Utility Board OKs 2 contracts to bring power to off-grid community

Florida Keys News - Key West Citizen

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Utility Board OKs 2 contracts to bring power to off-grid community

BY TIMOTHY O'HARA Citizen Staff
tohara@keysnews.com

The Keys Energy Services board unanimously approved the first two contracts for work needed to bring commercial power to No Name Key.

The homes there could be on the grid by the end of August, officials said.

The Utility Board voted Wednesday on a $69,000 contract for the construction of an overhead electrical system and a $125,000 contract for a bridge conduit system.

Utility Board attorney Nathan Eden warned board members that the Monroe County Commission likely will file for an injunction to halt the work, or at least delay it until a judge or the state Public Service Commission rules on whether running power to No Name Key violates the county's comprehensive land use plan. The plan states that public utilities are "discouraged" there.

Eden has been in contact with Chief Assistant County Attorney Bob Shillinger, who plans to ask county commissioners Wednesday if they want to file for an injunction or possibly invite Keys Energy Service to engage in official conflict resolution proceedings with the county, Eden said.

The proceedings would "compel us toward mediation," Eden said.

Eden told the Utility Board it had no choice but to approve the two contracts, because earlier this year it approved a contract with the No Name Keys Property Owners Association.

The utility would face a breach-of-contract lawsuit if the board did not approve the contracts.

Eden said he expects the county to file the injunction or a lawsuit in "short order."

The county could halt the project by refusing to sign off on easements on two separate pieces of county-owned property needed to bring commercial power there. The easements may be on conservation lands, and county officials aren't sure if they could approve the easements even if they wanted to, officials said.

No Name Key resident Alicia Putney was among a handful of commercial-power opponents to speak Wednesday night against moving forward with the contracts.

She argued that the Utility Board should wait until the 3rd District Court of Appeal rules on who has jurisdiction in the matter, after circuit Judge David Audlin ruled in February that the Public Service Commission does.

The County Commission had asked Audlin to rule on whether bringing power to No Name violated the comp plan.

Before the Public Service Commission could make a ruling on the matter, the Utility Board agreed to bring power to No Name Key.

The utility has since asked the PSC to dismiss the case, which it will consider doing at its June 5 meeting.

The County Commission has voted to be an intervening party in the case.

tohara@keysnews.com

Share your thoughts and opinions related to this posting. Login or register to post comments. More Info

Sad...

Submitted on Fri, 05/11/2012 - 8:38pm by keystroublemkr

...that the previous writer knows so very little about the history of this issue. Must be a politician or a wannabe, as most think repeating the same lies over and over and over again makes them true. It would be lovely to have a list [that includes date of NN purchase]of the No Name Key Property Owner's Assoc.

Login or register to post comments
Flag as offensive

Of Course They Will Try And Stop It To Avoid Disgrace

Submitted on Thu, 05/10/2012 - 9:08am by Pops

BOCC Member's Murphy, Nuggent and Wiggnington will demand that the County spend (waste) its (our) time and money on trying to stop power coming to No Name because they have such a close, long time, relationship to their dear friend Alicia Putney. But you have to ask why? Why would a supposedly democratic entity not listen to the majority, especially when the majority has wanted and sought power on that island for decades. What is it that this Ms. Putney has 'on' the likes of Murphy and Nuggent that would see them side with her time and again and thus against the majority on No Name, many being there decades longer than their 'friend'? They will surely try to protect Ms. Putney's personal 'pet' law, one SHE so proudly wrote while on the Planning Commission and while also directly attached to a lawsuit fighting power and without regards for a clear conflict of interest as a resident, Planning Commissioner and being directly linked/interested party some ten years ago and one that her friends, including Murphy and Nuggent quickly supported without public comment and without notification to the residents of No Name that the County was planning to steal these poor people's rights, right under their noses. Shame on the BOCC for the continued sham, for letting personal relationships take priority over majority rule and for stealing residents rights for a decade. The gig is up. Delay all they want but the end is near and the outcome will surely show that what Ms. Putney did to her community, and the BOCC did (and continues) in following her direction and demands SO many times over SO many years, was a dirty, rotten, disgrace.