Chapter 11 – Local Governments: Counties, Cities & Communities

The Legal Status of Local Governments

Local governments are subdivisions of state government that exercise authority delegated to them by the state

States are not sovereign entities

their authority flows from the state

U.S. Constitution recognizes states as sovereign

but is silent on local governments (even Washington, D.C.)

Relationship between state & local gov’t

unitary, not federal

Dillon’s Rule (1868)

“Municipal corporations owe their origin to the legislature. As it creates, so may it destroy.” – John F. Dillon (Clinton v. Cedar Rapids, 1868)

Local gov’ts possess

only those powers explicitly granted by the state constitution or statute

Dillon’s Rule Establishes

a narrow interpretation of local authority

Dillon’s Rule Cited

by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hunter v. Pittsburgh (1907)

Home Rule

cities have inherent powers not granted by state constitution or laws

Home Rule Allows 

local communities to adopt a charter and exercise self-government

Home Rule Powers

limited only by what state law or charter forbids

In Texas: Cities > 5,000

may adopt a home rule charter; smaller ones operate under general law

Advantages of Home Rule

Greater local autonomy, democracy, citizen participation, and policy control

Disadvantages of Home Rule

Fragmentation, “patchwork” laws, interest-group influence, and long ballots

Functions of Local Government

• Service Function

• Political Function

Service Function

providing services not offered by private sector (e.g., police, roads, sanitation)

Political Function

resolving conflicts over “who gets what” and representing citizens politically

Service and political functions frequently overlap

the quality of services reflects local political choices

Types of Local Governments

• General-Purpose Governments

• Special-Purpose Governments

General-Purpose Governments

• Provide a wide range of services.

• Include counties, municipalities, and towns/townships.

Special-Purpose Governments

• Created for specific functions (e.g., school, fire, utility, MUD).

• Often least understood and least transparent to voters.

• Texas ≈ 4,000 special districts (1,070 ISDs + 2,984 others)

County Governments

the oldest form of U.S. local government

Traditional Commission Form

Members share responsibility for all functions — no chief executive

Traditional Commission Form - Board of Commissioners

acts as both legislature and executive

Traditional Commission Form - Elected officials

sheriff, constable, county clerk, tax assessor, treasurer, auditor, coroner, health officer, library board

Council-Executive Form

• Centralized structure with a county executive or “mayor.”

• Commissioners act as legislative body. Found in ~15% of U.S. counties

Council-Administrator Form

• Professional administrator handles daily operations; commissioners handle politics and policy.

• Common in ~12% of U.S. counties.

Home Rule Counties

37 states permit charters for counties with greater autonomy (~9% of counties)

Texas Counties

All use the commissioners’ court structure (4 commissioners + county judge)

Texas Counties Responsibilities and Structure

defined by the Texas Constitution

Texas counties primary functions & expenses

law enforcement (≈50%), roads (10–30%), health & welfare (≈10%)

Texas counties serve as

local administrators for state functions (voter registration, courts, public records)

Municipal Corporations

Incorporated communities with a city charter

Charter acts as

“mini-constitution” defining structure & powers

Cities may be

special-act, general-law, or home-rule charter cities

Special Act Charter

Granted individually by state legislature; rare today. Changes require legislative approval

General Law Charter

“One-size-fits-all ” rules; municipality has only state-granted powers

Home Rule Charter

Locally drafted & voter-approved charter allowing broad self-governance

General Law Cities (Texas)

small cities (<5,000), limited powers

Home Rule Cities (Texas)

 ≥ 5,000 population, “full power of self-government,” may do anything not prohibited by law

College Station

incorporated as a general law city (1938) and adopted a home-rule charter (1952)

Forms of Municipal Government

• Commission Form

• Town Meeting / Representative Town Meeting

• Council-Manager Form

• Mayor-Council Form

Commission Form

Elected board combines legislative and executive power; departments led by commissioners; rare today (<1%)

Town Meeting / Representative Town Meeting

Direct democracy in New England towns; voters make policy; Board of Selectmen implements. Low actual participation

Council-Manager Form

Separates political & administrative functions. Council makes policy; appoints a professional city manager. Common (~55%).

Mayor-Council Form

Common (~39%). Power balance depends on whether the mayor is strong or weak

Strong Mayor-Council

• Clear separation of powers: council = legislature; mayor = chief executive.

• Mayor has veto, agenda-setting, appointment & budget powers.

• Efficient but risks corruption (“boss politics”).

Strong Mayor-Council Example

Houston — only large Texas city with strong-mayor form

Weak Mayor-Council

• Council retains legislative and executive authority.

• Mayor’s role is largely ceremonial; success relies on informal influence.

Local politics concerns

things with direct, measurable effects on daily life — policing, property, zoning, roads, schools — yet few actually participate

Local Election Turnout 

is low, especially in off-year or stand-alone elections

Local Elections Participants 

skew older, whiter, and more affluent

Local elections are nonpartisan

in ≈ 80% of U.S. cities (including Texas)

Single-Member Districts (Wards)

One representative per geographic district; enhances minority representation

At-Large Seats

City-wide elections; intended for broad view but can dilute minority voices

Efforts to convert districts to at-large systems

sometimes masked attempts to limit representation of minorities and poorer neighborhoods

Low turnout

nonpartisan ballots, separate elections, small cities, homogeneity, council-manager form

High turnout

partisan elections, concurrent with state/national races, diverse large cities, referenda issues, strong-mayor form

Political machines

centralized power to get things done in disorganized growing cities

Machine politics relied on

patronage and tangible benefits (jobs, services) for loyalty

Machine politics catered to

immigrants and the urban poor

Machine politics provided

social services before modern welfare programs

Progressive Reform Movement

Reaction against corruption & machine dominance

Progressive Reform Movement Goals

nonpartisan elections, civil service reforms, short ballots, council-manager government, and administrative efficiency

Reformers viewed municipal government

as an administrative problem, not a political one

Decline of Machines

• Assimilation of white ethnic groups reduced constituencies.

• Federal social programs supplanted local patronage.

• Rising middle class values & structural reforms weakened party organizations.

Decline of Machines Result

candidate-centered politics and fragmented urban coalitions

Democrats

dominate most urban areas since the New Deal

“Big-tent” Democratic coalition

includes working class, minorities, labor, progressives

Democratic coalition internal splits

over crime, policing, and public spending have grown

Urban Republicans

Appeal to voters on “law and order,” lower taxes, and cutting bureaucracy

Post-2016 realignment

GOP has made some urban gains among working-class and Hispanic voters