It is well-established that burden of proof before administrative “[a] litigant’s tribunals as well as before most civil proceedings is satisfied by establishing a preponderance of evidence which is substantial and Samuel J. Lansberry, Inc. v. Pa. Pub. Util. legally credible.” 578 A.2d 600, 602 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1990). Comm’n, DSC has the burden of proving that its proposed filing is just and reasonable. Summary of Public Input Hearings One public input hearing was held on February 26, 2015, at the Delaware Township Building in a Formal Complainant testified Dingman’s Ferry. Five individuals, each at the public input hearing. The following is a summary of the testimony given: Edward testified that the increase is too tremendous, that it is outrageous. Tr. at 31. O’Connor Mary Ellen Templin stated that the economy in Ferry is not good and that the Dingman’s proposed increase is outlandish. Tr. at 32. Debra Michell explained that she is retired and on a fixed income, struggling to maintain her residence. She stated that the proposed increase is unjust and that she would not be able to maintain her home with the increase. Tr. 33-34. Emma Dolan stated she has never had a problem with DSC. She also wondered why a small amount of their fees for updates which she thought would have [of money] wasn’t taken out – seemed more sensible than a 288% [sic] increase. Tr. at 36. She further testified that the proposed increase would force her out of her house, but that she could handle a small amount. Tr. at 36. Robert Bajkowski stated that he has owned his home for 20 years. He stated that the proposed increase was unfathomable. Tr. at 38.
It is well-established that “[a] litigant’s burden of proof before administrative tribunals as well as before most civil proceedings is satisfied by establishing a preponderance of evidence which is substantial and legally credible.” Samuel J. Lansberry, Inc. v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm’n, 578 A.2d 600, 602 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1990). DSC has the burden of proving that its proposed filing is just and reasonable. Summary of Public Input Hearings One public input hearing was held on February 26, 2015, at the Delaware Township Building in Dingman’s Ferry. Five individuals, each a Formal Complainant testified at the public input hearing. The following is a summary of the testimony given: Edward O’Connor testified that the increase is too tremendous, that it is outrageous. Tr. at 31. Mary Ellen Templin stated that the economy in Dingman’s Ferry is not good and that the proposed increase is outlandish. Tr. at 32. Debra Michell explained that she is retired and on a fixed income, struggling to maintain her residence. She stated that the proposed increase is unjust and that she would not be able to maintain her home with the increase. Tr. 33-34. Emma Dolan stated she has never had a problem with DSC. She also wondered why a small amount [of money] wasn’t taken out of their fees for updates – which she thought would have seemed more sensible than a 288% [sic] increase. Tr. at 36. She further testified that the proposed increase would force her out of her house, but that she could handle a small amount. Tr. at 36. Robert Bajkowski stated that he has owned his home for 20 years. He stated that the proposed increase was unfathomable. Tr. at 38.