June 2001

A year ago as we started the summer, we were accustomed to having what seemed to be an endless supply of inexpensive energy. However, this summer's different.

Reporters in (order of appearance):

KEN VERDOIA, KUED
DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE
CHRIS VANOCUR, KTVX
ROD DECKER, KUTV
SANDY RIESGRAF, FOX 13
JOHN DALEY, KSL-TV
PAUL ALLEN, HERALD-JOURNAL:

Transcript:

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Governor, thanks for joining us today. You've used this Thursday morning as a time to initiate public awareness of energy conservation you deem important for the summer months. What are its primary points, and why is it important for us to initiate this effort?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Today is the first day of summer, and with it will come long summer evenings but also some hot summer days. A year ago as we started the summer, we were accustomed to having what seemed to be an endless supply of inexpensive energy. However, this summer's different. We now recognize that that isn't going to be our lot, that we have not only a shortage in the West, but we also have higher energy bills. So we have initiated today in conjunction with all of the power companies in the state, both municipal and investor, and the media, a program we call Power Forward. Basically, Power Forward is a system of warnings, like a high stream warning or a high wind warning, that would scroll across the screen of a television when the power rates are going into a dangerously high area. Now, these will almost always be between 2:00 and 8:00 in the evening. 2:00 in the afternoon to 8:00, those are the peak hours. So when we get to a point that we've used up all of the capacity, the television stations and radio stations, including this one, will put on their screen basically a warning saying that we're going into an emergency or period of time when the power rates are going to be substantially higher. We have a reliable system and we have among the lowest power rates in the country, and we want to keep them that way. And conservation is a very important part of it. And you will hear and see lots more about this. Basically, when those warnings happen, we ask them to walk around their house and turn off the lights, turn off their computers if they're not using it, if they're not going to be at home turn their air conditioning down or off. We're not asking people to go without, just simply to use good judgment. Not simply to assure we have electricity, because I believe we'll have it, but to preserve the money. We could have as much as $200 million leave the state, if we don't do this, unnecessarily. Last year, we were in a peak period when we were out into the market only 4% of the entire year, but it cost nearly $200 million in power bills. So we're all working together to make conservation part of the solution to this energy dilemma.

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Does the state participate in that, Governor?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Yes, we do. I issued this morning an executive order directing all of the agencies, as well as the building managers, to receive the alerts and to respond immediately. We'll have a building manager and a site manager in each area. We have an e-mail system that will be hooked to a website that citizens can sign up for and immediately upon a warning being issued, they'll receive an e-mail. And we'll have radio, we'll have television, we'll have e-mail, we'll have other means. We may even use the I-15 signs to indicate that it's time to conserve.

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: I've heard people complain about the Capitol at night. They hear the talk about conservation, look up and see that Capitol brightly lit where you can see it around the valley. Is that subject to the lights out warning as well?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Again, we're not asking people to go without. We're saying if you're not using them. If we get into a red zone, then I think with some certainty we may turn off that as an unnecessary light. If we're in yellow, I don't know that we will. It's an important monument for the state. In a period of green, which is moderate conservation, we'll likely leave it on.

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Today might be a yellow day, correct? I think we're at 97, something like that?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: The point at which we cross into a yellow is typically going to be 96 or 97 degrees. The forecast is somewhere in the area of 97. There are a lot of other things that could affect it. What's happening in other states, other pieces of the grid. All of that could have some impact. But this is a piece of it we can control as citizens. The need to conserve to have power, as much as anything, it's about conserving the dollars for consumers. If a power bill goes from $100 to $300, that's $200 that consumers don't have to spend on things that are important to them. And it does the economy absolutely no good. Because the money doesn't even recirculate. It doesn't create jobs, it doesn't do anything. So we're anxious to see it -- we're anxious to all work together, the power companies, the citizens and ratepayers and also the media.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: What about energy and private industry? Have you worked with them to get them to buy into this conservation process?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: We have. We've involved large employers. Our utilities have been working hard. They tell me they'll likely achieve a 10% reduction of power demand by managing the demand side of the equation. They're offering incentives not just for businesses, but also for consumers. Many of our utilities have a rate plan. If you save 20% over your last bill in the number of kilowatts you use, they'll give you another 20%. You save what you would have otherwise used, and also, they'll cut your rate by 20% in addition.

CHRIS VANOCUR, KTVX: Governor, if we could switch topics, on July 16th, the Olympic bribery trial is scheduled to begin. Do you expect to be called as a witness?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: As a person who had to step into the middle of it and clean it up, it would not surprise me to have either side be interested in my testimony. If I'm called, of course I will respond.

