Biggest Power Bill Ever

Florida consumers may be on the hook for the largest power bill ever -- $30 billion and rising. That the cost of new nuclear power plants proposed by Progress Energy and Florida Power & Light. TECO customers are also part of the deal because TECO is in on the deal with Progress .

Asjylyn Loder wrote about the issue in the St Pete Times and pointed out the similarities between this deal and the ill fated Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) debacle of the 1990's. WPPSS predicted a need for five nukes and used financing similar to what Florida is considering. The result was the largest bond default in history, four rusting partly built plants, and one that operates.

Will demand increase? Florida is no longer the hot place for migration in the US. Jobs are declining and the cost of living in increasing. More people are moving to North Carolina. Coupling those facts with a declining economy means lower energy use.

Second, energy efficiency is getting cheaper and better. In tight times like these, there's more incentive than ever for new energy efficiency technology. The price of solar power keeps declining. All it takes is one technological breakthrough and the demand for energy would go negative.

That means there's a huge risk in putting up $30 billion plus for these plants. Perhaps that's why the utilities can't find investors and persuaded the legislature to make you, the ratepayer, put up the money.

That's right, ratepayers have to pay for these plants in advance, regardless of whether they are needed or ever produce electricity. And, may I repeat, the investor owned utilities can't find investors to back the deal.

This leads to what may be the largest problem: gold plated power plants. If the utility is taking no risk, there is no incentive to build the plants efficiently. In fact, the utility has the opposite incentive. If more public money is invested, the utility will be able to tack on more overhead costs to our bills. WPPSS "cost-plus" contracts led to enormous cost overruns.

The Public Service Commission is considering the deal. Let them know what you think:

Florida Public Service Commission
1-850-413-6100

S 2860 Gets Watered Down

This year's insurance bill, S 2860, has been replaced by a committee substitute that is likely going to the Senate floor for debate. There is a new staff analysis on the Senate site above.

FCAN still supports the bill, and I believe many members of the statewide Consumer Insurance Coalition support the bill, although there are various complaints. FCAN supports the substitute because it still has prior rate review and no arbitration panels. I believe those two measures help our Insurance Commissioner stand up to the insurance companies and keep rates low.

These is continuing debate over the Insurance Capital Build-Up Incentive which subsidizes new insurance companies with $250 million from Citizens, but it could be argued that this will ultimately lower rates by bringing new companies into the state.

I'll do my best to summarize the changes this amendment makes to the original S 2860:

As noted, the $250 million Captial Build-up.

Limited anti-trust enforcement - for some reason, insurers seem pretty nervous about being subject to anti-trust laws. I wonder why? So this got watered down a bit.

Limits the fines OIR can levy against insurers. I hope there are still enough teeth for the fines to work.

Expedites the appeals process for insurers if they disagree with OIR's rulings on rates.

Sets the bar for reinsurance costs at the expected 250 year event, which is quite a bit higher than the usual 100 year event. We have enough trouble predicting for 100 years, and it seems to me that 250 years is really a work of fiction and would allow much higher rates. Nevertheless, reinsurance purchased on the open market is subject to real competition and may be presumed to have fair prices. The effect of this would be mainly on companies buying reinsurance from their parent companies as a method of getting profits out of state.

Another provision prohibits the Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR) from limiting the cost of reinsurance in any way. Same problem as above.

Required actuarially sound rates in Citizens after another one year rate freeze. Can't see a reason why not.

The amendment deleted the provision requiring policies to be renewed for three years if they meet certain requirements of the Florida Building Code. Darn. That would have been a good guarantee for people that invest in retrofitting their homes that their insurance rates would stay low.

And in the final untimate watering down, the amendment deletes the provision making it a felony to corruptly influence or obstruct lawful insurance regulation. That was kind of a personal favorite. I hope someone makes this an amendment on the floor.

Despite these changes, the bill still has some good things in there. For instance, it still seems to prohibit Citizens from selling wind only policies, which would make Citizens more competitive.

I continue to urge FCAN members to call Rep Ron Reagan, 850-488-6341, Chair of the Jobs and Entrepreneurship Council and Gov Charlie Crist 850-488-4441.

S 2860 The Insurance Bill -- what's in it?

The Florida Senate is poised to pass S 2860, this year's insurance bill. The bill is moving to the Senate Floor, and it may pass. On the House side, there is no companion will. The House has other ideas altogether. So, as is usual in Florida, this will come down to a last minute "horse trading" session right at the end of this year's legislative meeting.

