Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Carlos Alvarez, Esq. <br />December 11, 2014 <br />Page 6 <br />• 22.01 % higher than the rates of FPL in December 2004; <br />• 45.01% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2005; <br />• 9.56% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2006; <br />• 31.12% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2007; <br />• 30.23% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2008; <br />• 30.63% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2009; <br />• 26.46% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2010; <br />• 21.57% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2011; <br />• 31.45% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2012; and <br />• 41.19% higher than the rates of FPL in December 2013. <br />Because FPL is an investor-owned utility, its electric rates are regulated by the PSC under <br />Chapter 366, Florida Statutes. In contrast, as a municipal electric utility, the City and its electric <br />utility rates are not regulated by the PSC. See §§ 366.04 and 366.02(1), Fla. Stat. (providing the <br />PSC with the jurisdiction to regulate rates and services of a "public utility," but excluding <br />municipalities from the definition of "public utility"). Instead, the City's electric utility is managed <br />and its rates are set exclusively by the City Council. Ch. 14439, § 40, Laws of Fla. (1929). The <br />City Council Members are elected by the citizens who reside inside the City's corporate limits. <br />Under Florida law, the rate levels of a municipal electric utility like the City are not <br />regulated by the PSC because there is an expectation that citizen -ratepayers of a municipal electric <br />utility have an adequate voice in regulating their own electric rates. This expectation is based on <br />the premise that elected municipal officials are ultimately responsible to their citizen -ratepayers <br />for all rate impacts associated with their operation of the municipal utility system. In other words, <br />if a customer believes that an elected official is not properly managing the municipal electric <br />utility, then that customer can vote the elected official out of office. <br />However, because approximately 62% of the City's electric customers are non-residents of <br />the City, a significant majority of the City's electric customers cannot vote in City elections, and <br />thus have no voice in electing those officials that manage the City's electric utility system and set <br />their electric rates. Although the City is not subject to the PSC's rate -setting jurisdiction, the City <br />is still required by law to set rates that are reasonable. The special act creating the City provides <br />that the "City Council may by ordinance make reasonable regulations as to the use of any public <br />utility and may fix reasonable rates for service furnished by public utilities to consumers." § 40, <br />Ch. 14439, Laws of Fla. (1929) (emphasis added). <br />In the Town's view, the City has engaged in oppressive rate -making practices that require <br />the Town and its residents to unfairly subsidize City operations that are not related to the furnishing <br />of electric service to customers. For example, the City has set its electric rates so that the Town <br />and other captive non-resident customers are required to produce millions of dollars of surplus <br />electric revenues that the City then diverts to the City's General Operating Fund. Those diverted <br />surplus revenues are then used to cover non-utility costs, including propping up the City's <br />unfunded pension obligations to current and former employees that had nothing to do with the <br />operation of the City's electric utility or the furnishing of electric service. In addition, the City is <br />diverting these surplus electric revenues from non-resident customers as a surrogate for ad valorem <br />