Richmond and Coquitlam have been ordered by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner to disclose how much they’ve spent appealing BCUC decisions. And now Surrey is launching its own “weak” challenge to another decision.
Introduction
The Utilities Commission Act gives the BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) powers to oversee energy utilities in the province. The BCUC regulates utility assets throughout their lifecycle, including investment, cost recovery, decommissioning and abandonment.
The Act also specifies that municipalities can’t override the BCUC’s authority. This allows the BCUC to take a provincial perspective and not be held hostage to local interests.
That said, the BCUC isn’t necessarily the final word on energy-related matters. Its decisions can be challenged in the courts, if you have the money for lawyers.
In recent years municipalities have become increasingly litigious, using their taxpayers’ money to try to overturn BCUC decisions. This hasn’t ended well for municipalities.
Now, at last, we may find out just how much some of these quixotic challenges have cost.
Municipal inquiry
In 2024 the BCUC concluded an inquiry into the regulation of municipal utilities. Several municipalities in BC provide energy services, such as electricity or heat, either directly or through companies they own.
The BCUC determined that while the Utilities Commission Act didn’t cover municipalities’ own activities, it did give the BCUC powers over the activities of companies owned by municipalities.
The City of Richmond (which owns Lulu Island Energy Company Limited) and the City of North Vancouver (which owns Lonsdale Energy Corporation) didn’t like that interpretation, and hoped the BC Court of Appeal would read the legislation differently. It didn’t.
I asked both municipalities how much they had spent on legal fees. North Vancouver told me they had spent $20,490, a fairly modest sum for litigation these days. Richmond, however, refused to disclose their costs, so I asked the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) for a review. Their decision was issued recently – Richmond was ordered to disclose their legal costs by October 16.
The BCUC was much more transparent, by the way, telling me they had spent $75,465 participating in the appeal. These costs, which will be paid for by energy users across the province, would not have been necessary but for the municipalities’ appeal.
If the BCUC’s legal bills are anything to go by, Richmond’s will cost its taxpayers well into six figures.
Coquitlam’s pipeline dispute with Fortis
The BCUC was forced to spend even more ($100,270) when the City of Coquitlam challenged another of its decisions. The BCUC had allowed Fortis to leave an abandoned gas pipeline under the Lougheed Highway, and the City asked for a second opinion. The BC Court of Appeal came back with the same answer it had given Richmond: appeal dismissed.
Coquitlam was equally shy about its legal costs, but again the OIPC came through on the side of transparency, and ordered the City to disclose them by October 19.
Richmond’s contract dispute with Fortis
Gas pipelines seem to be a source of much legal wrangling in BC.
In 2021 the BCUC had ruled on contract terms between Richmond and Fortis regarding the relocation of a gas pipeline. The municipality didn’t like the decision, and challenged it in the court. Result: the Court of Appeal rejected the appeal, saying the BCUC was in the right.
As before, Richmond refused to disclose its legal fees, which the OIPC has ordered them to share.
Surrey’s transmission line
These legal cases are all in the past now, but municipalities haven’t given up. The City of Surrey has now decided to get in on the act.
The BCUC decided in 2025 that Surrey must pay BC Hydro to move a transmission line if it wants to build a new road that would cross its path. The move is expensive – up to $39 million – but the transmission line was there first, and the BCUC decided that BC Hydro’s ratepayers should not have to pay the cost of a move that they don’t need.
Surrey is now taking the BCUC and BC Hydro to court. The Court of Appeal has agreed to consider only one part of the appeal, noting that it was “weak”. Regardless, the case will cost yet more money, paid for both by Surrey’s taxpayers and, because the BCUC and BC Hydro are involved, by energy customers across BC.
Conclusion
The BCUC’s decisions are legitimately open to challenge. It’s important that they don’t have untrammeled power over utilities, municipalities, or anyone else for that matter.
But we have a problem when municipalities use their taxpayers’ money to launch cases with little chance of success, hoping that no one will notice the cost.
Fortunately, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner took the view that municipalities shouldn’t be able to hide behind the veil of “solicitor-client privilege”. Taxpayers should know how their money is being spent.
It’s just a shame the information won’t be available in time for the municipal elections on October 17.