No Bull, No Fluff, No Smudges
Your news source for
Flagler, Florida and Beyond

Palm Coast Joins Local Governments in Opposition to Utilities’ Proposed Cost-Shifting

| October 15, 2015

A utility company lobbyist scopes out a client's power. (Larry & Teddy Page)

A utility company lobbyist scopes out a client’s power. (Larry & Teddy Page)

Take any significant public road in the city. It’s usually paralleled by utility lines. When Palm Coast needs to make road improvements, the city asks Florida Power and Light to move its poles. FPL must pay the cost of some of that relocation. After all, FPL is using public right-of-ways for its utility lines in the first place, at no cost to FPL. City taxpayers are, in effect, subsidizing FPL. That’s how it’s been for a century, going back to a 1905 U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

Utility companies—power companies, cable companies, phone companies, gas companies, internet providers—want to change that arrangement. Last year, utility companies lobbied the Legislature and got bills introduced that would shift the cost of moving utility poles to local governments in certain circumstances. For example, FPL would be required to pay its own cost of relocation if the lines are cross a road, but not if it parallels it. It would also limit the state transportation department’s regulatory authority over those lines.

It wouldn’t matter of the transmission lines don’t even benefit the customers in the given locality: that local government would have to pay for moving the lines anyway.

One such bill passed the House, 110-5. The bill was never heard by the full Senate so it died. But local governments expect the measure to be revived this year. They are vehemently opposing it through the Florida League of Cities.

“Amen,” is how Palm Coast Mayor Jon Netts punctuated the beginning of the discussion on the matter earlier this week: Palm Coast is taking an affirmative position against the proposal as part of its legislative priorities, as Flagler County government did last week. Local governments think they have a shot at stopping the measure. But recent history shows otherwise.

Netts was at a Northeast Florida League of Cities’ regional meeting two weeks ago. Three of the local legislators were there. “Two of the three legislators seemed very receptive to the city’s point of view, one of them was—well, I need more data,” Netts said. (The third, Cindy Stevenson, wanted the additional information.) “But be that as it may, this is something that affects every municipality, every 411 of us in the state of Florida.”

Already heavily subsidized by taxpayers, utilities want to upend a century-long arrangement.

“So the ones that were supportive of us, are we talking about Travis Hutson and Paul Renner?” council member Bill McGuire asked.

“Yes,” Netts said.

Not quite.

Renner, Flagler County’s representative, voted with the majority earlier this year, against the cities. (He’d taken contributions from TECO Energy, Duke Energy, First Coast Energy and the Nextera Energy political action committee during his run for office).

“It’s just amazing to me,” is how City Manager Jim Landon presented the utilities’ proposal. “They have lobbied state legislators and have gotten quite a bit of support with the idea that no, the taxpayers are going to pay for that, whether you use that part of the utility or not. And we’re talking, for a community like us, we’re talking major dollars. From a fairness standpoint, they use our right-of-ways free.” (A legislative analysis of the proposal earlier this year cited a City of Cape Coral project showing the cost of moving two utilities as part of three road projects totaling over $4 million.)

“It’s a mandated taxpayer subsidy of the utility companies,” Palm Coast Attorney Bill Reischmann said.

“And the only ones who really, truly benefit are the bondholders, the shareholders in the utility,” Netts said, “because they’re not going to lower their utility rates because they’re now relieved of these costs. It’s just going to be more profits to the shareholders and more expense to the local taxpayers.”

If the city doesn’t pay the utility (assuming such a law passes), the utility could refuse to move their poles.

What makes it “more offensive sometimes,” Landon said, is when local governments ask to use easements that utilities own. They don’t provide those without requiring governments to follow their rules—and to pay.

The Florida League of Cities is hoping to gain support from all cities to build up enough collective muscle to counter the lobbying power of utilities.

“If this bill passes, then I want a companion bill that the city can now charge rent for the use of our right of way,” Netts said.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

8 Responses for “Palm Coast Joins Local Governments in Opposition to Utilities’ Proposed Cost-Shifting”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Whose side is Paul Renner on? Doesn’t he work for us? The utilities have enough money to pay fancy lobbyists fancy money,they can certainly pay to move those utility lines!

  2. YankeeExPat says:

    “Renner, Flagler County’s representative, voted with the majority earlier this year, against the cities. (He’d taken contributions from TECO Energy, Duke Energy, First Coast Energy and the Nextera Energy political action committee during his run for office).”

  3. confidential says:

    I voted for Adam Morley last election and will vote for Morley again next time around!! All you voted for Renner then now you have to foot the bill if this additional subsidy to the 1% passes! Remember this one.

  4. Sherry says:

    It’s clear to me whose side Renner is on. . . and it is the lobbyists who “bribe” him, NOT the tax payers who “elected” him!!!!!

    Again, it’s all about maximizing profits and lining pockets. . . NOT about providing high quality VITAL services at a reasonable price to the tax paying citizens!!!

  5. Karnack says:

    ” Very Interesting ” here we have two Monopolies fighting for themselves. A Natural Monopoly the utility company and a Government Monopoly the City of Palm Coast.
    One thing for certain is, which ever way it turns out, the additional cost will be paid for with new taxes or higher utility bills. Which will make each one of them happy and content.

  6. Freddy says:

    More reason to vote for a non politician that do not take contributions from special interest.

  7. Dave says:

    Well if the city planners were smart enough they should have planned for future expansion to include poles and the right-of-way for those poles for future growth. . Pay up for being under prepared.

  8. Anonymous says:

    This proposal is right in line with Tallahassee’s decades long policy of transferring cost to local governments. This time they wish to have local taxpayers pick up costs for utilities. Pretty soon every corporation in this state will be getting government subsidies… Those damn welfare queens…

Leave a Reply

FlaglerLive's forum, as noted in our comment policy, is for debate and conversation that adds light and perspective to articles. Please be courteous, don't attack fellow-commenters or make personal attacks against individuals in stories, and try to stick to the subject. All comments are moderated.

Read FlaglerLive's Comment Policy | Subscribe to the Comment Feed rss flaglerlive comment feed rss

More stories on FlaglerLive

FlaglerLive Email Alerts

Enter your email address to get alerts.


support flaglerlive palm coast flagler county news pierre tristam
news service of florida

Recent Comments

FlaglerLive is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization | P.O. Box 254263, Palm Coast, FL 32135 | Contact the Editor by email | (386) 586-0257 | Sitemap | Log in