In this paper and presentation, the focus is about the relation between the State and the municipalities regarding the governing of school reforms. The most common perspective used when studying governance of Swedish schools is viewing school as primarily a national concern and a matter for the state. However there are examples that indicate that the picture is more complex than such a top down perspective shows. As newer research indicates, the governing of school is more complex than that, and local variations are of interest. In documents from the government, (example Swedish Government Official Report, SOU) and in research it is clear that the governing of school is complex and it seems unclear if it was the State or the municipals who governed the school and that local variations occurred. Example of interest is when the communists suggested, in the parliament of 1945, that the school ought to be governed by the state, which the school commission of 1946 turned down. Another is when the general director of the National board of education (Skolöverstyrelsen) 1969-1978 and head of the Swedish Government Official Report, SIA (The inner work of school) said that the municipalities had the main responsibility for elementary school. These two example are of interest together with a big school reform in 1991. Even if my research does not handle the time after 1973, the reform called “kommunaliseringen” ("municipalisation") in 1991 are important. The parliament, with only a five vote majority, decided that the municipals should have responsibility for the school. The general perception is that the government in 1991 handed over responsibility for the school to the municipalities, and the state withdrew. From a historical perspective, it is reasonable to ask whether the change (“kommunaliseringen/ municipalisation”) really meant a change in the state's relationship to school.