Iowa leaders hope to find urban, rural balance
By Dan Gearino, Journal Des Moines Bureau | Posted: Monday, January 15, 2007
DES MOINES -- In Iowa politics, the greatest conflict isn't necessarily between Democrats and Republicans, it's between urban and rural. At least that's what a coalition of legislators and city leaders believe -- and they're sick of it.
The group is putting together a five-point plan aimed at serving the mutual interests of urban and rural economic development.
"As rural Iowa grows, all of Iowa benefits, and as urban Iowa grows, all of Iowa benefits. We need to put programs together than can benefit these communities simultaneously," said Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, one of the lead sponsors of the plan.
A preliminary draft of the plan includes the following elements:
-- A tripling of the tax credit for historic preservation and cultural districts.
-- A sales tax exemption for art sold in designated cultural districts.
-- A new program for job training in areas with high unemployment or a shortage of skilled workers.
-- A doubling of the funding for the Main Street program, which helps communities revitalize old downtowns.
And then there's the controversial part: The plan would allow local governments to seize private property for the purpose of connecting existing recreational trails. To pay for the land acquisition, the state would sell bonds and make a $2.9 million payment on the bonds each year.
The total cost for all of this would be in the neighborhood of $20 million per year. A precise cost estimate is not yet available.
Urban vs. rural
The idea of urban-rural cooperation gets a lot of talk, but has little to show for it. Rural legislators complain that the state's largest economic development program, the Iowa Values Fund, gives a grossly disproportionate share of benefits to urban areas. At the same time, urban legislators complain that the state's highway funding system devotes way too much money to rural roads and not enough to the areas with the most traffic.
This tension between urban and rural plays out in just about every major issue before the Legislature.
In an attempt to get beyond this conflict, a group gathered last September in Marshalltown for a day of seminars and policy discussions. This was the meeting that led to the set of proposals.
"It's an acknowledgement that small towns and big-city neighborhoods have more in common than they have dissimilar," said Sen. Jack Hatch, D-Des Moines, one of the organizers of the event.
Among the participants were the mayors of Carlisle, Marshalltown, Mason City, Newton and Waterloo; city council members or staff members from Davenport, Des Moines and Marion; and state legislators.
Sen. David Johnson, R-Ocheyedan, is a longtime supporter of an increase in the historic tax credit. He didn't attend the conference, but he likes the idea of directing tax breaks toward small communities and historic restoration.
His Northwest Iowa district includes several small cities n such as Spirit Lake and Spencer n that have improved their downtowns with projects that qualify for historic tax credits.
"These are good programs that have produced results," he said.
Eminent domain revisited
Most parts of the new plan will likely have wide support. The big exception is the proposed changes to eminent domain.
Former Gov. Tom Vilsack signed a bill in his first term that bans local governments from seizing land for recreational trails. And last year, the Legislature overwhelmingly approved wide-ranging restrictions on eminent domain, a measure that became law through an override of a Vilsack veto. Both measures had strong support from the Iowa Farm Bureau.
Considering this recent history, the trails proposal faces an uphill fight, but the people behind the plan say the fight is worthwhile.
Marshalltown Mayor Gene Beach points to two bike trails in his region, one that goes through the center of town and one in a rural area just outside the city. The trails are just a few miles away from connecting with each other, but the land in-between is owned by a farmer who refuses to sell.
"One of the greatest things we can do is provide people with opportunities to walk and to bike," Beach said.
He thinks recreational trails are an amenity that can help attract new residents and tourists, but the trails need to be long and they need to go somewhere.
Any attempt to change eminent domain rules will face stiff opposition from the Farm Bureau. Christina Gruenhagen, government relations counsel for the group, said she can't comment on the new proposal because she hasn't seen it.
Speaking in general about eminent domain for trails, she said the Farm Bureau "would certainly oppose any attempt to erode private property rights."
Johnson opposes any change in eminent domain rules for trails. He notes that many new trails have opened and been connected with other trails since Vilsack signed the current limits into law.
"What's the problem? We continue to develop trails in this state at a good pace," he said.
Dotzler strongly supports the trails proposal, but won't let it derail the whole plan if he senses strong opposition.
"This bill is not going to hang or die on one single provision," he said.
Dan Gearino can be reached at 515-243-0138 and dan.gearino@lee.net.
A plan has 5 elements:
-- The state would sell bonds to set up a $30 million fund to acquire the land needed to connect existing recreational trails. This would cost about $2.9 million per year to maintain. Also, local governments would gain the ability to use eminent domain to seize the land for trail connections.
-- Tax credits for historic preservation and cultural districts would triple, rising from $6 million per year to $18 million.
-- Fine art sold in designated cultural districts would be exempt from sales tax. The potential cost of this is not yet available.
-- A new program, with an annual cost of $3 million, would be started within the Iowa Department of Education to provide job training assistance in areas with high unemployment or a shortage of skilled workers.
-- The Main Street program, which helps communities improve the appearance of old downtowns, would get $1.3 million per year, which is about double the current funding level.
The total cost for all of this would be in the neighborhood of $20 million per year. A precise cost estimate is not yet available.