Here's what's in the bill and FCAN's interpretation. There is also an analysis on the Senate's web site at the link above.

First and foremost, the bill extends "file and use" for setting insurance rates and the bill continues to ban arbitration panels, which weaken and overturn the Insurance Commissioner. These two items are the center of FCAN's insurance program because we believe they are crucial to holding down insurance costs.

Also in S 2860:

Increased penalties for violations of the insurance code. The bill increases the maximum fines up to $100,000 per willful violation from the current $20,000 and eliminates the aggregate cap. This arose because in 2007 insurers didn't seem bothered by fines of $20,000 and seemed to ignore them completely. The bill also allows suspension of the insurer's certificate of authority, meaning they can't sell insurance. These new penalties give the Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR) some real teeth. FCAN supports the change.

Insurance Capital Build Up -- this part of the bill is an additional subsidy to encourage companies to take policies out of Citizens. FCAN is neutral on this provision. FCAN generally opposes subsidies to private companies, but it is possible that this could encourage smaller start up companies that will end up saving money for all Floridians.

Applying Florida Anti-trust law to insurance -- FCAN believes this will help lift the cloud of doubt surrounding insurance practices. As long as consumers know insurance companies are exempt from these laws, consumer will believe insurers take advantage, whether they do or not. FCAN supports this change.


OIR approval of non-renewal plans -- requires OIR approval for non-renewal of 10,000 policies or more 90 days prior. The section allows OIR to make sure the impact on consumers is the minimum possible. FCAN supports this change.

Changes to rate filings -- S 2860 strengthens laws on insurance rate filings and requires the use of models approved by the Florida Commission of Hurricane Loss Projections. FCAN hopes this effectively opens up the "Black Box" models that have led to huge rate increases in recent years.

Citizens Rate Freeze - the bill extends the freeze on Citizens Property Insurance for another year. This is controversial because while it is popular with everyone in Citizens, it could lead to rates which are not actuarially sound and higher assessments on policyholders not in Citizens, creating a subsidy. This might lead to more risky coastal development, and, in turn, higher costs in the future and more environmental damage. But the bill also prohibits Citizens from selling wind only policies, which means a broader base for policies and a sounder financial base.

Guaranteed renewability of mitigated homes - this provision means that homes that meet the Florida Building Code for wind borne debris protection will be renewed. If you spend your hard earned bucks making your home safe, there is at least this reward. Also, the homes safety must be disclosed at sale.

So, there's a lot in this bill. Everyone can find things to like and dislike. On balance, FCAN supports the bill. To us, the most important element remains continuing "prior rate review" and ending arbitration panels. Those items are in this bill and we consider them essential to keeping rates down.

There are the usual people saying that insurers will leave, but they never have and State Farm has actually increased their "book of business" in recent years. Florida is the fourth largest market in the US. Besides, there is nothing that bad here, but it does allow us to make sure we are being charged appropriate rates. Insurers should be grateful that the legislature is restoring credibility to the insurance market.

The question of how to manage Citizens is difficult, but FCAN maintains that Citizens should be run like a business and must compete to offer the best deal for consumers. Since Citizens is stuck with the riskiest customers, that isn't easy. The current deal would require Citizens to issue assessments to make up for a shortfall in the event of a big storm. An alternative would be for Citizens to buy reinsurance, spreading the risk to the international market but probably raising rates.

Ultimately, FCAN would like to see rate regulation by the state result in fair rates for consumers and reasonable profits for insurers. This is a difficult balance to achieve in a complicated market. The opposing view is that if the market were deregulated, balance would occur naturally. We disagree because insurance is a necessary product, meaning people must pay the price requested. Secondly, people usually cannot understand the insurance product and cannot strike a bargain that is in their best interest.

The Smog is back

Actually, it never really went away. Tampa Bay residents remember bad smog days a few years ago and the vehicle emissions tests we all had to do yearly. That went away when Tampa Electric cleaned up Big Bend power plant, eliminating 90% of the pollution from the plant. Thanks, TECO.

But Jeb Bush stopped the emissions tests and Progress Energy has yet to clean up its plants. Now, the smog is back. Progress is fixing up its Weedon Island plant and changing it to clean burning natural gas, so that will be an improvement, but Progress is slow moving on the others.

