GRU Authority discusses plan for the next year, indicates they want to recover the $250k the City Commission took for legal fees

BY JENNIFER CABRERA
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – At the November 15 GRU Authority Workshop, the board nearly doubled the number of planned meetings over the next year, discussed hiring their own attorney, decided to discuss CEO Tony Cunningham’s continued employment at their December 6 meeting, and indicated that they would like to further reduce the transfer to General Government and recover the $250,000 the City Commission took from GRU reserves to pay legal fees in a lawsuit opposing the bill that created the Authority.
Hiring an attorney that answers solely to the Authority
After a General Public Comment period that was added to the published agenda by Chair Craig Carter, Carter explained that he wanted the Authority to hire its own attorney instead of relying on City Attorney Daniel Nee. Carter said, “The Governor put us in here to run this like a business… In my opinion, I need legal counsel that’s not answering to the City Commission.” He explained that the Authority would need to go through GRU’s procurement procedures to hire an attorney, so it will take some time.
Deciding on Cunningham’s employment
Carter also said the Authority needs to decide whether to keep CEO/General Manager Tony Cunningham as the CEO of Gainesville Regional Utilities: “Do we need to get a business person… to come in and take this organization to a different mindset? That’s a conversation I think this board needs to have. I told Tony, you know, if he’s our guy, I want all of us behind Tony and fighting for Tony, but we also have to give him some tools,” including goals for reducing GRU’s debt. He continued, “If this isn’t the direction we want to go, the sooner we make the change, the better. If this is the direction we want to go, I would like this board to get behind and fly that flag and run with him, side by side, and let’s get this job done.”
Carter said the purpose of the workshop was for board members to be able to exchange ideas; he proposed adding a second meeting a month to their previously-agreed-upon once-a-month schedule, but he said that would be a board decision.
Cunningham handed out a work plan (shown at the bottom of this page with changes added during the meeting) to the board members with proposed meeting dates and topics. Specifically, the plan calls for the Authority to discuss the General Services Contribution and debt reduction in the first meetings of January and February and take up the Integrated Resource Plan on January 17. In subsequent meetings, they will discuss the path forward for GRUCom and net metering rates, along with developing the budget for the 2024-25 fiscal year.
Most urgent topics: reducing bills, reducing payments to the City, increasing revenues
Cunningham went on to say that the most urgent topics are reducing bills, focusing on core services (which includes selling the Trunked Radio System and Power District properties), reducing expenses paid to the City, eliminating vacant unfunded positions, increasing revenues with net metering and natural gas expansion, the budgeting process, and liquidity facilities (discussed at the November 1 meeting and also coming up on December 6).
Eliminating payments to the City Commission and recovering $250k taken from GRU for lawsuit
Regarding SLAs (Service Level Agreements) and MOUs (memoranda of understanding), Cunningham said his staff recommends ending some of those “right now… because we’re not getting any service for that. So an example of that is the City Commission: we pay a portion of the City Commission and what they do. That’s not appropriate anymore because they no longer have a role with the utility.”
Cunningham also recommended that the Authority attempt to recover the $250,000 that was taken from GRU reserves by the City Commission to pay legal fees in their lawsuit against state officials.
Reducing the Government Services Contribution

GRU Chief Financial Officer Claudia Rasnick showed the history of the Government Services Contribution, the amount that is transferred every year from GRU to General Government. She said that reducing the amount is key to reducing GRU’s debt because the debt service is 20-25% of overall expenses. Rasnick said the debt service of other utilities is “more reasonable, a much, much lower percentage. And I think people kind of get lost in that because they’re saying it’s okay because the percentage of operating revenue is 6-7%–not when you’re paying $100+ million in debt. That’s the difference.”
Carter asked whether there was any way to recoup any of the overpayments in previous years, and Rasnick said she didn’t know of a way to do that. Carter suggested that GRU could “go flat for a period of time… At some point, we have to realize that mistakes were made. When I was on the City Commission, I admit it to you, I was part of the problem. I didn’t get a reduction. So we need to recognize that, and let’s make sure we’re whole… I just think we owe it to our ratepayers and employees to look at all of the options.”
Vice Chair James Coats said he thought it was important to discuss any legal ramifications of canceling the General Services Contribution with an attorney hired by the Authority.
Net debt reduction plan
Rasnick told the Authority that using a formula developed in October 2022, the utility is at a debt-to-capitalization ratio of 86.99%, and the net debt reduction plan has the goal of reducing that to 70% in 10 years. The plan assumes that rates will continue to climb in accordance with a Resolution approved by the City Commission in July 2021. Rasnick added that GRU will need additional funds to pay down principal and avoid pushing it out via refinancing, as has been done in recent years.
