The Gainesville Regional Utilities Authority voted on Thursday to seek applicants for the general manager/ CEO position currently held by Tony Cunningham, a week after agreeing not to fire him. 

The 3-1 vote, with Board member Eric Lawson in dissent, directs Chair Craig Carter to head to process to create a request for proposals for the position.  

Earlier in the meeting, the authority also unanimously directed Carter to finish negotiations with Folds & Walker LLC. for interim attorney services and also directed the utility staff to draft a request for proposals for a permanent attorney to serve the authority. The authority also discussed the city auditor’s role in the utility.  

The decision to open the general manager position to a request for proposals came during commissioner comment at the very end of the meeting. Carter brought up the issue. He said that he had been caught off guard and been uncomfortable by Board member James Coats’ approach to Cunningham’s contract. Because of that, he hadn’t considered the issue fully at the time.   

Just like the decision to issue a request for proposals to find the best attorney for the authority, Carter said the members should issue one to find the best general manager possible—whether Cunningham or someone else. 

Also, Carter said he’d looked at House Bill 1645 again and seen that the authority is tasked to hire and set a salary for the general manager. He said that makes Cunningham an interim until the authority offers a contract.  

Last week’s decision not to fire Cunningham, which came after the motion by Coats failed to get a second, didn’t establish him to be the permanent general manager by contract.  

Carter asked if the authority was interested in opening the position. If not, he said they needed to negotiate to make Cunningham permanent.  

Board member Robert Karow made the motion, seconded by Coats, to issue the request for proposals.  

Cunningham said he believes he is the best person to lead GRU through the current transition. He said he will continue to focus on the utility and looks forward to submitting his name through the request for proposals.  

The issue of a new city attorney has consistently surfaced since the new authority took office on Oct. 4. The board members discussed again the situation, and much of the talk centered on what the law and city charter allows.  

City Attorney Daniel Nee gave his office’s opinion that certain actions by the authority require the legal watch of his office—not an outside firm. He also said that the authority is within its rights to hire outside counsel for advice and expertise on many other matters.  

However, board members said they really need an attorney controlled by the authority to get their opinion on the legality of the matter—who the authority can or cannot use for certain matters.  

The board members directed Carter to move forward with Folds and Walker LLC. The draft version of that contract places a $50,000 cap on monthly payment to the firm. The authority plans to use the firm to clarify its position with respect to the attorney position within GRU and also advise on other matters.  

A request for proposals will be drafted by GRU staff and returned to the authority for approval. Along with that proposal, the authority discussed if it would pay the full amount to the city attorney’s office. If not, GRU must figure out how to quantify the amount to cut.  

The authority also voted on how to move forward with audit services. In the past, the city auditor’s office served in the role.  

When the new authority began, Cunningham put a pause on the services. On Thursday he explained that the city auditor works based on a plan approved by the Gainesville City Commission and reports to the commissioners. That workflow doesn’t make sense with the new authority.  

The authority directed staff to research an internal GRU audit component along with how a new service level agreement would look if continued with the city auditor. Staff will return in the spring with a recommendation. 

GRU is required to perform certain audit functions as required in certain financial contracts. However, the utility doesn’t need audit services as required of cities per Florida statute.