1.

CM Head accused CM Williams of leaking the billing guidelines to the advisors

and delaying approval of the building [sic] guidelines over the advisors
objections. Was that the case?

The word leaking is being used to suggest something inappropriate. The

Advisors were consulted on the guidelines, which is what routinely happens
when professionals and clients negotiate billing guidelines. Dentons has billing
guidelines with many of its clients and they result from discussing the clients
objectives and what is workable in the context of the type of work done and the
nature of the representation. Dentons, and the other utility Advisors, stated
clearly on the record that they supported billing guidelines that would be a part of
the new contracts. Advisor input would be routine and assumed.

CM Heads motion to adopt the guidelines stated clearly that the billing
guidelines should be mutually agreed upon, incorporated, and enforced as
provisions of the Councils Utility Advisors contracts (emphasis added). How
could they be mutually agreed upon without Advisor input?

Furthermore, the Ordering paragraph of CM Heads motion said:

BE IT MOVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW

ORLEANS, That the set of billing guidelines attachedis hereby
approved, and that the billing guidelines shall be incorporated into
and enforced as provisions of all contracts between the Council,
and its Utility, Cable, Telecommunications and Technology
Committee Advisors, as mutually agreed upon in contract
negotiations. (Emphasis added).

Again, how could the guidelines be a mutually agreed upon part of a negotiated
contract without the input of one of the parties to the contract? Consulting with the
Advisors is routine, expected, standard practice and a requirement of the motion
approved by the Council.

Moreover, the initial version of the guidelines was largely unworkable in several
respects. The Advisors comments explaining why several changes were suggested is
attached. As you will see, a major flaw in the initial version was that it would have
severely hampered the Advisors ability to counter the superior financial resources of
Entergy, to the point that a regulatory imbalance would have resulted in Entergys
favor.

2. Are you concerned about the cap on 10 percent of billings being miscellaneous?
I noticed that in some months last year, miscellaneous work accounted for
nearly 50 percent of the work you billed for.

103236424\V-2
We have never stated an objection to this provision, nor did we in the attached
comments. Miscellaneous entries often result from matters that arise unexpectedly,
before they are assigned a particular matter number, or because they relate to
something ancillary to a designated matter that does not fall within the matter for billing
accuracy.
Miscellaneous entries also often relate to work not related to a single billing matter, but
are important recurring activities. For example, before each UCTTC meeting the
Advisors prepare briefing papers on each matter that will be considered at the meeting.
The Advisors also conduct in-person briefings with individual Committee members and
their staff. Because these efforts do not relate to a single matter, but apply to the entire
upcoming meeting agenda they are often recorded as miscellaneous. The same is true
for the quarterly reports that are prepared for Committee members to update them on
all pending matters, including those that might not reach a meeting agenda for months.
What is important for you to understand is that every matter that appears on our bills is
preapproved by either the UCTTC or its Chair, or CURO before any work is done. Our
bills are fully transparent. Every entry relates to approved work. All Advisor bills are
reviewed by CURO and by the Chair and his staff. Once approved, they are sent to
Entergy. They are subject to public records requests. None of our comments on the
billing guidelines would in any way change this process.
3. Are you willing to limit the number of Dentons attendees at Council meetings? I
noticed that Dentons routinely bills for three staffers, which accounts for about
$43,000 each month?
We do limit the number of attendees at meetings. Our attendees are geared to what
issues are coming before the Committee and what expertise is necessary. Meetings
generally address 3-5 major pending issues that, collectively, are worth hundreds of
millions of dollars in potential ratepayer impact. Utility regulation is very complex.
Matters under consideration often involve multiple parties, not just Entergy, all pursuing
their own interests while our job is to consider all points of view and advise the Council
on what best outcome for the entire City would be.
It may be helpful for you to know more about Committee meetings and what goes into
them. Committee meetings are not just the 2 or so hours the Committee actually
meets. Billings in connection with meetings include the in-person briefing of members
and their staffs, which generally run the whole day before the meeting. During these
briefings, our team must be prepared to answer questions from the Councilmembers
about the items on the meeting agenda and to work through any last minute issues that
may arise. Meeting trips also include meetings with stakeholders who have matters or
issues that must be discussed in connection with the meeting. Meeting related billings
routinely include last minute changes that must be made to motions and resolutions,
which result from requests from Councilmembers during the briefings or from other
stakeholder meetings.
Finally, what you dont ask in your question is how many lawyers, engineers, regulatory
personnel, governmental relations people and executives does Entergy bring to

103236424\V-2
meetings? A quick survey of the audience would reveal that usually that number is 15-
20, which would include at least 5 lawyers. Entergy has Fortune 500 resources, which
they bring to bear on each and every matter that comes before the Council. In the face
of that, the utility Advisors have had a remarkable rate of success over the years with
hundreds of millions in savings to ratepayers.
Our success has been independently and repeatedly acknowledged:

Councilmember Susan Guidry commended our team on the negotiated

termination of the Entergy System Agreement at the January 28, 2016 committee
meeting:

[Y]ou know, the other operating companies [were] scrambling

to do everything they could to benefit themselves in ways that
hurt us.

And then to be looking out into what felt like the darkness to
see what else, what other way there was for us to go and
having that transmission company coming in and the
possibility of going in two separate directions which seemed
like it would not be beneficial and that it would be very costly
and then having things wind up so well.

And that could have only happened because you guys are
just, youre wizards. I mean, youre amazing, you truly are.
And if there was ever any question about the value of our
advisors on the utility committee, I think it solved -- its
answered today with this.

