GRU Authority takes no action on fund transfer, votes to have joint meeting with City Commission
BY JENNIFER CABRERA
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – At their January 17 meeting, the GRU Authority decided against cutting the Government Services Contribution (GSC) to the City and instead voted to schedule a joint meeting with the City Commission for the purpose of asking the City to help reduce GRU’s debt.
GRU Authority Attorney Scott Walker said he believed the Authority has the ability to amend the budget previously set by the City Commission and reduce or eliminate the GSC. However, he said, the City could possibly retaliate by implementing a franchise fee that would have to be passed on to customers.
Chair Craig Carter said, “That’s the conversation that caused me to be cautious” when he voted to postpone an earlier agenda item that would have led to new expenditures to do a search for a new CEO/GM.
Member Robert Karow said the Authority has an obligation to reduce rates and reduce debt, and if the City decides to add a franchise fee to consumers’ bills, “the burden is on them… We can look in the mirror and say, ‘We did what we can do.'” He pointed out that the City collects the utility tax from each GRU bill.
Several alternatives were presented to the Authority:
- Reduce the GSC by $7.8 million a year and use half to reduce rates and half to reduce debt;
- Reduce the GSC completely and use half to reduce rates and half to reduce debt;
- Reduce the GSC by various amounts and direct savings to different mixes of rate reduction and debt reduction.
Karow said he believed they should remove the GSC entirely and decide later how to distribute the savings. “We need to address our debt and our ratepayers. If they want to come back at us and try to reduce our efforts to help the ratepayers of GRU, then that’s their business,” he said.
Member Eric Lawson said GRU customers could end up paying more if the City implemented a franchise fee.
Carter said it “sounds sexy” to eliminate the GSC, but “it’s already been reduced by $19 million.” He cautioned, “The City is going to find the money somewhere… I’m not prepared to vote for [a complete GSC reduction].”
Debbie Martinez said from the audience, “It sounds like extortion,” but Carter said he was just explaining the options.
First motion
Karow made a motion to reduce the GSC 100%.
Member James Coats said he was “torn” because the utility does not have any “levers” to reduce debt. He predicted that Lawson and Carter would vote no, leading to the failure of the motion, and he said the Authority needed to reduce rates right away.
Carter said that if the City had taken more money than GRU had made in profits, as has been stated in Tallahassee, he would like to get that back but added, “[The City has] the levers to get the money; our ratepayers are ultimately going to pay it.”
Lawson said the Authority now has the “stick-and-carrot” ability to sit down with the City and negotiate for the benefit of its customers.
Carter said, “[Eliminating the GSC] scares me because I don’t know what will happen.” He said people would consider Authority members to be heroes if they cut the transfer, but the citizens would end up paying the bill.
Coats said the City and commissioners have put out negative messaging: “When are they going to come up with solutions?” He said the Authority should give the City a deadline to come up with solutions “to help clean up their mess” and reduce the debt. Coats said that if the City is unwilling to help with debt reduction and rates, he would second Karow’s motion and support reducing the GSC completely.
Carter said he couldn’t vote to reduce it 100% or even by half, but he could support some reduction. He said the City should be looking at the Authority and thinking, “If there was a fifth member, we’d be down $15 million right now.”
Coats suggested a public meeting with all decision-makers, which could take all day, “and at the end of it, if we don’t get any levers pulled at all,” then the Authority would discuss cutting the GSC at their next meeting.
Karow’s motion failed for lack of a second.
Second motion
Coats made a motion to have a joint City/GRUA meeting within the next 45 days. Lawson seconded the motion.
During public comment, several people urged the Authority to cut the transfer, but most people praised the motion to have more conversations before making a decision.
Carter said, “If I knew for a fact that ratepayers wouldn’t end up paying for this… The very people we say we’re going to help will get hurt if we’re not careful… I just want to make sure that the City is not going to pull a lever that our ratepayers will pay… I want to reduce this as much as possible.”
The motion passed 3-1, with Karow in dissent.
Should the city decide to implement a franchise fee, no general fund transfer should be made. Further, the franchise fee should apply only to customers within the city limits. Those city residents have the ability to elect members of the city commission. Customers outside of the city limits again would be given no redress regarding the franchise fee. The city should not be able to set a county franchise fee.
