PUBLIC UTILITIES

PUBLIC UTILITIES: ELECTRICITY – LIGHT & POWER: DELINQUENT BILLS: Municipal utilities must use reasonable methods to compel payment for services and utility service may not be disconnected other than for good cause. Op. Atty. Gen. 624c-4 (Nov. 2, 1938) superseded. 624c-4 (cr.ref. 624d-5) John T. Shockley May 16, 2019 Page 2 Courts in other states have discussed the methods municipal utilities may or may not use to enforce the collection of fees or utility charges. As you noted in your letter, the South Dakota Supreme Court held that a city wrongfully disconnected electrical and telephone service for nonpayment of garbage collection fees because garbage collection was a collateral matter. See Owens v. City ofBeresjord, 201 N.W.2d 890, 893 (S.D. 1972). Similarly, the Nebraska Supreme Court held that a city could not attempt to force collection of garbage fees by disconnecting water service. See Garner v. City ofAurora, 30 N.W.2d 917, 921 (Neb. 1948). On the other hand, the California Supreme Court held that, where a city used a single bill for municipal services (water, sewer, and garbage collection), the city did not violate due process by terminating all municipal services for failure to pay the garbage collection portion of the joint bill. See Perez v. City of San Bruno, 616 P.2d 1287, 1296-97 (Cal. 1980). The court cautioned, however, that "when a statutory or legislative scheme utilizes a means to reach its end and which is unduly harsh or exacts a penalty which may be deemed oppressive in light of the legitimate objections sought to be achieved, it may be held to be violative of constitutional due process guarantees." Id. at 1297. A Minnesota Attorney General opinion from 193 8 opined that a village providing water, heat, and electricity, all billed on one statement, may adopt a regulation allowing for discontinuance of any and all services for delinquency of one service. Op. Atty. Gen. 624c-4 (Nov. 2, 1938). While Attorney General opinions are given careful consideration, they are not binding. Village of Blaine v. lndep. Sch. Dist. No. 12, Anoka Cty., 138 N.W.2d 32, 39 (Minn. 1965). Given the substantial development of the law since 1938, regarding consumer protection, entitlements to provision of gas, electric, and water service, and the reasonableness of terminating services for nonpayment, this Office is not confident that the 193 8 opinion remains an accurate legal analysis and expressly overrules it. Ultimately, whether enforcement of a city ordinance that allows for disconnection of a utility service based upon nonpayment of another service is unreasonable turns on specific questions of fact and the construction of any local ordinance or resolution implementing the enforcement method. The Attorney General does not render opinions that require making such factual determinations or construing the meaning of terms in local ordinances or resolutions. See Op. Atty. Gen. 629a (May 9, 1975). You did not supply a specific ordinance, rule, or regulation John T. Shockley May 16, 2019 Page 3 implementing the enforcement method you discussed in your request. Given the breadth of the municipal services established in your inquiry, however, we do not believe that the law allows a municipality to disconnect utility service for nonpayment of the varied and unrelated municipal services stated in your letter. Enclosure: 114479693-vl Sincerely, KEITH ELLISON Attorney General 1'4£t>' KATHERINE HINDERLIE Assistant Attorney General (651) 757-1468 (Voice) (651) 297-1235 (Fax) Op. Atty. Gen. 629a (May 9, 1975) Op. Atty. Gen. 624c-4 (Nov. 2, 1938) MINNESOTA LEGAL REGISTER MAY, 1975 Vol. 8, No. 5 Page 22 Opinion, of the Attorney General Hon. WARREN SPANNAUS ATTORNEY GENERAL: OPINIONS OF: Proper subjects for opinions of Attorney General discussed, Thomas M. Sweeney, Esq. Blaine City Attorney 2200 American National Bank Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 In your letter to Attorney General you state substantially the following FACTS May 9, 1975 629-a (Cr. Ref. 13) Warren Spannaus, At the general election in November 1974 a proposal to amend the city charter of Blaine was submitted to the city's voters and was approved. The amendment provides for the division of the city into three election districts and for the election of two council members from each district. It also provides that the population of each district shall not be more