Dillon's rule is from mars, home rule is from venus: Local government autonomy and the rules of statutory construction

Publius

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 662-685

  Richardson, Jesse J ^a  

^a VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053513670     PISSN: 00485950     EISSN: 17477107     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/publius/pjr030     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR). 1993. Local government autonomy: Needs for state constitutional, statutory and judicial clarification (A-127). Washington, DC: Government States Printing Office.
2. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1981. Measuring local discretionary authority (M-131). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
3. Albuquerque, M. 1998. California and Dillon: The times they are a-changing. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 25: 187-196. (Pubitemid 128150517)
4. Arlington County v. White, 528 S.E.2d 706 (Va. 2000).
5. Atkins v. Kansas, 191 U.S. 207 (1903).
6. Barron, D.J. 2003. Reclaiming home rule. Harvard Law Review 116: 2255-2386. (Pubitemid 36737711)
7. Bentham, J. 1970. In Of laws in general, ed. H. L. A. Hart, London: University of London, The Athlone Press.
8. Black, H. C. 1990. Black's law dictionary. St Paul, MN: West Publishing.
9. Bluestein, F. S. 2006. Do North Carolina local governments need home rule?. North Carolina Law Review 84: 1983-2029.
10. Brennan, G., and J.A. Buchanan. 1980. The power to tax: Analytical foundations of a fiscal constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Briffault, R. 1990. Our localism: Part I - The structure of local government law. Columbia Law Review 90: 1-115.
12. -. 1991. Home rule, majority rule and Dillon's rule. Chicago-Kent Law Review 67: 1011.
13. The Chickasaw Nation v. U.S., 534 U.S. 84, 122 S.Ct. 528, 151 L.Ed.2d 474 (2001).
14. Chicago Home Rule Commission. 1954. Modernizing a city government. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15. City of Clinton v. Cedar Rapids and Missouri River Railroad Co., 24 Iowa 455 (1868).
16. City of New Orleans v. Board of Directors of Louisiana State Museum, 709 So.2d 1008, La. App 4 cir. 1998.
17. City of Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U.S. 182 (1923).
18. Clark v. City of Des Moines, 19 Iowa 199 (1865).
19. Clark, G. L. 1984. A theory of local autonomy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 74: 195-208.
20. Commission on Local Government, Commonwealth of Virginia. 2001 Alternative Approaches to Interlocal Concerns.
21. Csoka, L. 2007. The dream of greater municipal autonomy: Should the legislature or the courts modify Dillon's Rule, a common law restraint on municipal power?. North Carolina Central Law Journal 29: 194-223.
22. Community Communication Co. v. Boulder, 455 U.S. 40 (1982).
23. Connecticut National Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249, 112 S.Ct. 1146, 117 L.Ed.2d 391 (1992).
24. Eskridge, W. N. Jr., P. P. Frickey, and E. Garrett. 2006. Legislation and statutory interpretation. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: West Publishing.
25. Geon, G., and G. K. Turnbull. 2004. The effect of home rule on local government behavior: Is there no rule like home rule? (Working Paper No. 04-05). Retrieved from Georgia StateUniversity, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies website: Http://aysps.gsu.edu/urag/ workingpapers/(2004)/urag-0405.pdf.
26. Gere, E. A. Jr. 1982. Dillon's rule and the Cooley doctrine: Reflections of the political culture. Journal of Urban History 8: 271-298.
27. Gray, V., and P. Eisinger. 1997. American states and cities. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.
28. Grumm, J. G., and R.D. Murphy. 1974. Dillon's rule reconsidered. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 416: 120-132.
29. Hanson, R. L., ed. 1998. Governing partners: State-local relations in the United States. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
30. Krane, D. n.d. Local government autonomy and discretion in the USA. Retrieved from National Academy of Public Administration website: Http://www.napawash.org/aa-federal-system/98-national-local.html.
31. Krane, D., P. N. Rigos, and M. B. Hill Jr., eds. 2001. Home rule in America: A fifty-state handbook. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
32. Lake, R. W. 1994. Negotiating Local Autonomy. Political Geography 13 (5): 423-442.
33. Mead, T. D. 1997. Federalism and state law: Legal factors constraining and facilitation local initiatives. In Handbook of local government administration, ed. J. J. Gargan. 31-45. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.
34. Mikesell, J. L., and Mullins, D. R. 2007. The impacts of property and household characteristics and property tax systems on household property tax burdens: An analysis from individual property data. In NTA proceedings from the 100th annual conference in Columbus, Ohio. http://www.ntanet.org/images/stories/ pdf/proceedings/07/013.pdf (accessed June 21, 2011).
35. Mikva, A. J., and E. Lane. 1997. An introduction to statutory interpretation and the legislative process. New York: Aspen Law and Business.
36. Owens, R. E., and P. D. G. Sarte. 2004. Accommodating rising population in rural areas: The case of Loudon County, Virginia. Economic Quarterly - Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond 90: 33-50.
37. People v. Hulburt, 24 Mich. 44 (1871).
38. Posner, R. A. 1990. The problems of jurisprudence. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
39. Ronnow v. City of Las Vegas, 65 P.2d 133 (Nev. 1937).
40. Pratchett, L. 2004. Local autonomy, local democracy and the 'new localism'. Political Studies 52: 358-375. (Pubitemid 38846307)
41. Richardson, J. J. Jr., M. Z. Gough, and R. Puentes. 2003. Is home rule the answer? Clarifying the impact of Dillon's Rule on growth management. http://www.brookings.edu/es/urban/ publications/dillonsrule.pdf.
42. Singer, N. J., and J. D. S. Singer. 2009. Sutherland statutes and statutory construction. Minneapolis: West. Sonenshein, R. J., and T. Hogen-Esch. 2006. Bringing the state (government) back in: Home rule and the politics of secession in Los Angeles and New York City. Urban Affairs Review 41: 467-491.
43. Timmons, M., J. Grant, T. Popp, and H. Westby. 1993. County home rule comes to Minnesota. William Mitchell Law Review 19: 811-870.
44. Turnbull, G. K., and G. Geon. 2006. Local government internal structure, external constraints and the median voter. Public Choice 129: 487-506. (Pubitemid 44769857)
45. Weeks, J. D., and P. T. Hardy. 1984. The legal aspects of local government. In Small cities and counties: A guide to managing, ed. J. M. Banovetz. 25-41. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.
46. Welch, J. 1999. Home rule doctrine and state preemption-The Iowa Supreme Court resurrects Dillon's Rule and blurs the line between implied preemption and inconsistency. Goodell v. Humboldt County, 575 N.W.2D 486 (Iowa 1998). Rutgers Law Journal 30: 1548-1564.
47. Wolman, H., and M. Goldsmith. 1990. Local autonomy as a meaningful analytic concept. Urban Affairs Quarterly 26 (1): 3-27.
48. Wolman, H., R. McManmon, M. Bell, and D. Brunori. 2010. Comparing local government autonomy across states. In The property tax and local autonomy, ed. Michael E. Bell, David Brunori, and Joan Youngman. 69-114. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
49. Stetson v. Kemp, 13 Mass. 272 (1816).