Trending
The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio rejected a request from the city of Youngstown and the Office of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel to require an expiration date for large emergency rate increases for downtown steam heat customers.
In a 4-0 vote Wednesday affirming its June 24 decision, the PUCO wrote the OCC and Youngstown request "did not demonstrate in their assignments of error that the finding and order was in any respect unjust or unwarranted."
The city and the OCC asked if an end date isn't set for the emergency rate hikes that the PUCO require SOBE Thermal Energy Systems LLC, the troubled steam heat utility company for most of downtown, file an application for new permanent rate increases.
Also, the two entities urged the PUCO to require language that the emergency increases are subject to refunds.
In the Sept. 14 joint filing, the city and the OCC did not object to the major rate increases granted June 24 by the commission and instead made the other requests of the PUCO. The increases took effect June 30.
Setting an expiration date, the PUCO ruled, is a "meritless" argument because "the emergency rates are temporary. Now that the emergency rates are in effect, the receiver is required to provide monthly status reports to staff that include detailed financial information. Additionally, the commission maintains its jurisdiction over SOBE pursuant to (state law) and may terminate the emergency rates when appropriate."
That same state law, the PUCO ruled, doesn't require SOBE "to file a permanent rate case within a specific time period. Conversely, staff recommended in the present rate case that the commission establish no 'strict deadline by which SOBE must file a base rate case' and instead recommend 'that the receiver submit monthly status reports to staff' so that staff can stay apprised and 'make further recommendations to the commission.'"
Regarding the refund, the PUCO wrote the "OCC and Youngstown present no evidence to suggest that the emergency rates are above the minimum level necessary to relieve the emergency. Indeed, the receiver's report explains that SOBE does not have sufficient funds to pay debts to its receiver and counsel, does not have sufficient funds to ensure all customers have working meters, and it will be unable to pay its expenses in November 2026 or earlier. The receiver's report also states that SOBE may be required to seek abandonment of the facility. Thus, it appears as though the emergency rates may not be sufficient to relieve the emergency, and we are unconvinced that 'subject to refund' language is necessary given these circumstances."
City Law Director Adam Buente said: "We are once again disappointed by the PUCO's lack of meaningful oversight. We are evaluating the possibility of an appeal."
J.P. Blackwood, OCC spokesman, said the counsel is looking at the entry from the PUCO.
"We'll evaluate it and consider the next steps," he said.
The rate hike authorized by the PUCO called for 13 of the SOBE's then 23 customers, to pay 93% increases for the non-heating season between May and October. Two others were to pay 92% more with one at 91% and two at 36%. The five other customers are paying between 64% and 80% more.
That same PUCO decision called for the rate to increase by another 162% for 14 of SOBE's customers with one charged 163% more between November and April and two billed 85% more. The six others were to be charged increases between 123% and 159%.
That additional rate increase, which took effect Sunday, is not necessarily correct and is too high, SOBE receiver John C. Collins and Michael Moran, the utility's legal counsel, recently said.
Three of the 23 buildings on the system have since left it and one was disconnected for nonpayment.
Because of SOBE's significant financial problems, it will be out of money by January unless the state and/or federal government intervenes with funding, Collins said.
Collins and Moran said SOBE hasn't made any additional money with the huge rate increases because several customers refuse to pay them.
SOBE was put into court-ordered receivership Sept. 26, 2025, after the PUCO determined the utility company could no longer provide services to its customers.