Progress has a plan to clean up its Anclote Plant and its incredibly dirty Crystal River power plants. Progress says it will spend $736 million over the next ten years to clean up Crystal River, but it is also in court along with other utilities fighting clean air rules.

According to the Environmental Integrity Project, Crystal River ranks #7 in the US in total pollution released, a staggering total of 16,026,757 pounds in 2006.

While they're fighting clean air rules in court, its hard to believe anything Progress says. And they want the public to pay in advance for their new nuke plant which they promise will be clean? Why not invest more in solar power or renewable energy?

Let the Florida Public Service Commission know how you feel.

Nuke Plant Consumer Rip-off

It is reported today that the costs of the planned Progress Energy Levy County nuke plant will triple. Guess who is going to pay? You! Me! Everyone! Thanks, Legislature. Great job.

Think you get off the hook because you're a Tampa Electric customer? Sorry, they want to buy into the deal too. Why not? Spend all you want building the plant, bill the customers, and add on profits for the stockholders. What's not to like?

Progress gets to bill the ratepayers IN ADVANCE for the construction of this plant, now estimated to cost $17 billion and climbing. Your power bill could start going up soon -- the Florida Public Service Commission is holding a hearing beginning May 21. Maybe you should let them know what you think.

There are two huge problems.

1. We might not need this power. Florida may be losing population and energy efficiency is improving. Solar costs are dropping. When compared to very expensive nuclear power, alternatives look much better. Nuke is old fashioned technology -- boiling water to make steam. We can do better.
2. When the ratepayers are automatically on the hook to pay the costs, whatever they are, the utility has every incentive to build a gold plated plant. This appears to be a strategy Progress Energy has already adopted, if the increased cost is any indication.

Just imagine if we invested all those dollars into solar energy instead.

And of course there is the problem of nuclear waste disposal. The government still hasn't come up with a way to dispose of the waste, meaning we're creating huge waste dumps around the Crystal River complex.

Finally, Progress energy is running one of the dirtiest power plants in America at Crystal River now. Why should we trust them to run a nuke plant?

FCAN on HOPE Task Force

FCAN Executive Director Bill Newton was appointed to Gov. Charlie Crist's HOPE Task Force. HOPE stands for Home Ownership Promotes the Economy, and although the name doesn't really let you know, it means home foreclosure.

We all know foreclosures are a huge problem in the state. Part of it is speculators, part of it is people just getting in over their heads, but a big part of the problem is banks and lending institutions pushing people into homes they couldn't afford.

We know that much of the problem arose from banks securitizing loans and reselling them. That left investors holding the risk and banks with little interest in making sure they only made good loans. It also makes it hard for homeowners to renegotiate their mortgages because the bank doesn't own the loan anymore. Its messy.

Now, what should we do? FCAN will be part of the Governor's panel looking into the problem and seeking solutions. Money is short. That's going to make it difficult to find any public funds to put into the problem if that is a useful solution.

But something must be done. Not only were many of these loans set up under questionable circumstances, but the economic damage now is more that anyone wants. Every foreclosed home brings down property values. Those former homeowners aren't shopping at Home Depot or anywhere else. There are ripples of damage spreading out from the housing crisis in every direction.

Post your comments with your ideas.

NOAA - Global Warming may decrease hurricanes

While Allstate and other insurance companies are claiming that global warming is causing them to increase rates, NOAA is saying that global warming may actually decrease the incidence of hurricanes.

The NOAA article is here. It is a pdf. The author, Chunzai Wang, a physical oceanographer and climate scientist, responds to some criticism here. Environmental News Network has an overview of the article and some pointers to other resources.

What's important is that scientists just don't really know what effect, if any, global warming is going to have on hurricanes. But insurance companies are experts at capitalizing on fear. Fear of what might happen motivates people to buy insurance. By calculating and quantizing that fear, insurance companies maximize the rates they charge.

FCAN urges our Insurance Commissioner and the Florida Senate to keep looking into what insurance companies and their "modelers" are doing. Hearings today should help. Every time we get them under oath we learn more.

Call your Florida Senators today and urge them to hold insuance companies accountable.

The McKinsey Report

What in the heck is the McKinsey Report? Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty is trying to force Allstate to produce the McKinsey Report at their rate hearing in Tallahassee. Other regulators and lawyers have tried to force the release of the McKinsey Report. So, what's in it?

