Bielarski: Governor should replace GRU Authority appointments with city residents

Letter to the editor
Despite the clear language of HB 1645 and the intentions of its sponsor, Representative Chuck Clemons, the concept of making GRU Authority appointments in proportion to the ratio of GRU customers inside and outside the city was lost in the process. The first three appointments to the Board are all GRU customers, each one living outside of the city limits – seemingly a violation of the bill.
As you might expect, opponents of HB 1645 jumped on the news of the appointments, exclaiming their moral outrage at the injustice of it all. On the other side, proponents of HB 1645 said that there was a difference in deciding the composition of the incoming Authority members versus appointments after their terms expired. A thorough reading of HB 1645 is in order.
There are two specific sections of the bill that address the composition of the Authority regarding the numbers of members living inside and outside the city limits. First, Section 7.04(2)(d) states:
All members of the Authority shall:
Be a qualified elector of the City, except that a minimum of one member must be a resident of the unincorporated area of the county or a municipality in the county other than the City of Gainesville.
The language of this section sets forth the concept that all Authority members must be City of Gainesville voters, except for those chosen from outside the city. It doesn’t establish the mechanism for determining the number of members who live outside the city, just that there must be a minimum of one.
The mechanism for determining the number or proportion of non-city-resident Authority members is spelled out in Section 7.04(3):
The composition of the Authority shall be adjusted upon the expiration of any member’s term, or upon any Authority vacancy, to reflect the ratio of total electric meters serving GRU electric customers outside of the City’s jurisdictional boundaries to electric meters serving all GRU electric customers.
As of the time of the initial appointment, GRU sat at 39% of all electric meters outside the city. Therefore, according to the formula, one Authority member should be chosen from outside the city (20% of five members equals one member). Only when GRU’s customers outside the city limits reach 40% would a second Authority member be chosen from outside the city limits:
For example, upon expiration of a member’s term or upon an Authority vacancy, if the ratio of total electric meters serving customers outside the City boundaries to total electric meters serving all electric customers reaches 40%, the Governor MUST appoint a second member from outside the City boundaries…
The argument that the initial appointments can be made without regard to this formulaic process is flawed, specifically because the first sentence of Section 7.04(3) states that “The composition of the Authority shall be adjusted upon expiration of any member’s term, OR UPON ANY AUTHORITY VACANCY…” The initial appointments fill the vacancies currently at hand.
For all of us who believe in fairness and the rule of law, I implore the Governor to correct the improper appointment of three non-city-resident Authority members with the appropriate number of city residents.
For all those who oppose HB 1645, don’t think I don’t see the hypocrisy in your arguments. When I came on board to rid the City of the Biomass PPA, I encountered the facts surrounding a commission intent on executing the deal, no matter the consequences. Mayor Pegeen Hanrahan was on record as saying that under the Biomass PPA, GRU would only pay for the energy GREC generated. GRU’s chief negotiator, Ed Regan, stated before the public, “We (GRU) only pays for the energy they (GREC) gives us.” As expressed by City officials, that was the intent of the Biomass PPA. When that premise turned out to be false, all we heard was crickets from these same folks. No moral outrage, no cries of injustice.
Sadly, the Biomass PPA was a $2.5 BILLION mistake. I suspect that the failure to abide by the rules of the composition of the Authority will result in nowhere near that damage. Should the Governor make it right? Sure, but spare the moral indignation.
Ed Bielarski, Gainesville
The opinions expressed by letter or opinion writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AlachuaChronicle.com. Letters may be submitted to info@alachuachronicle.com and are published at the discretion of the editor.
I thought the entire point of a non-city controlled board was to get more non-city input? Wouldn’t it be nice and poetic justice for those of us in the county SCREWED for decades to turn the tables so to speak?
The point was to have non-city government control, not to have no city resident control.
39% is closer to 2 non city members than to 4 city people. IOW, less than 30%, 4 & 1. More than 30%, 3 & 2.
The bill reads, 40% or more you get 2.
If you have not noticed, Ron D. is running for President. He has no time to be bothered doing mundane things like running the state and making proper appointments, you know, the job he is paid to do.
I think it should be a mix of city and county.
The bill allows for a composition of city and non-city customers on the board in proportion to GRUs electric customers in and out of the city.
But the customers should be those who aren’t promised something by City leaders or dependent on government handouts that may sway their decisions.
We’ve seen how well that’s worked for the rest of us.
The City has proven they are still in denial and prejudice towards any normal financial guidance. They should maybe get 1 or 2 at the most ,but be brought in on a 90 Day probationary period to make sure they are not affiliated with the failed and fired Gainesville City Mayor, Commissioner’s as well as the overwhelmed and incoherent and incompetent staff. They are all to extremely overwhelmed with their bigoted Political Correctness
This issue was caused by current and past City Mayor and Commissioners whose political beliefs are all the same. They caused the problem and it has to be fixed. This is a great start, in spite of their whining and refusal to admit any wrong doing.
The board does not yet exist, therefore there are no ‘vacancies’ per se.
The vacancies were created the day the Bill went into egfect.
I doubt the governor and members of the JLAC committee are pleased with the city commission’s and city manager’s performance since April (not cutting the budget at all after being told to do so, while sticking it to taxpayers and ratepayers once again). Perhaps this is a well-deserved ‘slap in the face’ from the state? Or, maybe there won’t even be a city anymore at some point, so it won’t matter?
Give them enough rope and the republican fascists will hang themselves. Just sit back and watch how they’re going to screw GRU up worse than it’s ever been before.
Open your tax bill and GRU bill. It wasn’t the “republican fascists” who did that..it was your beloved incompetent liberal elected commission who have no concept of basic finance and budgeting.
Please name one city commissioner who would get serious consideration for a position on the board of directors of a financially distressed private company the size of GRU.
Joey how do you like that 29% property tax increase just wait until their is zero transfer to the city then tell me how republicans mess up
I really do not give a sh*t whee the GRU board members reside. I DO care that they are competent, unlike their predecessors.
Are they from the service area? Who cares. We just need objective brain cells who can do math. And avoid global Illuminati doomsday policies.
GRU is1.7 billion in debt. The most qualified candidates who know how to manage a budget and cut costs should receive priority.
“Qualified Elector” of the City of Gainesville criteria for initial GRU Utility Authority Appointees.
I agree with the proposition that four (4) initial appointees must be “qualified electors” of the City of Gainesville.
Chapter 2023-348 does not explain when this requisite status must be obtained
The Hayes-Santos, Hutchinson, Alford, McGraw, Wheeler, etc democrat approaches to “primary residence” are readily available well before the next currently scheduled City election.
This technical defect that has been alleged easily cured thus does not disqualify any appointee per se at this time, or on 10/04/23. October 4th might be emancipation day for GRU ratepayers.
I’m OK with having ALL city of Gainesville residents compromising the entire GRU advisory board. However, since I live in the county I would have NO representation for our bankrupt utility. Let us choose which utility provider we want and leave us the hell alone.
One of the major sources of criticism aside from GRU rates was the lack of representation for county ratepayers. So remind me why this is an issue, Ed???? Now if we have two reps from the City, there will be some balance. Nearly 1/3 of rate payers reside in the county.