And so we really appreciate it. And I know our ratepayers can

-- you know, its really too much to understand for most
everyone, but they should just know that this system of
regulation of our utility, it works for the ratepayers and it has
been working and it continues to work.

And thank you for all of your hard work1

Council member Jared Brossett similarly was pleased with the benefits obtained
on behalf of New Orleans ratepayers and specifically the New Orleans-only TPZ,
as part of the System Agreement settlement. During the September 30, 2015
UCTTC meeting, he said:

1
UCTTC Meeting Transcript, 16:22-17:22 (Jan. 28, 2016) (emphasis added).

103236424\V-2
 Thank you Chairman Williams, and I too want to commend our
entire team, our advisors, Tom Stratton. I dont think the public
knows how significant that we have our own--that we will have
our own transmission pricing zone.

That means a great deal for the ratepayers and is more of a

reason why we have experts, like you, defending the
ratepayers and assisting us here on the City Council, and I
just want to commend you, and I hope the naysayers are
watching. You know, you are important as you travel across
the country in DC and fight for us down here in New Orleans at
FERC, and so forth. And I just--I am really glad that the
transmission pricing zone is ours. And, so, thank you.2

Major stakeholders in the City have also acknowledged the work of our team, together
with the other advisors, in achieving seemingly improbable results for ratepayers. At the
November 13, 2015 UCTTC meeting, Casey Roberts, then-Chief Executive Officer of
the Alliance for Affordable Energy, commented on the success in finding funding for
Energy Smart without resorting to a rate increase:

The Alliance for Affordable Energy supports the mechanism for

funding Energy Smart using the refund for the tax allocations.
We continue to be surprised and impressed that the
advisors find these pockets of money to help manage our
rates here in New Orleans and to help fund a very
important energy efficiency program which directly helps
customers lower their bills, but also helps manage our
entire demand on the grid. So the Alliance for Affordable
Energy supports the resolution.3

Even local media have acknowledged the good work of the Council and its Advisors.
Commenting in the post-Katrina environment, columnist Clancy DuBos reflected on the
historical success of the Council and its advisory team:

Lower rates do not happen by luck or accident. Utility

regulation is a painstaking, complex, often thankless task,
and doing it effectively takes a team of top-drawer advisers,
analysts and attorneysTruth is, the New Orleans City
Council and its utility consultants since 1985 have saved local

2
Audio tape: UCTTC Meeting at 19:21-20:27 (Sept. 30, 2015) (emphasis added).
3
UCTTC Meeting Transcript, 36:8-19 (Nov. 13, 2015) (emphasis added).

103236424\V-2
 ratepayers billions in excessive costs, including more than $1
billion in Grand Gulf charges that the utility was forced to
absorb.4

In an earlier Katrina-related article, DuBos especially acknowledged legal Advisor Clint

Vince:

Council members took their bows as the [post-Katrina]

agreement was announced, as they should, but the real hero
of the white-knuckle talks with Entergy New Orleans (ENO)
was (advisor) Clint Vincewho behind the scenes has helped
save New Orleans ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars
during the years he sparred with Entergy lawyers and analysts.5

Even the OIG, after an extensive investigation, issued a report in June 2015 on utilities
regulation that concluded:

[The OIG consultant] found that the Council had done an

effective job regulating the Citys utilities and that much of
its effectiveness can be attributed to the input and efforts
of the Advisors.6

For you to look at a bill for a meeting and to suggest that the Council and the
ratepayers are being overcharged ignores all history and context and is simply,
factually wrong.
4. Cm. Head questioned why Dentons would charge so much each month for each
attorney. For example, in March 2016, I saw that you billed the Council for 141.7
hours worth of work. My calculation is that adds up to eight hours a day for 3 1/2
weeks. Could you respond to Cm. Heads concerns about why the Council was
billed this way, especially for the high hourly rate for partners?
I cannot remember the last time I worked only 8 hours in a day. Practicing law at the
level of my firm requires much longer hours to provide the kind of representation that we
routinely deliver.
Among the important matters that went into that 141.7 hours are at least five separate,
active matters: Energy Smart energy efficiency negotiations, system agreement clean-
up issues, on-going revised storm hardening report issues, rate impact issues and, most
important, the very complex, but very important IRP issues, which accounted for 63.5
hours.

4
Power Play, Gambit, Clancy Dubos, Apr. 10, 2007 (emphasis added).
5
Power to the People, Gambit, Clancy DuBos, Oct. 31, 2006 (emphasis added).
6
New Orleans Utilities Regulation, Final Report, New Orleans Office of Inspector General, at n.92 (June
17, 2015) (OIG Report) (emphasis added).

103236424\V-2
As I explained to you previously when you wrote about our selection in December, even
though you chose not to include it in your article, Dentons is a power house utility firm.
Dentons is the one of the premier energy law firms in the world. In 2015 and 2016
Dentons was named the "Energy Firm of the Year" by Who's Who Legal, a peer driven
survey. More recently, Dentons was ranked as the number two law firm in the world for
client service. BTI's Client Service A-Team Survey, which conducts in-depth interviews
with over 330 top legal consumers, concluded that Dentons provided the second best
client service in the world.
BTI also named Dentons as a 2017 Fearsome Foursome, along with Jones, Day, Kirkland &
Ellis and Skadden, Arps (a firm used by Entergy). The list reflects the four law firms that most
"strike fear in clients -- and law firms alike -- when seen [as counsel] on the other side."

Clearly, you seem to completely overlook that Dentons has the fire power, the experience and
the resources to take on even a Fortune 500 company like Entergy.

103236424\V-2