Municipal Advocacy Strategies

Effective Engagement with State Government

By: Drew Campbell & Byron Campbell, Capitol Insights

March 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Texas Legislative Landscape
   • 2.1 Legislative Structure & Process
   • 2.2 Key Committees for Municipal Issues
   • 2.3 Relevant State Agencies
3. Municipal Policy Priorities
   • 3.1 Local Control & Preemption
   • 3.2 Revenue & Taxation Authority
   • 3.3 Infrastructure Funding
   • 3.4 Economic Development Tools
4. Effective Advocacy Strategies
   • 4.1 Coalition Building
   • 4.2 Strategic Communications
   • 4.3 Direct Engagement Tactics
   • 4.4 Community Mobilization
5. Case Studies
   • 5.1 Revenue Cap Legislation
   • 5.2 Transportation Funding
   • 5.3 Economic Development Programs
6. Conclusion & Action Plan

1. Introduction

Texas municipalities face an increasingly complex policy environment that requires strategic, coordinated advocacy to protect local interests and advance community priorities. This guide provides a comprehensive framework for developing effective municipal advocacy strategies at the state level in Texas.

The relationship between municipalities and state government continues to evolve, with increasing tension between local control and state preemption in recent years. Effective advocacy requires not only understanding the formal legislative process but also developing relationships, building coalitions, and communicating municipal priorities in ways that resonate with state policymakers.

This document draws on decades of experience navigating the Texas legislative landscape to provide municipal leaders with practical strategies for influencing policy outcomes. By implementing these approaches, municipalities can more effectively protect their interests and advance their priorities in Austin.

While this guide focuses primarily on legislative advocacy, many strategies can be adapted for engagement with regulatory agencies, regional planning organizations, and other governmental bodies that impact municipal operations.

2. Texas Legislative Landscape

Developing effective advocacy strategies requires a thorough understanding of the institutional structures, processes, and key players in Texas state government.

2.1 Legislative Structure & Process

The Texas Legislature meets biennially in odd-numbered years for a 140-day regular session, with special sessions called at the Governor's discretion. This compressed schedule creates a unique rhythm for advocacy efforts:

• Interim (Even Years): Between regular sessions, legislative committees study assigned topics and develop recommendations. This period is critical for relationship-building, education on municipal priorities, and influencing the agenda for the upcoming session.
• Pre-Filing (November-December of Even Years): Bills may be pre-filed beginning in November before the session starts, providing an early indication of legislative priorities.
• Early Session (January-February): Focus on procedural matters, committee assignments, and broad policy directions.
• Middle Session (March-April): Committee hearings and deliberations on bills intensify.
• End Session (May): Floor debate, conference committees, and final passage of legislation occur at an accelerated pace.

Understanding this timeline is essential for planning advocacy efforts and allocating resources effectively throughout the cycle.

Key Advocacy Periods

• Interim: Focus on education, relationship-building, and shaping study topics.
• Early Session: Emphasize communicating priorities and positioning on key bills.
• Mid-Session: Provide testimony, technical expertise, and amendments.
• End Session: Concentrate on targeted advocacy on priority bills and conference committee negotiations.

2.2 Key Committees for Municipal Issues

Municipal issues typically fall under the jurisdiction of several key legislative committees:

Building relationships with committee chairs, vice-chairs, and key members should be a central component of any municipal advocacy strategy. Committees often serve as the primary venue for substantive policy discussions and amendments, making them critical engagement points.

2.3 Relevant State Agencies

While the Legislature sets policy direction, state agencies implement and interpret legislation through rulemaking and program administration. Key agencies for municipal interests include:

• Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT): Administers transportation funding, plans state highway projects, and sets standards that impact local transportation planning.
• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ): Regulates water, air quality, and waste management, with significant implications for municipal utilities and development.
• Texas Water Development Board (TWDB): Provides financing for water and wastewater infrastructure through loans and grants.
• Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA): Administers affordable housing programs and community development block grants.
• Office of the Comptroller: Oversees revenue distribution, including sales tax allocation and fiscal impact analysis of legislation.
• Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM): Coordinates disaster response and administers certain hazard mitigation funding programs.

Effective advocacy requires engagement with both the Legislature and relevant agencies, as policy implementation can significantly impact outcomes for municipalities. Developing relationships with key agency staff and participating in rulemaking processes are essential components of a comprehensive advocacy strategy.

3. Municipal Policy Priorities

While each municipality has unique needs based on its size, demographics, and regional context, several policy areas consistently emerge as priorities for Texas cities and towns. Understanding these core issues provides a foundation for developing targeted advocacy strategies.

