BY MARK SCHUMANN

Pronouncing the agreement between the city and Florida Power & Light as a good deal, Councilwoman Pilar Turner said the sale will accomplish her two objectives, namely securing FPL rates and “liberating the waterfront.”  Turner’s second priority is costing the city no less than $20 million.

Lost in the details of the agreement is the fact that some $20 million in the value of the deal is going to achieve the objective of those who are willing to see city residents and taxpayers bear a horrendously high price so that all 17 acres of the power plant site will someday be cleared for “public use.”

“Public use?”  Don’t believe it.  Those with their eyes on the property will eventually use the city’s budget woes as an excuse to ask voters to agree to lease the land for commercial development. Councilman Craig Fletcher swears he would never support selling the land, but notice that he avoids saying he would not be willing to hand the power plant site over to a commercial developer on a long-term lease.

If some on the council were not so interested in pursuing the side agenda of “liberating the waterfront,” negotiations for the sale of Vero Electric could have focused exclusively of achieving lower rates.  As a result, the city would have netted no less than an additional $20 million.   Twenty million dollars is a high price to pay for a 17 acre public park the city can ill afford to maintain.

The vast majority of Vero Electric customers who support the sale are simply interested in lower rates.  They do not also share Turner’s interest in “liberating the waterfront” by spending some $20 million to remove a power plant she no longer wants to look at from her riverfront home.

Think about this.  With voter approval, the city could have given FPL four acres on the western end of the power plant site for a new substation, leaving the remaining 13 acres for “public use.”  Or, with voter approval, the city could simply have sold FPL the power plant and the underlying 17 acres.  That deal could have have included a reverter clause returning the property to the city should FPL ever choose to voluntarily decommission the power plant.

By allowing FPL to continue to operate the power plant, all the contamination questions would become a non-issue.  Further, the cost FPL has allocated for decommissioning the power plant could also be rolled into additional sale proceeds for the city.  Quite simply, the city is paying an high price to improve the view from Turner’s back porch.

The money FPL says it will spend to relocate the substation across the street to the former postal annex site could instead have gone to the city as sale proceeds.  Further, the city could have retained the valuable four-acre site on the southwest corner of 17^th Street and Indian River Boulevard for some higher and better use.

An additional $12 million will be spent by FPL upgrading transmission lines in order to allow for the eventual decommissioning of the power plant.  Since FPL is counting that $12 million as a part of its offer, that money could instead have gone to the city.  That $12 million is, after all, part of what FPL and city leaders say is a fair price for Vero Electric.

Though Fletcher describes the power plant as “antiquated,” the fact is the main turbines are nowhere near 50 years old and are in excellent condition.  If the city were not requiring FPL to decommission the power plant, the company might very well be willing to pay more for the system, given the value to FPL of acquiring a permitted power plant.

City leaders who agreed to this deal are, for all intents and purposes, spending $20 million of public money to ensure all 17 acres of the power plant site can eventually be handed over to developers, who will then be expected to construct something Turner and others will find more pleasing to view from their back porches.