Document Details
Conference Paper
Publication Year:
Background Paper on the Place and Role of Local Government in Federations




Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 6 and 7 May 2002

Prepared by Professor Nico Steytler,
Community Law Centre, University of the Western Cape, South Africa


This paper sketches
very briefly the role and place of local government in federal countries that
will be discussed during the conference. The aim of the paper is to provide
some background material to place the discussion on problems of common
competencies and vertical fiscal imbalance in the constitutional, legal,
financial and social context pertaining in each country.

As only a thumbnail
sketch of each country is given, the paper is guilty of oversimplifying the
complexity and variations that occur in each country. An accurate picture may
not emerge. However, it is hoped that the paper provides a useful background
framework for comparing the various country experiences presented at the


The constitutional
recognition of local government as an order of government in federal countries
is a modern phenomenon. The first federal constitutions of the modern era did
not include local government as an order of government as evidenced by the
constitution of the United States (1787), Canada (1867) and Australia (1901).
It was after the Second World War that local self-government increasingly
appeared in federal constitutions, often coinciding with the return to
democratic rule. The first was the constitution of the Federal Republic of
Germany of 1949. Although the Spanish Constitution of 1978 was focused on the
creation of Autonomous Communities, local autonomy was nevertheless guaranteed.
Brazil’s return to civilian rule was also marked by the extensive protection of
local self-government in the Constitution of 1988. While the entrenchment of
local government in the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the
Indian Constitution in 1992 was prompted by developmental concerns, the
extensive protection of local self-government in the South African Constitution
of 1996 was the result of both democratic and developmental objectives. Similar
sentiments informed the entrenchment of local government as an order of
government in the Nigerian Constitution of 1999. 


In most countries
there is a wide array of local government institutions but a few commonalities
emerge. Multi-layered structures are present in most countries. Distinctions
are made between rural and large urban municipalities, investing greater powers
and functions in the latter.

The functions and
powers of local government cover a broad range of areas, reflecting both
similar competencies as well as significant differences. Different techniques
are used to demarcate the powers. Narrow definition of competencies is,
however, increasingly making way for broader plenary powers. There are
prospects of role confusion and conflicts over functions in most countries.

In most countries
local government is an important part of the state. Local authorities are
responsible for between 5% and 26% of all the government expenditures as is
illustrated in Table 1.

Table 1: Percentage of expenditure by three spheres of
government of total government expenditures




Local government

United States (1992)






45 %

17 %

Australia (1997-8)


Germany (2000)








Spain (1997)




South Africa








While the role of
local government in some countries is shrinking, the trend is to increase the
role of local authorities in the provision of services. Local authorities are
increasingly seen as the engine for growth and development with more and more
functions being downloaded on them. This places considerable stress on local
governments to finance the increased expenditures.

The financing of local
government shows great variation. In a few countries, local government is
largely self-sustaining. In most countries, it relies heavily on transfers from
other levels of government as the following table illustrates.

Table 2: Percentage of total local government income
derived from intergovernmental transfers

Country (Year)

Income from IG

United States (1992)


Canada (1999)


Australia (1997-8)


Germany (2000)


India (1994-5)


Spain (1997)


South Africa


Nigeria (1999)


As far as its own
revenue is concerned, local government relies heavily on property taxes.


With the increased
role of local government as an institution of self-government in the provision
of services, sound intergovernmental relations are vital to ensure the proper
demarcation of responsibilities, effective cooperation between the different
levels of government, and the adequate financing of local government. In this
regard, organized local government is playing a critical role in bringing about
cooperative government.


The United States of
America is a federal republic comprised of 50 states and a federal district
(Washington DC). More than 80% of the population of 285 million people lives in
329 metropolitan areas. In 1997 there were 87,453 local government structures.


As the US Constitution is silent on local
government, the matter falls under the residual powers of the states. Local
authorities are thus “creatures of the states”.  The states have dealt extensively with local government in their
constitutions. There are three types of constitutional provisions, namely those
(a) creating and protecting local autonomy; (b) enshrining political
accountability for certain activities; and (c) regulating and controlling
finances. Local autonomy is usually referred to in the state constitutions as
“home rule”, or more recently “local self-government”. To date 36 states have
adopted home rule provisions in their constitutions while a further 12 have
home rule by statute.

The definition of home rule powers is
expressed in the Illinois State Constitution as follows: “a home rule unit may
exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to its government and
affairs including, but not limited to, the power to regulate for the protection
of the public health, safety, morals and welfare; to licence; to tax; and to
incur debt.” The principal strength of home rule provisions is to give
communities substantial freedom to shape the structure of local government
institutions. With regard to functional powers, conflicts between state and
local enactments are usually resolved in favour of the state.

Not many local authorities have opted for
home rule. In California, for example, one fifth of the cities and twelve of
the 58 counties have adopted home rule charters.


Most state constitutions provide for
various types of local governments. All states have counties (except
Connecticut and Rhode Island). Counties were first seen as a political
subdivision of the state administration, but they have changed in most states
to be institutions of local self-government that may adopt home rule charters
(although only 4% have done so).

The US has a vast array of local government
institutions varying across the 50 state jurisdictions. There are at least two
basic forms that are distinguishable: the political, incorporated body with
plenary powers and the singular or multi-purpose special districts. In the
latter category school districts are the most prevalent. There are, however,
similar structures particularly in metropolitan areas dealing with specific
issues such as water, sanitation or transport. Special districts differ
regarding their purpose, whether they are democratically accountable, whether
they coincide with municipal boundaries, whether they have independent sources
of revenue and whether they are permanent or temporary. It is said that they
“represent the definitive twentieth-century structure of urban governance,
supplanting, quite often, the old municipal and county units.”

1997 the 87,453 local government structures consisted of 3,043 counties,
19,372 municipalities, 16,629 towns and townships, 34,683 special districts and
13,726 school districts. Of these institutions, the special districts
institutions have shown phenomenal growth in the last decades. There are also
an estimated 180,000 semi-private residential community associations that
provide a limited number of community-type services.

Functions and

As creatures of the states, the powers of
local government was at first narrowly circumscribed by the so-called Dillon-rule, formulated in the 19th
century, namely municipal corporations have and can exercise only those powers
expressly granted, those necessarily or fairly implied there from, and those
that are essential and indispensable to their corporate status. Most state
constitutions now give plenary powers to local governments subject to state

Local government by 1995 was the dominant
provider of the following services: primary and secondary education, utilities,
police protection, fire protection, sewage, other sanitation, parks and
recreation, and libraries.

