February 14, 2011
School dollars, bottle bill top local concerns
Iowa legislators Rep. Chuck Soderberg and Sen. Randy Feenstra discussed everything from school dollars to anti-smoking money with Plymouth County taxpayers Saturday.
The local legislators addressed about a dozen citizens' concerns and questions during a public forum at the Le Mars Public Library.
Allowable growth
The Iowa House's vote to set allowable growth at 0 percent for fiscal year 2012 and 2013 has some school officials concerned.
Shirley Schroeder, a member of the Remsen-Union School Board, said a 0 percent allowable growth means she will have $82,000 less to spend.
Some of her frustration, Schroeder said, is the state has mandates like having a librarian or teaching a certain subject for schools, but doesn't provide monetary support.
"My feeling is that if you want to run schools and tell us everything we need to do, then give us the money," Schroeder said.
Soderberg, R-Le Mars, said the House voted to approve $216 million in new state funding for school districts in fiscal year 2012.
However, that money is needed to take care of last year's underfunding when the Legislature said it would increase allowable growth to 2 percent, but failed to do so, Soderberg said.
"Had we not had to backfill and make those cuts whole, theoretically we could have given a 6.5 percent allowable growth to schools," he said. "That's how big the hole was."
The intent behind the 0 percent allowable growth is to not push the responsibility of coming up with the money onto taxpayers, Soderberg said.
The problem with allowable growth being 0 percent, Feenstra, R-Hull, said, is that school districts' costs such as health insurance and IPERS (Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System) continue to go up.
He thinks the Senate will approve a 2 percent allowable growth and then a conference committee will have to look at both decisions and school districts may end up with a 1 percent allowable growth, Feenstra said.
Bottle Bill
In response to a man's question Saturday, Soderberg said he doesn't know if a bill to repeal Iowa's 5-cent bottle redemption program will be passed in the House.
He believes the issue came forward because of an increase in recycling and lawmakers are wondering if it makes sense to continue the redemption or shift the focus to recycling, Soderberg said.
"The challenge and question that I have on the recycling side: is that going to put the burden on rural Iowa?" Soderberg said. "Does everybody have the ability for curbside recycling out of the cities and we don't. Not everywhere."
He noted the bottle redemption program was implemented during Gov. Terry Branstad's previous term in office.
"Years ago there was no such thing as recycling or very little," Soderberg said. "And now things have changed significantly. It's amazing how much stuff can be recycled."
Both he and Feenstra agreed the bottle redemption program is a complex issue.
Soderberg pointed to what he called the "borders' issue" using the example that South Dakota cans don't have a 5 cent deposit.
"I think the distributors right now collect more cans than what they receive deposits on because of the cans coming across the state line," Soderberg said.
Another man attending Saturday's forum wondered what would happen if the bottle redemption program is done away with.
"If you don't give and get a nickel, are they going to throw them back out on the side of the highway like they used to?" he asked.
Feenstra said the repeal would increase fines for littering but it would be difficult to police.
Health Care
When it comes to the national health care bill that passed last year, Soderberg said it's a "huge issue" no matter what "side you're on."
He said it will probably be next year before the U.S. Supreme Court rules on a case in Florida as to whether it's unconstitutional to require residents to purchase health insurance or be fined.
"It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court rules on that," Soderberg said. "It will be a test if federal government can require us to purchase something."
A man attending Saturday said he works in health care and is in favor of "making people buy health insurance."
He spoke of his employer who writes off millions of dollars a year in bills that people cannot pay.
"I just want to remind folks that we are already paying for people who don't have health insurance," he said.
Registration and Titling
Plymouth County Treasurer Linda Dobson gave the legislators a heads up as to a bill that is pushing for automobile dealerships to have electronic vehicle registration and titling.
She and other treasurers across the state are not in favor of it because they feel it would be a burden on small dealerships, Dobson said.
The large dealerships, which make up 15 percent statewide, want to be able to offer the electronic services, Dobson said.
Treasurers also don't think it would be a good idea for an additional 300-500 people to have access to the database that provides vehicle registration and titling information, she said.
Casino tax
Another citizen asked the legislators,"Is the casino industry able to support a 33 or 35 percent (property) tax increase or are we going to kill another industry in our state?"
Feenstra said he's always against any tax increase no matter the entity.
"I understand what Branstad is saying 'use the money (from gambling) to reduce income tax,'" Feenstra said. "My feeling is let's reduce income tax and not raise property tax."
Soderberg said historically the intent was to always go up to that amount in the casino industry and the governor is saying let's go there now.
It would mean a $180-$200 million increase, Soderberg said.
The same man asked where the money goes now and wasn't it initially meant to go toward schools?
"That's a good example of not constitutionally protected funds," Soderberg said. "The money goes for other things."
Anti-smoking campaign
One citizen questioned why anti-smoking advertisements will no longer be funded and whether money came from a tobacco settlement to pay for that.
Feenstra said the about $300 million from the settlement is gone.
"The state decided to bond and use it for I-JOBS and other infrastructure projects," Feenstra said. "It was supposed to go for smoking cessation stuff."
Soderberg added that the $1 a pack increase in the price of cigarettes implemented a couple years ago was supposed to go into a health fund.
"It would have been a good, logical place to make some money for education," Soderberg said. "As of last year, there's no such fund. It was all dumped into the general fund."
http://www.lemarssentinel.com/story/1703016.html