3.1 Local Control & Preemption

Recent legislative sessions have featured increasing state preemption of municipal regulatory authority, creating tension between local governance and state oversight:

• Regulatory Authority: Municipalities have faced restrictions on their ability to regulate in areas such as:
  • Short-term rentals and home-sharing platforms
  • Tree preservation and removal
  • Labor standards (e.g., paid sick leave, scheduling requirements)
  • Building materials and construction standards
  • Mobile telecommunication infrastructure (e.g., small cell deployment)
• Annexation: The 2019 annexation reform bill (HB 347) effectively ended unilateral annexation by municipalities, requiring voter approval in most cases. This change fundamentally altered growth management strategies for many Texas cities.
• Zoning and Land Use: Efforts to restrict local zoning authority, particularly for housing development, have increased in recent sessions.
• ETJ Authority: Bills restricting municipal regulatory authority in extraterritorial jurisdictions have been introduced with increasing frequency.

Advocacy strategies should emphasize community-specific impacts of preemption, highlighting how local decision-making addresses unique community needs and values. Proactive engagement on specific regulatory issues can be more effective than general arguments about local control.

3.2 Revenue & Taxation Authority

Municipal fiscal authority and stability have been significantly impacted by state legislation in recent years:

• Property Tax Revenue Caps: SB 2 (2019) reduced the voter approval rate (formerly rollback rate) from 8% to 3.5% for cities and counties, significantly constraining local revenue growth and potentially impacting service delivery over time.
• Sales Tax Distribution: Changes to online sales tax sourcing rules have created revenue volatility for some municipalities, while others have benefited.
• Hotel Occupancy Taxes: Expanding uses of hotel occupancy tax revenue while ensuring collection from short-term rental platforms remains an ongoing issue.
• Fees and Special Assessments: Legislative efforts to restrict municipal fee authority and special assessments have increased, potentially limiting infrastructure financing options.
• State Shared Revenue: Programs like mixed beverage tax sharing and right-of-way compensation face periodic scrutiny during budget deliberations.

Effective advocacy on revenue issues requires clear articulation of service impacts, demonstration of efficient financial management, and direct connection between revenue constraints and community outcomes.

3.3 Infrastructure Funding

Municipal infrastructure needs consistently outpace available funding, creating advocacy opportunities around several programs:

• Transportation: Despite increases in state transportation funding through Propositions 1 and 7, municipal transportation funding remains constrained. Opportunities include:
  • Ensuring municipally-important projects are included in TxDOT's Unified Transportation Program
  • Advocating for equitable distribution of county transportation infrastructure funds
  • Supporting maintenance of local participation funding programs that leverage local dollars
  • Preserving municipal authority over right-of-way management and compensation
• Water and Wastewater: The Texas Water Development Board administers several critical funding programs for municipal water infrastructure:
  • Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF)
  • Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF)
  • Flood Infrastructure Fund (FIF)
  • Texas Water Development Fund (DFund)
• Broadband: With the creation of the Broadband Development Office, new funding streams are emerging to support municipal broadband infrastructure.
• Resilience and Hazard Mitigation: Federal funds flowing through state agencies provide opportunities for municipal infrastructure hardening and adaptation.

Advocacy strategies should focus on demonstrating specific community needs, highlighting regional benefits of investments, and showcasing successful project implementation and management.

3.4 Economic Development Tools

Municipalities rely on various economic development mechanisms that require state enabling legislation and continued authorization:

• Chapter 312/313 Tax Abatements: Chapter 313 school district tax abatements expired at the end of 2022, while municipal Chapter 312 authority requires periodic reauthorization. Legislative efforts continue to craft replacement programs.
• Economic Development Sales Tax: Type A and Type B economic development corporations provide critical local funding for economic development initiatives but face periodic scrutiny and proposed restrictions.
• Tax Increment Financing/TIRZ: These tools for capturing increased property value to fund infrastructure and development incentives are essential for many municipal revitalization efforts.
• Public Improvement Districts: PIDs provide financing mechanisms for infrastructure, services, and improvements in specific areas.
• Hotel Occupancy Tax: While primarily a revenue tool, HOT funds support tourism and convention facilities that drive economic development.

Advocacy should emphasize measurable economic impacts, job creation, competitive necessity, and safeguards that ensure accountability and transparent use of these tools.

4. Effective Advocacy Strategies

Successful municipal advocacy requires a comprehensive approach that integrates relationship building, clear communication, and strategic mobilization of stakeholders.