All three levels of government share in the
delivery of health services, environmental protection and financial and
judicial administration. Roads, streets and highways are a state/local
responsibility. Federal and local governments share again the provision of
housing and community development, airports and transportation services.

A continuing concern has been state
governments imposing burdens on local governments (for example, to provide
handicap-accessible facilities) without providing the funding to meet these
responsibilities. In an effort to guard against unfunded mandates, a few states
have adopted bans on such mandates in their state constitutions. For example, a
1978 amendment to the Hawaii Constitution requires that when a state imposes a
new function or increases the level of a service, such determination must also
provide that the state shares in the cost. In 1984, the New Mexico Constitution
was amended in similar vein; a state regulation mandating a local government to
engage in a new activity or increase any current level of service, will have no
force of law “unless, or until, the state provides sufficient new funding or a
means of new funding” to pay for the cost of performing the new activity or
increased service.

In 1992, the share of total government
expenditure of the three levels was as follows: federal government, 54%; state
government, 20%; and local government, 26%. The primary expenditures for local
government is in the areas of policing, hospitals, and education – primary and
secondary. In 1995, local government institutions employed 10 million people,
more than the combined workforce of nearly four million of the states and five
million in the federal government (including defence agencies).

Financial relations

At the beginning of the 20th
century, local government was almost entirely self-sufficient financially. A
century later, it now receives a third of its income from state and federal
agencies, with the bulk coming from the states.

While state constitutions may in principle
provide that municipalities are authorised to levy and collect taxes and fees,
these powers are closely circumscribed either in the constitutions themselves
or laws authorised by the constitutions. Rates on property (property taxes)
have been the mainstay of own income of municipalities. Limitations on property
taxes included: the imposition of maximum tax rates, specifying maximum annual
increases by fixed percentage points or linked to the consumer price index or rate
of inflation. Some states have linked these caps on rates with caps on the
maximum increases in property valuation. Some states have also imposed
full-disclosure provisions, compelling local governments to inform taxpayers
about the proposed tax rates and increases in valuations. In a few states,
state and local authorities share the same tax base, for example, sales and
fuel taxes.


Property tax has now been superseded by
state grants as the largest contributor to overall local revenue. It now
accounts for 46% of own revenue and 28% of general revenue. Local
government’s own revenue in 1995 was as follows:

Local revenue source

Per Cent

Income taxes




Property taxes




Publicly owned utilities





Interactions between
state and local authorities are often mediated through the various voluntary
associations of organized local government. Local authorities are also
organized at a national level in order to engage with the federal government.
The premier body is the National League of Cities (NLC), which represents 49
state municipal leagues and approximately 1,800 member cities, towns and
villages. Through the state municipal leagues that belong to the NLC, the
organization also represents 18,000 additional municipalities. The US
Conference of Mayors is the official non-partisan organization of cities with
populations of 30,000 or more. The aim of this body, with its membership of
1,139 cities, is to strengthen federal-city relationships and to ensure that
federal policies meet urban needs.  The
membership of the National Association of Counties consists of more than
two-thirds of all counties, representing over 80% of the nation’s population.
NACo acts as a liaison with other levels of government and serves as an
advocate for counties.

In nearly half of the
states, formal institutional mechanisms play a role in local-state relations.
Commissions on intergovernmental relations, originally set up to deal mainly
with interstate relations, now focus primarily on internal relations between
each state and its local governments.


Established in 1867, the Canadian
federation consists today of ten provinces and three territories. Eighty
percent of Canada’s 30 million people live in urban areas with nearly two
thirds residing in 27 municipalities. Local government is currently organized
in approximately 4,000 local authorities. 

Constitutional recognition

Under the 1867 constitution, local
government is one of the matters on the list of provinces’ exclusive
competencies. Local government thus falls fully under the jurisdiction of the
provinces and local authorities are creatures of provincial statutes.

Given this status, organized local
government, both at federal and provincial level, is currently advocating for
the entrenchment of local government as fully recognized order of government in
the federal system.

Institutional arrangements

Since local
government is an exclusive provincial function, there is a wide array of
institutions across the country. Two-tiered municipal structures, excluding
cities, have been part of Ontario since 1849 in the form of the county system.
In British Columbia, three types of local authorities are to be found:
incorporated municipalities, regional districts and improvement districts.

A number of
provinces are making distinctions between cities and other municipalities.
Vancouver in British Columbia, Winnipeg in Manitoba, Montreal in Quebec and
Saint John in New Brunswick are so-called “charter cities”. Based on the policy
that one legislative framework does not fit all municipalities, charter status
recognizes the uniqueness of a city and customizes the governing legislation to
the needs and responsibilities of a particular city. Despite charter status,
these cities are not – generally speaking – more empowered than other cities.
For example, the city of Toronto is currently governed in terms of two special
acts, but they are no different than the general local government law of Ontario
that applies to all municipalities, large or small.

At the federal level, the interests of
local government are advanced by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, a
member based NGO comprised of 1,000 municipalities representing 80% of the
population. At the provincial and territorial level, municipalities are also
organized in voluntary bodies (i.e. the Association of Municipalities of

Functions and powers

Local government falls within the
competence of the provinces; the province determines the powers and functions
of the constituent municipal bodies. Therefore, municipal powers vary greatly
across provinces. There are two approaches to municipal powers. The first is
the so-called “laundry list”: municipalities have only those powers that are
specifically granted and thus the ultra vires doctrine applies. This
approach is followed in Ontario. The second, more recent, approach is to grant
municipalities plenary powers. In 1995, Alberta introduced so-called “natural
person” powers that give municipalities the powers of a natural person unless
specifically excluded by legislation. Legislation in British Columbia gave
municipalities broad powers including those facilitating public-private
partnerships and giving more flexible revenue-raising authority. A further
variation is that a number of provinces are making distinctions between cities
and other municipalities. The so-called “charter cities”, mentioned above, are
given greater powers than other municipalities in their provinces, although they must
still obtain the consent of the provincial authority prior to introducing new
revenue sources and new regulations.

The Newfoundland Cities Act of 2000, for
example, gives each city broad powers “to provide good government and services,
as the council considers appropriate, in response to existing and future local
issues and needs and to give the council (a) full discretion in the exercise of
its powers to meet local conditions, (b) the right to determine the local
public interest”. Subject only to federal and provincial law, the city’s powers
relate to 15 spheres of powers subject to the province’s right to establish
standards for services in three spheres – the environment, safety and
protection of people and the protection of property.

