From:
To:

Cc:
Subject:
Date:

Sam Randazzo
Senator Seitz; "tpine@firstenergycorp.com"; steve.lake@dplinc.com; "john.keaton@duke-energy.com";
ryan.gentil@duke-energy.com; dlarr@larrpc.com; "mbrello@aep.com"; cdwright@aep.com;
"tom.raga@dplinc.com"
Senator Balderson; rep37@ohiohouse.gov
RE: Michigan SB 348
Wednesday, August 12, 2015 3:17:13 PM

Not sure what is considered to be a good idea – if getting rid of portfolio mandates is
a “good idea” there is a lot easier way to get rid of the mandates.  Regardless of what
any legislation may say or legislators think it may say, things may be very different on
the implementation side of government’s good intentions. 
 
Sam Randazzo
McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
sam@mwncmh.com (614) 395-4268

 
From: Senator Seitz [mailto:Seitz@ohiosenate.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 2:58 PM
To: 'tpine@firstenergycorp.com'; steve.lake@dplinc.com; 'john.keaton@duke-energy.com';
ryan.gentil@duke-energy.com; dlarr@larrpc.com; 'mbrello@aep.com'; cdwright@aep.com;
'tom.raga@dplinc.com'; Sam Randazzo
Cc: Senator Balderson; rep37@ohiohouse.gov
Subject: Michigan SB 348

 

All—
 
This looks like the Michigan bill that will move. I would appreciate input on which portions of this we
should emulate in Ohio. Because Michigan is a regulated state, we can’t just copy this even if we
wanted to. But there seem to be some good ideas in here.
Sincerely,
William J. Seitz
 

** This message has been scanned by a BARRACUDA SPAM & VIRUS FIREWALL and
verified virus free **   ­­