CHRIS VANOCUR, KTVX: Have there been any indications from either side that they may call you?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I'm not going to discuss the trial or, for that matter, anything leading up to the trial or any of the pretrial process. But as I indicate, it wouldn't surprise me. If I were asked, I would respond. Reporter:

CHRIS VANOCUR, KTVX: The indication from the Justice Department is I believe that while they and perhaps the defense can't or won't discuss what witnesses they're going to call, if a person is notified, that person can disclose. Have you been notified in any way?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: As I indicated, I am not going to be discussing the trial or, for that matter, the pretrial, now or during the trial. I just don't think it's appropriate. And as I indicated, for some months now, I'd guess that given the fact that I was in the middle cleaning it up, that both sides may call on me. I don't know if either side will. If they do, I'll respond.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: If we could, let's discuss the front page of the Salt Lake Tribune this morning which carried an article saying that in 1999, analysis of the Olympic budgeting identified a serious financial risk to the state through the state's promise to indemnify Salt Lake City against Olympic debt. The newspaper report indicates you ordered the analysis by accountant Scott Green destroyed, including destruction of any computer records. Is that true?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Let me give it perspective. First of all, it's important to realize that this was about the budget for the Games. It had nothing to do with the bid. Nothing to do with the so-called scandal. It was simply to do with the budget for the ongoing Games. The analysis and the memo was very good analysis. The draft, I did ask to have changed. The budget director asked to have changed. Because the tone of it was just not in keeping with what we wanted to have representing our office. And -- but the conclusions weren't, and they were acted upon. There is another memo that's a part of this that is actually a response from the Olympic committee to our concerns. I required and they agreed to a $100 million set-aside as a result of Mr. Green's analysis. And that was maintained. In fact, when Mitt Romney took over the Olympic Games, that $100 million contingency was in place, it's still in place, and it's a very important part of being able to manage the Games to what I'm sure will be a successful economic result.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: An earlier Tribune story on the same subject quoted Mr. Green, or may have quoted him -- in any case, it said Mr. Green in his investigations saw the scholarship program, told Lynn Ward about the scholarship program, and indicated may have been -- it may have gotten up to you about the scholarship program. Do you know anything about the scholarship program that you can enlighten us on with respect to that memo and Mr. Green?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I have no new information I haven't shared in this forum and many others before. With respect to what has been said or may have been said or may have been said to someone who may have said it, we're down to a point that we're really dealing with gossip. I can't respond to it because I don't know if it ever happened. I can tell you I didn't participate in any of those conversations. And the whether or not whoever told him that they did, did or not, I don't know. So it's just not something I can respond to because you can't logically respond to something you don't know is true.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: Was the scholarship program mentioned in any way in the draft memo which was destroyed?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: No, it was not. It had nothing to do, nothing to do with the previous bid. It simply dealt with the bid for the Ñ rather, the budget for the Games. This is an important point in all of this. We had a bid committee. It was private money. It was organized with a board of trustees. They elected officers. It had no state money. The state had no authority or, for that matter, responsibility. Nor did we receive any information about the budget for the bid. Now, in each case, when they made a bid, they had to include a budget for the Games. How much was it going to cost to put the Games on? Because the state has a financial interest in the Games, it was the obligation of the Governor's office to check that budget. And that's what we're talking about is the budget for the Games.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: Do you still have a copy of the draft memo that was destroyed? Will you release that copy now that evidently it's been in the news?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I do not have a copy. I understand that there's a link on the Tribune's website that they can give it. We're not a hundred percent sure that's it. If it is, you can see it. But it's simply -- just read the memo. It's basically analysis of the budget. It was a very good analysis. And the final memo, which is available, has the same conclusions in it. It was simply a function of editing because the -- frankly, there was a little personal venting that went on in the memo and conclusions that analysts ought to be depending on the supervisor to make. We acted on them, and that's why we ended up with $100 million of contingency. It was good analysis. We followed it. We put a contingency into place. And it's worked.

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Go back to the original question. Did you order the destruction of that memo?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I didn't order the destruction. I was -- I read the memo as a draft and said -- I remember the conversation. We just Ñ the budget director brought it to me in draft form, and I said basically what I just said to you. "This is good analysis, and we need to follow it." But there was not ordering the destruction. Let's put this into context --

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Who did order it?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Just a second. You write for a newspaper every day. What ends up in the newspaper? It's your final draft. It's not unusual, I suppose, for you to have more drafts than one. And I'm guessing that an editor that you report to often looks at something and may say, "I don't like that word," or "That may be stronger than it should be," or "That's not strong enough," or "I'm not sure that's descriptive of what we want to say in this newspaper." A supervisor has that same right in any context. There were no conclusions changed in this process. None.