4.1 Coalition Building

Municipalities can amplify their voices by building coalitions with aligned interests:

• Municipal Associations: Working through the Texas Municipal League (TML) and regional city coalitions provides strength in numbers and shared resources.
• Cross-Sector Alliances: Municipal interests often align with:
  • Business organizations (chambers, economic development corporations)
  • Professional associations (police/fire, utilities, planners)
  • Infrastructure stakeholders (transportation, water, utilities)
  • Community groups (neighborhood associations, service organizations)
• Regional Approaches: Coordinating advocacy with neighboring jurisdictions demonstrates broader impact and reduces message fragmentation.
• Unexpected Partners: Issue-specific alliances can sometimes bridge traditional divides, such as rural/urban or partisan differences.

Effective coalition-building requires clear objectives, formal coordination mechanisms, consistent messaging, and equitable sharing of both work and credit.

Coalition Development Process

1. Identify potential partners with aligned interests
2. Convene exploratory discussions to find common ground
3. Develop shared advocacy objectives and messaging
4. Create formal structure for coordination (meetings, communications)
5. Assign clear roles and responsibilities
6. Implement coordinated advocacy activities
7. Regularly evaluate effectiveness and adjust as needed

4.2 Strategic Communications

Clear, persuasive communication is essential for effective advocacy. Municipal leaders should:

• Develop Clear Policy Positions: Create concise, well-researched positions on priority issues that articulate:
  • Community impact
  • Fiscal implications
  • Implementation considerations
  • Alignment with state priorities
• Tailor Messages to Audience: Frame issues differently for various stakeholders:
  • For legislators: Emphasize constituent benefits, cost savings, and alignment with state priorities
  • For agencies: Focus on implementation feasibility and administrative efficiency
  • For public/media: Highlight tangible community benefits and quality of life impacts
• Utilize Multiple Channels: Coordinate advocacy through:
  • Direct communication (meetings, calls, emails)
  • Traditional media (op-eds, interviews, press releases)
  • Social media (targeted campaigns, infographics, success stories)
  • Community forums (public meetings, town halls)
  • Formal testimony (committee hearings, agency proceedings)
• Provide Supporting Materials: Develop research briefs, fiscal analyses, case studies, and visual aids that reinforce key messages.

Communications should be fact-based, solution-oriented, and connected to community values and priorities. Avoid overly technical language when addressing non-expert audiences.

4.3 Direct Engagement Tactics

Personal relationships and direct engagement remain the foundation of effective advocacy:

• Relationship Development: Build ongoing relationships with key decision-makers:
  • Host legislative tours of municipal facilities and projects
  • Invite legislators to community events and recognition ceremonies
  • Schedule regular briefings with local delegation members
  • Establish relationships with key legislative staff
• Testimony and Formal Input: Provide expert perspectives through:
  • Testimony at committee hearings (prepare concise, impactful statements)
  • Submission of written comments on legislation and proposed rules
  • Participation in stakeholder workgroups and advisory committees
  • Informal technical assistance on bill language and amendments
• Legislative Visits: Conduct strategic visits to Austin:
  • Coordinate with municipal associations on designated "city days"
  • Schedule targeted visit days for specific priority issues
  • Bring diverse delegation including elected officials, staff experts, and community stakeholders
  • Provide leave-behind materials with clear contact information
• Agency Engagement: Develop relationships with regulatory agencies:
  • Participate in rulemaking processes and stakeholder meetings
  • Invite agency representatives to tour local facilities and projects
  • Provide technical feedback on implementation challenges
  • Recognize and celebrate successful agency-municipal partnerships

Direct engagement should be persistent but respectful, fact-based but passionate, and focused on both short-term objectives and long-term relationship building.

4.4 Community Mobilization

Engaging community stakeholders can significantly amplify municipal advocacy efforts:

• Grassroots Activation: Mobilize community members through:
  • Educational campaigns about priority issues and potential impacts
  • Coordinated contact campaigns (calls, emails, letters to legislators)
  • Organized participation in public hearings and town halls
  • Social media engagement and sharing of advocacy messages
• Business Community Engagement: Partner with local businesses through:
  • Chamber of commerce advocacy committees
  • Industry-specific coalitions on relevant issues
  • Business leader testimonials on economic impacts
  • Joint municipal-business delegations for legislative visits
• Civic Organizations: Leverage existing community networks:
  • Neighborhood associations and homeowner groups
  • Service organizations (Rotary, Lions, etc.)
  • Faith-based organizations and leaders
  • Professional and trade associations with local chapters
• Digital Engagement: Use technology to broaden participation:
  • Issue-specific email updates and action alerts
  • Social media advocacy campaigns with consistent hashtags and messaging
  • Virtual town halls and legislative briefings
  • Digital toolkits for community advocates with sample messages and graphics

Community mobilization should be strategic and targeted, focusing on issues with direct local impact rather than attempting to engage on every policy matter. Providing clear, simple ways for community members to take action increases participation and effectiveness.

