Although low voter turnout in national elections has garnered considerable attention and concern, much lower turnout in municipal elections has often been largely ignored. Using a survey of cities in California, this article examines a series of institutional remedies to low turnout in mayoral and city council elections. Moving local elections to coincide with the dates of national elections would have by far the largest impact on voter turnout, but other institutional changes that tend to raise the stakes of local elections also increase turnout. Specifically, less outsourcing of city services, the use of direct democracy, and more control in the hands of elected rather than appointed officials all tend to increase turnout.Observers of American politics have repeatedly expressed concern about low voter participation in federal elections (Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995;Lijphart 1997;Bennett and Resnick 1990). The fact that almost half of all eligible voters do not vote in presidential elections has been cited repeatedly as evidence of an ongoing crisis in American democracy. Declining voter participation over time in these national elections has also been highlighted by a host of scholars who have raised questions about the health of American politics (Rosenstone and Hansen 1993;Teixeira 1992).Yet for all of the attention garnered by national elections, turnout in these elections is comparatively high. Nowhere is the turnout problem worse than at the local level. Although few studies have looked comprehensively at municipal-level turnout in recent decades, the existing evidence suggests that 645