From the beginning of their negotiations with the City of Vero Beach, Florida Power and Light spokespersons have said the company will need to operate the power plant for no more than five years.  Will the site then be returned to the city as has been widely expected?

According to City Hall sources, a number of changes being considered to the purchase and sales agreement suggest the land might be marked for commercial development, with or without voter approval.

Early drafts of the agreement between the city and FPL call for the company to lease the power plant site, while assuming ownership of the buildings and equipment.  FPL spokespersons have said the company plans to eventually decommission and dismantle the plant, turning 17.1 acres of vacant land back to the city.

Any environmental cleanup would be the responsibility of the city, and the degree of remediation required will depend on how the land is to be used.  For example, the public might eventually agree to lease or sell the land for commercial development, perhaps as a marina and resort, or as a hotel and casino.  Those uses of the land would involve more extensive and costly environmental cleanup than would be necessary if the site were converted into a riverfront park, or simply set aside for open space.

But changes to the purchase and sales agreement may be in the offing. According to one City Hall source, FPL is proposing to reduce its cash offer by $1.5 million in exchange for agreeing to do whatever environment work may needed to make the site ready for commercial use.

In effect, by accepting $1.5 million less in cash, the city would be picking up the tab for environmental cleanup.  And who will gain?  Most likely, the benefit will go to whoever eventually develops the site.

Having FPL agree to complete the environmental remediation, though, eliminates the possibility of there being a political struggle down the road, for no one can be certain future Councils would be willing to spend public money to make the land available for development.

If FPL’s cash offer is reduced by $1.5 million in exchange for the company doing the environmental cleanup, then ultimately the public will be picking up the tab.

Some say such a change in the sales agreement is nothing more than a clever way of sticking the public with a cost that should be born by developers.  It has also been argued that spending $1.5 million in taxpayer dollars to do any more cleanup than would be necessary to convert the site to a park or open space would be a waste of taxpayer money.

A second obstacle to building a hotel and casino or a marina and resort is a provision in the City Charter requiring voter approval before the land can be sold or leased for commercial use.

In an attempt to satisfy that Charter provision, the Council last fall sought and received permission from voters to lease the power plant site for the purpose of selling Vero Electric.

But what if the city enters into a lease agreement with FPL that is for far more than five years, and what if that lease includes a provision allowing FPL to sublease the land?

It has been argued that negotiating a long-term lease with a sublease clause would fall within the authority granted the Council with the passage of the 2011 “lease” referendum. But again, some say such a move would be nothing more than a shrewd attempt to circumvent the City Charter.