It is hereby declared to be in the public interest that public utilities be regulated as hereinafter provided in order to provide the retail consumers of natural gas and electric service in this state with adequate and reliable services at reasonable rates, consistent with the financial and economic requirements of public utilities and their need to construct facilities to provide such services or to otherwise obtain energy supplies, to avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities which increase the cost of service to the consumer and to minimize disputes between public utilities which may result in inconvenience or diminish efficiency in service to the consumers. Because municipal utilities are presently effectively regulated by the residents of the municipalities which own and operate them, and cooperative electric associations are presently effectively regulated and controlled by the membership under the provisions of chapter 308A, it is deemed unnecessary to subject such utilities to regulation under this chapter except as specifically provided herein.
Notes of Decisions
Frost-Benco Elec. Ass'n v. Minnesota Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 358 N.W.2d 639 (Minn. 1984).
· cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 216B.01 (1982). When chapter 216B was originally enacted in 1974, cooperative associations like Frost-Benco were included in the definition of public utilities.”
LSP Transmission Holdings, LLC v. Katie Sieben, 954 F.3d 1018 (8th Cir. 2020).
· cites it 2× “at 47 (quoting Minn. Stat. § 216B.01). They also explain that the legislative history of the Minnesota ROFR law 7 Appellees correctly note that it would be somewhat awkward to label a Minnesota law as discriminatory despite benefitting a company that has an operation in…”
Siewert v. N. States Power Co., 757 N.W.2d 909 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 4× “” Minn.Stat. § 216B.01. The filed-rate doctrine, as applied to utilities, is a common-law rule whereby a court declines to decide a dispute between a public utility and its consumers because of the regulatory mandate that controls the utility.”
Petition of N. States Power Co., 416 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. 1987).
· cites it 2× “, Minn.Stat. § 216B.01 (1986). The burden of proof rests with public utility seeking the change to demonstrate that the rate change is just and reasonable.”
In Re Excelsior Energy, Inc., 782 N.W.2d 282 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “The commission considered itself bound by its “normal statutory obligations” to regulate public utilities in the public interest under Minn.Stat. §§ 216B.01, .03 (2008). The commission noted that, in addition to these normal statutory obligations, it “is also required to…”
Taylor v. Beltrami Elec. Coop., Inc., 319 N.W.2d 52 (Minn. 1982).
· cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 216B.01 (1980). One aspect of regulation “specifically provided” is subdivision 6a of section 216B.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.