Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.105 (2026)

Filing of budget; rules; review by commission; pensions as operating expenses

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      757.105 Filing of budget; rules; review by commission; pensions as operating expenses. (1) The Public Utility Commission has the right and power of regulation, restriction and control over the budgets of expenditures of public utilities, as to all items covering:

      (a) Proposed payment of salaries of executive officers;

      (b) Donations;

      (c) Political contributions and political advertising;

      (d) Expenditures for pensions or for a trust to provide pensions for employees and officers;

      (e) Other expenditures and major contracts for the sale or purchase of equipment; and

      (f) Any payment or contemplated payment to any person or corporation having an affiliated interest for service, advice, auditing, associating, sponsoring, engineering, managing, operating, financing, legal or other services.

      (2) On or before a date prescribed by the commission by rule, each public utility shall prepare a budget showing the amount of money which, in its judgment, shall be needed during the ensuing year for covering all such activities and expenditures, and file it with the commission.

      (3) When any such budget has been filed with the commission, the commission shall examine into and investigate the same and unless rejected within 60 days thereafter, the proposed budget is presumptively fair and reasonable and not contrary to public interest.

      (4) Proposed expenditures for pensions or for a trust to provide pensions for the employees and officers of such utility whether for future service or past service or both, shall be recognized as an operating expense if the trust fund is irrevocably committed to the payment of pensions or benefits to employees and if such pensions are reasonable and nondiscriminatory. The commission may disallow as an operating expense any expenditure for pension purposes in excess of the amount necessary and proper to maintain an actuarially sound retirement plan for the employees of the utility in Oregon. [Amended by 1957 c.593 §1; 1971 c.655 §82; 2013 c.96 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1960–2013 · leading case: Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Davis, 608 P.2d 547 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Davis, 608 P.2d 547 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 16× “105(1)(c), supra, which gives the Commissioner authority over budgets of expenditures for political advertising, means that the commissioner may apply the "guidelines" only to political advertising.”
Cascade Nat. Gas Corp. v. Davis, 560 P.2d 301 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 7× “Sabin, supra, that ORS 757.105 represents an extension of the Commissioner’s authority and not a limitation on his power to exclude a particular expense from the rate base in determining what would be a just and reasonable rate.”
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Sabin, 534 P.2d 984 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 4× “495) or of the utility’s annual budgets which include payments under that contract (ORS 757.105) “estop” him from disallowing any portion of those payments when exercising his authority to determine and impose “just and reasonable” rates? As noted at the outset, rate making is a…”
Am. Can Co. v. Davis, 559 P.2d 898 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 2× “495, or of his prior approval of a utility’s annual budget under ORS 757.105. There we said: "* * * Does the Commissioner’s prior approval of a contract between a utility and an affiliated interest (ORS 757.”
Portland Gen. Elec. Co. v. United States, 189 F. Supp. 290 (D. Or. 1960). “ORS 757.105 to 757.125, inclusive. “One of the most important aspects of the regulatory power is that over earnings.”
Wah Chang v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 301 P.3d 934 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Davis, 28 Or App 621, 630 , 560 P2d 301 , rev den, 279 Or 1 (1977) (“ORS 757.105 represents an extension of the *165 Commissioner’s authority and not a limitation on his power to exclude a particular expense from the rate base in determining what would be a just and reasonable…”
Oregon Tel. Corp. v. Pub. Util. Comm'r, 483 P.2d 822 (Or. Ct. App. 1971). ““* * * * ORS 757.105. In so doing, it is obvious he must consider all assets as well as liabilities of the utility.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.105(1) — 1 case
Cascade Nat. Gas Corp. v. Davis, 560 P.2d 301 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). “Sabin, supra, that ORS 757.105 represents an extension of the Commissioner’s authority and not a limitation on his power to exclude a particular expense from the rate base in determining what would be a just and reasonable rate.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.105(1)(c) — 1 case
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Davis, 608 P.2d 547 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “105(1)(c), supra, which gives the Commissioner authority over budgets of expenditures for political advertising, means that the commissioner may apply the "guidelines" only to political advertising.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.105(3) — 1 case
Cascade Nat. Gas Corp. v. Davis, 560 P.2d 301 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). “Sabin, supra, that ORS 757.105 represents an extension of the Commissioner’s authority and not a limitation on his power to exclude a particular expense from the rate base in determining what would be a just and reasonable rate.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 757.105(l)(c) — 1 case
Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Davis, 608 P.2d 547 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “105(1)(c), supra, which gives the Commissioner authority over budgets of expenditures for political advertising, means that the commissioner may apply the "guidelines" only to political advertising.”
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.