BY MARK SCHUMANN

It has been suggested that Vero Beach need another 13 to 17 acres of park land, which it can ill-afford to maintain, about as much as a drowning man needs a glass of water.

So, in the face of cuts in staffing and services and possible tax increases, why is the City Council so intent on insuring that all 17 acres of the current power plant site will be cleared for possible development?

While the future use of the land is unclear, Mayor Craig Fletcher has said he wants to see the land used to make money for the city.  He, along with Council members Tracy Carroll and Pilar Turner speak with one mind of possibly building a a marine on the site.  The three Council members have never had a specific, public discussion on the subject, so how they all came to embrace the same notion remains puzzling.  Equally puzzling, is the notion the city needs and can support a second municipal marina.

What I find ironic about this idea is that Carroll, Fletcher and Turners are fundamentally opposed to city government providing anything other than “essential services.”  What may be in play here is a longer-term plan to eventually persuade voters to agree to lease the land long term for a commercial development as a marina resort.

If private sector developers are going to eventually get their hands on the property, then why not let them bear the cost of eventually demolishing the power plant building and clearing the site of any environmental hazards.  If private developers crave the property, then they can buy it “as is.”

Assuming the sale of Vero Electric goes through, probably no earlier than late 2016, if at all, Florida Power and Light plans to operate the power plant for up to four years.

Once FPL has built a new, scenic substation on the corner of 17^th Street and Indian River Boulevard, the company will be required to decommission the power plant at an estimated cost of $5 million.  Though this cost will be paid by FPL, it is essentially being charged to the city’s taxpayers, in as much as FPL is counting the future $5 million expense as a part of its $179 million offer for Vero Electric.

Rather than requiring FPL to demolish the power plant, why not let them sell off the generators and other equipment, and then mothball the plant until such time as deep-pocketed developers come along wanting to build a marina resort.

A completely separate question, of course, is why the city never explored the possibility of selling FPL 4 acres of the current power plant site for its new substation.  What the city has chosen to do is to hand over the valuable former postal annex site on the southwest corner of 17th Street and Indian River Boulevard, where FPL plans to build a larger substation.  Turner and company want the 17 acre power plant site completely cleared because are determined to “improve” the city by “liberating the waterfront.”

O’Connor dismisses the idea of letting FPL have a portion of the power plan site because “the voters who have to approve it.”  So what!  Why not ask Vero Beach residents and taxpayers if they would prefer to leave the substation where it is, or turn over valuable city-owned property and forgo a minimum of $8 million in sale proceeds  simply to “liberate the waterfront” for the benefit of some fairly new residents, including Turner, who would like to improve their view of the the western shore of the Indian River Lagoon, but certainly not at their own expense.