“Lemmon is either being intellectually dishonest, or he is drunk on FPL Kool-Aid.”

MARK SCHUMANN

In his Sunday front page column, Press Journal pundit Russ Lemmon, a member of Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers’ editorial board, asserted that “the will of the people” was clearly expressed in elections held in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. One might think Lemmon would have discovered by now that divining the will of the people is a complex and risky business.

Along with Councilwoman Pilar Turner and Florida Power & Light President Eric Silagy, Lemmon continues to claim the 2011 referendum on allowing for a lease on the power plant site was a definitive expression of the public’s desire to sell the electric system at any price.  Yet, at the time of the 2011 referendum, Turner, FPL, Lemmon and the Press Journal editorial board were all assuring voters the sole question on the ballot was whether or not to authorize the City Council to negotiate with FPL.

Looking back to 2009, Lemmon argues that the election of a slate of pro-sale candidates constitutes irrefutable evidence the voters of Vero Beach are willing to hand the electric system over in a deal that will require ratepayers to swallow a $26 million surcharge. That voters were lead to believe the city would net $90 million to $156.5 million is apparently of no relevance to Lemmon.  Instead, the Press Journal’s sanguine columnist gazes into the tea leaves and sees what he wants to see.  Lemmon is either being intellectually dishonest, or he is drunk on FPL Kool-Aid.

Without considering the context in which the vote was held, how can Lemmon, or anyone else, claim to interpret the “will of the voters” from the outcome of the March 2013 referendum, or from any referendum?  For example, what was the public being told by political leaders, by the press and by advocated for or against the sale?

For his part, Lemmon wrote a column in advance of the March 2013 referendum leading readers to believe there was a very good chance that if voters approved the proposed purchase and sales agreement, with its many blanks and holes, they could expect to be customers of FPL by early 2014. The conclusion Lemmon came to then could only have been the result of the most simplistic, wishful thinking. Lemmon’s Sunday column was more of the same.

Beyond the March 2012 referendum, the public has spoken at other times and in other ways. Jay Kramer’s reelection, Richard Winger’s election and reelection, Tracy Carroll’s defeat and Amelia Graves’ election are also expressions of public opinion on the power sale. Unlike Carroll, who signed an unqualified pledge to sell the system to FPL, Kramer, Graves and Winger never committed to turn the electric system over at any price.

Lemmon predicted there will be a public outcry if the sale cannot be concluded, yet two online polls suggest there is strong opposition to the proposed $26 million surcharge.

Despite what FPL’s president told Lemmon and other Scripps writers and editors when he met with them at Scripps offices in Stuart two weeks ago, this deal almost surely cannot be concluded by Jan. 1, 2015, if ever.

As a next step in working toward a solution, representatives of the city and the FMPA are scheduled to meet April 2.  Their discussions will likely focus, not on FPL’s counter offer, with its several stipulations which the FMPA’s general manager has already made clear are “unworkable and unacceptable,” but on the issues Vero Beach must now address on its own. Those issues, (contingent liabilities, stranded costs and the All Requirements Project exit date), will add further expense, and surely further delay to Silagy’s proposed Jan. 1, 2015 closing date.

For its part, FPL will now likely attempt to negotiate a deal with the Orlando Utilities Commission to take Vero Beach power entitlements through the end of 2017. The OUC has reportedly already made a $44 million offer. No one should be surprised, though, if the OUC takes this opportunity to renegotiate its earlier agreement to permanently assume Vero Beach’s position in three FMPA power projects as of Jan. 1, 2018 for just $34 million.

Without making it clear to his readers the electric sale still faces significant hurdles, Lemmon is simply perpetuating the same unrealistic expectations he has encouraged all along. What the public wants is meaningful action to lower rates. With the exception of FPL executives and a handful of Tea-Party-type utility activists who see a municipal electric utility as a “non-essential service,” few people care who owns the electric system. If and when it becomes clear the city’s electric utility cannot be sold at this time, the only responsible course of action for city leaders will be to move quickly and decisively to lower rates.

If Lemmon is, as he claims, an advocate for Vero Electric’s out-of-city customers, he could exercise that advocacy by encouraging efforts to lower rates, while refraining from serving up more FPL propaganda.