[Watchdogs] PEC Questions and a possible trinity

[joesummy at moment.net]

1. Yes, it was a refund of money to Texland...but it was money in the
Texland account to use as needed. Most of that 2 million and what was
leftover after repaying, with interest, the PEC, Bluebonnet, and the NREA,
from what I understand, was used to pay other Texland debts, i.e., outside
attorneys and consultants. Also include Bennie's, Bud's, and A.W.
stipends. Remember, this was over a long period of time.

The point of contention in the legal action by Cattleman's Bank against
the PEC, Bluebonnet, and Texland is that  Cattleman's Bank has asked the
court to decide just what entity owns the money. Bluebonnet, PEC, or
Texland.

According to Luis Garcia (in-house legal counsel at the PEC), the new
receiving agent for Texland (replaced Bud), all three entities,
separately, will answer Cattleman's lawsuit this coming Monday. The three
entities (again PEC, Bluebonnet, and Texland) have their own receiving
agents and will have their own attorneys...Mr. Garcia will not be the
attorney for Texland.

This is the reason I believe that Bluebonnet and PEC wisely reorganized
Texland with different officers from both the PEC and Bluebonnet, and with
a different receiving agent for Texland. Knowing beforehand that the court
might rule that the funds belong to Texland... because Texland had
returned the funds that PEC and Bluebonnet paid to join Texland initially.
Here might lay the disconnect between the PEC and Bluebonnet to Texland.

Will the court decide:

1. Does the money belong to PEC as a separate entity?

2. Does the money belong to Bluebonnet as a separate entity?

3. Does the money belong to Texland as a separate entity?

4. Or, does the money belong to the trinity (3 as 1 scenario) of PEC,
Bluebonnet, and Texland?

Whatever is decided the PEC, Bluebonnet, Texland, and Cattleman's Bank
have covered all the bases for the outcome of the court's decision for the
benefit of their clients. The funds are safe.

My speculation is that the court will decide Texland owns the money, and
then the new directors of Texland will decide what to do with the money
and Texland.

Again, my speculation is that the Texland officers and directors will,
unfortunately, dissolve Texland for prudent political reasons...instead of
prudent business reasons.

2. Concerning (my speculation) the LCRA park on the Pedernales River
outside Johnson City:

  *The LCRA doesn't do anything without a motive, including the unspoken
ones.

  *The LCRA doesn't need to pump from the Pedernales River...since it
empties into Lake Travis anyway.

  *LCRA's long term possible goal is to bring water to San Antonio by
slowly moving down US 281 South.

  *Buying up water rights along the way, including those of municipals.

  *Johnson City has some excellent wells from which to draw.

  *Establishing a LCRA park outside Johnson City is a good PR move for the
LCRA. Establishes a win/win for the LCRA and Johnson City and gives the
LCRA a friendly negotiating position with the City of Johnson City.

  * JC will have to decide what is best for the town in the long term...to
continue to finance its own water and sewer systems, or to sell the
water rights to LCRA. The LCRA will be buying, in this scenario, an
infrastructure that is fully established and well operated. Another
possible win/win for Johnson City and the LCRA.

  *Sends a positive notice to other water owners down 281 South

Why is this important to the PEC members?

  The LCRA has long been notorious for passing, at least some, of its
water operations (and other LCRA endeavors) expenses on to the coops.
Which finally means the members of the coops.

A Big Question (speculation) is what could this mean in the long term with
the possible buyout offers for the PEC? For a possible example: Is there a
connection between Sharyland Utilities (belonging to the Hunts') and the
LCRA?

Just food for thought.

Joe Summy
Johnson City





 At 10:21 AM -0500 9/2/08, joesummy at moment.net wrote:
>>  >Bill,
>>
>>I believe Texland Inc. received about 2 million dollars back from Shell
>> of
>>the earnst money it paid for the lignite site.
>
> But that was simply a refund of Texland funds.  I doubt that Shell
> would have any reason to pay anything extra, unless perhaps there was
> interest on the 2mil.  And wouldn't that money (the 2 mil plus the
> interest) have been owed to PEC and Bluebonnet, who funded or
> guaranteed everything in the first place?
>
>
>
>>Why would the LCRA settle with the Texland for about 18-20 million when
>> it
>>had the it "on the ropes"?
>
> Good question.  And if they did settle, why would they have paid
> anything more than the legal fees (if even that)?   Did they just pay
> Texland off with the agreement that it would go away and leave them
> alone?
>
> So the question remains, where did the excess (almost) one million
> dollars in Texland's account(s) come from?  And why was it not
> returned to PEC and Bluebonnet once things were over?
>
>>
>>If I remember correctly Texland Co-ops was to be a consortium of any
>> co-op
>>in Texas that wanted to join. Mainly, for negotiating the purchasing  of
>>power. It was to be non-profit.
>>
>>Texland Inc. was to be a for-profit power generating company to compete
>>with the LCRA.
>>
>>The two, singularly and together, were to bring negotiating and
>>competition pressures on the LCRA, which had a strangle hold on the
>> Co-ops
>>at that time, and still does today.
>>
>>Sure LCRA wouldn't want the competition. It had and has a monoply on
>> power
>>generation. It is also a quasi-state agency, since its directors are
>>appointed by the governor.
>>
>>  If I remember correctly the PUC killed the Texland Inc. mainly through
>>political pressure brought by the LCRA. The formal reasons are in the PUC
>>brief, however, what it fails to state are the political issues of the
>>time that drove the PUC's decision.
>>
>>Question: The LCRA is buying about 250 acres outside of Johnson City for
>> a
>>LCRA park that has river front property on the Pedernales River...why?
>>
>
> Probably so they have another place where they can draw water to feed
> their increasing water supply committments.
>
> --
> Bill Christensen
> <http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
>
> Green Building Professionals Directory:
> <http://directory.greenbuilder.com>
> Sustainable Building Calendar: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/calendar/>
> Green Real Estate: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/realestate/>
> Straw Bale Registry: <http://sbregistry.greenbuilder.com/>
> Books/videos/software: <http://bookstore.greenbuilder.com/>
>