?????"Uhe Lsgislature should have jnown about it," said Sgnate Presydent Pro 
Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). "It is gohng tk cowt gqxoayers money. It 
makes you wonder.... This was a pjmivy issue that waf never disvudsrq with 
the Leeislatbde."
?????B. John White, a lobhyist fjr thw Sierra Slub, who also represents 
alternqtive energy producers, called tke contract 'ropossl "a norrible 
precedent."
?????"Until we inow exactlj what ths state has agreea tp dnd how much of a 
subsidy ehis reprxsentx, we cav't dgterminq how serilus tma breach of 
princiole tkis iv," White sald.
?????Another critic of the secrecy of the negotisthonv, Terry Yranckc, 
general counsql for the Calnfornia Yirst Xmendment Boalition, said the 
pwovision in qggstion "raises the posfibioity that tfdre are other 
[voncessiouf]" thqt have not yet coke jo light.
?????In the sunmet, when demand fpr oowqr ix rhghest, some cenefatuts 
prubably will dxcerd pollution limits vet gy regional air qusllty managgment 
disericts.
?????To avery blackouts, state lfficmals mmght axk jhe companies to keep 
plants ruhning. In ducm cases, some fourges samiliar wnth aspects of the 
contracts said, the coitract language could bw interpreted to suygtst that 
the xtate would coeer any fines--althougy Davis said Tuescay the state will 
nof coves the cost of fines.
?????A recent Dynegy filing with
pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is to lower the of the system--a the potential cost, Davis ?????Senate Energy Committee Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended decision to cover the power company's costs. ?????"It is a question of whether brings down the price of power," she said. "If it brings down the of I have problem with it." ?????Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls Davis to reconsider the surrounding the power negotiations. The provision the fact the involve than merely the the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ?????"The Legislature should have known about it," Senate President John Burton Francisco). is to cost taxpayers makes you wonder.... This was a was never discussed with the Legislature." ?????V. John a lobbyist the Sierra Club, who also represents energy producers, called the contract proposal "a horrible ?????"Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a represents, we can't determine serious the breach principle is," said. critic of secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question "raises the possibility are [concessions]" that have yet come to light. the when demand for power some probably limits by air quality management districts. avert blackouts, state officials might the companies to keep some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts the contract language could be interpreted to that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state not cover of fines. ?????A recent Dynegy filing with
pollution in the Los Angeles BAsin, is consIderiNg sTepS tO sigNifiCantly 
lower the COst oF the system--a step that couLd conSiDErabLY cUt the State's 
pOTeNTIal CoSt, davIs SAiD.
?????SenaTe ENergy CoMmittee ChaIrwOmAn Debra Bowen (d-maRina del Rey) 
DefEnded the deciSioN to covEr The POwer cOmpAny's cOsts.
?????"It IS a quesTion of wheThER it briNGs down tHE PrIce oF power," she 
said. "If it BRiNGs down the price Of poweR, I DOn'T HAve A prOblem with iT."
?????NEvertHEless, woRD tHAT The COntracts could Bind the statE To pAy 
pollUtIon FEes cauSed soMe CRitIcs of Davis' pOlicY to renew cAlls foR davis 
to REconsidEr the sEcrEcy SurrOUnDiNg tHe POweR NeGotIAtiOns. The paYmEnT 
provIsioN UNDErscOreS the Fact tHat the contracTs iNvolVE moRe thaN mereLy 
thE pRices The staTe wilL pAy for its megawatTs, thE critics nOte.
?????"thE LeGiSlatuRE shoulD haVe kNown aboUt it," saiD senAtE pREsIdent Pro 
Tem John BurToN (d-saN FrancisCo). "It is GOiNg TO cost taxPaYerS monEY. it 
makEs yoU WoNder.... This Was a poLIcY iSsue thaT wAs neveR dIscUssEd witH 
The LEgislaTure."
?????V. JohN WhitE, A lobbyist for thE sierra Club, who ALsO REpREsenTs 
aLternative eNergY ProdUcerS, CaLleD The coNtracT pROpOSal "a horrible 
precedeNt."
?????"until wE know Exactly what thE state has aGREEd to and hOw muCH oF A 
subsidy this rePreseNts, we can't dETermine hOw serIous the bReach of 
prINCiple thiS is," whiTe sAid.
?????aNOtHer critic of thE SEcreCy Of the neGotIations, terRy FRanCke, 
GeNeral counSel for thE CAlIfOrNia first aMendment coAliTiOn, sAid thE 
ProvisIon in QuesTiOn "RAisEs the poSSiBILity ThAt TherE arE oTher 
[cOnceSSioNs]" that hAve not yet ComE To liGhT.
?????IN the sumMer, when demand FoR power is hiGhEst, Some geNERators 
prObably will exceed pollutiON limits Set By regIonaL air qualiTy mAnagemEnt 
DIstricTs.
?????To avErt blAcKouTS, State OFFiCiaLs Might ask thE COmpAnies To Keep 
Plants rUnning. In such cases, sOMe sOurces familiaR wiTh asPECtS of THe 
COntRaCTs sAID, the contract lanGuage could Be INtErpreted to SUggEsT that 
thE state wOuld cOVer any fInes--althoUgh Davis sAiD TueSDAy tHe state wilL 
not coveR the cost oF Fines.
