Louisiana uses “Parishes” and they’re functionally equivalent. It’s based on French and Spanish rule where Catholic Church boundaries were drawn.
DC doesn’t have counties (or congressional representation) because it’s geographically small and also a territory, not a state. (Though it’s got more people than Wyoming or Vermont, everyone pays federal taxes, etc. so it really should have Representatives and Senators if “no taxation without representation” means anything.)
As I understand it, Alaska has “boroughs” near cities that sort of serve a similar function but much of the state is (or was) largely unpopulated so there will be a borough in the core settlement that acts like a county. Then, there’s lots of private, federal, and state lands that aren’t really inhabited and aren’t governed by the borough anyway.
Really? That’s odd. But they probably have something similar right?
Louisiana uses “Parishes” and they’re functionally equivalent. It’s based on French and Spanish rule where Catholic Church boundaries were drawn.
DC doesn’t have counties (or congressional representation) because it’s geographically small and also a territory, not a state. (Though it’s got more people than Wyoming or Vermont, everyone pays federal taxes, etc. so it really should have Representatives and Senators if “no taxation without representation” means anything.)
As I understand it, Alaska has “boroughs” near cities that sort of serve a similar function but much of the state is (or was) largely unpopulated so there will be a borough in the core settlement that acts like a county. Then, there’s lots of private, federal, and state lands that aren’t really inhabited and aren’t governed by the borough anyway.
Very interesting thank you for explaining!