**PUBLIC UTILITIES:**  **COMMISSION STATUTORY**  **CITIES: City**  **council is**  **not authorized**  **to delegate**  **operation and**  **management of** **telephone and** **cable television**  **services to**  **utility commission.**  **Op. Atty.**  **Gen. 624a-3**  **, May 7,**  **1968, superseded.**  **Minn. Stat.**  **§ 412.351. 624a-3**  **November 2,**  **1998**
**Paul J. Sandelin Crosslake**  **City Attorney**  **308 First**  **Street P.O.Box**  **298 Pequot**  **Lakes, MN 56472**  **Dear Mr.**  **Sandelin: Your**  **letter addressed**  **to Attorney**  **General Hubert**  **H. Humphrey**  **III, dated**  **January 13,**  **1998, �!ates the**  **following FACTS**  **The City**  **of Crosslake** **is a**  **statutory city**  **of the**  **fourth class**  **that owns**  **and operates**  **its own**  **telephone company**  **and cable**  **company. The**  **city has**  **adopted an**  **ordinance that**  **created a**  **loca: utilities**  **commission to**  **manage and**  **operate the**  **telephone company**  **and cable company.**  **The commission**  **establishes written**  **policies to**  **govern the**  **day to**  **day operations,**  **but the**  **city council**  **retains general**  **supervisory authority**  **over the**  **commission. The**  **city council**  **is now**  **considering other**  **options regarding**  **the management**  **and operation**  **of the**  **telephone and**  **cable companies.**  **The city's**  **goal is**  **to create**  **a commission** **that would**  **be independent** **of the** **city council.**  **Then you**  **ask the**  **following QUESTION**  **Does the**  **City of** **Crosslake have**  **the authority**  **to create**  **a utilities**  **commission to**  **manage and**  **operate the**  **Crosslake Telephone**  **and Cable**  **companies independent** **of the**  **City Council?**  **OPINION We**  **answer your**  **question in**  **the negative.**  **Except to**  **the extent**  **otherwise provided**  **by statute,**  **governance of**  **the affairs**  **of the**  **city is**  **vested in**  **the council.**  **See e.g0** **, Minn.**  **Stat. §§**  **412.111, 412.221,**  **412.241, 412.271**  **(1996). Caselaw,**  **and prior**  **opinions of** **this office**  **havee uniformly**  **held that,**  **absent specific** **statutory or**  **charter authority,**  **local governing**  **bodies may**  **not delegate**  **their powers**  **and duties**  **calling for**  **the exercise**  **of judgment**  **and discretion**  **to other**  **persons or**  **bodies. See**  **e.g., Muhring**  **v. School**  **District No.**  **31, 244**  **Minn. 432,**  **28 N.W.2d**  **655 (1947);**  **Minneapolis Gas**  **and Light**  **Co. v.**  **City of**  **Minneapolis, 36**  **Minn. 159,**  **30 N.W.**  **450 (1886);**  **Ops. Atty.** **Gen. 1007,**  **July 8,**  **1977; 1001-a,**  **September 13,**  **1950. While**  **there does**  **appear to**  **be authority**  **for a**  **statutory city**  **to own**  **and operate**  **telephone exchanges**  **and cable**  **television services,** **1 we**  **are not**  **aware of** **any statutory**  **provision authorizing**  **the delegation**  **of the**  **authority to operate**  **such city**  **functions to**  **a board**  **or commission**  **independent of** **the supervision**  **of the**  **city council.**  **It could**  **be argued**  **that the**  **council may**  **delegate such**  **operation to**  **a public**  **utility commission**  **established pursuant to**  **Minn. Stat.**  **§ 412.331**  **et seq.**  **Unlike advisory**  **boards and**  **departments created at the**  **discretion of** **the council**  **to assist**  **in management** **of city**  **affairs, such**  **a commission**  **has substantial**  **authority to**  **operate the**  **public utilities**  **placed under**  **its jurisdiction,**  **independent of** **council control. See**  **Minn. Stat.**  **§ 412.361-412.371.**  **Ho,vever, while**  **telephone and**  **cable services**  **would seem**  **normally to**  **fall within**  **the term "public**  **utilities," Section**  **412.351 expressly**  **limits the**  **"public utilities"**  **that may**  **be placed**  **und.::r the**  **jurisdiction of** **the commission**  **as follows:**  **The council**  **shall, in**  **the ordinance**  **establishing the**  **commission, decide which**  **of the** **following public utilities**  **shall be**  **within the**  **commission's jurisdiction:**  **(I) the**  **city water** **system; (2)**  **light and**  **power system,**  **including any**  **system then**  **in use**  **or later**  **acquired for**  **the production**  **and distribution**  **of steam heat;**  **(3) gas**  **system; (4)e** **sanitary or**  **storm sewer**  **system or**  **both, including**  **the city**  **sewage disposale**  **plant; (5)**  **public building**  **owned or**  **leased by**  **the city;**  **(6) district**  **heating system.e**  **As used**  **subsequently in**  **s,:ctions 412.51**  **to 412.391,**  **the term**  **"public utility"e**  **means any**  **water, light**  **and power,**  **gas or**  **sewer system,**  **or public**  **buildings thuse**  **placed by**  **ordinance under**  **the jurisdiction** **of the** **public utilities**  **commission.e**
**It is**  **a general**  **rule of** **statutory construction**  **that "where**  **a statute**  **enumerates the**  **persons or**  **things to**  **be affected**  **by its**  **provisions, there**  **is an**  **implied exclusion**  **of others."**  **Maytag Co.**  **v.**

**See e.g.,**  **Minn. Stat.**  **§§ 237.19,**  **238.08, 412.014,**  **465.70.**

**2 1** **Comm'r. of** **Taxation, 218**  **Minn. 460,**  **463, 17**  **N.W.2d, 37,**  **40 (1944).**  **See also**  **Lilly v.**  **City of**  **Minneapolis, 527**  **N.W.2d 107**  **(Minn. Ct.**  **App. 1995);**  **A/AL, Inc.**  **v. City**  **of Faribault,**  **569 N.W.2d**  **546 (Minn.**  **Ct. App.,**  **1997). Inasmuch**  **as neither** **telephone nor cable**  **television service**  **is listed**  **in section** **412.351, we**  **must conclude that**  **management of** **those services**  **may not** **be vested**  **in a**  **utility commission. We are**  **aware that**  **in Op.**  **Atty. Gen.**  **62 4a-3,**  **May, 7,**  **1968, this**  **Office opined**  **that a**  **village council** 
**was authorized**  **by Section**  **412.351 (1965)**  **to delegate**  **operation of**  **a television**  **transmission system**  **to the**  **village utility commission.**  **However, we**  **have reviewed**  **the wording**  **of Section**  **412.351 as**  **it existed**  **in 1965**  **and in**  **1967, and**  **cannot discern**  **the statutory**  **basis for**  **that determination.**  **Nor does**  **the opinion**  **itself supply**  **any explanation**  **of the**  **process whereby**  **that conclusion**  **was reached.**  **Consequently we**  **do not**  **find the**  **pre"ious opinion**  **persuasive, and**  **supersede it** **to the extent**  **that it**  **is inconsistent**  **with this**  **opinion. Very**  **truly yours,**  **HUBERT H.**  **HUMPHREY III**  **Attorney General** 

**KENNETH E.** **RASCHKE, JR.**  **Assistant Attorney**  **General**

**3**