Allstate reportedly hired the McKinsey consultants to tell them how to increase profits and they've been covering up the report ever since. According to reports on the internet, McKinsey told Allstate that stalling on claims and forcing customers to their knees with unbearable financial burdens should be considered having customers, "in good hands." Alternatively, anyone that chose to fight Allstate should get the "boxing gloves" or a taste of Allstate's aggressive attorneys.

Needless to say, Allstate feels this won't look good in the press. According to internet reports, Allstate has increased profits by $700 million as a result of employing the McKinsey recommendations. That's just plain evil.

FCAN urges Commissioner McCarty to stick to his guns with Allstate and take them to the mat. They've apparently employed unscrupulous means to increase profits, and McCarty's job is to protect consumers. More power to him.

Insurers Fleece the Public

Consumer Federation of America (CFA) released a report today on how insurance companies are overcharging consumers. There are news articles, a press release, and a 37 page report. I am proud to say that FCAN is an affiliate of the Consumer Federation.


Bob Hunter, Consumer Fed's Director of Insurance and a former insurance regulator, says that the data show insurance companies overcharge consumers to inflate profits. Insurers have been making lower profits from their bond investments, and have made that up by charging consumers more. However, Hunter points out insurers profits keep going up no matter what. He expects another record profit year in 2007.

FCAN is pushing the Florida Legislature to open up the "black box" models the insurers use to gouge consumers. CFA supports that in their report. Consumer Fed also suggests ending insurers' anti-trust exemption, which FCAN has pushed for.

A novel suggestion by CFA is that Florida's Citizens Property Insurance should sell auto as well as homeowners. Hunter's reasoning is that this will increase "profits" to taxpayers and balance our book of business in a manner similar to the insurance companies. I have to agree.

Above all, Florida must maintain its new system of prior rate review and no arbitration panels. Those measures, approved last year, have strengthened our insurance commissioner and are leading to lower rates, finally.

Rep Don Brown's Duck Hunt

Representative Don Brown, Chair of the Florida House of Representative Insurance Committee, is holding a Duck Hunt. After I stopped laughing, I got angry. This is how insurance companies deal with our elected officials. By paying $5,000 to be a "Platinum Sponsor" of Don's Duck Hunt, insurance companies and others get to spend quality time with the Chair of the Insurance Committee.

If FCAN wants to talk to Rep. Brown, we make an appointment at his office and we get our five or ten minutes, if we're lucky. Your insurance company, using part of your premium dollars, buys time with Rep. Brown or another politician, makes a contribution to his campaign, and to his "leadership committee" -- what we used to call a slush fund.

Events like this Duck Hunt, ostensibly to raise money for Rep. Brown's favorite charity, show why citizens are at a great disadvantage to corporate interests. What really burns me is that Rep. Brown wouldn't be in a position to help this charity if it weren't for the citizens. Did he campaign on that? Did he say, "Vote for me, and I'll raise money from insurance companies for causes I like." No, he didn't.

Some companies actually resent being extorted for money this way. Some companies would just prefer a level playing field. But they know if they don't curry favor with the Don Browns of the world they'll be at a disadvantage. So they pony up $5,000 or whatever it takes.

Rep. Brown will be standing in the way of reforms that we propose in the House. I'm sure the insurance companies can count on him. He is an insurance agent by trade. But at this point, he has to undo what we did last year, and I don't think he can do that.

This fall, his constituents will have a chance to vote on Rep. Brown's choice of charities. We can only hope they prefer to make their own choices rather than read about Rep Brown selling them out.

Sueing the Insurance Companies

Governor Charlie Crist announced he has recruited some lawyers to research a class action suit against Florida property insurance companies. What might such a lawsuit look like? What might be some of the issues in the case?

There are only tantalizing bits in the Governor's statements. He hints about insurers not passing along savings and about collusion between players in the marketplace. So, what's that all about. I can only guess, but I'd like to make that guess here and now.

A little history: the insurance industry is exempt from anti-trust laws and can legally share information. However, the industry has always been a little sensitive about this and tries to preserve an illusion of competition. To do otherwise would appear anti-capitalist and these are major capitalists. On the other hand, sometimes it suits them to get together.

The insurance companies used to use the Insurance Service Organization (ISO) to set rates. The ISO issued an advisory rate which companies generally followed and added a little if they provided more customer service and subtracted a little if the office wasn't as fancy. Some years ago that got kind of embarrassing and they moved to a system where the ISO issued formulas instead of rates. Still basically the same thing.

