Today, in the Sarasota Herald Tribune, there was an Op-Ed that I would like to respond to.
FPL began informal discussions about the franchise renewal last year, and we continue to negotiate in good faith and accommodate requests by the city. Contrary to rumors, the proposed franchise agreement does not prohibit customer-installed renewable generation, distributed generation, or providers with new technologies from serving the city, nor does it prevent the city from building its own renewable or other generation facility to serve its own facilities. In fact, we have met several times with local officials to discuss renewable energy opportunities. However, the city has not yet determined the next steps that it would like to take. –By RAE DOWLING Guest Columnist Published: Saturday, May 29, 2010 at 1:00 a.m.
While I feel that all sides should be heard from in the negotiations of the City of Sarasota FPL Franchise agreement, I also feel that the facts need to be quoted in full disclosure.
Rae Dowling and I have been a part of the meetings that she mentioned in her op-ed column today. Rae is a representative of FPL and I was there on behalf of the City of Sarasota. These meetings stemmed from the town hall that was hosted by the Public Service Commission last June, 2009 in Sarasota to discuss the rate request of FPL. It was at that hearing that Rep. Fitzgerald (D- Sarasota), Rep. Doug Holder (R- Sarasota) and Mayor Kirschner of Sarasota introduced the idea of a renewable energy pilot program in Sarasota with FPL.
Soon after the town hall, we entered into our first meeting with FPL to discuss the possibilities of renewable energy projects throughout, not only the city, but also the county. Representatives listed above, plus representatives from Sarasota County and the Rep. Buchanan’s office we there in the begining. We met twice with FPL between June 2009 and January 2010 to present to them our list of projects that we wanted to see happen in Sarasota -both city and county wide. At our last meeting in January, we gave FPL a two page list of projects that we would like to see happen. We were told that these projects were “doable” by the FPL Reps. FPL left the meeting with that list and was to get back to us on the next step. It wasn’t until later that evening of January’s meeting that we found out that the franchise agreement was up for renewal. If it is true that FPL “began informal discussions about the franchise renewal last year,” it was at the bitter end of last year. But to my knowledge, it wasn’t until January, the day of our last meeting, that the city was made aware of this renewal.
The reason that I feel it is important to clarify this information is to keep the spin from happening. It is unfair to imply that the city has been “discussing” – informally or otherwise the franchise agreement since last year, giving the impression that these negotiations have been going on for a long time.
It is also unfair to imply that the city is the one who has dropped the ball on the renewable energy projects. FPL was to get back to us on how to proceed. They were not waiting for us. We have been waiting for them.
The comments Rae made about renewables and the city are very misleading. We are not concerned about minor concessions that FPL would make for the city properties. we want concessions that assist all property owners and citizens. i would love to see this 2 page list. Rex James, Solar Direct