Why does Fairfax County's building code look like Prince William County's? Why does Norfolk's permit process use the same technical standards as Lynchburg's? The answer is not accident or harmonization — it is the Dillon Rule. Virginia is a Dillon Rule state, and the doctrine structurally constrains how local governments regulate construction, land use, and almost everything else. For developers expanding into Virginia from Maryland, Pennsylvania, or New Jersey, the Dillon Rule explains a surprising amount: the statewide building code, the narrow zoning-enabling statute, the absence of local wage or hiring ordinances, and the relative uniformity of permitting across the Commonwealth.
The Dillon Rule is the common-law doctrine — articulated by Iowa Supreme Court Justice John Dillon in an 1868 decision — that municipal corporations (cities, towns, counties) possess only the powers expressly granted by the state legislature, those necessarily or fairly implied from expressly-granted powers, and those essential to the declared purposes of the municipality. Any doubt about the existence of a power is resolved against the municipality.
The opposite doctrine — the Home Rule rule — treats municipalities as possessing inherent police powers limited only by specific legislative preemption. Most states have moved to home rule (by constitution, charter grant, or statutory default). Virginia has not.
The Supreme Court of Virginia has reaffirmed Dillon Rule status repeatedly. Bd. of Supervisors of Arlington County v. Town of Clarendon, 163 Va. 977 (1934), Tabler v. Bd. of Supervisors of Fairfax County, 221 Va. 200 (1980), and subsequent cases make clear that the Commonwealth delegates, and localities exercise, only enumerated powers.
The Dillon Rule has three direct effects on construction regulation in Virginia.
Under Va. Code § 36-98, the Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC) is the sole standard for construction in Virginia. Localities may enforce the USBC but cannot adopt different or more stringent standards except in narrow, statutorily-authorized categories. See our USBC essay for the full framework.
This is a direct Dillon Rule consequence. Other states permit local amendment — Maryland's MBPS is "layered amendment" by design, Pennsylvania's UCC has the opt-out-and-enforce-your-own model. Virginia's USBC imposes uniformity because the General Assembly declared it a uniform statewide standard and did not delegate local modification authority.
Virginia's zoning enabling statute is Title 15.2, Chapter 22 of the Code of Virginia. Localities may zone only as the statute authorizes. They may not condition development on matters outside the zoning enabling act's scope — inclusionary housing, for example, has historically required General Assembly authorization for Virginia localities to impose (authorized in specific contexts by § 15.2-2304 and § 15.2-2305, with defined limits).
Compare: Montgomery County, Maryland's 1974 Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit (MPDU) ordinance was adopted without special state authorization. Maryland is a home-rule state for chartered counties. A Virginia county could not similarly adopt an inclusionary ordinance without specific General Assembly grant — and the grants that do exist have conditions (requiring voluntary density bonuses, limited to certain localities, etc.).
For decades, Virginia localities could not impose prevailing-wage requirements on construction contracts because no enabling statute granted them that power. In 2020, the General Assembly enacted the Virginia Public Procurement Act amendments that created a statewide prevailing-wage framework for state and authorized-locality projects — but the locality must elect to opt in via ordinance, and the wage rates are set by the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry, not by locality.
Local-hire preferences (Virginia resident, local minority, etc.) for publicly-funded construction are similarly constrained. General Assembly delegation is required for each category of preference.
Localities in Virginia exercise construction-related powers only in the lanes the General Assembly has opened. The lanes include:
Outside these lanes, a locality's ordinance is subject to Dillon Rule challenge. Virginia developers occasionally challenge local requirements as ultra vires — beyond the locality's delegated authority — and the Supreme Court of Virginia is receptive to well-framed challenges.
Developers coming out of Maryland, DC, or NJ frequently misread Virginia local processes, expecting the same kind of flexible home-rule conditions (affordability exactions, environmental overlays, fee-in-lieu programs) that neighboring jurisdictions impose. The Dillon Rule defense is:
Successful Dillon Rule challenges in Virginia are not rare. Proffer reform itself (Va. Code § 15.2-2303.4, 2016, with 2019 amendments) was driven in part by developer pressure over proffers that could not be tied to specific authorizing statute and that the General Assembly ultimately constrained through legislation.
Virginia has 38 independent cities and a larger number of towns and counties. Some have charters — specific acts of the General Assembly that grant powers beyond the general statutes. Charter provisions effectively enlarge the local authority for that specific locality. Arlington, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Alexandria, Norfolk, and others have charters that grant authority on particular subjects.
A charter grant is still a General Assembly delegation — it is not home rule. But it expands the lane for that locality on whatever the charter addresses. A developer researching a locality's authority in Virginia must read both the general Code of Virginia and the locality's charter.
The USBC is amended periodically, and localities sometimes lobby for specific amendments addressing local concerns — coastal flood resilience in Norfolk, wildfire interface in mountain counties, historic fabric protection in Richmond. These amendments must be adopted at the state level, through the Board of Housing and Community Development, to have force. A locality cannot unilaterally impose a higher flood-resistant-construction standard; it must persuade the state rulemaking process.
The flipside: once the state adopts an amendment, it binds every locality in Virginia. USBC uniformity works both as ceiling and floor.
Three practical rules for construction work in Virginia:
For non-Virginia developers, the Dillon Rule explains the structure: more statewide, less local, and more predictable than neighboring jurisdictions. The trade-off is less room for locality-specific tailoring — a Virginia jurisdiction cannot easily add a custom affordability exaction or a custom prevailing-wage provision the way a chartered Maryland county can.
Primary sources for this essay: Code of Virginia Title 15.2 (Counties, Cities, and Towns); Code of Virginia § 36-98 (USBC); Tabler v. Bd. of Supervisors of Fairfax County, 221 Va. 200 (1980) and other Supreme Court of Virginia decisions construing Dillon Rule authority; Virginia Public Procurement Act (Code Title 2.2, Chapter 43); enabling statutes cited above. Virginia Municipal League and Virginia Association of Counties publications are practitioner-facing companions.