The beauty of this arrangement is that the regulators standardized the policies and the insurers used the ISO as evidence that rates had to be higher. Everyone stayed in sync and the insurers could keep increasing profits. The ISO is owned by the insurance companies so it really isn't independent from them. It is them.

We come to the modern age of computer modeling. Or we come to a point when insurers felt like they needed higher returns because their neighbors, who worked at Exxon and Enron, had nicer cars, whichever you prefer to believe. We don't know exactly how they got to where we are now, but we have companies that provide computer models in place of the ISO's outdated formulas.

One of the rating companies is owned by, act surprised, the ISO. The legitimacy of these organizations is something Gov. Crist's lawsuit can look into. Are they really independent of the insurance companies? Or are they just an extension of the model insurers have always used?

One thing is for sure, insurance company profits have gone up dramatically since about the time they started getting into modeling. This partly reflects the fact that risk over five years is always going to look higher than risk over 50 years. At a recent NAIC hearing, Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty questioned representatives of the modeling companies on their use of the five year period. They all said it had no scientific basis, but was preferred by their clients, the insurance companies.

Crist's attorneys can question whether consultants hired by the insurance companies are ever going to tell their clients to lower rates. Personally, I doubt it. They tell their clients what they want to hear.

The question is, then, is this cozy arrangement between insurers and their modelers just a little too cozy? When you look at insurer profits, it sure looks like some funny business in going on. We hope Gov Crist gets to the bottom of it. Go Charlie Go!

Nuclear Power surges consumer costs

Nuclear power costs surge in rush to build

Customers may help shoulder the increase.

By ASJYLYN LODER, Times Staff Writer
Published December 12, 2007

Nuclear energy -- billed as the cheap, carbon-free energy source of the future -- isn't sounding so cheap anymore.

The price for a new nuclear plant has soared as the rush to construct nearly 30 facilities across the country over the next 15 years has pushed up the cost of labor, raw materials and possibly even the plants themselves.

New industry estimates double and even triple prices quoted a year ago by utilities throughout the Southeast, including those for Progress Energy Florida's planned nuclear plant in Levy County. Based on cost estimates for other nuke plants and analyst reports, Progress Energy's costs could balloon to more than $10-billion, far more than early estimates of $4-billion to $6-billion.

Jeff Lyash, president and CEO of Progress Energy, said that material prices have escalated and that the utility's early estimates didn't include costs like the land purchase, financing or transmission. But he refused to offer a new estimate.

The upshot for Florida customers of Progress Energy? Be prepared to pay billions of dollars more than you bargained for. Under Florida law, customers could start seeing that cost tacked on to their monthly bills years before the plant is complete.

That scenario has raised concerns in the industry that optimistic early estimates may leave customers with sticker shock.

"We were very concerned early on that there were some improper expectations being set by not telling the whole story," said Steven Scroggs, who is in charge of new nuclear plants for the state's biggest utility, Florida Power & Light.

Its two-reactor project planned in South Florida could cost $12-billion to $18-billion, Scroggs said. That's far higher than prices quoted elsewhere in the industry, and double Progress Energy's early estimate in Levy County.

FPL's unusual candor raises questions about the low estimates offered by utilities throughout the Southeast: What did their estimates include? Are those estimates reliable? Just how much will this nuclear renaissance cost us?

* * *

No one knows what a new nuclear plant will cost. No one has built one here in more than 30 years, and no U.S. utility has signed a contract yet for a new plant.

The utility industry quotes costs in its own jargon of cost per kilowatt. Progress Energy's early estimates ranged from $1,800 to nearly $3,200. FPL recently offered a much higher range of $3,108 per kilowatt to $4,540.

Moody's Investor Services offered an October estimate of $6,000 per kilowatt.

A year ago, Progress Energy quoted costs of $2-billion to $3-billion for a one-reactor project in Levy County, and later said that it might build two reactors. The St. Petersburg utility selected a new reactor called the Westinghouse AP1000 -- the same technology FPL is considering.

So why the enormous difference in their costs?

Lyash said that the early estimates were "generic overnight costs." It didn't include interest costs, price escalation, the $47-million the utility spent buying land, or the cost of more than 200 miles of transmission lines the utility will need to run through 10 counties.

By contrast, Scroggs' estimate of $12-billion to $18-billion for FPL's plant is "all in," and includes costs like transmission, site preparation, financing and price escalation.

"To understand how it really impacts customers, you have to talk about the all-in costs," Scroggs said.

