LETTER: Little guys had no input in FPL settlement

It's almost too easy to pick on Florida Power & Light.

The recent settlement in a case where Florida's largest utility was asking for a historic rate hike should be — actually was — good news.

But the way it was settled is, can we say unsettling?

Maybe we should focus our disappointment on the Public Service Commission. They postponed a hearing on the rate hike to allow FPL to work out a compromise with the state's largest companies.

Why did they do that if not at FPL's bidding?

Media outlets throughout the state are accusing FPL and the PSC of postponing the hearing because it would delve deeply into the utility's business practices and require opening up the books (for lack of a better term).

But something had to be done to short circuit FPL's request for a $10 billion rate hike over the next four years. That was just too much to stomach — even though FPL continues to set an example for its performance, especially when faced with hurricane recovery.

Here's our beef. First, there was no one speaking up for us, the little guy. FPL met with companies that had the most to lose if their electric bills went up. They met behind closed doors and hammered out a compromise that will save rate payers about $3 billion.

Second, the deal still guarantees shareholders a profit of almost 11%, according to a Tampa Bay Times story.

This has been our problem all along with FPL and its almost annual rate hike requests. Who says its shareholders have to enjoy a certain return on their investment?

Here is a list we saw of what companies had a seat at the table: The Florida Industrial Power Users Group; the Florida Retail Federation; the Florida Energy for Innovation Association; Americans for Affordable Clean Energy; Electrify America, LLC; the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy; Walmart Inc.; EVgo Services, LLC; Circle K Stores, Inc.; RaceTrac Inc.; Wawa, Inc.; and Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

The compromise — which gives some of those businesses breaks on their bills during peak hours and other considerations — isn't a done deal.

The PSC will meet this fall to decide if it will sign off on the agreement.

There is plenty of opposition still. The Office of Public Counsel, which by law is supposed to represent utility customers, according to the Times, is not agreeing with the deal and neither are three groups — Florida Rising, the League of United Latin American Citizens of Florida and the Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida — who want a better deal for the little guys (that's us).

We appreciate having a utility like FPL in Florida. Despite its prices and fixation on keeping shareholders happy, it does a good job and its attention to solar energy is encouraging.

It's only fair, however, that the general public have more representation in this price-setting scenario. Making good with large corporations is fine, but the families struggling with inflation, high insurance costs and some still recovering from hurricanes need to be considered, too.

The argument that a few dollars a month difference is no big deal for great service falls flat if you walk in their shoes or those of the state's older population that may be living on Social Security or a tight fixed income.

The PSC needs to consider all this before it thinks about rubber stamping the deal.