Court Opinion

ID: 6757839
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-21 00:28:56.151628+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:02:30.184072
License: Public Domain

Celebrezze, C.J.,
dissenting. The majority opinion states that the only restraint imposed upon a utility is that the rates charged be reasonable and nondiscriminatory. Does this imply that a municipal utility need not comply with the municipality’s ordinances and that charges, beyond those set by ordinances, are permissible unless they are unreasonable or discriminatory? To the contrary, I believe that a utility is bound to comply with an ordinance which specifies allowable charges.
Appellee maintains that the ratepayer must prove that the aggregate revenues collected under the base rates and the adjustment clauses exceeded those permitted by both the base rates and the fuel ordinances. Appellee’s position, adopted by the majority, unfairly places the burden of compliance on the customer. It forces the ratepayer to closely scrutinize each bill received and compare charges with those allowed by the city ordinances. Clearly this is an onerous burden because the average ratepayer does not have the time or expertise to analyze ordinances and check the application of the *172prescribed formulas to his bill. Instead the burden properly should be on the utility to strictly follow the mandates of the ordinances.
The majority focuses on the aggregate revenues collected. This approach ignores the language of the city ordinance which provides that the fuel adjustment clause includes the “cost of fossil fuel consumed including freight, demurrage, and taxes plus identifiable fuel costs associated with purchase power * * (Emphasis added.) Based upon this ordinance, the trial court made the following finding of fact: “7. Ordinance No. 21-75 provides that only identifiable fuel costs associated with purchased power be included as a component in calculating the fuel adjustment factor. In violation of said ordinance, defendant included the entire cost of purchased power in calculating the fuel adjustment factor.”
The majority seems to conclude that because the purchased power cost less than if the utility had generated it, the ratepayers cannot complain that the charges were illegal. The savings due to the purchase are irrelevant to the issue of proper charges. The ordinance specifies the allowable charges in purchased power and the utility is bound to comply, whether municipally owned or otherwise.
For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully dissent.