In general, local authorities in Canada
deal with services to property, policing and regulatory provision over a range
of economic activities. In urban areas, the focus of regulation includes the
safety of buildings, trading hours, traffic, licensing of restaurants and other

Many municipalities are experiencing
unfunded mandates, bestowed on them by the federal and provincial governments.
These include transferring responsibilities formally to municipalities, or
discontinuing responsibilities which then, by default, fall on the shoulders of
municipal governments. While competencies such as regulation, policing and
property services are widely recognized by all orders of government to be the
domain of local government, cities increasingly have to deal with a wide range
of responsibilities
to protect the health and general welfare of citizens. These include
infrastructure, transportation and transit, environmental protection, water
supply and waste management, economic development, public health, affordable
housing and race relations and social cohesion.

The functions of local government are
executed by about 250,000 municipal employees, nearly three quarters of the
number employed by the federal government. In 2000-2001, municipal expenditures
comprised 16% of total government expenditures.

Financial relations

Transfers from provincial governments are
an important source of revenue (16% in 1999). Meanwhile, municipal governments’
own revenue sources accounted for 81.2% of all municipal revenues.

Revenue sources for municipal governments
in Canada in 1999 are as follows:

Local sources of revenue

Per cent

Property related taxes


Consumption taxes


Other taxes


Sales of goods and services


Investment Income


Other own source revenue


Total local revenue sources:


Please note that the “sales of goods and
services” includes user fees, licenses, and permit fees. 

Transfers (18.7%)

General purpose                                   2.2%

Specific purpose                                   16.4%

Financial powers of municipalities vary, of
course, from province to province, but usually include property taxes, user
fees and licensing fees, of which property tax is the main source of income.
Within some provinces, the so-called charter cities are granted different
revenue raising powers. The Charter of Montreal, for example, grants that city
the power to deal with any asset including the power to pledge and mortgage an
asset and the power to raise money by any kind of security.

In some provinces, municipalities share
some of the provincial taxes. Manitoba allocates revenues of two percentage
points of the personal income tax and one percentage point of the corporate
income tax to municipalities in the form of a per capita grant to local
authorities. In British Columbia the province shares gasoline sales tax
revenues with the municipalities. In Alberta the cities of Calgary and Edmonton
are receiving a transportation grant based on a fuel consumption levy in those

Provincial grants are usually made on a conditional
basis for particular purposes. Education is the main purpose, accounting for
over half of all provincial grants. 
Other areas include police, water and sewage services, road
transportation, culture and recreation. Federal grants are almost always
designated for infrastructure purposes.

growth, the reduction in provincial transfers, stagnation of property tax
revenues – along with the offloading of responsibilities – have combined to
create serious fiscal problems for municipal governments.

Intergovernmental relations

Local government’s primary interaction is
with the province. In some provinces, the provincial-local relationship has
been formalized. In 1996, the provincial government of British Columbia and the
Union of British Columbia Municipalities signed a protocol of recognition for
local government that explicitly recognized local government as an
“independent, responsible and accountable order of government”. The Protocol
sets out principles that form the basis for the relationship between the two
orders of government, including –

there must be a clear division of responsibilities that leaves
the Province and the local governments accountable for specific policies
and gives them the authority and financial capacity to effectively perform
their roles;
for matters that are the responsibility of local government,
they must have adequate authority and independence to deal with them;
new responsibilities will not be allocated without discussing
the required funding thereof; and
proposed significant changes in legislation, policy or program
must be preceded by consultation.

The Government of Ontario has signed a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario
that is inspired by the British Colombia Protocol and will serve a similar

Given the fact that local government falls
within the exclusive control of the provinces, the power of the federal
government to deal directly with municipalities is limited. However, a new
trend is the conclusion of formal agreements between the three spheres of
government. The cities of Vancouver and Winnipeg have tri-partite agreements
between the provincial and federal governments, in which all three agree to
work together to meet urban challenges. In more rare instances, the federal government has found
creative ways to deal directly with municipal governments (for example, the
Homelessness Funding program)


Australia comprises of
six states, one territory and a capital territory. Its population of nearly 19
million people is highly urbanized, with more than 60% of the population living
in 20% of the urban municipalities. There are 730 local authorities with about
8,000 elected representatives.

Constitutional recognition

In the 1901 Constitution,
local government was not mentioned and thus fell under the residual powers of
the states. An attempt to recognize local government in the federal
constitution failed in 1988.

Recognition of local
government in four state constitutions came only in the last quarter of the 20th
century and then in a very attenuated form.
The constitutions of Victoria
(1979), Western Australia (1979), South Australia (1980) and New South Wales
(1986) recognized two core principles of local self-government. First and foremost,
the continuation of a system of local government is guaranteed. Second,
provision is made for elected councils. However, qualifications have been added
that make democratic government not immutable. In Victoria a council can be
dismissed or suspended by the state government. The New South Wales
Constitution provides for “duly elected or duly appointed local government
bodies”. Despite the recognition in the state
constitutions, the states still fully retain their absolute powers over local

Institutional arrangements

As the institutions of
local government are governed by state law, they differ somewhat from state to
state, although revisions of local government acts over the past decade have
adopted generally similar approaches. In New South Wales, local authorities are
called cities, shires, and municipalities; municipalities being predominantly
urban and shires rural. However, the Local Government Act of 1993 makes no
distinction between these councils. The state government may also establish
county councils, comprising of the whole or part of one or more local
government areas. Counties have one or more specified functions to the
exclusion of local councils, in areas that could not be adequately dealt with
by the individual councils alone, such as the supply of electricity. Only
limited use has been made of this system.

Not all areas have
been incorporated in local authorities, particularly remote, sparsely populated
areas.  Also, of Australia’s 730 “local
governing bodies”, about 100 are special indigenous community councils rather
than general purpose authorities.  The
communities served by general-purpose local authorities vary from 150 people
for a municipality in Western Australia to 833,000 for Brisbane City Council in

regional organizations of councils (VROCs) have been an important feature of
Australian local government since the 1970s. The VROCs established cooperation
agreements among councils for specific functions that were better handled
jointly. In 1995, there were over 50 VROCs consisting of 45% of the councils
serving 74% of the population of the country, but the number and effectiveness
of VROCs fluctuates considerably.