than 5 percent over or under the average popu­ lation per di-strict, which is calculated by dividing the total city population by three. The amendment also states that if there is a population difference from district to di-strict of more than 5 percent of the average population, the char­ ter commission must submit a redistricting proposal to the city council. The Blaine Charter Commission in its preparation aqd drafting of this amendment intended that the difference in population between election districts would not be more than 5 percent over or under the average population for a district. Therefore, the maximum allowable difference in population between election districts could be as great as 10 percent of the average population, You then ask substantially the following QUESTION Docs the Blaine City Charter, as amended, permit a maximum population difference between election districts of 10 percent of the average population per district? OPINION The answer to this question depends entirely upon a construction of the Blaine City Charter. No question is presented concerning the authority to adopt this provision or involving the application or interpretation of ·state sta­ tutory provisions. Moreover, it does not appear that the provision is commonly found in municipal charters so as to be of significance to home rule charter cities generally. See Minn. Stat. § 8.07 (1974), providing for the issuance of opinions on questions of "public importance."* • Minn. Stat. § 8.07 (1974) lists those officials to whom opinions may be issued. That section provides as follows: The attorney general on application shall give bis opin­ ion, in writing, to county, city, town attorneys, or the attorneys for the board of a school district or unorgani­ zed territory on questions of public importance; and on application of the commissioner of education be shall give his opinion, in writing, upon any question arising under the laws relating to public schools. On all school matters such opinion shall be decisive until the question involved be decided otherwise by a court of competent jurisdiction. See also Minn. Stat, §§ 8,06 (regarding opinions to the leg- IN THIS ISSUB 11■.,Jeet O•• lfe, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Opinions Of, 629-a 5/9/76 COUNTY: Pollution Control: Solid Waste, 125a-68 5/21/76 In construing a charter provision, the rules of statutory construction are generally applicable. See 2 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations § 9.22 (3rd ed. 1966). The declared object of statutory construction ls to- ascertain and effec­ tuate the intention of the legislature. Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (1974). When the words of a statute are not explicit, the legislature's intent may be ascertained by considering, among other things, the occasion and necessity for the law, the circumstances under which it was enacted, the mischief to be remedied, and the object to be attained. Id. Thus, an interpretation of a charter provision such as that referred to in the facts would require an examination of a number of factors, many of which are of a peculiarly local nature. Local officials rather than state officials are thus in the mo·st advantageous position to recognize and evaluate the factors which have to be considered in con­ struing such a provision. For these reasons, the city attor­ ney is the appropriate official to analyze questions of the type presented and provide his or her opinion to the municipal council or other municipal agency. The same is true with respect to questions concerning the meaning of other local legal provisions such as ordinances and resolu­ tions. Similar considerations dictate that provisions of federal law generally be construed by the appropriate federal authority. For purposes of summarizing the rules discussed in this and prior opinions, we note that rulings of the Attorney General do not ordinarily undertake to: (1) Determine the constitutionality of state statutes since this office may deem it appropriate to intervene and de­ fend challenges to the constitutionality of statutes. See Minn. Stat. § 555.11 (1974); Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 144; Minn. Dist Ct. (Civ.l R 24.04; Op. Atty. Gen. 733G, July 23, 1945. (2) Make factual determinations since this office is not equipped to investigate and evaluate questions of fact. See, e.g., Ops. Atty. Gen. 63a-11, May 10, 1955 and 121a-6, April 12, 1948. (3) Interpret the meaning of terms in contracts and other agreements since the terms are generally adopted for the purpose of preserving the intent of the parties and construing their meaning often involves factual determin­ ations as to such intent. See. Op. Atty. Gen. 629-a, July 25, 1973. (4) Decide questions which are likely to arise in litiga­ tion which is underway or is imminent, since our opin­ ions are advisory and we must defer to the judiciary in islature and legislative committees and commissions and to state officials and agencies) and 270.09 (regarding opin­ ions to the Commissioner of Revenue). 23 MINNESOTA LEGAL REGISTER Published monthly and containing all Opinions of the Minnesota Attorney General Pnbll¬bed by The Progrees-Regieter 200 Upper Midwest Bldg., Mlnne11,polls, Mn. 66401 Sold only In combination with The Progress­ Register (weekly) at $15.00 per year In Min­ nesota.. Out-of-state $16.00 per y{'a.r. Payable In advance. Binder and Index aervlce Included, Second-cla.aa poatn.ge paid at Minneapolis, Mn. such cases. See Ops. Atty. Gen. 519M, Oct. 18, 1956, and 196n, March 30, 1951. (5) Decide hypothetical or moot questions. See Op. Atty. Gen. 519M, May 8, 1951. (6) Make a general review of a local ordinance, regula­ tion, resolution or contract to determine the validity thereof or to ascertain possible legal problems, since the task of making such a review is, of course, the re­ sponsibility of local officials. See Op. Atty. Gen. 477b-14, Oct. 9, 1973. (7) Construe provisions of federal law. See textual di·s• cussion supra. (8) Construe the meaning of terms in city charters and local ordinances and resolutions. See textual discussion supra. We trust that the foregoing general statement on the nature of opinions will prove to be informative and of guidance to those requesting opinions. WARREN SPANNAUS, Attorney General Thomas G. Mattson, Assist. Atty. Gen. MAY, 1985 '') ·,,r_ \ \ ,: .) ., :r  ,, '-.S) ----.j - INDEX: Villages •- Water and light depa.rtment - services ... _ Disoontinuance o˶ service for failure to pay tor same. Kr. He.l:l.man. Sokoohat Tillage Attorney Ool.eraine, H.innosota Dar 31r: Thia will acknowledge reeeipt ot yov le˷ter to A'l.torney General. ··,1111&& s. 1˸2: .. ,in wb.eroin 7ou ato.t.e u4 laqulre: •sltlUl.ticll: 'l'lle Tillage wnter, 11.&ht, •'•• • s˹eioa me11• the 'three tollowl .... rT1eeMa (1) .. ter, {I) heat, a.ad (S) •l.atri•l'T• TM $11:Ne 11- are billed on oa.e e\a˺a,, alt •"CJl 1, :e4 aepuatelJ'. Coanaer, 1n oar .... , ,-,-. 'Q kla n.ur aad elaieU'i.el,7 1Ja 1"11l.l. 1 lea.Y- 111& tu hM.\ •.u.ra•• unpa.14. a.a \he • la- alea tlNoall.JIM •1 '-lier ot t.11• eta• ••"ri. ••• (Witter or:.eleolr101,7) ˻ou ado»,1oa et no.ti a r11l.lag u 1- • ,he ˼ea\ 1˽ not pa1˾t" Jdaa. SYS, ou- S.,reae Oou-\ llel4 \.t:.st; a -.miolpall'7 •7 a6Dp, reaaoD&llle rul,■ u• r-s'!!l.a\lou lo ea.tore• _p˿t et •M%'•• ror •̀ •́ aenl••̂ r . Acred ,̃ •ODaWrs 7 t..11• ..aieipal.l\7. Ille AN or POW8ll Ye City or Dlll•'-ll• 91 JliJul. N, , .. o-liga,10 oa, par, of lh ooa .... r a n••1Ye &Jltl par ror atak ••rTl••• re•̄ • lll)Oll oon,rae1i a.JUI. it tile -'-aof. ot enrore ..... ̅ ot P•JJ18•t f'•r n er::;.op̆ •4 by tu ...,.1•1• pa11,7 1• reaaopllle ud. no" proh11t1̇ ry he eoanaar nit• JNt■ alaa•ll '-o \ho nil.es alld. regal.atioaa ö ,he auaielpal.lt7 pertailliq to aueh JU'thol ot pay:aea1.. Ua4•r '.b.• ru1• laid down 'by our Supr ... Oour\ 1D \Alt abo•• reterre4 1lo eaaea 1 we are ot the oplDloa i1:1at ■a14 water and 118.b.t oc:aa1aa1on -T adopt a regul ,1on prondlag that wh&DeY•l" &llJ of t;lle obarpa tor ••rd .... t.rniehe4 by the water an4 llgh\ 4epar'-ta, of-.. Yillap NOCNM telhqueat an7 or all 01 Ȗȗoh aenl••• -1 N la­ eon•laae4 uatU •11 oon■umar p 7■ auoh 4•11nqueat ill•• You alao 1aq_u1r• a •;.rou:!.4 it make MJ' 41tterttno• if, wbaa l••• the.aȘ• ,o,a1. 4ue oa t.ll• •--1••1 •• ett.. te11•nt 1• pa:l4• it the r elp' wre aarlce4 'pe.Jllll.e•t OD ••ooUAt' Ulllt •• or ,...,_., 1a t\111 for water an4 eleotr1el\J ,o ____ ,,ș It tlae oomaiea1onll\op,a a re \tl t1iln prn14Ț t 'i .... t.bli onarge tor any or the •-nioe■ tlll"niahed ,. • OOD• et ț •....-le•• aa7 b• 41aaont 111ae4 uatil th• •oar&•• Ȝ-=•tu m ,-ta.· ,.. lt•lleT11 t.bat '-• oo-s•ȝiga• • riebt Ȟa ,1.., B7 Yours Yery trul.J WILLIAM n. ;ȟIN A•tor••Ƞ Genaral »WIQHS.' N. lOHNSOK I'■ wou.14 DO'C 'be $peoial .:.aaiatail't .·ȡ t\orAeJ Oen•ral.