Coats asked Rasnick what she would do to reduce the debt, and she said she would “pull principal forward… But we have to have the funding to do that, the commitment from the board to actually do that. And you also have to make different decisions, as far as capital programs and those sorts of things.”
City Attorney Nee says there is no conflict of interest for him
During a discussion about whether the Authority should hire its own attorney, Nee insisted that there is no conflict of interest for him because the Authority and the City Commission are simply two governing boards of the City, and the City is his client. Carter and Coats seemed skeptical that Nee could represent the Authority in any disagreements they may have with the City Commission. Nee also said he believes that the City Charter makes him the Authority’s attorney.
Carter asked whether the Authority could reduce its transfer to General Government for legal services and hire an independent attorney, and Nee said they could hire a “consultant,” but under the Charter, the City Attorney would need to review contracts and bond issuances and defend any liability lawsuits.
Integrated Resource Plan: “Solar is a piece of of the answer. It’s not the whole answer.”
Eric Walters, Chief Sustainability Officer for GRU, gave an overview of the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP); the modeling outputs will be brought to the Authority in January 2024, and the Authority will consider recommendations in April 2024.
Authority Member Eric Lawson asked whether decisions about resources in the past had been “made around a target date for carbon neutrality.” Walters said GRU “didn’t go out and initiate things that were just from that,” but one of the things coming out of that was the solar contract for 75 MW that was signed recently; the upgrade of the Kelly plant was another thing that came out of the previous version of the IRP. Walters said all the IRPs he has seen have a mix of solar and natural gas generation: “So what that tells us is that, hey, solar is part of the future. It’s not the answer, but it is a part of it.”
Carter said, “I love solar, by the way. I can’t afford it, but I love it.” He asked about load-balancing requirements with solar, and Walters said the utility had determined at the time of the previous IRP that they could add up to 80 megawatts of solar without having to add “firming capacity,” which is typically a battery or a fast-start gas turbine. However, now that GRU has added 75 megawatts of solar, they will need to add one megawatt of firming capacity for every two megawatts of solar added to GRU’s generation mix.
Carter said, “I personally would have hit a pause button on the solar contract, just because I don’t think we need it yet, but I’m being told different, so we’ll see.”
Authority Member Robert Karow asked how much solar power had been produced over the past two rainy days, and Cunningham responded that GRU does not currently have any utility-scale solar (the 75 MW plant has not been built yet). Walters added, “So for instance, on days like today–yeah, there’s none.” He said the models account for that by assigning a percentage of solar that will be available on the average day and said, “Again, solar is a piece of of the answer. It’s not the whole answer.”
Net metering of consumer-sited solar power: non-solar customers are subsidizing solar owners
Regarding net metering, Walters said that under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, utilities are required to purchase renewable generation, and most utilities, including GRU, pay the full retail rate for customer-sited generation, such as solar. Walters said the number of customer-sited solar installations has exploded, and non-solar customers are now subsidizing solar owners. Walters said GRU has roughly 1,400 net-metering customers today, and 425 of them were added over the past year, so the number is increasing quickly.
Carter proposed a scenario in which the solar owner pays about $16.80 a month if the solar power is fully used, and Walters said, “If it all says ‘full,’ then yes.” Carter responded, “So… the poor people that we’re trying to help are actually subsidizing the people that can afford the big solar panel… Bring me every option you can to recoup my money for the people in this city.”
Updated work plan
At that point, the Authority took a break while GRU staff adjusted the draft work plan for the year in response to the members’ comments.
When they returned, Cunningham proposed a meeting schedule for the next year with two meetings in most months (the meetings in yellow below were added to the original schedule of one meeting a month).
Carter said the Authority would have a discussion on December 6 about changing the added meetings to Regular Meetings instead of workshops, but that needed to be done at a meeting where they could vote.

Member comment: Cunningham’s contract scheduled for December 6
During Member Comment at the end of the meeting, Coats proposed using the U-shaped table arrangement for their future meetings, saying he liked being able to see the other members. The other members agreed.
Coats also asked that they discuss Cunningham’s contract and employment as the first agenda item on the December 6 meeting, and Carter agreed, saying he’d had the same request on his list for Member Comment.
The GRU authority needs to zero out the transfer IMMEDIATELY. And the legislature needs to pass a law saying the City Commission CANNOT make up that money by raising property taxes. Cut the damn budget. We’re dying out here.
