City of Grand Island, Application of, S-93-511

• Decision Date: 03 March 1995
• Docket Number: No. S-93-511,S-93-511
• Citation: 247 Neb. 446,527 N.W.2d 864
• Parties: , Util. L. Rep. P 26,459 In re Application of CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, Nebraska. CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, Nebraska, Appellee, v. SOUTHERN NEBRASKA RURAL PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT, Appellant.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

Page 864

527 N.W.2d 864

247 Neb. 446, Util. L. Rep. P 26,459

In re Application of CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, Nebraska CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, Nebraska, Appellee, v. SOUTHERN NEBRASKA RURAL PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT, Appellant.

No. S-93-511.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

March 3, 1995.

Syllabus by the Court

1. Nebraska Power Review Board: Appeal and Error. A decision of the Nebraska Power Review Board will be affirmed on appeal if it is supported by evidence in the record and is not arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise illegal.

2. Statutes: Appeal and Error. Statutory interpretation is a matter of law in connection with which an appellate court has an obligation to reach an independent, correct conclusion irrespective of the determination made by the court below.

3. Statutes: Legislature: Intent. When asked to interpret a statute, a court must determine and give effect to the purpose and intent of the Legislature as ascertained from the entire language of the statute considered in its plain, ordinary, and popular sense.

4. Statutes: Appeal and Error. In the absence of anything to the contrary, statutory language is to be given its plain and ordinary meaning; an appellate court will not resort to interpretation to ascertain the meaning of statutory words which are plain, direct, and unambiguous.

5. Statutes: Legislature: Intent. The components of a series or collection of statutes pertaining to a certain subject matter may be conjunctively considered and construed to determine the intent of the Legislature so that different provisions of the act are consistent, harmonious, and sensible.

6. Nebraska Power Review Board: Municipal Corporations: Public Utilities: Annexation. A municipally owned electric system, serving such municipality at retail, shall have the right, upon application to and approval by the Nebraska Power Review Board, to serve newly annexed areas of such municipality.

7. Municipal Corporations: Public Utilities: Annexation: Time. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 16-120 (Reissue 1990) requires a city to furnish city services to newly annexed areas within 1 year after annexation.

Kenneth H. Elson, for appellant.

Keith Sinor, Grand Island City Atty., for appellee.

Steven G. Seglin, of Crosby, Guenzel, Davis, Kessner & Kuester, for amicus curiae Norris Public Power Dist.

HASTINGS, C.J., WHITE, CAPORALE, FAHRNBRUCH, LANPHIER, WRIGHT, and CONNOLLY, JJ.

FAHRNBRUCH, Justice.

Southern Nebraska Rural Public Power District (Southern) claims that the Nebraska Power Review Board (Board) erred when it denied Southern compensation for a part of Southern's power service area which was transferred to the City of Grand Island (City).

We affirm the denial of compensation to Southern.

This appeal was originally filed with the Nebraska Court of Appeals. It was removed to this court pursuant to our authority to regulate the caseloads of the appellate courts.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

Ponderosa Lake Estates subdivision was platted as an addition to the City. On November 7, 1991, the subdivision was included within the incorporated limits of the City. A portion of the subdivision was located within Southern's power service area.

On October 27, 1992, the City filed an application with the Board to have that portion of the subdivision located within Southern's power service area transferred to the City's power service area. On April 21, 1993, a hearing was held before the Board. Southern conceded the City's right to have the annexed property in Southern's power service area transferred to the City's power service area. However, Southern contended that the City must pay compensation for the taking of the service area transferred to the City.

It is undisputed that Southern has no powerlines, facilities, or customers located within the area annexed by the City. Nevertheless, Southern contends that it should be compensated for the loss of its right to serve such area. C.J. Hoke, Southern's general manager, testified that Southern, for the next 10 years, should receive 25 percent of the gross revenue the City will receive from providing electrical service to the inhabitants in that portion of the subdivision transferred to the City. This request was based upon a formula developed by the South Dakota Legislature.

The Board granted the City's request to transfer Southern's service area in the subdivision to the City and denied Southern's request for compensation. Southern timely filed this appeal.

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Restated, Southern claims that the Board acted arbitrarily and unreasonably (1) in refusing to determine the total economic impact on Southern by the transfer of a portion of Southern's service area to the City, and (2) in failing to establish the amount of compensation the City should pay to Southern for the loss of Southern's right to serve the power needs within the area transferred to the City.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

A decision of the Nebraska Power Review Board will be affirmed on appeal if it is supported by evidence in the record and is not arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise illegal. In re Application of City of Lexington, 244 Neb. 62, 504 N.W.2d 532 (1993).

ANALYSIS

The first of Southern's assignments of error claims that the Board acted arbitrarily and unreasonably in refusing to determine the total economic impact on Southern by the transfer of the portion of Southern's certified service area to the City.

Southern argues that even though it had no facilities or customers located within the portion of property annexed by the City, under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 70-1010(2) (Reissue 1990), it is entitled to compensation for the taking of its loss of right to serve within such area. Essentially, Southern is claiming that the Board misinterpreted the applicable statutes.

Statutory interpretation is a matter of law in connection with which an appellate court has an obligation to reach an independent, correct conclusion irrespective of the determination made by the court below. Grady v. Visiting Nurse Assn., 246 Neb. 1013, 524 N.W.2d 559 (1994); No Frills Supermarket v. Nebraska Liq. Control Comm., 246 Neb. 822, 523 N.W.2d 528 (1994). When asked to interpret a statute, a court must determine and give effect to the purpose and intent of the Legislature as ascertained from the entire language of the statute considered in its plain, ordinary, and popular sense. In re Guardianship & Conservatorship of Bloomquist, 246 Neb. 711, 523 N.W.2d 352 (1994); Durand v. Western Surety Co., 245 Neb. 649, 514 N.W.2d 840 (1994).

In the absence of anything to the contrary, statutory language is to be given its plain and ordinary meaning; an appellate court will not resort to interpretation to ascertain the meaning of statutory words which are plain, direct, and unambiguous. No Frills Supermarket, supra; State ex rel. Wieland v. Beermann, 246 Neb. 808, 523 N.W.2d 518 (1994).

The components of a series or collection of statutes pertaining to a certain subject matter may be conjunctively considered and construed to determine the intent of the Legislature so that different provisions of the act are consistent, harmonious, and sensible. In re Application of City of Lincoln, 243 Neb. 458, 500 N.W.2d 183 (1993). See Grady, supra.

The City is a municipality that owns and operates its own electric system that serves the inhabitants of the municipality. The City has a statutory right to serve areas within its corporate limits, which includes newly annexed areas. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 70-1008(2) (Reissue 1990) provides in part: ...