The confusion over what estimates include is only part of the problem. Prices for materials like cement and steel have risen dramatically, driving up the cost of coal and natural gas plants as well as nuclear.

Lyash said he didn't want to give an estimate while negotiations are ongoing with Westinghouse. He also declined to say whether FPL's estimates seemed in line with Progress Energy's expectations.

"I'm not trying to be evasive," Lyash said. "I'd prefer to wait until we have a specific number."

* * *

Utilities throughout the Southeast face the same quandary as Progress Energy.

Five utilities chose the Westinghouse AP1000, for a total of 12 reactors. Progress Energy plans to build four of those, two in Levy County and two in North Carolina. Georgia Power and Duke Energy have also selected the AP1000.

Georgia Power hasn't offered a public estimate, but Duke Energy offered early estimates of $4-billion to $6-billion for two reactors, similar to Progress Energy's early estimate.

Rita Sipe, spokeswoman for Duke Energy, said those estimates are now being revised but declined to offer a new number.

Westinghouse spokesman Vaughn Gilbert said the company will not discuss costs while it is still negotiating with utilities.

The nuclear industry already has a credibility hangover from the multibillion-dollar cost overruns that plagued the industry in the 1970s and 1980s. If the public senses that its numbers aren't reliable, it could face a backlash.

Hoping to avoid a repeat, the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group, pulled back from early estimates last year, said Adrian Heymer, senior director for new plant deployment for the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington, D.C., nuclear trade group.

Many utilities weren't very clear about what their early estimates included, he said.

"We sensed about a year ago now that we were a little out of synch with each other, and we've been drilling down trying to figure out what is the number, and we're getting varying stories out there," Heymer said.

But his group couldn't offer a number, either. Heymer said a real number won't be known until utilities sign their agreements with Westinghouse, which he predicted will happen in the next six to 18 months.

Times researchers Angie Holan and John Martin contributed to this report. Asjylyn Loder can be reached at aloder@sptimes.com or (813) 225-3117.

[Last modified December 12, 2007, 00:00:45]

FCAN Letter on Energy

Saint Petersburg Times

Today's Letters: Energy bill good news for U.S.

Letters to the EditorPublished December 7, 2007

The lies in the recent advertisements about Congress' energy bill are outrageous. Congress is currently considering an energy bill that has three key amendments. They are CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) standards, renewable electricity standards and the increased production of biofuels. Together, these amendments will save consumers money at the gas pump, decrease our dependence on foreign oil sources, increase our own energy independence by using renewable energy sources, and create American jobs.

CAFE standards will set higher fuel efficiency requirements for our vehicles. This not only saves consumers money but also decreases our use of foreign oil. Additionally, better fuel efficiency protects our environment from harmful greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the auto manufacturers who do build fuel-efficient vehicles are seeing larger profits, enough to open new factories and create new jobs here in the United States.

RES will require utilities to get 15 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power. This would save natural resources, which would cut consumer costs. And because these sources are renewable, we will be increasing our energy independence. The increased production of biofuels also decreases our dependence on foreign oil. Biofuels can come from waste products like ethanol made from orange rinds or from used french fry oil.
These are the facts of our Congress' energy bill. This is real American progress for energy independence, lower costs and increased jobs.

Tom Krumreich, Tampa

Aquaculture in the gulf

Did you know? The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service are federal bodies that make laws about fishing in U.S. waters. Right now they are finishing a plan to allow industrial ocean fish farming – the growing of fish in huge cages out in open water - in our Gulf of Mexico - and are scheduled to approve this plan in January 2008!

Fortunately we have a chance to stop this bad plan. Last month concerned citizens, fisher men and women, academics, scientists and more told our government that we wanted an opportunity to talk about this plan before it is approved - and we got it!

Public workshops are being held in each Gulf state to allow those of us that will be most affected by this to weigh in on what we think of the plan. The hearing for Florida is right here in Tampa Bay on

Monday December 10th 6pm

at the Comfort Inn

2260 54th Avenue North,

St. Petersburg- (for directions, call: 727-362-0075)

For more information call Marianne at 813-881-0150 and go to: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1185/t/741/signUp.jsp?key=2902 for more information.

If you are interested in learning more, or concerned about what open ocean aquaculture may do to your future and our Gulf of Mexico , please attend this meeting! This is likely the last chance we will have to make a difference on this. - See you there!!

Aquaculture pens: