Court Opinion

ID: 8037465
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 03:22:35.385713+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:37:11.554496
License: Public Domain

Carter, J.,
dissenting.
The only question in this case is whether the city of Curtis had the power to acquire the franchise granted by the village of Maywood and to own and operate the electric plant and distribution system within the corporate limits of the village of Maywood and sell electric energy direct to' its inhabitants. As a premise for the discussion to follow, it cannot be disputed that a municipal corporation is a creature of statute. Its powers are limited to those granted in express terms, those reasonably implied from, or incident to, powers expressly granted, and those essential to the declared objects and purposes of the municipality. Special grants of power are to be strictly construed, and all doubt will be resolved against the existence of a power, rather than in favor of it. The rule generally is that a power not granted is withheld.
The legislature has authorized villages to grant franchises to and make contracts with any person, company or association for the purpose of granting to such person, company or association the furnishing of electric energy. Comp. St. 1929, sec. 17-440. Authority to grant such a franchise to another municipality was not granted, and consequently the village of Maywood had no power to grant a franchise to the city of Curtis. Clearly, if the city of Curtis was not a proper party to obtain such a franchise directly from the village of Maywood, it cannot subvert the statute and obtain one by assignment.
Neither is the city of Curtis authorized by statute to take or own a franchise from another city or village. The initi*128ated act before us, chapter 116, Laws 1931, authorizes cities and villages to extend their electric light and power systems beyond their corporate boundaries, to enter into agreements to connect and interconnect its electric light and power system with those of other cities and villages, and to enter into contracts to furnish and sell electric energy to any person, firm, association, corporation, municipality or public electric light and power district. We necessarily arrive at the conclusion that the village of Maywood is without power to grant a franchise to the city of Curtis for the privilege of providing electrical energy, and the city of Curtis has no authority to take or own such a franchise.
To permit a city or village to invade the territorial limits of another municipality and assume governmental or proprietary powers therein creates a conflict of j urisdiction and authority disadvantageous to both. Questions as to tax exemptions, eminent domain, control of rates, the compelling of adequate service, and the right of condemnation by the invaded city or village, create a field of political confusion which ought not be permitted in the absence of a statute expressly authorizing it. I submit that the language used in the act conclusively establishes an intent to avoid such a situation by withholding any such grant of authority to the cities and villages of this state. The attempt of the city of Curtis to take, own and operate under the franchise granted to the Maywood Light Company is, in my judgment, wholly unlawful, and the judgment of the district court ought to be reversed.
Simmons, C. J., and Johnsen, J., concur in dissent.