60% of the population live in the five metropolitan areas, only Brisbane has
even half the area covered by a single council. The rest are fractured into
numerous councils. It is said that in most parts of Australia, state
governments act as the de facto
metropolitan governments and do not wish local governments to emerge as rivals.

Functions and powers

The powers of local
government are defined in state legislation, a prerogative that was entrenched
in the state constitutions when local government was recognized in those
instruments. At the first, state legislation specified in great detail the
scope of their powers. In the 1990s, there was a marked movement to grant
municipalities broad competency powers. For
example, in South Australia, the 1999 Local Government Act gives municipalities
plenary powers. This does not, however, include legislative powers – the making
of by-laws. This power can, however, be granted in terms of sectoral state

The powers of local
governments are similar across Australia, but do vary from state to state in
some respects. In some states, municipalities provide water and sewerage; in
others it is the responsibility of the state. Usual functions include planning
and building regulations, roads, drainage, environmental and waste management,
community land, recreation, libraries and community services and regulation of
limited commercial activities. Over the past 40 years, the focus of local
government has broadened from property-related services (mainly roads) to
community-based services.

Local government as an
order of government is seen as small and financially its relative importance is
declining. While its expenditure has been growing in absolute terms, its growth
has not kept pace with that of the federal or state governments. In the past
forty years, its outlay has shrunk from 8% to 5% of total government
expenditure. In 1993-1994, local government had 10% of public sector
employment, federal government had 23%, and states had 67%.

Financial relations

In 1997-1998, 19% of
local government’s revenue came from federal and state grants. Since the
introduction of federal funding in 1974-1975, own-source revenue of
municipalities as a total proportion of revenue has increased in most states.
This coincided with the decline in the level of state grants: from providing
15% of local government revenue in 1974-1975, these declined to 7% in
1997-1998. The Commonwealth financial assistance grants are provided through
the states as specific purpose payments. 
Grants are provided through the Local Government (Financial Assistance)
Act of 1995 in the form of untied general-purpose assistance and local road
funding.  The general-purpose grants are
distributed to states on a per capita basis and the roads grants on a fixed
share basis.  Each state has a Local
Government Grants Commission that must determine the spread of the grants to
local authorities through an equalisation formula. There is great variation
among local authorities; rural and urban councils with significant
socio-economically disadvantaged communities are more dependent on Commonwealth
assistance than other large, usually urban-based councils.

As creatures of state
governments, local authorities’ revenue raising powers are fully regulated by
state law.  Their main sources of own
revenue are property taxes (rates), fees and charges, and fines.  Except for the Northern Territory (with a
great prevalence of non-rateable land), rates contributed on average 47% of all
revenue and user charges 25%.

Intergovernmental relations

Nationally, local
government is organized in an association called the Australian Local
Government Association (ALGA). This is a federation of the seven state and
territory associations which together represent nearly every council. ALGA is
regarded as a forceful and influential lobby group that has had an impact on national
policy relating to local government. However, since local government operates
mainly under state laws, the state and territory associations play the greater
role in representing councils’ interests on day-to-day issues, and exercise
strong control over ALGA, which they fund.

In recognition of the
important role of local government, the federal government invited ALGA in 1992
to become a member of Council of Australian Governments (COAG), the forum where
the Prime Minister, the state premiers and territory chief ministers meet
regularly for discussions on broad policy issues not covered by specialist
Ministerial Councils.  ALGA is now
represented on a number of those Ministerial Councils and, in total, on more
than 70 national councils and committees.

The previous federal
government also signed an Accord with ALGA in 1995, which committed both
parties to building a closer and more productive relationship between the two
spheres of government. ALGA committed local government to implement the federal
government’s microeconomic and urban reform programs and social welfare
strategies. For its part, the federal government acknowledged the role local
government plays in the federal system and pledged to work towards enhancing
ALGA’s position in Australia’s intergovernmental network. The Accord no longer

While ALGA finds
recognition at federal level in COAG, the quality of intergovernmental
relations varies widely from state to state and is often poor. There are
notable exceptions.  Queensland has a
long history of more productive relations, and state and local governments
there have signed protocols to promote cooperation on a range of issues.  More recently, Tasmania has led the way in
developing specific partnership agreements with local government. They may be
statewide with organized local government, regional groupings of municipalities
or with specific municipalities. The state’s objective of these agreements is
to promote economic growth, social justice and community development. The aim is
to facilitate the role of local governments to enable them to drive their local
economies and communities.


The Federal Republic
of Germany is comprised of 16 Länder. The population of 82 million
people is largely urban-based. Following a slow process of consolidation, by
1999 the Länder together had a total of 426 counties and 13,854 municipalities.
The average number of persons per local government was nearly 6,000. A large
percentage of municipalities remain small – 45% have less than 1,000


Germany’s constitution, the Basic Law of
1949, inaugurated a new era of recognizing the role of local government in the
federal system. The Basic Law requires that counties and municipalities be
democratically governed and entrenches the right to local self-governance as
follows: “The Municipality shall be guaranteed the right to manage all the
affairs of the local community on their own responsibility within the limits
set by law. … The right to self-government shall include responsibility for
financial matters. The local governments have the power to levy trade taxes
according to the rates for assessment determined by them.” (article 28(2)).

Given the general
guarantee in the Basic Law of local self-government, the protection of local
government in the Land constitutions cannot subtract from the general
guarantee; they may only add more. In only a few Länder have local
government powers been further articulated. 
The Bavarian Constitution, for example, contains a list of 16


The institutions of
local government are Kreise (counties) or Gemeinden (municipalities).
Kreise consist of a number of Gemeinden with the function of providing
services more effectively through the pooling of resources and expertise. They
also coordinate functions that, due to their nature, a municipality could not
perform adequately on its own. Such services include water services and social
welfare. They also play a supervisory role over constituent municipalities on
behalf of Länder. Kreise are directly elected and their
powers are derived from Land
legislation and delegations from the Land
and municipalities. In practice most of their powers come from delegations from
the Länder.

Some of the large
cities have the same status as Kreise and are referred to as kreisfreie Städte (county-free cities).
Cities with populations over 100,000 are city-county (Stadtkreis). It should also be mentioned that three of the 16 Länder
are city-states, namely Hamburg, Bremen and Berlin; they combine state and
local governments.

