GRU credit remains stable, unlikely to improve 

GRU Deerhaven Plant
The Gainesville Regional Utilities' Deerhaven Plant.
Courtesy city of Gainesville

Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU) remained at the “A” level with a stable outlook, according to the latest report by Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings, one of three companies that assign ratings.  

The report, released on June 30, lists a series of pros and cons for the utility and notes the uncertain future with a new authority board poised to take control of GRU in October.  

Standard & Poor’s (S&P) last issued a credit rating for GRU in 2021. Since then, Moody’s Investor Service, another credit rating company, also affirmed GRU’s rating with no change. Moody’s did, however, lower the city of Gainesville’s rating to Aa3 in January.  

Become A Member

Mainstreet does not have a paywall, but pavement-pounding journalism is not free. Join your neighbors who make this vital work possible.

Looking ahead, the report said the company doesn’t expect to raise GRU’s credit rating in two years. But the rating could be hurt depending on future action by the new authority or city commission.  

“We do not expect to raise the rating over the next two years, as we believe that GRU’s substantial debt burden and high rates constrain improvement in credit quality,” the report stated.  

S&P said the authority could hurt the credit rating if it fails to adjust the pass-through cost of fuel to customers or to if it fails to increase base rates. The city’s willingness and authority to raise rates as needed to stay financially secure is one reason Moody’s and S&P have kept stable outlooks for GRU. 

The Gainesville City Commission adopted a seven-year rate increase schedule in 2021. That schedule forms a key part in the city’s plan to reduce debt by $315 million in the next decade. The S&P report also pointed to that plan as a pro for the city.  

“In our view, financial metrics are stabilized by the adoption of electric and wastewater rate increases, the reduction in the transfer to the city’s general fund, and the plan to reduce leverage [the $315 million debt reduction],” the report says.   

The report also touches on the biomass plant and the city’s plan for zero emissions by 2045.  

S&P points to the highest renewable energy in the state as a plus but also states that the biomass plant is one of two reasons for high rates—the other being the solar feed-in tariff. The report also highlights that the biomass plant isn’t competitive, pointing to a reduction in use between 2019 and 2022.  

Overall positives:  

  • Economy stabilized by UF, hospitals and diverse customer base 
  • Virtual elimination of coal-fired generation and renewables representing 30% of generation 
  • Robust fixed cost coverage 
  • Robust liquidity that provides flexibility 

Overall negatives: 

  • Uncompetitive renewable energy sources—biomass and solar feed-in tariff 
  • Electric rates among the highest in the state (132% of state average in 2021) 
  • Ratepayer backlash resulting in the new authority board that could change GRU’s strategic goals and cost recovery 
  • Constrained ability to fund future capital improvements because of high debt and rates 

You can find the eight-page report online.  

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Once the City Commission can no longer access GRU funds not just for the GFT, but all the additional ways they manage to suck money out of GRU for everything from Depot Park, to the CWC, to paying for an easement for their equipment at Innovation Square, then GRU should be able to make their loan payments and at least stabilize rates if not lower them.

Jeff Gehmann

There you have it! The 2 huge reasons the city commission got us into this huge mess with former mayors Poe and Hanrahan responsible for both: uncompetitive biomass and ridiculously expensive feed in tariff for the few elite that are on it for life before it was shut off. GRU doesn’t need your solar power costing us over $1 million a year. At least the appointed board won’t try to get benefits for themselves or comply with Kyoto Protocol!

Yvonne Kendall

Looks as if we’ll be paying the price for past mistakes for years to come. Disgraceful contempt for taxpayer money.