The voters of wokeville control the budget by voting these left wing idiots out of office put someone in their that will listen to the voters they should be only funding essential items, fire, law enforcement, roads , garbage then look at the salaries they paying out for upper management. It’s time to cut those out alone with their own salaries needs to be cut.
The only missing subject was filling the vacant commission spot, and it needs to be a city resident.
Maybe it would be taken care of if Governor DeSanctomonious was doing his job instead of his failed presidential bid.
What would you suggest the Governor do? The problem boils down to idiotic, short-sighted, feel-good decisions by the City Commission dating back to the red-head ‘engineer’ mayor.
Um, the governor is in charge of appointing the members of the GRU Authority. How do you not know that?
The board is totally illegitimate – there is only one qualified member – and it’s meetings and paying attention to it is a waste of time. How these clowns have the brass to pretend to be qualified is a permanent stain on their character and anyone who accepts the charade as legitimate.
Who would you suggest? Pegeen?
Even a board of one person (if that’s how you see it) is still a board.
“Quorum” dude. Look it up.
Jizzy on Chin, I am sending you my GRU and property tax bill. Now wipe your chin
It appears as if the GRU Authority could use a utility manager who has experience in fixing FINANCIALLY broken utilities like ours.
Excellent reporting by the Alachua Chronicle and I suggest those with means donate and ask others to do the same so we can continue to have quality local news coverage without all the political spin.
Let me know how ya’ll make out on that deal.
Cut off the city’s access to GRU funds and then they will be forced to cut the budget.
They just did that and the the GCC raised our taxes.
Or raise taxes another 27% but what do I care I don’t live in the city just a country resident that is unfortunate to have GRU
That’s right. No need to shed a tear for the Gainesville voters or the City Commission. It’s more than obvious from their woke/joke budget they have not accepted their reality. Cut the transfer to zero and let them deal with their agenda driven chaos and get serious about sensible spending. Pigs at the trough!!
Get a different attorney. There is no way Mr. Nee can advise GRU on the merits of any case that needs to be brought against the city to align GRU with the interests of all rate payers.
Nothing against the incumbent, but I don’t see why GRU needs a Chief Sustainability Officer any more.
How can Nee represent both COG and GRU especially with a conflict between the two entities? The legislature needs to separate the two entities clarifying that the City attorney cannot and should not represent both. It is a clear conflict of interest. The legislature should also reverse the inflated property tax imposed by COG to make up their shortfall. Start eliminating employees not just positions that were budgeted and not filled or vacant with the city. Start cutting filled jobs/headcount and freeze salary increases at the city. Tony Cunningham should never have gone along with the bond delay. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn’t, but that doesn’t make what he did ethically or morally right. Not who I would want leading anything. It takes integrity and strength of character to lead.
>>Walters said the number of customer-sited solar installations has exploded, and non-solar customers are now subsidizing solar owners.
>>”So… the poor people that we’re trying to help are actually subsidizing the people that can afford the big solar panel…”
Important points that need emphasizing. It’s a common assertion that “climate change” is going to impact poor people the most, somehow, (and always 10 years from the date that the statement is made).
Yet the negative impact from the climate-change activists is actually real, and devastating these poor people *today* in the form of increased power bills, higher gas prices, costs of newer refrigerants, etc.
Thank you. And if the climate hoax were real, it’d first affect rich waterfront property owners. Hence the betrayal of Fla. politicians putting the poor on the funding hook for “infrastructure” upkeeping of rich property owners. Mostly lawyers, lawmakers and their donors.
Why the Gainesville City Attorney Cannot Represent the GRU Authority
Mr. Nee, Gainesville City (Commission and Charter Officer) Attorney, claims Section 3.03 of the City of Gainesville Charter requires that he be the attorney for the GRU Authority. According to Mr. Nee, any outside counsel could only serve as a “consultant” to the Authority. GRU would of course be charged for Mr. Nee’s representation.
The relevant portions of Section 3.03, promulgated in 1927, provide:
“…The city attorney shall serve at the will of the Commission. The city attorney shall prosecute and defend all suits, complaints, and controversies for and on behalf of the city, unless otherwise directed by the commission, and shall review all contracts, bonds and other instruments in writing in which the city is to be a party, and shall endorse on each approval as to form and legality.” (emphasis added)
Mr. Nee claims that the City Charter must be amended before the Authority can have independent legal counsel. He is seriously mistaken.
First, Mr. Nee answers to the Florida Bar and is prohibited by our Cannon of Ethics from rendering legal advice where there is a conflict of interest. After all, Mr. Nee filed a lawsuit at fantastic GRU ratepayers’ expense that attempted to thwart altogether the Authority from taking control of GRU, which was found to be devoid of merit.