The German Basic Law
also guarantees the right of local self-government to form associations of
municipalities. Unlike the Kreise,
which are area-specific, the associations are function-specific, usually
related to planning or service delivery. They are public entities that are
entrusted by the participating municipalities with certain powers. Specific
functions, such as schooling, education, fire services or waste disposal, may
be delegated to an association. There is a wide variety of associations,
depending on their purpose. Membership does vary and one municipality could
belong to more than one association.

Functions and

Local self-government
has two dimensions – one administrative and the other functional. The
administrative dimension relates to a municipality’s management powers, power
to appoint staff, power to make by-laws, power to administer its own finances
and zoning and planning powers. These powers are not dependent on enabling
legislation but stem from the Basic Law. Other powers are conferred by state

The range of local
government functions is divided into compulsory duties and other functions that
could be regarded as optional. The compulsory duties of public schools and
social welfare consume the major proportion of the budget, leaving hardly
anything to expend on the optional functions such as public amenities, concert
halls and adult education.

The powers of
municipalities and the functions they perform are most often delegated powers.
They act as agents for either national or Land governments to implement
and manage programs. While their autonomy is guaranteed, municipalities are
mostly service providers on behalf of the other two governments. These functions
include hazard prevention, building inspection, trade supervision, traffic
regulation, health and veterinary matters, nature conservation and
environmental protection.

Local government is a
significant order of government, being responsible for 22% of total government
expenditures, in comparison to 40% by the federal government and 38% by the Länder.

Financial relations

In Article 28(2) the
Basic Law guarantees that local self-government includes financial autonomy.
First, a municipality has the power to levy trade taxes, although the federal
government and Länder are entitled to a portion of the revenue so
collected. Second, property tax – a significant source
of income – falls under the domain of municipalities as well as local excise
taxes. Apart from the taxes they levy, municipalities are also entitled to a
specific share of the revenue raised by the federal and state governments from
income tax and general sales tax.

In 2000, local government raised nearly 25%
of its revenue. The principal sources were the trade tax (73.7%) and property
taxes (24.1%). The majority of income (75%) thus came from transfers from the
federal and Land governments.

In Land constitutions there are
usually provisions which provide that when duties are delegated to local
authorities, sufficient financial resources must accompany such delegation. For
example, the Land constitution of Lower Saxony provides that “State duties may
statutorily be delegated to the local authorities and counties by way of a
directive provided that proper arrangements are made to cover the expenses for
executing such delegated duties.” This principle does not apply to duties which
local authorities must execute as part of their self-government duties so that
a disjuncture between duties and the financing of them can occur. An example is
the duty of Landkreise and kreisfrei Städte for social welfare
aid. The level of benefits is set by the federal government, but financing must
be provided by the Länder.


The German local
authorities are organized in three structures. There are the Städtetag,
a council of cities and towns, the Städte- und Gemeindebund, a league of
towns and municipalities, and the Kreisetag, the council for
counties.  These are voluntary
associations without statutory authority. Municipalities are free to join any
of these and in practice most do.

There are few institutions that structure the relationship of
coordination and cooperation between the Länder and the municipalities.
A recent innovation has been the establishment of a dedicated structure, the
council of municipalities in the Land Rhineland-Palatinate named the Kommunaler
Rat. Created by Land statute in 1996, the Kommunaler Rat is
an advisory body to the Land legislature consisting of 27 members
indirectly elected by organized local government.  The function of this institution is to provide advice to the Land
legislature on matters affecting local government thereby strengthening
cooperation between the two levels of government. By a two-thirds majority vote
the council may make recommendations to the Land legislature.

Since the
establishment of the European Committee of Regions flowing from the Maastricht
Treaty, local government has had representation in the formal structures of the
EU. The three structures of organized local government, mentioned above, each
have a seat in the German delegation to the Committee.

INDIA (1950)

India is a federal
republic with a population of over one billion people. The country is divided
into 28 states, six union territories and a capital territory in Delhi. There
are over 256,500 local government structures with more than three million
elected representatives of whom a third are women.



Democracy from
the bottom up through local government structures, called panchayats,
was an article of faith of the independence movement. The independence
constitution of 1950, however, ineffectually reflected this goal as only a
“Directive Principle of State Policy” which reads: “The State shall take steps
to organize village panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as
may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government.” Directive principles of state policy are not
legally enforceable obligations and neither the Union nor state governments
were compelled to implement a system of local government with the result that
local self-government did not come to fruition.

Two constitutional amendments in 1992 sought to remedy this and
established a system of local self-government. The 73rd Amendment
deals with rural local government while the 74th Amendment is
concerned with urban municipalities. The Amendments provide a broad outline of
the structure and election of local authorities but leave the substance of their
powers and function to state legislation. Seats must be reserved for the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in proportion to their numbers in the
municipal district and not less than one third of all seats must be filled by

The financial affairs of panchayats are also placed at the
discretion of state legislatures. Panchayats may be authorized to levy,
collect and appropriate taxes, duties, tolls and fees and funds collected by
state governments may also be assigned to them.

As the 73rd
Amendment did not apply automatically to Scheduled Tribal areas in eight
states, an Act of Parliament extended the provisions of the Amendment to these
areas in 1996. While the Act provides for extensive powers to be given to
tribal local bodies, there has been considerable resistance from states to do
so and little has changed in these areas. 

While all states have
enacted local government legislation, the attractive set of principles for
local self-government appears to have fallen short of its promise in
practice.  Although by the end of 2000
most states had conducted elections, the necessary functions and funds have not
been transferred to the panchayats. As state legislatures were given the
discretion to translate the broad constitutional structure into a federal
practice, a weak third level of government has developed thus far.


Separate institutions
are created for rural and urban local government. The 73rd Amendment
provides for the establishment of three-tiered local government in rural areas
– gram panchayats at the
village, intermediate (block) and district level. The three-tier system needs
to be established only in states with populations exceeding two million people.
In 22 states there are three tiers, in one there are two and in five only one.

Urban areas are
divided in three categories of local authorities: nagar panchayats for areas in transition from a rural to an urban
nature, municipal councils for small urban areas and municipal corporations for
larger urban areas.

Where the interests of rural and urban local government overlap, the 74th
Amendment requires the establishment of district planning committees, the aim
of which is to consolidate the plans prepared by the panchayats and the municipalities in the district and to prepare a
draft development plan for the district as a whole.

