VERO BEACH — Vero Beach residents will likely find out in the next few weeks whether they will have the chance to vote again on the sale of the city’s electric utility to Florida Power & Light, a vote that could come in March.
The utility is considered the city’s biggest cash cow, a utility that charges inflated rates that generate millions of dollars a year in revenues to pay for other services.
But others see the big blue mass at the foot of the 17th Street Bridge as a monstrosity, an antiquated system that will one day bring the city to its knees when it comes time to replacing old equipment.
Just when it seemed that the sale was a go with the majority of the city council members backing it, one council member suggested the decision be made by the voters instead.
As to how many of Dick Winger’s colleague’s agree with him remains to be seen in the upcoming weeks.
Mayor Pilar Turner, Vice Mayor Craig Fletcher and Councilwoman Tracy Carroll are firm in their beliefs that the city needs to get out of the electric utility business.
And while they work to get the memorandum of understanding signed by mid October, essentially paving the way for the sale, the issue of letting city voters have another say in the sale will also likely be decided soon.
Winger would like a roll call on the matter, but he’s just not sure if Sept. 18, the council’s next formal business meeting is the appropriate time. “It’s about 50-50,” he said.
Still, Winger’s already handed in paperwork on the matter with includes proposed language for the referendum he would like to see posed before voters.
Winger maintains that he is not against the sale as it stands but that his main concern is the city gets a fair price. The $179 million that is currently on the table has the city only coming away with a fraction of that after other contractual relations are met.
He also doesn’t want drastic cuts its services to make up for the potential loss of roughly $3.6 million a year in revenue that would have otherwise gone into the city’s general fund.
“I want Vero to stay Vero,” Winger said.
Winger also worries a legal challenge could be brewing if there is no other referendum on the sale. “I know there are people who plan to challenge it,” Winger said.
A new referendum, said Winger, “takes out all of the doubt: Do you approve of the sale or do you not?”
He said a number of people have told him they are concerned about what will become of the city without the utility.
“Who does the city belong to? Does it belong to the five city councilmen or does it belong to the city residents? To me, I’m elected to do what they want and I want to know what they want,” Winger said.
Winger has at least one council member willing to let the decision ride in the hands of the public: Jay Kramer.
“The utility belongs to the people and the people ought to be able to make a decision on it,” Kramer said.
Should a referendum go forward and fail it will be a first.
In the mid 1970s, voters agreed to a sale only to have it scuttled by the federal government because of concerns over monopolies.
By a 2-to-1 margin, voters in November approved the lease of the property to FP&L.
Nick Thomas, an island resident running for city council, doesn’t see a potential referendum as a do-over. He thinks that the November referendum which won by 999 votes when 3,149 city voters cast ballots was vague.
Thomas said the public should be informed of the potential budget shortfalls before they vote should it come down to it. Should the sale goes through as is, the city will walk away with between $35 million to $40 million and still have budget shortfalls if either taxes are not raised or more cuts made.
City Manager Jim O’Connor prepared a list of seven options for the city council to address last week, but after more than five hours of meeting on the budget and other business council members decided not to hear his presentation.
O’Connor’s options are:
•Use the net funds to supplement revenues and keep services at a constant level while at the same time incrementally increase taxes so not to dramatically impact taxpayers. He suggested a seven- to 10-year transition period.
•Reduce service levels and cut costs by consolidating services with the county or contracting out services with a continued reduction of staff. The money from the sale could be used to pay for contracted services.
•Use the money from the sale to offset the expected shortfalls for the next seven to 10 years while seeking new revenues.
•Use the proceeds to reduce debt which would allow other options for debt service funding.
•Establish a policy to set the appropriate reserve amount which would pre-determine new revenue needs while setting the amount of the sale proceeds that could be used for annual expenditures.
•Continue cost reduction measures by outsourcing or organizational changes.
•Use sale proceeds to pay down pension debt allowing optional use of funds.
Thomas, who on Friday filed paperwork to run for one of the three open city council seats, had said the loss of the power utility will hurt the city. Voters last time around, he said, didn’t know the consequences of the sale when they went to the polls.
“If you have a referendum that says, ‘Who’s in favor of a free ice cream party every Friday?’ chances are it’s going to pass,” said Thomas. “And if you have a referendum that says, ‘Would you like to raise your taxes?’ It is probably going to fail.”
Thomas is adamant the potential loss in revenue is not worth electric bills being about 30 percent cheaper each month. “Nobody cares where they get their electricity from,” he said. “You just want to be able to plug a cord into your wall and know that your phone is charging. That’s all people want is goods and services at a reasonable rate.”
That’s hogwash, said Glenn Heran, one of the most ardent sale supporters. He and others say the city should not be in the utility business and inflate rates so it can balance its books.
A referendum on the utility so to speak has taken place numerous times – an election for open spots on the city council which is now stacked heavily with city council members in favor of the sale – since the idea to sell the power plant was floated several years ago.
“The voters have already spoken,” Heran said.
It’s too late to get a referendum on the ballot in time for the November election, said elections Supervisor Leslie Swan.
Winger proposes a March vote which could potentially piggy back off of an Indian River Shores election. At this point, it is too early to tell if any Shores races will be contested.
If there is a full-blown election, the referendum cost will be about $5,035, said Swan. It would cost about $20,000 to hold an election that does not piggy-back off another race, she said.
