Jul. 13--By Todd Wright, Tallahassee Democrat, Fla. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News

It seems it's up to Mayor John Marks.

Of the five members of the Tallahassee City Commission, only Marks appears undecided whether the city should participate in a coal-fired power-plant project in North Florida.

Commissioners Allan Katz and Andrew Gillum say they are against it.

Commissioner Mark Mustian says he's for it, and, although Commissioner Debbie Lightsey did not return phone calls, she indicated her support in a recent opinion piece she wrote for the Tallahassee Democrat. Which leaves Marks the tie-breaker.

"It's a very important decision that affects the future of the entire community," the mayor said. "We need to discuss this openly, and I want to hear the opinions and ideas from the other commissioners before I make a decision."

The commission is expected to make that decision today. At issue is whether to spend as much as $6.4million to become part-owner of the plant.

And it could become a science lesson, too.

Coal by itself is nothing more than a dormant compilation of decomposed vegetation and dirt buried deep under the earth's surface. But add a flame - or the phrase "power plant" - and it becomes a combustible and volatile element capable of scorching everything in its path, including political careers.

Nearly 15 years ago, Tallahassee's city commission faced a similar decision and some still wear the scars from the heated debate that ensued.

In 1991, the commission voted 3-2 in favor of a coal plant but saw its decision overturned by a voter referendum. As a result of that referendum, the city is prohibited from owning a coal plant in or around Leon County without the approval of voters.

"Before the coal debate, people would have said I was a shoo-in," said former city commissioner Jack McLean, who voted in favor of a coal plant in 1991. He lost his bid for re-election a few months later, mainly because of his unpopular stance on the issue.

"If I knew it was going to get me booted out of office maybe I wouldn't have taken the lead as much as I did. (Election night) was a pretty disappointing evening," said McLean, a commissioner from 1984 to 1992.

While much of the debate over coal has remained the same throughout the past 15 years, many believe the situation the current commission finds itself in is somewhat different.

Proponents of the plant point to the city's growing power needs and the expensive cost of natural gas, the generating source of the majority of the city's electricity. In 1991, some city utility officials were predicting the gas market would become volatile and suggested the city build a coal plant to diversify its fuel mix, McLean said.

Health concerns have driven the argument against coal plants, particularly the effects of sulfur, nitrogen, carbon and mercury emissions that pollute the water and air. Emissions from coal plants have been linked to heart, lung and brain diseases and fine particles released in the air have been known to worsen the condition of victims of asthma and other respiratory problems.

Dorothy Inman-Johnson, who voted against the coal proposal in 1991, said the current commission won't face the same heat as its predecessor because the plant won't be in Leon County.

The utility group is currently looking at sites in Taylor, Hamilton and Madison counties as possible spots to build the plant.

"The commission may be able to downplay the environmental impacts to the loudest advocates in Leon County, mainly because they are talking about siting it 60 or 70 miles away," said Inman-Johnson, who was Inman-Cruz when she served on the commission.

"It may not resonate as loudly with the general public as it did when they thought the smoke stacks might be on top of the people right here," she said.

Regardless of the location of the plant, the current commission has had to contend with opposition from residents and activists in Leon, Jefferson, Wakulla and Taylor counties.

And some have been swayed by what they have heard.

City commissioners Gillum and Katz have said they intend to vote against the plant, mainly on the strength of comments made during a public hearing July6.

Katz, who lobbied for the company that wanted to build the city coal plant in 1991, sent a letter to his fellow commissioners stating that he was for the proposal before the public hearing, but he changed his mind after the testimony of dozens.

"As you all know, a dozen years ago I represented a client who was trying to build a coal plant for the city utility. I believed it was appropriate and I was an advocate. Now, I see things through a different lens as a commissioner and believe that this plant is the wrong thing to do," he stated in his letter.

Gillum said he had many questions that have yet to be answered about the environmental impact of the plant and the economic impact on city utility customers.

Utility officials have said the electricity rates might go up while the city finances construction of the plant, but they would likely go down when the plant opens in 2012. An analysis showed that if the city had built a coal plant in 1992, customers electricity bills would be reduced by about 10 percent.

Still, Gillum said it would take more "concrete" information to persuade him to vote for the city's participation in the plant.

"I don't think that a coal plant should automatically be put on the backs of our already struggling rate-payers to help future customers," he said. "I can't in good conscience put that on the backs of this community."

The lone commissioner who also had a vote on the 1991 coal plant, Lightsey, has publicly declared her support for the city exploring the coal plant idea. In 1991, she voted for the city's building a coal plant, along with McLean and Steve Meisburg.

Meisburg, a city commissioner from 1987 to 2003, said the current commission has the advantage of looking back on what happened in 1991 and should be well informed on the issues.

Unlike McLean, he retained his seat on the commission after 1992, but he admits he had a tougher time than expected because of his stance on coal.

He agreed with Lightsey's assessment that the city needs to diversify its fuel mix and should play a role in the planning of a plant if it is destined to come to North Florida, regardless of the city's participation.

He voted for coal because the economic impact on electricity was too great to pass up, and he felt the issue would likely come up again.

And it has.

"I think the critical point right now is are we convinced that this plant will be built whether we are apart of it or not?" he said. "Where do you divide the issues of economics or environment?

"If the City Commission is serious about economic development then they have to get serious about cheaper energy," Meisburg said. "It was a really difficult decision back then and it is the question (the city commission) has to answer now."

-----

To see more of the Tallahassee Democrat -- including its homes, jobs, cars and other classified listings -- or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.Tallahassee.com .

Copyright (c) 2005, Tallahassee Democrat, Fla.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.