10/19/1977 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 MR. BLOUNT STATED THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW AND NOTED THAT UNDER THE PRESENT METHOD, IF THEY WERE TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT IN REGARD TO A FRANCHISE FEE, THERE WOULD BE NO IMMEDIATE IMPACT ON THE 3.7% CHARGE. HE POINTED OUT THAT IF THE METHOD SHOULD CHANGE, THAT WOULD HAVE SOME SIGINIFICANCE FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CUSTOMERS. COMMISSSIONER SIEBERT ASKED THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE OF THE WORDING OF THE RESOLUTION FROM "LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY" TO "COUNTY." MR. BLOUNT STATED THAT THERE IS SOME MINOR DISTINCTION IN THE FRANCHISE FEE FORMULA FOR COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES. COMMISSSIONER DEESON ASKED IN'WHAT OTHER COUNTIES THEY HAVE FRANCHISES, AND MR. BLOUNT REPLIED DADE, BROWARD, SARASOTA AND BREVARD COUNTIES. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER STATED HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PUBLIC HEARING POSTPONED TO SEE WHAT THE PSC IS GOING TO DECIDE.- HE POINTED OUT THAT ONLY FOUR COUNTIES ARE DOING THIS NOW, AND STATED THAT HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT WILL BE WHEN NUMEROUS COUNTIES FALLOW SUIT. ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS A BUILT-IN SAFE- GUARD BECAUSE FP&L HAS TAKEN THE POSITION THAT -A COUNTY HAS TO HAVE A SPECIAL ACT OR THEY CAN'T IMPOSE THIS FEE. WE WERE FORTUNATE TO HAVE. HAD SUCH AN ACT, AND THE ATTORNEY FELT THIS ACT MAKES IT SELF-LIMITING. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO CON- SIDER RESCINDING THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION IF THE PSC MAKES A CHANGE, AND FURTHER NOTED THAT IT COULD TAKE THE PSC A VERY LONG TIME TO MAKE A DECISION. COMMISSIONER DEESON AGREED WITH COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, NOT- ING THAT THE TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING A FEE AT THE PRESENT TIME AND GET- TING NOTHING IN RETURN. COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED HOW LONG HAS FP&L BEEN CHARGING THE FRANCHISE FEE IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. MR. BLOUNT ANSWERED THAT FRANCHISE FEES HAVE BEEN TREATED AS AN OPERATING EXPENSE OVER THE PAST 30 OR 40 YEARS, BUT IT HASN'T BEEN SHOWN ON THE BILL UNTIL LAST YEAR. 37