Mark SCHUMANN
Utility activist, Daniel Mattson, recently wrote a letter to the editor to VeroNews.com complaining that InsideVero.com’s policy for posting comments is “dictatorial. See: Reader takes exception to discussion/letter policy
Today, Mattson wrote Inside Vero editor Mark Schumann insisting his recent story comparing Vero Electric’s rates to other utilities is a “lie.” See: When the pursuit of perfection becomes the enemy of good
“It is interesting Mark how the antisell gang will look at a month in history instead of history as a whole. If you are going to look at the history of Vero Electric rates, take a look back further to 2005- 2010 and show us those numbers, Also look at the numbers from today where Vero is 31% more than FPL, and back to only the 2011 anomally that you decided to show to. Vero was 45% more since 2011. Not telling the whole truth is a lie. I’m sure you can’t print this, as FMPA would not like it.” Mattson wrote.
The table below presents Vero Electric’s rate for 1000 kWh compared to the statewide average for Florida’s investor-owned utilities. The rate for investor owned utilities is adjusted to account for a 6 percent franchise fee. In 2009, when Vero Electric’s rates peaked at 134.68 per kWh, the city’s customers were paying 4.3 percent more than the statewide average for investor owned utilities.
| Year | Vero Beach | Invester Owned Avg. |
| 2014 | 129.43 | 124.73 |
| 2013 | 128.43 | 120.49 |
| 2012 | 121.43 | 115.54 |
| 2011 | 113.14 | 115.1 |
| 2010 | 123.45 | 118.92 |
| 2009 | 134.68 | 129.17 |
| 2008 | 124.18 | 110.38 |
Indian River Guardian 
Mark, I am “pro doing the sale the right way” so I am pretty much where most people are going.
But it would be informative to also finish the chart and show FPL’s rates in the third column as that gives us the whole picture and is what is stirring the dynamic.
It’s the goal we have to try to shoot for long term to settle this once and for all no matter how long it takes.
Thanks for all your insightful reporting and your detailed research.
Robert Hall
Why the average of investor owned and not compare FPL to Vero Beach? That is the information Vero voters and rate payers want.
At least this gives us something to do besides twiddle our thumbs while the folks who really, really want FPL to take over can figure out how to honor our legal contracts without costing us the other arm and leg. I’d love to see lower rates even if it means property taxes go up. I also wish I had a crystal ball so I could see where Indian River County will be in line when that Cat 4 or 5 hurricane makes its way up the entire east coast of Florida. If I’m lucky, that won’t occur in my lifetime–and I’m looking forward to many more wonderful years. But maybe the ocean will have risen so much by then, it won’t matter at all.
The whole point of the original article is that FPL rates appear to be unachievable, because the city’s electric system cannot be sold at the time – at least that is how it is looking. What becomes relevant, then, is to explore what is achievable. It seems to me, the city should be held to a standard of achieving the statewide average on rates.
Hey while your at it put up Lakeland and New Smyrna Beach, who both beat FPL, might as well put up who the lowest cost providers of the state are in each category, unfortunately FPL is not one of them. I think its clear the argument is not getting the lowest rates for people its the FPL corporate agenda. The sad thing is we stopped trying to do anything about the rates about 5 years ago, and we continue to be FPL’s toy and surrogate to perpetuate their war on FMPA. How in the world is anyone suppose to have any credibility when they show up with the Heron / Faherty talking points that have yielded us nothing but lack of action and discord in our community for the last 6 years.
Neither Lakeland nor New Smyrna Beach are FMPA entitlement owners of Stanton and Stanton II as is Vero Beach. In fact I don’t believe they are entitlement owners of any FMPA projects which control Vero’s electric rates.