Judge rules that ballot initiative to return control of GRU to the City was misleading but the City can try again
BY JENNIFER CABRERA
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – Judge George Wright ruled today that a referendum on the November 2024 ballot to return control of Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU) to the City of Gainesville was misleading, but he left open the possibility of a new ballot referendum with different language.
Misleading ballot language
The purpose of the referendum, which was placed on the ballot by the Gainesville City Commission, was to transfer control of Gainesville Regional Utilities back to the City Commission; the utility has been governed by the GRU Authority since October 1, 2023, following the passage of HB 1645.
The GRU Authority’s attorneys argued that the ballot summary left out “material elements” of the proposed amendment to the City’s Charter; the ballot language is shown below:
“SHALL THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO DELETE ARTICLE VII, ELIMINATING THE GOVERNOR-APPOINTED GAINESVILLE REGIONAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY AND ITS APPOINTED ADMINISTRATOR THAT MANAGE, OPERATE AND CONTROL THE CITY OF GAINESVILLE’S LOCAL PUBLIC UTILITIES, AND PLACING THAT RESPONSIBILITY WITH THE ELECTED CITY COMMISSION AND CHARTER OFFICER; AND ELIMINATING LIMITATIONS ON THE GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRIBUTION AND UTILITY DIRECTIVES, AS PROPOSED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2024-352?”
The Authority’s attorneys argued that the ballot language purported to return GRU to the former status quo before HB 1645 was implemented, but at that time, the City had a Charter Officer (GM of Utilities) who reported to the City Commission; the proposed Charter amendment would not restore that structure because it did not reinstate Section 3.06 of the Charter, which was eliminated by HB 1645.
The ballot language, according to the Authority’s attorneys, “misleadingly” states that the management of GRU will be placed with a “Charter Officer” without specifying which Charter Officer would take on that responsibility. During the April 18, 2024 City Commission meeting, City Attorney Daniel Nee said, “Part of the consideration was not to mislead anyone, to put personalities in place… There won’t be this City Manager always.” He added that the Charter specifies that the utility will go back under the City Manager “by default.”
Legal authority to present a ballot initiative to defeat an act of the legislature
The GRU Authority’s attorneys also argued that the City does not have the legal authority to present an ordinance to citizens of the city that would defeat an act of the Florida legislature, but Judge Wright disagreed with that and held that the City could change the Charter by placing another referendum on the ballot with different language.
The City of Gainesville sent the following unattributed statement:
“City of Gainesville leaders respect the court’s decision. City leadership and staff will continue to work with the GRU Authority Board to resolve issues of mutual importance, advocate on behalf of city residents and GRU customers, and ensure reliable utility service for our community.
“The Gainesville City Commission is expected to discuss at a future meeting the possibility of a reworded ballot referendum designed to honor the will of the 72.5% of city voters who supported returning GRU to City control.”
Well he got the first part right.
City has a dozen high paid lawyers on staff and combined they cannot word a simple referendum that is legal? FIRE THEM ALL. They are worthless.
Are they DEI hires or nepotism hires? They sure were not hired for their legal abilities.
It’s on purpose. Lawyers love an excuse to keep a case going.
So the City gets another chance to use GRU profits for THEIR personal agendas again.
The same idiot voters are likely to approve of it…again. I think those people who vote for it should donate a percentage of their own wealth, or lack of, to the City instead.
Unfortunately, the liberal hypocrites will never do that.
By your reasoning can we expect a check from Trump voters for the loss of wealth we all experienced after his “liberation” day? Hey, we can do double or nothing on how much we’ve all lost – or gained – in 2 years. Are you feeling lucky, punks?
Doubt it. He’s an idiot. A greedy idiot.
If you continue to throw your support and continued acceptance for their malfeasance you’re just as big an idiot.
Hard to believe the city can get another shot at this. It would seem that a state law passed by the legislature could not be changed by a city referendum. When a local law conflicts with state law, the state superiority rules. Gainesville will be forever governed not only by Democrats but by far left democrats. Any semblance of compromise or middle of the road decisions are long gone. HB 1645 would never have been necessary if Gainesville city had not treated GRU as a personal piggybank to advance far left ideology.
…and we’re drinking out of lousy paper straws here. It’s stupid: plastic cup, plastic lid, paper straws!
Oh!, We’re saving the planet.
How’d that “planet Earth CO2 climate change saving biomass plant” work out?
They need to stop wasting taxpayers money and clean-up the city.
I just visited Orlando, Clearwater, & Savannah GA and my friend said GNV was the one with most litter,
Vagrants, & panhandlers…
When it’s on the ballot next time, it’ll break 80%.
Sadly, there are good reasons to have an independent board over GRU, but the manner this was done created this situation.
Way to go Chuck. Accept the backlash because you earned it.
There’s one good reason it shouldn’t be controlled by the City Commission – they’re fiscally incompetent and have continuously utilized GRU profits as their personal piggy bank. The Commission shouldn’t be trusted or permitted to have control of the monies collected by GRU. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either an idiot or just mentally deficient in common sense and intellectual acuity.
If 80% vote in favor of the Commission controlling GRU’s coffers, it’ll be 100% of residents suffering because of it.
The city of Gainesville owns GRU and the commission is elected by the citizens, i.e., the owners.
What do you not get about this, or isn’t it how they do it in Russia or wherever the heck you came from.
Hey Jazzyass, the Commission’s use of GRU profits and spending has never been brought to the people for approval. Neither were the continued rate hikes.
Why is that so difficult for your dumbass to understand?
I know, because it’s just as difficult for some citizens to understand the Commission owns them. The one thing that separates today’s peeps from those of the 1800’s is the lack of physical chains.
How does the city have the money for all these lawsuits when their budget is in the toilet? Priorities, anyone?
The Florida Legislature should pass a Law prohibiting a Municipal Owned Utility (electric , gas, water), that is managed by a City Charter Officer, from serving customers outside the City Limits.
If the State Legislature does that and the second City ballot initiative passes, then the City must sell its assets outside of City Limits.
That will reduce revenue for the City, because GRU serves electric, gas and water beyond the City boundary.
People living in the County will no longer be subjected to the whims of City Commission they can not vote for.
100% agree. I think they should shut off power to anyone outside city limits that doesn’t want power from GRU. Those homeowners should be free to pay for transmissions lines to their home from any other utility or to forego receiving power at all.
Control of a utility company, is not a critical function of a city government. In fact, it’s a distraction. Let it go, and concentrate on, the things that cities normally do.
That makes sense however the city has used the utility as a slush fund for decades and they’re not going to let it go that easily.
We need gru for the people. We need the chuckle chestnut football field. We need trollies. We need cheap housing on the Eastside. We need the wood bur b er cranked up. Git her done
Interesting to see the city to say the want to honor the 72.5 percent of the city voters who supported returning GRU to city control.
What about the thousands who voted to make this change? We voted too.
This referendum did not respect or honor everyone.
… not to mention the thousands of ratepayers outside city limits, who had zero say in the processes that directly affect them… taxation without representation.
The GNV CC can’t get the panhandlers out of the street medians and they want to run a utility?
They need to focus on essential services instead of social services.
Zero tolerance for litterbugs.
Suck it Harvey! Hopefully the legislature eliminates property taxes and the City will be forced to really budget!
No wonder the City Commission can’t balance a budget. 72.5% of City Voters did not support returning GRU to the City. That would imply that 100% of the people registered to the vote in the City had actually voted. It may have been 72.5% of the people in the City who voted that day, which is not the same thing.
And don’t forget about the thousands of UF students living on a campus powered by Duke Energy. These cultish young people vote in city elections and have zero attachment to our area…it’s a disgrace. They vote in blocks..vote as they’re told..usually out of spite. Political parties are disgusting