COMMENTARY

“Essentially, the City Council will have two choices next Tuesday.  It can cave to undue pressure from FPL to make a hasty decision, or it can insist on taking the time necessary to gather all the information, advice and input needed to make a wise decision.” 

MARK SCHUMANN

After hearing the price at which the Florida Municipal Power Agency said it would agree to assume Vero Beach’s power entitlements through Dec. 31, 2017, Florida Power & Light representatives spent more than two months carefully, thoroughly, deliberately and purposefully considering their options.  Now, though, FPL representatives are pressuring the City Council to make a shoot-from-the-hip decision on the company’s recently announced proposal to assess the customers of Vero Electric a $26 million surcharge.

When the City Council meets next Tuesday morning, less than two weeks will have passed since FPL President Eric Silagy sprang the news that Vero Electric customers will have to throw some of their own money into the pot to help cobble the deal together.  In this short time, FPL expects the Council to be prepared to give them an answer, and without even putting the proposal before the Finance and Utilities Commissions.

What’s the hurry?  All of the sudden FPL, which did not even submit a proposal to the FMPA until late summer, and which spent more than two months meditating over the FMPA’s Dec. 6 response, now expects Vero Beach officials to hop to it.

You have to wonder if someone above Silagy has grown impatient with the foot dragging, or has become concerned over the mounting negative publicity, or is dreading the looming battle in the Florida Legislature over State Rep. Debbie Mayfield’s House Bill 861.  Or, perhaps FPL’s parent company, NextEra Energy, has other priority it needs to pursue, like figuring out how much it is going to cost to resolve maintenance issues at its St. Lucie nuclear plant.  “Get this deal done, or move on!”  Could that be the directive Silagy now has from his bosses?

But, wait a minute.  Vero Beach officials have their own priorities, too, and presumably their objectives have nothing to do with looking out for NextEra’s stock value.  At least, let’s hope not.  What Vero Beach officials must decide is whether this latest turn south in the negotiations is something to be worked through, or a message from on high that this deal was simply never meant to be. How can FPL representatives, who are all for careful deliberations when the ball is in their court, now demand the City Council move its decision making along at the reckless speed of a bullet train?

A reading of letters exchanged Wednesday between Florida Municipal Power Agency General Manager Nicholas Guarriello and Silagy reveals just how far apart the two sides are, and just how much is yet to be resolved before this deal can close.  Yet, Silagy continues to insist Jan. 1, 2015 is a realistic target date.  Since marijuana has not yet been legalized in Florida, you have to wonder what they are smoking down at FPL headquarters in Juno Beach.  Well, they are probably not smoking anything that would alter clear thinking, but they do seem to be carrying on their deliberations in an echo chamber.

FPL executives may be willing to make their decisions relying on their own limited perspective, but the people of Vero Beach deserve better from their leaders.  Before the City Council even considers giving its tentative approval to a surcharge, the Finance and Utilities Commissions should first review the proposal.

This latest plan, though, can hardly be considered in a vacuum.  To be sure, there are other as yet unresolved questions.  How much will the city have to pay to cover the FMPA’s stranded costs, and where will that money come from?  How will the city secure its contingent liabilities, and how much will that cost?  Finally, just when will the city be able to withdraw from the All Requirements Project?

There can be no thorough assessment of the pros and cons of FPL’s latest offer without more information. To ask the members of the Finance and Utilites Commissions to make a recommendation on the advisability of a $26 million surcharge, without knowing what other costs the city will have to bear, and without identifying a firm closing date, would be premature, if not irresponsible. Voters have already been asked to approve one contract that was full of holes and blanks.  Why put them through that again?

Essentially, the City Council will have two choices next Tuesday.  It can cave to undue pressure from FPL to make a hasty decision, or it can insist on taking the time necessary to gather all the information, advice and input needed to make a wise decision.