12/17/2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

municipal electric systems in the State of Florida; the referendum process at a City election; and the state legislature to resolve the electric issue. Mediator Alvarez indicated prior to breaking for lunch, he had a request from Dr. Stephen Faherty to speak. Dr. Faherty provided the mediator with a brief summary of electric issues stemming back to the summer 2007, when he got involved and highlighted the electric rates and FPL rebates. The Mediator called a recess for lunch at 12:35 p.m. and reconvened at 1:37 p m., with all parties present. Attorney Reingold referred to the Town's proposal and the dialog between the City and the Town. He wanted to make everyone aware that the County was in favor of the proposal and the County also wanted to be included in the Town's proposal. Mediator Alvarez asked for the City's thoughts on the Town's proposal. Attorney Wright said the City's mediation team reviewed the proposal and was not in support of it, but would take it to the Vero Beach City Council Meeting on December 17, 2014. He referred to paragraphs one (1) and two (2) of the proposal: Settlement Terms For purposes of settlement, and in return for the Town continuing to abate its lawsuit against the City, the City would: 1. Expressly acknowledge that the Town may provide electric service to its citizens upon expiration of the Franchise Agreement either through direct provision of such electric service or by contracting on behalf of its residents with another electric utility provider in accordance with the Special Act creating the Town. 2. Honor the Town's right to conduct an evaluation, which may include but not be limited to a Request for Proposal ("RFP") process, of the most appropriate means for the Town to provide electric service to its citizens upon expiration of the Franchise Agreement In the event the Town issues an RFP, the Town would recognize the City's right to submit a proposal in response to the RFP as a potential provider of electricity to the Town and its residents after the Franchise Agreement expires Attorney Wright pointed out in Paragraph 1 of the settlement terms: (1) the City was asked to expressly acknowledge that the Town could serve its citizens when the franchise agreement expires. He felt the wording relayed that the City was giving up their position. Mediator Alvarez questioned if Paragraph 1 was removed, what about Paragraph 2. Attorney Wright stated it was the consensus of the City's mediation team that Paragraph 2 was closely related to Paragraph 1. Town of Indian River Shores - City of Vero Beach - Indian River County Electric Utilities Mediation December 17, 2014 Page 8