Provision is also made
for the governance of metropolitan areas. A metropolitan planning committee
must be established, the function of which is the preparation of a draft
development plan for its own area. A metropolitan area is defined as an area
declared as such by a state governor comprising of one or more districts and
consisting of two or more municipalities or panchayats. State law may also assign functions
to the committee relating to planning and coordination.

With 73% of India’s
population living in rural areas, there are 231,630 village panchayats,
5,912 intermediate level panchayats and 532 district panchayats.
The 27% of the population that is urban is organized into 96 city corporations,
1,700 town municipalities and 1,900 nagar panchayats.

Functions and

While the Constitution
provides for a long list of permissible local government functions, state
legislation determines which are to be devolved and to which tier. For rural
areas, the list includes:

economic activities and regulation
(agriculture, land improvement, irrigation, small scale industries,
infrastructure (roads and waterways)
household services (housing, electricity,
water and sanitation, waste removal)
social services (education, health,
social development (libraries, cultural
affairs, women and child development)

For urban local
authorities, the list is not dissimilar:

economic regulation (abattoirs)
planning (land use, economic development)
infrastructure (roads)
household services (water, sanitation,
solid waste)
social services (health, welfare,
protective services (fire fighting)
administration (registration of births and
public transport

The powers that have
been allocated to local authorities vary considerably from state to state and
the devolution of powers and functions is taking place at a slow pace. The
functions of the three tiers have generally not been delineated in state
legislation and the issue is left usually to executive instructions. The role
of local authorities is mainly to administer legislation and policies, as these
authorities do not have legislative powers.

Despite the slow process of change, the
total expenditure by local government since the adoption of the Amendments has
increased significantly at the expense of the states. While the expenditure of
local authorities in 1992-1993 was 36.1% of total state expenditure, the
percentage has increased to 87.6% in 1997-1998. While less numerous than rural
authorities, urban local authorities incurred 75% of all local government

Financial relations

In 1994-1995, the last
year figures are available, 68.2% of local revenue came from transfers. The
village panchayats received about 90% of
their income from transfers that were guided by both Union and state finance

At the Union level,
the national Finance Commission, tasked with recommending the distribution of
revenue between the Union and the states, must also consider the position of
local governments and make recommendations in that regard.

In terms of the
Constitutional Amendments, each state governor must constitute a State Finance
Commission at least every five years. Its task is to review the financial
position of the local authorities and most importantly, to make recommendations
on the principles that should govern the distribution of revenue between the
state and local authorities. The commissions also recommend how the revenue
raised by the state should be divided between the different levels of local
government, the taxing powers of local authorities, and the grants-in-aid to
them. Most states have established a State Finance Commission, but their
reports for devolution of funds to local bodies are not taken seriously by all
state governments.

Urban local authorities
can impose property taxes as well as user fees and charges. Some large cities
impose a levy on goods brought into those cities. Overall the tax revenue
raised by local authorities constitutes 21% of their total income with a
further 7.8% coming from non-tax local revenue sources. The remaining 68% came
from intergovernmental transfers. 
Property tax accounts for about 60% of the revenue raised locally by


There are a number of
voluntary non-statutory local government associations. Prominent institutions
are the All India Council of Mayors, representing municipal corporations, and
the Nagar Palik Pramukh Sangthen, representing the other municipalities.

There are no special
forums for intergovernmental relations and local authorities have no formal
representation in state structures. In a number of states, members of state
legislatures are, however, ex officio members of district and block
local authorities.

SPAIN (1978)

With the advent of
democratic rule in 1978, Spain has gone through a process of regionalization,
establishing 17 Autonomous Communities with varying degrees of self-rule. There
are more than 8,000 municipalities, 86% of which have fewer than 5,000
inhabitants and house only 16% of the total population. There are 54
municipalities of more than 100,000 inhabitants that make up 42% of the
country’s 40 million population.


In the 1978 Constitution
local government was dwarfed by the central question of the political
accommodation of the nationalities driven by the Basque Country and Catalonia.
Local government did not feature prominently but nevertheless was accorded a
limited measure of autonomy. Along with the Autonomous Communities and
provinces, municipalities “shall enjoy self-government for the management of
their respective interests.”

The organic laws or constitutions of the
Autonomous Communities that were negotiated between 1979 and 1983 did not
enhance local self-government beyond what was required by the Constitution. A
number of these constitutions assert the general proposition that local
authorities fall under the jurisdiction of the Autonomous Communities, subject
to the national constitution’s guarantee of autonomy.


The Constitution recognizes two forms of local government:
municipalities and provinces. Following the Napoleonic division of Spain into
38 provinces, they were initially administrative units of the central
government. With the regionalization of Spain after 1978, seven of the 17
Autonomous Communities consisted entirely of one province with each Autonomous
Community assuming the functions of a province.

The provinces are governed by provincial councils, which are indirectly
elected by the municipal councils on the basis of proportionality. The Local
Government Act of 1985 defines three roles for a provincial council: first, to
ensure the balanced provision of public services to all municipalities; second,
to promote plans for joint municipal works and services; and third, to
collaborate with regional administration. The provinces have no exclusive
powers — all their powers are concurrent with other spheres.

Functions and

The 1985 Local
Government Act lists nine functions that all municipalities must perform:
public lighting, cemeteries, refuse collection, street cleaning, finance,
sewers, road access, pavements, food and drink inspection. Those municipalities
of more than 5,000 people must in addition provide public parks, public
libraries, markets and sewage treatment. Municipalities with more than 20,000
residents perform fire, police and social services, while those with more than
50,000 residents ensure urban transportation and environmental protection.

Municipalities are
also allowed to provide “complementary services” to those of the other spheres
of government in education, culture, housing, health and environmental
protection. In practice many of the powers of municipalities are shared with
the national and regional governments.

In executing its
overall coordination functions, a specific task for each province is the
approval of an annual investment plan covering the needs of its smaller
municipalities. Provinces can also perform delegated regional functions,
although that rarely happens.

Local governments are pressing Autonomous Communities for further powers
and through a series of “local pacts” during the 1990s they received additional
delegated powers. Specific functions mentioned are: parking, transport,
airports, tourism, information, encouragement of employment opportunities,
encouragement of commerce, industry and agriculture, environmental control,
protection and conservation, and municipal enterprises.