CHRIS VANOCUR, KTVX: Governor, with respect, most of us work for private companies. You work for the government and the people.

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: When we did the Centennial Highway fund, we had 26 different drafts of a budget. And there are often times when you're working through a process of trying to draw a conclusion that it's not unreasonable for those who worked together to say, "This is better," or "I don't like the way that feels." We do that in a lot of different circumstances, and we reserve the right to do it. It is -- if we were keeping the final document secret, that would be another thing. We weren't. We prepared and have released the documents from the -- from SLOC that basically said, "Okay, we hear your concerns, we'll respond." This is being viewed in some -- with some sort of skullduggery. There was none. It was simply the process of editing a document about a going-forward budget. The conclusions were not changed. And it was made public in the way that we normally would make them.

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Governor, just to protest the analogy of editing, the editor doesn't order the original document shredded and the original draft removed from the computer. That occurred here. Someone had to have ordered that.

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Well, I can't reconcile that for you. But what I can say is --

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: It wasn't you, then?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I didn't deal with the drafting of the memo. I made clear that I thought that the memo in tone was not what I would like to see represented in our office. The writer of the memo had previously been employed at SLOC. We viewed his employment at our office as an advantage because we had the capacity -- we were having to scrutinize the going-forward budget. We had a lot on the line here. I wanted to make certain we understood the budget. I felt that the memo reflected some of -- personal feelings that did not change the conclusion of his analysis, because it was very good analysis. And it was relied upon. And it was the basis upon which I told the Olympics that I would not approve their budget absent a number of conditions being met, one of them being a $100 million contingency fund.

DAN HARRIE, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: You did not order the destruction, is that correct?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I don't have any memory of ordering destruction of anything. I did make it clear that I didn't like the tone of it and told them I wanted to make certain there wasn't a place in which we could get this mixed up. Whether I did or whether I did not to me is not relevant. And to me it is -- given the fact that there may be other times that we have done that simply because people can misunderstand things, and it's not saying something unkind about someone. You want really to preserve something that's unkind and so it conflicts on other people? I don't think so. And I don't think it's necessary for us to keep draft documents that might not have put things in the right context or might not have put things in a fashion that would have been as professional as we'd like them to be just so that someone can write about them later and say, hey, they said something unkind or unpleasant. And that was all we were talking about. And people can disagree about that. But the truth is, we've done nothing but try to make our office business conducted in a very professional way. As I say, it was great analysis.

SANDY RIESGRAF, FOX 13: Were those personal feelings that were part of the memo things that you didn't want a matter of public record? Is that it?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I didn't want them reflected. They were his feelings. And I felt like the analysis was good, but there was really not a reason for us to play this out as we are playing it out now.

JOHN DALEY, KSL-TV: What specifically did he say? What was wrong with the tone? What were the personal feelings expressed there that you didn't think were appropriate?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Well, first of all, it's been, what, three years? I have not read the memo again. I don't remember. I just remember that the tone of it was not what I wanted represented in the office. I want to emphasize, Scott Green is a very able guy. And his analysis, I depended on. I depend on it now. He did a good job. I responded to his recommendations. I simply said, "Let's put this in a different way." And you can look at the -- read the memos. The conclusions don't change. We've simply -- we simply put it in a different context. And you can try to read all of that into it you want to. But we try to conduct ourselves in a civil way and a way that does not cause people to have their feelings hurt. And frankly, I'd appreciate if you guys would do the same thing. ( -- laughter --)

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: We will cease and use this opportunity to turn our attention to Logan where we have a question from Paul Allen from the Logan Herald Journal.

PAUL ALLEN, HERALD-JOURNAL: When you came up for your capital of the day tour, awhile ago you mentioned there'd be no change to the Bridgerland Community -- Bridgerland Applied Technology Center with your new Utah college technology plan. And after the legislative session yesterday, do you still feel that's true? And is that being generally well-accepted throughout the state?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Well, there will be changes. But I think there will be changes for the better. I think it will be nothing but improved. It would expand opportunities for students. They'll not only be able to receive certificates of applied technology in various disciplines and jobs, but if they choose, they'll also have a bridge into higher education if they choose to do that. I'm very excited what the Legislature did yesterday. It was a landmark moment in the history of higher education in our state. It's a moment in which we gave full stature to applied technology education. It's a way in which ultimately, Utah families will be able to make more money, have better jobs. And I think that's very good news.