Moreover, HB1645 created a new Article VII of our City Charter that provides as follows:
7.01 Establishment. –
“The Authority shall operate as a unit of our City government and, except as otherwise provided in this article, shall be free from the direction and control of the Gainesville City Commission.” (emphasis added)
7.09 Management and Personnel. –
(2) “All officers and employees of the City who serve under the supervision and direction of the sitting general manager of GRU shall serve under the CEO/GM. (emphasis added)
The CEO/GM shall have the exclusive Authority to hire, transfer, promote, discipline, or terminate employees under his or her supervision and direction.” The former charter officer portion of GRU GM and powers attendant thereof disappeared 7/1/23 with the repeal by HB1645 of section 3.06. 31 ordinances were simultaneously nullified.
7.10 General Provisions. –
(1) “The City and the Authority shall perform all acts necessary and proper to effectuate an orderly transition of the governance, operation, management, and control of all utility systems.
(2) “… In the event that any City Charter provision, ordinance, resolution, decree or any part thereof conflicts with the provisions of this article, the provisions of this article shall govern.”
Mr. Nee advances the same twisted, indefensible legal theories repudiated by Judge Dempsey to justify an outrageous assault on the autonomy of our newly-appointed GRU Authority. Mr. Nee must be stopped forthwith. Neither the Cannons of Ethics nor our Charter read as a coherent whole support of Mr. Nee’s assertions.
Thank you for your consistent insight.
Dude, this board is illegitimate and it’s procedures a waste of time. Cut the crap about rules and regulations which you only pay attention to if they fit your traitorous goals. Thank God this guy was not elected to the commission, but if he had been, would he be cheerleading it’s disenfranchisement by the Newberry Representative?
Well-written as always, Mr. Konish.
If the GRU Authority finds an attorney with 1/10th your knowledge and ability, then the citizens of Gainesville will be in great shape to defend our utility from the faithless swindlers that currently occupy our city hall.
The conflict of interest couldn’t be more obvious, and in my opinion the potential motivation for personal gain by billing the GRUA for attorney fees feels very unseemly.
There’s still hope for this city. If we can expose and cut off all the sources of graft, then carpetbaggers like Bryan “Baby Podesta” Eastman and the rest of the professional amateurs on the city commission will crawl their way out of town in search of a new host.
Suggestion box: Biomass plan B for when trees run out: use as incinerator for landfill trash (for when that fills up).
They are prohibited from burning trash, carcasses, sewage waste, etc…but always expect the double cross…
There is an error when it comes to Net Metering. Presently, when in the planning and permitting phase to install solar, the calculation of your present utility usage is part of the calculation to prevent excessive net metering. It is presently calculated here in Gainesville, so that net metering simply offsets night, cloudy/rainy days and the lower production of spring, fall and winter months. Also, net metering is usually paid at a much lower “wholesale” cost. Therefore, solar customers would be “selling” excess electric at wholesale and GRU would sell it at full retail. Simple business. Just like they produce electric at a “wholesale rate” (equipment, fuel, etc) and sell it at retail. This would also provide some relief to GRU during the high demand summer months since it would allow additional net metering to supplement power production reducing the load on the utility. Let’s look at the possibility of allowing additional net metering to be another method of power production for GRU (at little cost to the utility – just the wholesale price) and allow them to sell it to the other consumers at retail. There is no such thing as other customers subsidizing solar customers. Those with solar panels pay for the panels and all associated equipment at no cost to the city or other users. They would simply be another “source” of electric for the grid. There was another comment whereby no production was seen on cloudy days. He couldn’t be further from the truth. It still produces, even though greatly reduced, even when it is pouring rain. From sunup to sundown, there is some level of production with the maximum being in the middle of the day during the summer with a clear sky.
On net metering: in theory, solar panel owners feed into the grid during the day, when demand for electricity is high, and then draw on the grid at night when demand for electricity is lower. In short, the solar owner uses the grid to store power rather than pay for batteries to store power. GRU provides a real service as a storage facility for which it should be compensated. And the solar owner relieves GRU of bearing the capital expense necessary for meeting demand in peak hours.
If it costs the owner more to use the grid than the cost of using batteries, GRU loses the benefit of capital savings. Customers lose the benefit of lower capital expenses. Remember, this is in theory.
Seems like the sensible thing would be to maintain net metering but charge a fee for using the grid to store energy. It already charges a fee to connect to the grid even if no electricity is used.