The percentage of total government expenditures for which local
government is responsible has steadily increased to 13% in 1997 while the
percentage for the Autonomous Communities is 25.7% and the central government

Financial relations

Unconditional grants by the central government have been the most
important sources of revenue for municipalities. These grants come to
municipalities through the Autonomous Communities. In addition, municipalities
receive project grants from both the central and regional governments. For
provinces, central unconditional grants are their main sources of income (84%
in 1994). Provinces also receive capital grants that are then distributed to
municipalities as project grants. Overall, local governments derive 60% of
their income from intergovernmental transfers.

While the Constitution states that the “primary power to raise taxes is
vested exclusively in the State by law”, Autonomous Communities and
municipalities “may establish and levy taxes, in accordance with the
Constitution and the law.” A municipal council can set the property rates
within a framework set by the central government. While the central government
determines the local business tax base and rates, the municipalities can levy a
discretionary surcharge.

The most important local tax is on property, which brings in about 35%
of municipalities’ own revenue. Vehicle tax is the other important tax (the
rate is also set by the central government). Fees and charges make up 25% of
total revenue. Provinces own revenue comes from fees and surcharges on
municipal licenses.

Intergovernmental relations

Local government access to central government is facilitated through the
local government associations created to represent local interests. The most
important association is the FEMP (Federacion Espanola de Municipios y
Provincias) to which more than 4,000 of the 8,000 municipalities belong.
Its main task is to promote the interests of local government and negotiate for
local councils with central government.

Cooperation between the central state, the Autonomous Communities and
municipalities is facilitated by the Council of Local Authorities of Spain, a
statutory body established in terms of the Local Government Act of 1985 and
consisting of elected representatives from the three spheres. The Commission’s
main functions are the facilitation of cooperation and coordination, commenting
on legislation affecting local government, making proposals to the central
government, and participating in the determination of criteria for the allocation
of funds to local authorities.

AFRICA (1996)

With the advent of
democracy in South Africa, a decentralized system of government was established
in 1994, consisting of nine provinces. Of the country’s population of 43
million people, 54% live in urban areas. Local government has been radically
transformed in the past seven years. The local authorities that were divided
along racial lines have been joined and a process of amalgamation is underway.
This came to a conclusion with the first fully democratic local government
elections of December 2000, which established councils in 284 newly demarcated


In the Constitution of
1996, local government is recognized as a sphere of government alongside
national and provincial governments. The local sphere consists of
municipalities and the Constitution guarantees that a municipality “has the
right to govern, on its own initiative, the local government affairs of its
community, subject to national and provincial legislation, as provided for in
the Constitution.” On the other side, “[t]he national and provincial government
may not compromise or impede a municipality’s ability or right to exercise its
powers or perform its duties.”

Having set out the
broad objectives of local government (democratic and accountable government,
provision of services in a sustainable manner, promotion of social and economic
development and a safe and healthy environment), the Constitution lists a
number of functional areas in which local government is paramount. While both
national and provincial legislation may intrude in these areas, they may do so
only in a regulatory fashion.

Financial autonomy is
also secured. Unlike provinces that require enabling legislation to impose
taxes, municipalities may impose rates on property and surcharges on user fees
for services provided. Although this power may be regulated by national
legislation, it is not dependent on such legislation. Local government is also
entitled to transfers from the national government. Along with the provinces,
local government has a right to an “equitable division” of revenue raised

While the national and
provincial government must support and strengthen the capacity of
municipalities to manage their own affairs, provinces also have the duty to
monitor and support municipalities, and where the latter fail in fulfilling
statutory obligations, may intervene. Such an intervention is subject, however,
to the approval of the second house of Parliament, the National Council of


The Constitution
establishes three types of local authorities – metropolitan, district and local
municipalities – that cover the entire country. Six metropolitan municipalities
were established for the main urban areas. They are very large institutions.
For example, the city of Cape Town contains 75% of the population of the
province of the Western Cape. These municipalities exercise all powers
conferred on local government by the Constitution. Excluding the metropolitan
areas, the provinces are divided into local municipalities, numbering 242
across the country. They are then grouped together to form 46 district
municipalities. The constitutional powers of local government are divided
between district and local municipalities with the former’s main functions
being the coordination of planning of the local municipalities in the district,
the provision of bulk services and the redistribution of resources within the

Powers and

The Constitution
allocates state powers between national, provincial and local government. It
lists 38 items on which local government may make laws. They include the
following areas:

planning and building regulation
household services (electricity, gas,
water and sanitation, waste removal)
social services (child care facilities,
health care, cemeteries)
protective services (firefighting)
economic activities and regulation
(tourism, trade regulations, billboards, liquor sales, food sales, street
trading, markets, abattoirs)
transport (airports, public transport,
ferries,  traffic)
infrastructure (storm water management,
public works, roads)
environment (air pollution)
public spaces (public places, cleansing,
public nuisances, fences, amenities, street lighting, noise pollution,
traffic and parking, animals)
recreation (beaches and amusement
facilities, sports facilities, parks)

These powers are not exclusive. The national government and
provinces may pass laws that regulate these areas but may control them. This means
that national and provincial legislation may set a framework that can include
minimum standards and establish monitoring procedures.

The issue of overlap
between local and provincial government powers is real and arises in the
following ways: First, with respect to all local government competencies, both
the national and provincial governments can make laws that regulate the
exercise of municipalities’ legislative functions. It is always difficult to
assess when a national or provincial law oversteps the standard of regulation.
Second, functional areas overlap between provincial and local government. In
the areas of health, tourism, transport, trade, sports, roads, recreation and
even abattoirs, a distinction must be drawn as to which aspects of these areas
belong to the province and which to local government. When does a road stop
being a municipal road and become a provincial road? These conflicts have thus
far been dealt with through the political process of intergovernmental

Local government is a
sizeable partner in government: for 2000-2001 the shares in expenditures for
the three spheres of government were as follows: national government (including
debt servicing) 37.8%, provincial government 41.2%, and local government 21.0%.


provinces, which receive 95% of their revenue from transfers, local government
is largely self-sufficient. While the transfers are low (8% of overall revenue)
the percentages received by municipalities differ widely; those in the rural
areas without a stable tax base receive considerably more than the metropolitan


In terms of the
Constitution, municipalities have the following taxing powers: they may impose
property taxes and surcharges on fees for services. If authorized by national
legislation, they may also impose other taxes, levies and duties, excluding
income tax, value-added tax, general sales tax or customs duty.

