VERO BEACH — Vero Beach Councilman Brian Heady said Tuesday he thinks voters should be able to weigh in on the sale of the electric utility in stages as the deal progresses.
The Vero Beach City Council voted 4-1 Tuesday to give final approval to a referendum to go on the November municipal election ballot asking city residents to empower the City Council to lease the land upon which the Vero Beach Electric power plant sits, for the purpose of selling the utility.
The city charter prohibits any city council from selling the land, but a “yes” vote on the lease question would allow the city to at least go forward with negotiations with Florida Power and Light on the sale of the utility assets.
FPL officials have stated that FPL will need to keep the power plant operational for an indefinite period of time — at least five years — before decommissioning it.
Vero Transmission and Distribution Director Randall McCamish also verified that FPL would need to build major transmission upgrades and obtain approval from regulators charged with ensuring the stability of the power grid to take the power plant offline.
Critics have charged that the November referendum does not provide a chance to vote on a particular deal to sell the utility, so it leaves residents at a loss unless they are already dead-set for or against a sale.
If the referendum were to fail, negotiations with FPL would essentially be dead. If the referendum were to pass, city officials and their attorneys could continue working on a deal knowing that the charter requirements have been met.
Heady proposed on Tuesday that a follow-up referendum be placed on the ballot sometime next year, maybe even in January, once more details of the proposed deal are known.
The language must be submitted to Supervisor of Elections Leslie Swan nearly 60 days in advance to arrange for the printing of the ballots.
“I think it would address the citizens’ concerns over not having any of the particulars of the deal to decide on, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with putting another question to the voters later on,” Heady said after the council meeting.
Having a second ballot question, Heady said, could make voters who want the city to continue talks, but who are not sold yet on the final sale, more comfortable voting to give permission to lease the land.
Mayor Jay Kramer voted against placing the lease referendum on the November ballot. Kramer had voted against the ballot measure on the first reading as well, citing that the question is premature without an actual deal on the table.
The idea of a second referendum did not take hold at Tuesday’s meeting, but Heady said he would bring it up at a later date.
Councilwoman Tracy Carroll, the “point person” on the sale to FPL, has reported that FPL said they might be ready to put forth a purchase price to work from as early as October.
Heady also proposed, for a second time, that the city use its public access Channel 13 to host a forum to present both sides of the sale and referendum issue, but that idea was again nixed by the rest of the City Council and by Acting City Attorney Wayne Coment.
Not only is there a policy prohibiting Channel 13 to be used for political or election purposes, but cities are generally not permitted to expend public resources to educate or advocate about the merits of a ballot initiative.
The referendum will be the topic of discussion at this month’s luncheon of the Indian River Taxpayers Association on Sept. 14 at Joey’s Bistro in the Three Avenues plaza.
Utility activist and CPA Glenn Heran will speak about the ballot initiative, from the perspective of someone who supports the sale of the electric utility to FPL.