SANDY RIESGRAF, FOX 13: Governor, can we talk about your trip to Sidney? What are you looking for?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I'm going to Sidney for three days to look -- now that they've been a year out -- to look at what they did that worked. Economically. What did they do to attract business to Australia that's bearing fruit? What did they do that isn't bearing fruit? What would they do differently? A good opportunity for us to look into that laboratory and say, we have eight months or so left. How can we best prepare? What can we do to optimize this economic opportunity? Later this week, I'll be releasing resources for businesses in Utah that have an Olympic plan. I think every single business in Utah needs to have an Olympic plan. So that they can bring people to the state that are of importance to them. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity, and we need to optimize this. I'm going to Australia to find out how we can improve it. I'm also going to go to Tonga and to Samoa on the way back. I'm stopping there because we have 20,000 Samoans and Pacific Islanders in Utah. It's our fastest-growing minority population. They're wonderful people. They're family-oriented, they're hardworking, they're becoming more and more part of our state, our culture. We're becoming part of them. And I'd like to use my visit to communicate to them how important we view their role in the state and how welcome they are and how much we want them to be -- to feel a full part, both in their families and in our schools and in our community. I hope my visit will be interpreted by them as sending that message.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Governor, putting the emphasis in Australia on considering the economic gain, might you also spend some time considering the cultural and social impacts of what happens in the wake of hosting the world's largest party? Because there are some people who whispered that the days after, the months after, can in fact have a downward effect on a community

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I will be curious to find that. I have an opportunity Ñ I have I guess seven or eight different appointments with national government figures and the heads of their equivalent of state government and a lot of their private industry people. And I'll be asking questions like that. My sense is that they're finding it to have been a very good thing for them. All early indications are. I've got appointments with people who organized it. At our next monthly meeting, I'll be able to give you a little bit of a report.

ROD DECKER, KUTV: The Legislature yesterday voted to give $10 million additional in legal fees in the cigarette settlement on top of about $64 million that's already been awarded. Evidently, you had to sign off on that before it went to the Legislature. What was your thinking in giving the lawyers $10 million more from the state of Utah's share?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: I'm really not a fan of paying lawyers a lot of money, but we did have a problem. That is, we had a contract that the Attorney General had signed providing -- with a provision to give them 25%. That created a level of uncertainty for us, as it did for them. There were reasons for uncertainty on both parts. I came to the conclusion, given the fact that there was a potential upside for both and a potential downside for both, that that was a fair settlement and that we really ought to take the money that had come from the settlement already and move on

ROD DECKER, KUTV: In hindsight, the Legislature declined to put money into the Ñ into legal fees up front, where if they'd put in $100,000, it would have saved us $10 million. Or I don't know exactly the numbers, but large. Do you fault the Legislature? Do you fault the former Attorney General in handling this case?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Well, we've settled it out. I'm not sure that ascribing fault is productive. This is not an uncommon dilemma as to whether to operate on a contingent fee. At the time that the litigation was launched, it was the one question that I had and the reason that I had not actively approved it yet is because Ñ approved the lawsuit is because I wanted to know what the legal fees were. I wish that we had had a chance to think about it a little more and talk about it, but the decision was made, the contract was signed, and we found ourselves in the situation we do now. And we've now worked with the problem. We're dealing with dollars coming from tobacco. I'd like to have it in the state, like to spend it on health care, like to spend it on tobacco cessation and other worthy causes. At this point, we're paying them in legal fees.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Yesterday, the Legislature ponied up $1.5 million to settle a contingent legal entanglement with a private prison corporation that had entered into negotiations with the Department of Corrections. Many legislators, if they were upset over the tobacco settlement additional funds, were upset about having to put money out for no service at all. How did we get ourselves in that mess?

GOVERNOR LEAVITT: Well, it's really -- at the root of it is some good news. And that is that we have gone from adding 500 new prisoners a year to 250. We were planning our whole system around 500. Once we were able to see that they weren't going to happen, we'd already contracted to build this prison. And we concluded it would save us $2.5 million a year not to build it. That was compelling. We had a contract. And we needed to stand up to it and to act honorably, and we did. There was a little pain involved, but I think that's the way Utahns would have it.

KEN VERDOIA, KUED: Governor, we thank you for your time. We remind you a transcript of this broadcast is available online at www.uen.org. Good evening.

 

Return to home page