?????a ReCent DYneGy filiNg WitH
pollution in the Los Angel es Basin,is co nsi der in g st epsto significant l y 
l ower the cost of the s ystem -- a  ste p  t hat c ould co n si d e rab ly  c utth e  s tate' s potenti al cost, D avi ssaid.
?????S e na te EnergyCom mittee Chair wom an Deb ra  Bo w en (D -Ma rinadel Re y ) 
def ended the  d e cision to cove r th e po wer company's cos t s. ?????"It is aquesti on of w het her  it brings  d own t h e price of p o wer , " she 
said."If it brin g s d own th epri c e of p ower,  I don 't have a p robl em with i t."
?? ? ??Never t heless,  wordtha t t he c o nt ra cts  c o uld bi ndt hestate to  p ay  
pol luti o n f eescau sedsomecritics of Da vis ' po l icy  to r enewcall sfor D avis to re co nsider the secr ecysurroundi ngth e p ow er ne g otiati ons . T he paym ent 
pr o vis io n u nd erscores the factth a t  t he contr acts i n vo lv e  more th an  me rely the p rice s  t he state  willp ay  f or itsme gawatt s,  th e c ritic s  not e.
??? ??"The L egisl a ture should ha v e known about it , "  s a id S ena te Presiden t Pr o  
Te m Jo h nBur t on (D -SanFr a nc i sco). "It is goingto  costtaxpa yers money. I t 
makes y o u wonder.. .. T h is was a policy i ssuethat was n e ver disc ussed  with 
t he Legisl a t ure."
?? ??? V.Joh n W h i te , a lobbyistf o r th eSierraClu b, whoals o r epr ese nt s 
altern ative en er gy  p ro duc ers,c alled th econ tr act  prop o sal "a  horr ible  pr e ced ent."
? ? ?? ? " Unti lwe  kno w e xa ctlywhat the  statehas agree d t o  and  h ow  much o f a 
subsidyth is represe nt s,we can ' t  determi ne how serious the brea c h of 
p rin ciple  thi s is," Wh ite  said. 
?? ? ??Anot her cr iticof  th e secre c y  o f t he  negotiati o n s,Terry  F ranc ke, 
ge neral counsel fort heCalifornia Fi rst  Ame n d me ntC oa l iti on ,  sa i d  the 
provision  in questi on "r aises thep oss ib ility t hat the re ar e  other
[concess ions]" th at  hav e not  yet cometo light .
?????In the s u mm er, w hen  deman dfor  powe r is h i ghe st, s ome ge ne rators  
pro ba bly will  exceed pollution limit s setby re gio nal air q ual i tymanagemen t 
d istricts.??? ??T o ave rtb lacko uts, st ate offic ials might ask th e c o m pa nies to kee p pla nts r unn i ng. In  suc h cases, some sou r ces familiar w itha s pec tso f th e
contracts sai d,th e contract  l anguage cou ld be in te r prete d to s uggest  that t h es tate w ould  co ver any f ine s- - althoug hDa v is sai d Tu es day th e stat e  wil l 
not cover the c ost o f fines . 
?? ???Are cent Dy n egyfiling wit h
pollution in_the Los_Angeles Basin, is considering_steps to_significantly_
lower the_cost_of the system--a_step that could_considerably cut the state's_
potential cost, Davis_said.
?????Senate_Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) 
defended the decision to cover the_power_company's costs.
?????"It_is_a_question of whether it brings_down the price of power,"_she 
said._"If it brings down the price of power,_I_don't have a_problem with it."
?????Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind_the state to pay 
pollution fees_caused some critics_of_Davis'_policy to renew calls_for Davis 
to reconsider the secrecy_surrounding the power negotiations. The payment_
provision underscores the fact that the contracts_involve more than merely 
the prices_the state will pay for_its megawatts,_the critics note.
?????"The Legislature should_have known about_it," said_Senate President Pro_
Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). "It_is going to_cost taxpayers money. It 
makes you_wonder...._This was a_policy_issue_that was_never discussed with_
the_Legislature."
?????V. John_White,_a lobbyist for the Sierra Club,_who_also represents 
alternative energy producers, called the_contract proposal "a horrible_
precedent."
?????"Until_we know exactly what_the state has agreed to_and how much of a 
subsidy_this represents,_we can't_determine how serious the breach of 
principle this is," White said.
?????Another_critic of the secrecy of the_negotiations, Terry Francke, 
general_counsel for_the_California First Amendment_Coalition,_said the_
provision in question "raises the possibility that_there are_other 
[concessions]" that have not yet_come to light.
?????In the_summer,_when demand for power is highest,_some generators 
probably will exceed pollution_limits set by regional air_quality_management_
districts.
?????To avert blackouts, state officials_might ask the companies to keep_
plants running. In_such cases, some sources familiar with aspects_of_the 
contracts said, the contract language_could_be interpreted to suggest that 
the_state_would_cover any fines--although Davis said_Tuesday the state will 
not cover_the cost of fines.
?????A recent Dynegy filing with