Download Study Guide to Go - Cengage Learning

CHAPTER 3
Study Guide To Go
Learning Objectives
1.
Identify challenges to grassroots governments.
2.
Explain the differences between general-law cities and home-rule cities in Texas.
3.
Compare the structures of the principal forms of municipal government operating in Texas.
4.
Explain the difference between the at-large system and single-member districts for electing
council members in Texas cities.
5.
Explain the cumulative voting procedure and its purpose.
6.
List typical public services provided by municipalities in Texas.
7.
Describe the sources of revenue for Texas municipalities and illustrate typical expenditures.
8.
Describe the structure and operation of county government, noting the powers and functions
of elected county officers.
9.
Describe the sources of revenue for Texas counties, and illustrate typical expenditures.
10. Identify two basic problems that underlie reform of county government, and note special
problems of the 40 counties on or near the Mexican border.
11. Outline the principal characteristics and functions of independent school districts, junior or
community college districts, and noneducation special districts.
12. Summarize the means whereby some of the problems of Texas’s metropolitan areas have
been addressed.
13. Discuss San Antonio’s experience with term limits for members of the city council.
14.
Explain why the residents of Cameron Park, a colonia in South Texas, are so optimistic.
Local Governments
I.
II.
Local Politics in Context
A. Local Governments and Federalism
B. Grassroots Challenges
Municipal Governments
A. Legal Status of Municipalities
B. Forms of Municipal Government
1. Strong Mayor-Council
2. Weak Mayor-Council
3. Council-Manager
4. Commission
C. Municipal Politics
D. Municipal Services
E. Municipal Government Revenue
1. Taxes
2. Fees
3. Bonds
4. Property Taxes and Tax Exemptions
5. The Bottom Line
F. Generating Revenue for Economic Development
III. Counties
A. Structure and Operation
1. Commissioners Court
2. County Judge
3. County Attorney and County Sheriff
4. County Clerk and County Tax Assessor-Collector
5. Other County Officers
B. County Finance
1. Taxation
2. Revenues from Nontax Sources
3. Tax Incentives
4. The Bottom Line
5. Expenditures
C. County Government Reform
D. Border Counties
IV. Special Districts
A. Public School Districts
B. Junior or Community College Districts
C. Noneducation Special Districts
V. Metropolitan Areas
A. Councils of Governments
B. Municipal Annexation
Overview of the Text (pp. 95-123)
An understanding of local government is necessary if citizens are to influence policymaking
designed to address problems of cities, counties, or special districts.
Local Politics in Context (pp. 96-97). Texas’s local governments must deal with a wide range of
issues. Included are crime, threat of terrorism, public school controversies, and decaying roads,
streets, and bridges. Consequently, policies made by the governing bodies of local governments
affect all citizens. Some Texans become directly involved in local politics by running for city,
county, or special-district offices; others limit their participation to voting.
Municipal Governments (pp. 98-109). Texas municipalities are chartered as general-law cities
or home-rule cities. A municipality of the latter type must have a population of 5,000 or more at
the time its voters choose to become a home-rule city and adopt a charter.
The cities of Texas are organized according to one of the following models: strong mayorcouncil, weak mayor-council, council-manager, or commission. Each of these forms of municipal
corporation includes a popularly elected policymaking body, usually called the city council.
In recent years, municipal politics in Texas has featured rising expectations of African Americans
and Latinos for equal representation in city councils. Some of the state’s cities (including five of
the largest) have implemented single-member district plans for electing all council members,
whereas Houston has adopted a plan that combines single-member and at-large election systems.
A few Texas cities and 40 school districts now use a cumulative voting system that enhances
election opportunities for Latinos and African Americans.
Typical concerns of municipal governments include police and fire protection, streets, water
supply, and sewer services. Regulatory power extends to zoning, construction, food service, and
sanitation. Although not required, many cities operate libraries, airports, hospitals, and public
housing units.
Texas cities raise revenue from general property taxes, sales taxes, franchise fees paid by public
utilities (telephone and TV cable), licenses for the sale of beer and liquor, building and plumbing
permits, and money collected by municipal courts in the form of court costs, fines, and
forfeitures. Some cities profit from operating water, electric, and gas utilities. When revenue does
not cover expenses, cities borrow money by selling bonds.
