City of Cape Coral v. GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida
Decision Date | 13 June 1973 |
Docket Number | No. 42060,42060 |
Citation | 281 So.2d 493 |
Parties | The CITY OF CAPE CORAL, Florida, Appellant, v. GAC UTILITIES, INC., OF FLORIDA and the Florida Public Service Commission, Appellees. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Clyde G. Killer, Fort Myers, for appellant.
B. Kenneth Gatlin of Madigan, Parker, Gatlin & Swedmark, and R. M. C. Rose, Tallahassee, for appellees.
This cause is before us on appeal from the Circuit Court, Leon County. The trial court, in its final judgment, passed on the validity of House Bill 2425, Chapter 71--585, Laws of Florida, an Act relating to the city of Cape Coral, Lee County, giving this Court jurisdiction of the direct appeal under § 3 of Article V of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A. The pertinent sections of the Act are as follows:
'Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
The foregoing special law was held inconstitutional, as applied to appellee GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida, by the trial court on the grounds that it violates Article III, § 11(a)(20) of the Florida Constitution. 1 The trial court stated:
On appeal to this Court, the appellant argues that 'as of the enactment of House Bill 2425, the utility was no longer regulated by the Public Service Commission, and, therefore, there is no question involving the application of Article III, Section 11(a)(20).' The appellant contends that the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission can be altered by the Legislature, as it has been fit to do in the instant case.
Appellee GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida, raises additional grounds for the unconstitutionality of the Act: 1) defective title; 2) arbitrary and unreasonable classification setting the appellee apart from other similar utilities in the State; 3) no intelligible standards or guidelines for regulating the rates.
Appellee Public Service Commission raises an additional point to be considered by this Court should it find the statute constitutional, to-wit: 'The unqualified word 'rates' used in Section 1, Chapter 71--585, should be construed to include charges for service availability as well as charges for day-to-day water and sewer utility service.'
We hereby reverse the holding of the trial court that House Bill 2425, Chapter 71--585, Laws of Florida, is unconstitutional and invalid as applied to appellee GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida. The pertinent facts, as found by the trial court, are as follows:
Additional pertinent facts may be found in the preamble to House Bill 2425, as set out above.
We agree with appellant's contention that, as of the enactment of House Bill 2425, the utility was no longer regulated by the Public Service Commission, and, therefore, there is no question involved as to the application of Article III, § 11(a)(20), and no question of state preemption or regulation of GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida.
The preamble of the Bill complained of should be read against the language in Section I of House Bill 2425 vesting all authority for regulation of rates and services or the establishment of rates and service fees in the City of Cape Coral. The intention of the Legislature is abundantly clear. The object of the Act was not to create concurrent jurisdiction over the utility between the Public Service Commission and the City of Cape Coral, but was to establish exclusive jurisdiction over the operation of the utility insofar as rates and service availability are concerned in the City of Cape Coral.
All administrative bodies created by the Legislature are not constitutional bodies, but, rather, simply mere creatures of statute. This, of course, includes the Public Service Commission. In Re Advisory Opinion to the Governor. 2 As such, the Commission's powers, duties and authority are those and only those that are conferred expressly or impliedly by statute of the State. State ex rel. Burr v. Jacksonville Terminal Co. 3 Any reasonable doubt as to the lawful existence of a particular power that is being exercised by the Commission must be resolved against the exercise thereof, Southern Armored Car Service, Inc. v. Mason, 4 and the further exercise of the power should be arrested, State ex rel. Burr v. Jacksonville Terminal Company. 5 The Legislature of Florida has never conferred upon the Public Service Commission any general authority to regulate public utilities. Throughout our history, each time a public service of this state has been made subject to the regulatory power of the Commission, the Legislature has First enacted a comprehensive plan of regulation and control And then conferred upon the Commission the authority to administer such plan. Radio Telephone Communications, Inc. v. Southeastern Telephone Company. 6
To say that the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission cannot be altered by the State Legislature is to admit that the government is beyond the control of the people--that an administrative Frankenstein, once created, is beyond the control of its Legislative creator. 7
To say that the Legislature cannot amend or alter the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission by a special act for a special purpose is a conclusion which strains not only logic, but rational interpretation of the Constitution as well. 8
At the same instant the House Bill 2425 became law, the Public Service Commission ceased to regulate GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida, and the authority to do so passed to the City of Cape Coral.
Since we are speaking of the power to regulate and control the water and sewer utilities within the City of Cape Coral, it seems reasonable to suppose that the Legislature knew and desired that the exclusive jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission would be superseded completely by the jurisdiction of the City when it enacted House Bill 2425, and a proper and reasonable interpretation of the provisions of House Bill 2425 would be to transfer all the jurisdiction established in the Public Service Commission to the City of Cape Coral so that a full and complete job regulating all...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Don's Sod Co., Inc. v. Department of Revenue, State of Fla.
...cert. denied, 149 So.2d 41 (Fla.1963).10 See Florida Bridge Co. v. Bevis, 363 So.2d 799 (Fla.1978); City of Cape Coral v. GAC Utilities, Inc. of Florida, 281 So.2d 493 (Fla.1973); Edgerton v. International Co., 89 So.2d 488 (Fla.1956); Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n. v. Department of Business......
-
Turner v. Wainwright
...amenable to discipline, direction, and supervision of prison system officials none the less. 13 Cf. City of Cape Coral v. GAC Utilities, Inc. of Florida, 281 So.2d 493, 496 (Fla.1973). 14 Section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes A person who has been convicted of a capital felony shall be punis......
-
In re Advisory Op. to the Attorney Gen. re Rights of Elec. Consumers Regarding Solar Energy Choice
...; see, e.g., art. VIII, § 1(f), 1(g), 2(b), Fla. Const.; §§ 125.01, 166.021, Fla. Stat. (2015) ; City of Cape Coral v. GAC Utilities, Inc., of Florida, 281 So.2d 493, 495–96 (Fla.1973) ("All administrative bodies created by the Legislature are not constitutional bodies, but, rather, simply ......
-
Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. State Dept. of Business Regulation, Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, PARI-MUTUEL
...have only such power as the statutes confer. Florida Bridge Co. v. Bevis, 363 So.2d 799 (Fla.1978); City of Cape Coral v. GAC Utilities, Inc. of Florida, 281 So.2d 493 (Fla.1973); State v. Office of the Comptroller, 416 So.2d 820 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Fiat Motors of North America, Inc. v. Cal......