It appears that the board is getting questionable legal advice regarding the ability of the City to successfully implement a franchise fee on its own utility?
Carter brought in his guy at $400 per hour.
Not impressed.
Carter is still pandering to his friends on the the City Commisison and thinks he can reason with them.
The city does not have the authority to impose a franchise fee outside of the city limits.
OMG they are a bunch of cowards! They are going to cave to the corrupt city demonrats!
“Coats said the City and commissioners have put out negative messaging: “When are they going to come up with solutions?” He said the Authority should give the City a deadline to come up with solutions “to help clean up their mess” and reduce the debt. Coats said that if the City is unwilling to help with debt reduction and rates, he would second Karow’s motion and support reducing the GSC completely.”
Uh, Mr Coats – the GRU Authority (not the City) now has the responsibility and the authority to develop solutions to lower the debt and to reduce the rates. Remember- even if the majority of the members in the Authority board are illegitimate, it’s their job to “run GRU like a business”.
Thanks Mr konish, what a fine mess you’ve gotten us into.
Nobody seemed to mention that GRU already has the highest rates in the state. If the city did start a “franchise fee”, they would have to answer to the city residents for the even higher electric costs, since that city fee wouldn’t apply to the county.
Unfortunately city elections are in off cycle years, so only 3% elect the “winners”. Those voters depend on human misery and chaos for their job security. Doom loop.
This is currently quite inaccurate. You might want to update your facts. The last City Commission election primary was in August of 2022, averaging about a 30% turnout. Only one race was decided in the primary. The other three were decided on the November ballot, and the turnout was 48% for the Mayoral race, 60% for the District 2 seat, and 34% for District 3.
This is what the bill states about the GRU authority board
298 (4) No franchise, right-of-way, license, permit or usage
299 fee or tax may be levied by the City upon the Authority or the
300 utilities unless allowed by general law.
But is it allowed by general law? My first thought would be, yes it is. Though that might raise the issue of non-City customers paying the City franchise fee.
It was sad to see the false assertion that the City of Gainesville can drop franchise fees on ratepayers after 100 years of occupancy. There is the Supreme Court of Florida “privilege” fee case from Alachua County that prohibits this. The City cannot sue the Authority and is under ongoing State audit.
Seems to me that at the end of the day, what we still have – besides a tremendous amount of city debt being funded by GRU customers; is what many have said all along – the City will still find a way to rape residents to fund their pet projects.
It’s just another “bait and switch” scheme that will be implemented by the liberal idiots who were elected by another group of liberal idiots.
Hope the 2nd group is happy with who they elected to the first group.
I think GRUA should treat the City the same way GRUA would like to be treated. That would include not making a change in payments to the City until budget time so the City can adjust their expenses and revenues accordingly. Approve any change effective Oct 1, 2024. I agree the City has abused GRU customers in the past but I would prefer GRUA to be better than treating the City that way.
The city is full of idiot’s, we will find a way to retaliate, they are just typical POLITICIANS, tell the people what they believe they want to hear, then, do what we Da-n well please. We will SPEND LIKE WE WANT TOO, AND THE CUSTOMER BETTER LIKE IT, OR WE WILL GO UP ON THE RATES EVEN MORE……
Grow a pair and eliminate the GSC entirely. They are going to raise taxes as much as possible regardless. Eventually it will catch up with them. It’s really easy to run on a platform of reducing taxes, and we can always move out of Gainesville city limits.
You can’t flush out malignant parasites like Harvey Ward and Bryan Eastman in one dose–it takes multiple treatments to starve them out.
Yes. You can always move outsode of the city limits.
Please do.
Fire the Chairman, he’s too worried about what the City Commissioners will do, that means he won’t act in best interest of the Utility.
Stop trying to fire the GM. Give him a year and evaluate his performance. Spending up to potentially half-million for new leadership is not good use of Utility funds.
The elected Commissioners will have to answer to a franchise fee. Reduce the debt of the Utility asap. GRUA is not focused on its directive by continuing to discuss firing the GM and worrying about the City Commissioners.
Exactly. He is more concerned about being friends than doing the job he was appointed to do. Nothing changed since he was voted off the City Council.