Source: Interviews with the plan's authors
The group is putting together a five-point plan aimed at serving the mutual interests of urban and rural economic development.
"As rural Iowa grows, all of Iowa benefits, and as urban Iowa grows, all of Iowa benefits. We need to put programs together than can benefit these communities simultaneously," said Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, one of the lead sponsors of the plan.
A preliminary draft of the plan includes the following elements:
-- A tripling of the tax credit for historic preservation and cultural districts.
-- A sales tax exemption for art sold in designated cultural districts.
-- A new program for job training in areas with high unemployment or a shortage of skilled workers.
-- A doubling of the funding for the Main Street program, which helps communities revitalize old downtowns.
And then there's the controversial part: The plan would allow local governments to seize private property for the purpose of connecting existing recreational trails. To pay for the land acquisition, the state would sell bonds and make a $2.9 million payment on the bonds each year.
The total cost for all of this would be in the neighborhood of $20 million per year. A precise cost estimate is not yet available.
Urban vs. rural
The idea of urban-rural cooperation gets a lot of talk, but has little to show for it. Rural legislators complain that the state's largest economic development program, the Iowa Values Fund, gives a grossly disproportionate share of benefits to urban areas. At the same time, urban legislators complain that the state's highway funding system devotes way too much money to rural roads and not enough to the areas with the most traffic.
This tension between urban and rural plays out in just about every major issue before the Legislature.
In an attempt to get beyond this conflict, a group gathered last September in Marshalltown for a day of seminars and policy discussions. This was the meeting that led to the set of proposals.
"It's an acknowledgement that small towns and big-city neighborhoods have more in common than they have dissimilar," said Sen. Jack Hatch, D-Des Moines, one of the organizers of the event.
Among the participants were the mayors of Carlisle, Marshalltown, Mason City, Newton and Waterloo; city council members or staff members from Davenport, Des Moines and Marion; and state legislators.
Sen. David Johnson, R-Ocheyedan, is a longtime supporter of an increase in the historic tax credit. He didn't attend the conference, but he likes the idea of directing tax breaks toward small communities and historic restoration.
His Northwest Iowa district includes several small cities n such as Spirit Lake and Spencer n that have improved their downtowns with projects that qualify for historic tax credits.
"These are good programs that have produced results," he said.
Eminent domain revisited
Most parts of the new plan will likely have wide support. The big exception is the proposed changes to eminent domain.
Former Gov. Tom Vilsack signed a bill in his first term that bans local governments from seizing land for recreational trails. And last year, the Legislature overwhelmingly approved wide-ranging restrictions on eminent domain, a measure that became law through an override of a Vilsack veto. Both measures had strong support from the Iowa Farm Bureau.
Considering this recent history, the trails proposal faces an uphill fight, but the people behind the plan say the fight is worthwhile.
Marshalltown Mayor Gene Beach points to two bike trails in his region, one that goes through the center of town and one in a rural area just outside the city. The trails are just a few miles away from connecting with each other, but the land in-between is owned by a farmer who refuses to sell.
"One of the greatest things we can do is provide people with opportunities to walk and to bike," Beach said.
He thinks recreational trails are an amenity that can help attract new residents and tourists, but the trails need to be long and they need to go somewhere.
Any attempt to change eminent domain rules will face stiff opposition from the Farm Bureau. Christina Gruenhagen, government relations counsel for the group, said she can't comment on the new proposal because she hasn't seen it.
Speaking in general about eminent domain for trails, she said the Farm Bureau "would certainly oppose any attempt to erode private property rights."
Johnson opposes any change in eminent domain rules for trails. He notes that many new trails have opened and been connected with other trails since Vilsack signed the current limits into law.
"What's the problem? We continue to develop trails in this state at a good pace," he said.
Dotzler strongly supports the trails proposal, but won't let it derail the whole plan if he senses strong opposition.
"This bill is not going to hang or die on one single provision," he said.
Dan Gearino can be reached at 515-243-0138 and dan.gearino@lee.net.
A plan has 5 elements:
-- The state would sell bonds to set up a $30 million fund to acquire the land needed to connect existing recreational trails. This would cost about $2.9 million per year to maintain. Also, local governments would gain the ability to use eminent domain to seize the land for trail connections.
-- Tax credits for historic preservation and cultural districts would triple, rising from $6 million per year to $18 million.
-- Fine art sold in designated cultural districts would be exempt from sales tax. The potential cost of this is not yet available.
-- A new program, with an annual cost of $3 million, would be started within the Iowa Department of Education to provide job training assistance in areas with high unemployment or a shortage of skilled workers.
-- The Main Street program, which helps communities improve the appearance of old downtowns, would get $1.3 million per year, which is about double the current funding level.
The total cost for all of this would be in the neighborhood of $20 million per year. A precise cost estimate is not yet available.
Source: Interviews with the plan's authors
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 3 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
Joe McCright wrote on Jan 16, 2007 12:29 PM:
Warren wrote on Jan 15, 2007 3:23 PM:
Brad wrote on Jan 15, 2007 7:42 AM: