Payment for Electricity Expenses - Allocation Between Nonprofit Organizations
Question
We are a nonprofit organization that received an allocation from the municipality to use part of an existing municipal building. The remainder of the building is in use by another nonprofit organization, which has held it under a right of use since the building was established.
The arrangement with the municipality was that we would order a separate electricity connection from the Israel Electric Corporation, so that each nonprofit organization would have its own independent electricity meter. Until the separate connection is installed, we are using electricity from the existing connection of the second nonprofit organization and paying it for our electricity consumption. We note that the existing connection was ordered and funded by the second nonprofit organization since the building was established.
We would like to ask from a halachic standpoint:
A. Must we participate, in addition to payment for the actual electricity consumption, also in the fixed expenses of the electricity bill, such as the fixed charge and connection fees, insofar as they are included in the bill? This is because these expenses do not change according to the amount of consumption, and the second nonprofit organization would have been obligated to pay them in the same amount even had we not used any electricity at all.
B. If we are indeed obligated to participate in the fixed expenses, how should our share be calculated: by an equal division between the two nonprofit organizations, according to actual electricity consumption, according to the area of the building used by each nonprofit organization, or according to some other method of calculation?
With blessings and many thanks.
Answer
Hello and blessings.
The response of the dayanim of the Beit Hora’ah: Participation in electricity expenses. Since from now on everything will be according to what they decide, the entire question is relevant with regard to the shared past. In my humble opinion, there is no partnership here, since the first nonprofit organization gave them a right of use in its electricity connection, but not an ownership partnership in the electricity. Accordingly, the entire discussion is under the law of one who benefits.
Aside from the monthly consumption, which they certainly must pay according to the proportion of their usage, it seems that they should also be obligated in part of the management fees and the fixed payment, for these too are part of the service through which they benefit from the connection, from the meter reading, and from the ongoing use. And although the first nonprofit organization would have paid the fixed payment even without them, one should not say for that reason that this is merely a case of “one benefits and the other does not lose,” since in practice their use causes an actual loss through electricity consumption. And we find that if the beneficiary caused the owners even a slight loss, there are those who say that we impose upon him the entire value of his benefit, such as one who lives in another person’s house and slightly blackens the walls, who is obligated for the full rental value of the benefit, and not only for the amount of the loss (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 363:7; Sema ad loc., se’if katan 18).
The manner of payment under the law of one who benefits appears to be that one should compromise according to the proportion of their usage. That is, if the fixed monthly usage fees are 90 NIS and they consume about one-third relative to the first nonprofit organization, they should pay approximately 30 NIS per month.
