Resolutions with Teeth: Using Local Government Action to Bend State and Federal Policy

6 min read

Local governments may look small on a map, but when they move in sync, they become one of the most effective forces in American policymaking. In the Dallas–Fort Worth biosolids fight, city and county resolutions don’t just sit in archives- they’re leveraged through councils of governments, lobbying leagues, advisory committees, and broad coalitions to press agencies like TCEQ and the EPA. When dozens of local voices speak the same language, higher-level officials stop treating problems as “local complaints” and start treating them as priorities- exactly where real state and federal change begins.

When multiple cities and counties coordinate their messaging and pass aligned resolutions, they can elevate local concerns into higher legislative priorities. This collective action signals widespread support or opposition, which state and federal policymakers are more likely to consider when drafting or amending legislation. In the case of biosolids in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, local governments are effectively utilizing formal resolutions to create pressure points on both the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These resolutions not only document local concerns but also serve as formal requests for regulatory review or policy change.

Resolutions can be especially effective when they are paired with direct advocacy from elected officials and coordinated messaging through regional councils of governments (COGs). For instance, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), which represents local governments in the DFW area, has often served as a conduit between local concerns and state agencies. By consolidating similar resolutions, COGs can amplify local voices and increase the likelihood of state or federal responsiveness. This strategy demonstrates how local governments, though limited in jurisdictional authority, can achieve outsized influence through structured collaboration and sustained engagement with regulatory bodies¹.

Institutional Channels for Local Influence

Local governments have access to several institutional pathways that connect them to higher tiers of government. One such route involves participation on state-level advisory committees or legislative task forces. Local elected officials are often appointed to these bodies to provide input on issues ranging from transportation funding to environmental regulation. Their direct experience managing local impacts makes their contributions particularly valuable. These appointments offer a formal mechanism through which cities and counties can inform state-level policy design and implementation².

Another significant channel is the use of intergovernmental lobbying associations, such as the Texas Municipal League (TML) and the National Association of Counties (NACo). These organizations advocate on behalf of local governments at both the state and federal levels. They often base their legislative priorities on resolutions passed by their member jurisdictions. Through these associations, local governments can collectively push for or against legislation that affects their constituents. This institutional support gives weight to local policy preferences and facilitates access to key decision-makers in state legislatures and federal agencies³.

Practical Steps for Local Governments to Shape Broader Policy

For local governments aiming to shape state or federal policy, the first step is to develop a clear and well-researched resolution. This includes citing relevant data, outlining the local impact of the issue, and specifying the desired action from higher levels of government. A resolution that includes technical documentation, environmental assessments, or public health data is more likely to be taken seriously by state agencies or legislative committees. For example, in the DFW biosolids case, including findings on water contamination from the U.S. Geological Survey or local health departments can bolster the resolution's credibility⁴.

After passing a resolution, it is crucial to engage in follow-up advocacy. This may take the form of direct meetings with state legislators, testimony at committee hearings, or public comment submissions during regulatory review periods. Local officials should also consider leveraging media coverage to raise public awareness, which can, in turn, pressure state and federal actors to respond. Coordinating with neighboring jurisdictions to adopt similar messaging and timelines can further enhance the resolution's impact. The goal is to maintain persistent and unified communication so that the issue remains on the legislative or regulatory agenda.

Building Coalitions to Advance Local Priorities

Coalition-building is a critical component of influencing broader policy. When local governments face shared challenges, such as environmental degradation or infrastructure gaps, forming alliances can amplify their voice. In Texas, regional collaborations such as the Gulf Coast Coalition of Cities have successfully influenced state utility regulations by presenting a united front. These coalitions typically draft joint position papers, host regional policy forums, and coordinate advocacy visits to the state capitol. By pooling resources and aligning priorities, local jurisdictions can overcome individual limitations and collectively shape legislative outcomes⁵.

Effective coalitions often include not only local governments but also school districts, special districts, and local nonprofits. These partners can offer additional data, community support, and specialized expertise. For example, in addressing biosolids, water utility districts and public health agencies can provide empirical evidence that strengthens the policy argument. A coalition that includes diverse stakeholders is more likely to present a comprehensive case to policymakers, making it harder for state or federal actors to dismiss the issue as isolated or parochial.

Long-Term Strategy and Policy Sustainability

Influencing state or federal policy is rarely a one-time effort. Local governments must adopt a long-term strategy that includes institutional memory, regular policy reviews, and iterative advocacy. One effective practice is to assign specific staff or intergovernmental affairs liaisons to monitor developments at the state and federal levels. These individuals can track proposed legislation, identify windows of opportunity, and coordinate timely responses from local governing bodies. Institutionalizing this function ensures that local governments remain proactive rather than reactive in their policy engagement.

It is equally important to evaluate the outcomes of past resolutions and advocacy campaigns. Did the state agency respond? Was legislation introduced or amended? Were regulatory changes implemented? Conducting post-action assessments allows local governments to refine their strategies, build on successes, and avoid repeating ineffective approaches. Over time, this iterative process contributes to a more sophisticated and durable influence on state and federal policy, rooted in the grounded priorities of local communities.

Bibliography

North Central Texas Council of Governments. "Environmental Resources: Biosolids Management." Accessed April 2024. https://www.nctcog.org.
Texas Legislative Council. "Legislative Process in Texas." 2022. https://tlc.texas.gov/publications/legislativeprocess.html.
Texas Municipal League. "Advocacy Program and Legislative Priorities." 2023. https://www.tml.org/legislative.
U.S. Geological Survey. "Contaminants in Biosolids and Water Quality." 2021. https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/contaminants-biosolids.
Gulf Coast Coalition of Cities. "Annual Report on Regulatory Advocacy." 2022. https://www.gulfcoastcoalition.org.