Editor’s note: In a statement issued Nov. 13, Town of Indian River Shores Mayor Brian Barefoot claimed the questions raised in Indian River County’s petition to the Florida Public Service Commission are “fundamentally different” from the issues and legal claims the Town puts forth in its lawsuit against Vero Beach. “Our lawsuit is fundamentally different than the County’s filing with the PSC,” Barefoot wrote.  

In a separate statement released Dec. 17, Barefoot expressed concern that Vero Beach’s decision to file its own petition with the PSC could be a “collateral attack on the Town’s lawsuit.” Particularly as Indian River County Attorney Dylan Reingold now raises accusations that Vero Beach is acting in bad faith, the larger question may be whether Indian River County and the Town of Indian River Shores have launched coordinated, “collateral” attacks on Vero Beach.  

Public records reveal the County’s outside counsel, Floyd Self, was in possession of a draft of the Shore’s proposed lawsuit against Vero Beach before the case was filed in circuit court. Self forwarded the draft to Reingold along with a note that read, “Super secret. I will call you at 4:15.”  

Now Shores and County officials expect the public to believe they are not in anyway acting in concert in their legal attacks on Vero Beach. The following commentary was first posted Aug. 31, 2014.

COMMENTARY

MARK SCHUMANN

To hear officials from the Town of Indian River Shores and Indian River County tell it, it is purely coincidental the Shores’ lawsuit against Vero Beach and the County Commission’s Florida Public Service Commission petition were filed at practically the same time.  The two local governments, they contend, are not acting in concert in pursuing their legal assaults on the City.

An email from the County’s outside counsel, Floyd Self, to County Attorney Dylan Reingold suggests otherwise. Self wrote, “Super secret. I will call you at 4:15.” Attached to Self’s email was a draft of the Shores’ proposed lawsuit against the City. Every page was labeled, “CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT DO NOT DISTRIBUTE.”

Though it is certainly not illegal for the Shores and the County to launch coordinated legal attacks on Vero Beach, to pretend they are not somehow working in concert to dismantle the City’s electric utility is disingenuous.

In the face of the Shores’ and the County’s legal action against the City she claims to serve, City Councilwoman Pilar Turner recently objected to efforts by the City’s outside counsel to seek public records from the County and the Shores.  Amazingly, though her City is under attack, Turner said she wants to avoid creating adversarial relationships.

Public records released by the County last week also show that Florida Power & Light advocate, utility activist, Glenn Heran, had more than a little input into the County’s request for an audit of the Florida Municipal Power Agency.

After suggesting the County hire the Ballard Group, a lobbying firm already working for FPL, Heran was then appointed by the Commission to assist the Ballard Group in pushing for passage of a number of utility bills, as well as seeking funding for an audit of the FMPA to be conducted buy the State Auditor General.

With help from Sen. Joe Negron, who received $50,000 in contributions from FPL, $200,000 to pay for an audit of the FMPA was slipped into the state budget in the waning hours of the 2014 legislative session.

Text messages from Bob Ballard, of the Ballard Group, to County Attorney Dylan Reingold suggest the lobbying effort was not easy. On April 27, Ballard texted, “The audit is in the last house offer. Its pretty buried in auditor general area but be ready for those guys to FREAK. Hopefully senate will accept and we’ll be done tonight.  That’s the plan anyway.”

The following day, Ballard wrote, “Are you guys happy? do you sense that there is really a sense of how not easy that was. Waiting for fmpa to flip.”

During the Legislative session, FPL put on its own direct push for an audit of the FMPA.  (See: Dusting for FPL’s fingerprints on $200,000 audit request)

In a May 7 email to County Commissioner Bob Solari, Heran wrote, “Here is a list of potential items for the Audit Scope. Perhaps we can use this as the basis for Governor talking points.”

Heran’s two-page email detailed eight “talking points” for defining the broad scope of an audit of the FMPA. Heran’s request induced, “1. Measure the FMPA’s true economic value and member equity. 2. Consider FMPA contract limitations that contravene the public good. 3. Consider concept that the FMPA can mitigate the risk of an exiting member without harming other member cities or bondholders. 4. Detail compensation of all FMPA employees including salaries, pension and benefits. 5. Measure FMPA overhead. 6. Assess contingent liabilities and the realistic probability of loss, if any. 7. Consider the lack of transparency of FMPA financial presentations. 8. Compliance with 1969 inter local agreement and entitlement power contracts.”