Counties (pp. 110-117). Texas has 254 counties, but all counties have essentially the same
governmental structure. The principal policymaking organ of county government is the county
commissioners court. It is a body composed of the county judge and four commissioners elected
for four-year terms to represent precincts of approximately equal population. Presided over by the
county judge, the commissioners court adopts the county budget, sets the property tax rate,
administers and finances elections, administers county health and welfare programs, and directs
the maintenance of county roads and bridges. Major administrative responsibility at the county
level is vested in the county judge, who is elected for a term of four years. The county sheriff,
attorney, clerk, tax assessor-collector, and treasurer are also elected for four-year terms.
Texas counties usually rely heavily on property taxes for revenue. They also benefit from fees for
alcoholic beverage permits and traffic fines, and they share state motor vehicle taxes and fees.
Federal grants-in-aid and borrowing through the sale of bonds provide additional county
revenues.
Spending patterns vary from county to county, but maintenance of roads and bridges requires the
greatest expenditures by rural counties. Because Texas counties do not have home-rule status, the
organization of county governments is dictated by constitutional provisions that are not easily
changed. Servicing residents of colonias in the 40 counties on or near the Mexican border
presents special problems for county governments.
Special Districts (pp. 118-120). Texas’s special districts fall into two basic categories: school
districts and noneducation special districts. Special districts are created by the legislature or, in
some cases, by local ordinance. A special district usually has one function and serves a specific
group of people in a particular geographic area.
More than 1,000 independent school districts administer the public schools of Texas. Each
independent school district is supervised by a popularly elected, non-salaried board of trustees.
Junior or community college districts provide two-year academic programs beyond high school,
along with various technical and vocational programs. Although they receive some federal and
state funds, along with private donations, these institutions of higher education are partially
financed by local property taxes and by tuition and fees paid by students. Each junior or
community college district is governed by a board that sets the tax rate, issues bonds (subject to
voter approval), and adopts an annual budget.
Texas has more than 2,200 noneducation special districts that handle problems involving water
supply, sewage, parks, housing, irrigation, and fire protection. Mass transit authorities (like
Houston’s Metro and Dallas’s DART) are financed by a 1 percent sales tax.
Metropolitan Areas (pp. 120-123). The problems of local governments in Texas’s big-city areas
are especially troublesome because more than 85 percent of the state’s citizens are directly
affected. Because of the relatively large number of Texas counties, the proliferation of special
districts, and the incorporation of new municipalities, 24 councils of governments (COGs) have
been created to promote regional planning and cooperation among units of local government.
Annexation of adjacent territory is the main device whereby individual cities attempt to deal with
metropolitan problems.
Looking Ahead (p. 123). More citizen involvement is needed to improve the functioning of
Texas’s cities, counties, and special districts. Single-member districts and newly empowered
African-American and Latino voters are changing local political agendas.
Overview of the Selected Readings
“‘Extreme’ Term Limits—San Antonio Style” by Alexander E. Briseno (pp. 128-131)
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, San Antonio’s city council passed some unpopular measures.
Ultimately, citizens demanded and obtained an amendment to the city charter. The amendment
limits to two the number of terms that a council member or mayor can serve. Alexander E.
Briseno argues these limits are a bad idea. He contends that “extreme” term limits undermine
newly elected officials’ ability to move through the political cycle that involves learning,
adapting, executing, campaigning, and completing projects. Such limits also mean a constant
influx of freshmen who need time to “get up to speed” on the voluminous and detailed work of
municipal government. Briseno claims that a two-term limit reduces the pool of political talent
available for filling San Antonio’s elective offices. As a remedy, he suggests longer terms or
modification of the term limits now in place.
“Bottoms Up” by Cecilia Balli (pp. 131-134)
While some people in Brownsville see the upscale Paseo de la Resaca development as proof of
potential at the U.S.-Mexican border, the author finds the neighboring colonia of Cameron Park a
better example of what is possible. Cameron Park began as an unincorporated area without basic
services—a group of small plots whose owners had only enough money to build piecemeal and
without professional help. Based on median income for communities with more than 1,000
households, this South Texas neighborhood is identified as the poorest community in the United
States. Yet, Cameron Park has fought for, and won, commitments from the Texas Water
Development Board and the Brownsville Public Utilities Board to lay water and sewer lines. In
addition, Cameron County began paving streets, Texas A&M University’s Colonia Program
assisted with construction of a community center, and houses have been built with loans from Rio
Grande Multibank. Such evidence of community progress serves as an example of what is
possible for even the poorest community in the country.