The income distribution
of local authorities in 1999-2000 was as follows:

Local revenue source

Per Cent

Transfer from national government


Property tax (rates)


Surcharges on user fees (esp. electricity)


Licences, fees, fines


Payroll tax



The Constitution
recognizes organized local government and the South African Local Government
Association (SALGA) is a statutory body consisting of nine provincial
associations of organized local government. It has a non-voting right of
participation in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP), the second chamber
of the national Parliament. On the executive arena, SALGA participates in all
the major intergovernmental relations instruments. It is part of the
President’s Co-ordinating Council, an informal body consisting of the
President, the premiers of the nine provinces and the SALGA chairperson. SALGA
is also a member of a number of sectoral committees comprising of national and
provincial executives. Intergovernmental relations are still underdeveloped in
the provinces.

NIGERIA (1999)


Nigeria is a federal
republic with a population of 126 million people, the majority of whom are
rural-based. The number of states has increased from four in 1963 to the
current 36, the last six being created in 1996. The government has alternated
between military and democratic rule since independence in 1960. Local
government has often played a prominent part in reestablishing civilian rule in
that local government elections usually led the transition process to
democracy. There are currently 774 local authorities.


With the return to
civilian rule in 1999, the Constitution of that year effectively reenacted the
1979 constitutional provisions. In the same section stating that Nigeria shall
be a federation consisting of 36 states and a federal capital area, the
Constitution provides that there shall be 768 local government areas and six
area councils in the capital territory. Local government as a level of
government is entrenched but is placed in a subordinate position to the states.
The states must legislate on the establishment, structure, composition, finance
and functions of municipal councils.

The Constitution lists a
number of functions, including the provision of basic services in the areas of
cemeteries, homes for the destitute and infirm, roads, sewage and refuse
collection, assessment and collection of rates (property taxes), and the
collection of licence fees including those for radio and television. These
powers are not, however, exclusive to local government as they also fall under
the control of the states.

While local
authorities have limited powers to collect licensing fees, the main source of
income is transfers. Both the National Assembly and the Houses of Assembly of
the states must “make provision for statutory allocation of public revenue to
local government councils”.

The structures of
local government are slowly emerging and by the end of 2000, a number of states
had not yet enacted enabling legislation in terms of the Constitution.


The Constitution
determined the number of councils for the country and the procedure for
demarcating boundaries and the creation of new municipalities. In each
municipality development districts must be formed.

Functions and

In terms of the Constitution
mandatory functions of local government include:

social services (cemeteries, homes for
destitute or infirm)
economic activities and regulation
(abattoirs, markets, motor parks, outdoor advertising, control and
regulation of a range of enterprises such as bakeries and restaurants,
sale of liquor)
infrastructure (roads, drains, public
public spaces (open spaces, gardens,
public conveniences, pets)
household services (sewage, refuse
administration (registration of all
births, deaths and marriages)
transport (licencing of all non-motorised
means of transport)
finances (collection of rates, radio and
television licences)

Local government must
also participate in state functions such as provision of primary, adult and
vocational education; development of agriculture and natural resources (other
than minerals); and the provision of health services. The state may also confer
other functions on a local council. Finally, local authorities must also
participate in state planning structures.

On the face of it,
local government is not responsible for essential functions. Of the big service
functions (water, power, roads, health, and education) most are
participatory/recurrent with the state government. The participatory/recurrent
functions have also caused confusion as unclear assignments of responsibility
for service delivery among the levels are reported. Moreover, the weak position
of the local authorities has forced some states to discharge responsibilities
that are theoretically the responsibility of local authorities.

The share of total
government expenditures in 1999 was as follows: federal government 74.2%,
states 20.6% and local government 5.2%.

Fiscal relations

In 1999, local governments raised less than 6%
of their revenue needs. Over 92% of local government revenues come through automatic transfers because internally
generated revenues of local governments are very poor /non-existent. The federal government would pay 10% of
national revenue to councils. Likewise, states would pay 10% of their recurrent
income to the councils in their area. The funds are to be deposited in a joint
state/local government account from which states could not borrow. However,
transfers from states are highly unpredictable, as many states do not transfer
the statutory allocations to local authorities.

local government councils do not enjoy much in the way of taxing powers. The
Constitution refers to the assessment of privately owned houses or tenements
for the purposes of levying rates as prescribed by the state. The councils
appear not to have the power to determine the rates payable but they may only
collect them. Performing an agency function, councils collect radio and
television licence fees. A further source of income is the licencing of
non-motorized means of transport such as bicycles, canoes, wheelbarrows and
carts, as well as the sale of liquor. In 1999, the estimate sources of local
revenue was as follows: rates 42%, taxes 24%, fines 10% and other sources 24%.
Tenement rates appear to be a significant source of revenue for urban


Local government is organised in the
Association of Local Government of Nigeria (ALGON), a statutory body
representing municipal councils. At the state level there are also voluntary
bodies of local authorities, representing local interests.

National local government associations
for countries mentioned in this paper

South Africa Local Government
Association (SALGA)

Pretious Street, HSRC Building, 6th Floor, Pretoria, South Africa  0001

Tel: 011 27 12 338 6701 – Fax:
011 27 12 338 6747

Association of Local Governments of
Nigeria (ALGON)

Plot 2652, Yedseram St., Cadastral Zone A6,
Maitama, Abuja, Nigeria

Tel: 234 9

Federation of Canadian Municipalities

24, Clarence Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1N
5P3 Canada

Tel: 613
241-5221 – Fax: 613 241-7440

The National League of Cities

1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 550,
Washington, DC 20004

Tel: 202

Federación Española de Municipios y Provincias

Calle Nuncio 8 – 28005, Madrid, España

Tel: 34 91
364 3700 – Fax: 34 91 364 54 82

Australian Local Government Association

8 Geils Court,, Deakin ACT 2600, Australia

02 6122 9400 – Fax: 61 02 6122 9401

Städtetag (Council of Cities and Towns
in Germany)

Lime Tree Avenue
13-17, 50968 Cologne, Germany

Tel: 49 0221 3771-0 – Fax: 49 0221 3771

Städte-und Gemeindebund (German
Association of Towns and Municipalities)

Marienstr 6, 12207 Berlin, Germany
Tel.: 49 030 773 07 0 – Fax: 49 030 773 07 200

All India Council of Mayors (AICM)

8 Bhai
Vir Singh Road, New Delhi 110001

Tel:   91 11 373 4435 – Fax: 
91 11 336 8524