Carter can’t find anything to cut in budget? Seems like he gets bamboozled easily.
Most sensible solution presented. It won’t be done because it has too much common sense.
Thank you Mr. Karow for trying. He’s only on the board another 6 months and we’re 6 months into this. What actions have actually been accomplished? Is this going to wither on the vine due to inaction?
I agree. He’s also the only member with pertinent utility experience. The rest were essentially political appointees
All this makes me glad I don’t have GRU. Clay goes out sometimes but I’m still so happy to have them rather than GRU. Glad I don’t live in Gainesville as well, what a bunch that city crew are.
Carter is trying too hard to play God. Instead of worrying about how things will look “at the end of the day,” he should be worried about the end of the year or the end of the decade. Most citizens would be fine continuing down the rocky road for a while longer if it will result in the possible cancellation of the biomass debt, for example. Sometimes it’s better to shake things up instead on continuing to play patty-cake. The State removing some “leaders” or even dissolving the City entirely would be a Good thing. Let the chips fall where they may.
Not getting into the politics of his run, but our Governor will soon be back to Florida and the job he was elected to do.
I have a feeling he will once again focus some of his time on Alachua County for the last 3 years of his term (assuming he doesn’t join the next presidential cabinet).
I’d be nervous if I was the city…..
Carter excels at playing patticakes with the City Commisison.
GRU *could* continue higher rates and cause MORE general, asymmetrical malaise. While the City *could and already is* warning their army of bribed NGO admins and “volunteer” voters they could be cut, if their services are no longer “needed” to appease vocal fringe groups.
What is the leverage customers have if they don’t like the actions of the utility authority?
No Leverage, other than vote your fired commissioners out and pray GRU survives the Carnage the City Leaders created and own.
Unless you live in the county but are forced to get power from GRU. We literally have zero recourse.
Unfortunately, 40% of us live in the county and can’t vote for city elect officials so we’re screwed
Wish it was that easy. Unfortunately most of the voting population of Gainesville, (and Alachua County for that matter), can be likened to an abused child. No matter how assaulted, traumatized or molested they may be, they’ll always love their parents.
So we have seven elected politicians and four unelected political appointees and combined they can’t/won’t do anything. Sad.
Finally we have an independent group running GRU but, as someone shouted from the audience, now we have terrorist tactics and the new board is bowing to it.
Bottom line: I am a county resident who can’t vote for city leadership but am forced to get power from GRU. Either give me the ability to elect the clowns that are, somehow, still swilling from the GRU rate-trough, or give me choice of what company supplies my power.
And with all the non-essential services the city funds with our money, why do they always have to threaten to cut police and fire services if their grift gets reduced?
We should all start paying the electric mafia with Monopoly money! See how fast they come up with solutions then.
We always have several legal experts in this room. My question is if the city was to Levy taxs on GRU customers what is the chance that the 40% of us who live in the county could file a lawsuit and stop it for County residence
I can smell their pu**ies.
Smell grows stronger every day.
Do something with a g’ville sack.
1. Make a motion and get it on the record that no one seconded or voted for it. Don’t talk it to death and never TRY to take action.
2. Why would you delay and go talk to people about QUICKLY fixing 20 years of criminal activity?
3. Where is your fifth member so we can see some three/two actions passing or failing?
So the city manager’s Palace staff tells us in 800 words they may have to raise taxes if we return about $15 million bucks taken from our cold, overcharged residents to keep the managers Palace warm.
The executives message failed to mention the eternal 10 and 20% collected from every customer who is stuck with the overcharging Monopoly.
And now Palace supporters on the authority and some self-appointed do gooders who never once stood up at City Hall against our dimwit debt loving commission advise you to help keep the excess City Hall executives warm.
Things have changed. The “virtuous” used to try to look like they cared for those who could not afford the salaries and and charges of overpaid government managers and executives. Now they snuggle up together.
Ask the rank and file who work to deliver the services… many of them can’t afford to live in the city they work for.
As Ms Antoinette once said to cold hungry folks who paid too much to keep the Palace in jewels… “Let them burn logs. ”
….although ms Antoinette was suggesting cake cause folks couldn’t afford bread… no real difference from the palace here.