5. Case Studies

The following case studies illustrate effective municipal advocacy strategies in action, highlighting key lessons for future efforts.

5.1 Revenue Cap Legislation

Background: In 2019, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 2, which reduced the voter approval tax rate (formerly known as the rollback rate) from 8% to 3.5% for cities and counties with populations over 30,000. This legislation significantly constrained municipal revenue growth potential and threatened service delivery in many Texas communities.

Municipal Response:

Cities across Texas implemented a multi-faceted advocacy strategy to mitigate the most harmful provisions of the bill:

• Coalition Formation: The Texas Municipal League coordinated with city managers' associations, police and fire groups, and infrastructure stakeholders to present unified messaging.
• Data-Driven Approach: Cities compiled and presented specific data on:
  • Actual year-over-year property tax increases (demonstrating they were generally below the proposed caps)
  • Service impacts of constrained revenue
  • Infrastructure projects that would be delayed or canceled
  • Public safety implications
• Differentiated Messaging: Advocates divided issues by city size and type, allowing rural and smaller communities to negotiate separate provisions (such as the 30,000 population threshold).
• Alternative Solutions: Rather than simply opposing the legislation, municipalities proposed alternative approaches including:
  • Targeted homestead exemptions
  • Circuit-breaker provisions for vulnerable populations
  • Exclusions for public safety expenditures
  • Phased implementation schedules

Outcome: While the legislation passed with the 3.5% cap, municipal advocacy efforts secured several important modifications:

• The higher population threshold (originally proposed at 15,000)
• Exclusions for specific expenditures including new debt approved by voters
• Implementation delayed until the 2020 tax year
• Provisions allowing banking of unused capacity
• Simplified calculations for compliance

Key Lessons:

1. Data-Driven Advocacy Works: Specific, local data on impacts was more persuasive than general policy arguments.
2. Propose Alternatives: Offering constructive amendments rather than only opposition increased influence.
3. Differentiate by Community Type: Allowing flexibility for different municipal categories prevented all cities from being treated identically.
4. Focus on Implementation Details: Technical amendments often had significant practical impact even within an overall policy change.

5.2 Transportation Funding

Background: In 2022-2023, the Texas Department of Transportation was developing its 2024 Unified Transportation Program (UTP), which allocates projected transportation funding over a 10-year period. Municipal transportation needs significantly exceeded available resources, requiring strategic advocacy to secure funding for priority projects.

Municipal Response:

The Dallas-Fort Worth region implemented a coordinated regional advocacy strategy:

• Regional Coalition Development: The Regional Transportation Council, North Central Texas Council of Governments, and 12 municipalities formed a coordinated coalition with shared priorities.
• Technically Sound Project Development: Cities invested in preliminary engineering and environmental studies to advance project readiness.
• Economic Impact Analysis: The coalition commissioned an independent economic impact analysis demonstrating regional and statewide benefits of priority projects.
• Multi-level Engagement Strategy:
  • Direct engagement with TxDOT district engineers on technical aspects
  • Coordinated testimony at Transportation Commission hearings
  • Legislative delegation briefings to build political support
  • Business community engagement highlighting economic development implications
• Strategic Project Bundling: Smaller municipalities agreed to support a coordinated project list rather than competing against each other, enhancing regional influence.

Outcome: The regional coalition secured over $3.4 billion in UTP funding for priority projects including:

• Critical interstate expansion projects
• Strategic arterial connections
• Regional multimodal facilities
• Technology investments for congestion management

Key Lessons:

1. Regional Coordination Amplifies Influence: Speaking with a unified regional voice significantly increased impact compared to individual city advocacy.
2. Technical Readiness Matters: Projects with completed preliminary work moved ahead of those still in conceptual phases.
3. Economic Arguments Resonated: Demonstrating statewide economic benefits proved more persuasive than local congestion relief alone.
4. Strategic Bundling Works: Coordination rather than competition among neighboring cities increased overall regional allocation.
5. Multi-level Engagement Required: Successful outcomes required coordinated engagement at technical, administrative, and political levels.

5.3 Economic Development Programs

Background: Following the expiration of Chapter 313 school tax incentives in 2022, Texas municipalities faced significant disadvantages in competing for major economic development projects. The 2023 legislative session offered an opportunity to advocate for replacement programs and preservation of municipal economic development tools.

Municipal Response:

A broad coalition of municipalities, economic development corporations, and business groups implemented a strategic advocacy campaign:

• Evidence-Based Advocacy: The coalition developed a comprehensive report documenting: