Special districts are not well represented in federal data and reporting on the health of local governments across the country, and the populations they serve are not federally recognized due to a glitch in federal law preventing recognition of special district’s territorial service boundaries.
The resulting implications of how special districts are viewed as an element of local government cannot be understated, with the most significant consequence being special districts’ inability to independently certify their population figures with federal agencies – impacting the ability for districts to apply directly for programs tied to population.
It is for these reasons why AASD advocates for federal remedies to public policy solutions beyond simply establishing a definition of “Special District” in federal code and seeks to ensure America’s special districts (also known in some states as “authorities”, “municipal authorities”, or “special purpose districts”) are properly recognized for the essential services provided to millions of Americans every day.
Counting Governments Like the Census Counts People Every Decade
The U.S. Census Bureau counts all 90,000+ local governments across the country every five years, similar to how it counts people every 10 years, in what is known as the Census of Governments.
The Bureau does its best to collect information on a voluntary basis from local governments – but with little in terms of centralized resources and shallow understanding of special districts across states, the Bureau recognizes the gaps and undercounts of special districts. This is largely due to the inconsistent collection of special districts’ budgets, audits, and other reports at state levels and/or is the side effect of little oversight over special districts’ budget reporting to their respective counties. All in all, this leads to an inconsistent and incomplete official accounting of special districts across the country.
This in turn creates difficulty for advocates to tell the story of America’s special districts as the most common form of local government.
Nonetheless, the Bureau’s semi-decennial Census of Governments is the best official and consistent measurement of the nation’s state and local governments – including for the special district sector. This data offers a view of the American local government landscape, and it indicates the significance of special districts as public providers of critical infrastructure services.
The Problems with Counting Special Districts
The 2022 Census of Governments counted 39,555 units of special district government across 38 unique special district functions in 50 states and the District of Columbia. Examples of these functions include water supply, fire protection, parks and recreation, electricity, resource conservation and much more. This data includes fiscal and employment data.
Through analyzing this data coupled with other Census surveys and products, we can begin to shed light on special districts’ significance. For instance, we understand that special districts provide 6 percent of all local government jobs in the United States. When removing local education agencies, the local government workforce becomes 12 percent, altogether injecting an estimated $300 billion dollars annually in payroll into local, regional, and state economies.
But Census has identified a range of issues with the data reporting. For example – the Census of Governments’ dataset is gleaned from voluntary response that includes many agencies that are not, in reality, special districts. Due to widespread underrepresentation of district data, Census’ statisticians are forced to stretch district data from states with good survey response rates to account for poor ones in other states. Further, there are several states, such as Louisiana, where there is a severe underestimate of the number of special districts providing a range of services across the state; and in California, likewise, where joint power authorities and public insurance pools are, for all intents and purposes, misclassified as special district governments. The latter makes California’s special districts altogether appear to be a public sector of local government that is three times its true size.
Stating the Obvious: Special Districts Provide Public Services to People
The issue of population recognition emerged across all districts during the COVID-19 pandemic, when special districts were not only omitted from funding intended for state and local governments as allocated in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, but districts with large populations meeting minimum population requirements were also turned away from direct access.
U.S. Department of the Treasury denied special districts’ attempts to certify their populations served to be greater than 500,000 in order to receive direct allocations of local government assistance, as the law allowed for local governments, as defined, that reached the population threshold.
Why are special districts independently unable to certify their community population figures? Because the federal government does not recognize special districts as units of government eligible to update and certify population figures gleaned through U.S. Census Bureau studies and surveys, as outlined in 15 CFR 50.60.
This is because federal regulation, without any statutory basis, considers special districts to be neither a standard unit of government nor a geographic unit of government. This renders special districts ineligible for the Geographically Updated Population Certification Program. Hence, the reason it is so crucial for a definition of “Special district” to be formally established in federal law.
Simply put: the federal government does not recognize special districts as local governments with boundaries, and it cannot determine how many people live within any special district (unless its boundaries are the same as cities or counties).
As a result, special districts cannot directly access any population-based federal formula program, such as the Community Development Block Grant. Special districts providing emergency response and mitigation work on federal lands are not guaranteed reimbursement from certain programs as their local government counterparts, such as with the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination program. Further, special districts providing water services in rural communities must go door-to-door to independently survey salary and household data to gauge their eligibility for programs. This leads to these already resource-strapped special districts to allocate time and energy into an additional activity, which other units of government can readily certify, before they even apply.
This must change – AASD is leading the charge to change this policy for the betterment and benefit of all America’s special districts.
Be part of the movement and effort to change these policies impacting all districts and the communities they serve across America! Give the American Association of Special Districts a try and join fellow district leaders in advocacy.