rodsullivan.org
SULLIVAN'S SALVOS
August 29, 2014
Sullivan’s
Salvos 9/2/14
In this edition:
*RIP Jim Clifton
*Roads Update
*Real Economic Development!
*Did You Know?
*RIP Jim Clifton
I
never really understood how badly the US needed healthcare reform until I met
Dr. James Clifton. Yeah, I had a softball injury when I was young, stupid, and
uninsured. It took me several years to finally pay off the bill. I hated it,
and it seemed unfair, but I naively thought there was no better way.
Then in the early ‘90s, I met Jim Clifton. He had gravitas; he was
an important guy at UIHC. Yet he really cared about the health of schmucks like
me. In addition to being a skilled provider and teacher, Jim was a passionate
and articulate advocate for healthcare reform.
He
left a huge impact. RIP, Dr. Clifton.
*Roads Update
I
decided it was time for an update on this summer’s activities in the Johnson
County Secondary Roads Department. This information is cribbed from a report
County Engineer Greg Parker sent to the Board on August 12.
Construction Project
Updates:
Mehaffey Bridge: The contractor is putting together a new completion timeline due to
the two flood events that impacted our original completion timeline. At this
point, the contractor appears to be 12 weeks behind schedule. The contractor
will have a revised construction schedule timeline completed in the next couple
of weeks.
Mehaffey Bridge Road: The intermediate asphalt layer is in place. The
contractor has will be putting down the final surface layer within the next
couple of weeks. We were hopeful to complete this project before school
started, however, it looks like we won’t be complete on this project until
September.
520th Street (Utah west to Hills): The flood this summer has also extended the
construction timeline for the contractor on this project. We just received an
updated schedule and they have all shoulder work and the cold-in-place work
being completed by the end of August. The new timeline for completion is the
end of September.
Sharon Center Road Bridge: The contractor is bringing in additional crews to
speed up construction completion. They will be working on the other pier and
they are continuing to get the regrading of the roadway completed.
Design Projects:
Curtis Bridge Road: Design is in progress for the summer of 2015.
Oakcrest Hill Road Bridge (R-28-12): Due to the extended timeline on 520th we are
considering holding off construction for this structure until Spring 2015. This
is not what we preferred, however after last winter, we do not want to have the
road closed over the winter. We will keep you informed as we get closer to the
decision deadline.
Copi Road – Timber Bridge: Preliminary design is complete. Permits have been
submitted to the COE and IDNR. Staff is looking into the cost for removing and
relocating the existing bridge. We have received our approved permit from the
COE. We have been calling the IDNR for updates and have not heard back from
them yet.
Johnson-Iowa Road Timber Bridge: No change. Preliminary design is complete. Our
joint permit has been submitted to the COE and IDNR for approval. The
preliminary design plans have been submitted to the Iowa County Engineer for
comments as this is a joint project.
Mehaffey Bridge Road Separated Trail: No change. This is planned for a 2016 construction
timeline due to federal funding availability.
IWV Road Phase 1: Design is in progress. It is scheduled for summer 2016 construction.
Ely Road/Trail: Staff is working on different phases as it was approved in the 5-year
program. We are working with Linn County on their project that starts at the
county line and goes into Ely. We have also met with and are collaborating with
Conservation on the Solon to Ely Trail alignment to accommodate the trail in
the County ROW. Several alignment options are being considered.
Maintenance Activities:
1.) Seal Coat: The
contractor is planning to be completed with seal coating of 17.5 miles of
County Road which is planned for completion middle of August.
2.) Shoulder Repair and
Pothole patching: We are continuing to actively take care of locations.
3.) 2nd Application Dust
Control: This is planned for, weather permitting, August 19th.
4.) Equipment: We will be
replacing a dump truck with a Volvo as discussed at the Board meeting, the
truck has been ordered. We are going to be replacing two District Foreman
Pickups as defined on our approved Equipment Replacement Schedule for FY2015.
5.) Culverts/Roadway: We
are blading roads as needed, ditch cleaning and replacing culverts.
6.) Flood: We have been
repairing the flood-damaged areas and we have had an initial meeting with FEMA.
Due to the most recent declaration from the President, we will be attending the
upcoming meeting to further prepare for FEMA reimbursements. We are still
cleaning ditches, washouts around structures and debris removal.
8.) Maintenance Rehabilitation
Program: We are planning to start the Observatory regrade around Sept. 1st.
Letters to residents in the area should be sent out in the next week.
Integrated Roadside Vegetation
Management Program Activities:
· Maintenance and weed
control of turf type buffalo grass planting at Shueyville Shed.
· Mowing of cover crop in
prairie plantings at Shueyville Shed.
· Completion of various
visibility complaints at intersections, driveways, etc.
· Herbicide applications
for brush management in Districts 3 and 4.
· Landowner contacts for
Roadside Maintenance Agreements.
· Seeding and erosion
control activities in maintenance/ditch clean out areas.
As
you can see, lots going on in Secondary Roads! Please let me know if you have
any questions or concerns.
*Real Economic Development!
*What
if I told you we could bring in 50 full-time jobs that would pay $15 per hour?
*What
if I told you these jobs could neither be outsourced overseas nor subcontracted?
*What if I told you those jobs would be filled by hard-working
low-income people, all of whom are local?
*What if I told you NO bribery (aka “tax incentives”) would be
required to land these jobs?
*What if I told you there were no special workforce training programs
required?
*What if I told you virtually ALL of the money earned would be
spent locally?
What
would happen? Well, the Chamber of Commerce would put it in their newsletter,
and the Ambassadors would do a ribbon cutting. Debi Durham would come over from
Des Moines and do a big press event, and the Governor just might join her. ICAD
would tweet this success to the world. Mayors would grab gold shovels and pose
for a photo. You might get a visit from a US Senator. The Press Citizen and
Gazette would both do front page stories. The Corridor Business Journal would
write a nice editorial. The region would be hailed for its forward thinking,
and folks would talk far and wide about how well we do economic development.
So
what if I told you the exact equivalent has already occurred? It has.
Several
years ago, I went to a National Association of Counties (NACo) conference and
learned about a program that had started in Cook County, Illinois.
As
it turns out, a huge number of low-income workers leave money on the table when
it comes to the federal income tax system, particularly the Earned Income Tax
Credit (EITC). Cook County created a series of free tax clinics to ensure this
money returned to their county.
I
did some investigating, and it just so happened that Johnson County had the
same problem, though obviously on a much smaller scale.
So
I pushed for Johnson County to begin a free tax help program. It struck me that
we had a potential partner in the Tippe College of Business, and as luck would
have it, I could not have had better timing. Dr. Joyce Berg was ready to
greatly expand the work her student tax preparers would do. It was a perfect
fit.
Former
Supervisor (and current Legislator) Sally Stutsman was very supportive. Amy
Correia had just been hired as Johnson County’s first Social Services Director,
and Amy took the ball and ran with it, including securing grants to cover all
operating costs. The Tippe College, ICCSD, United Way, Iowa City Public
Library, and many others have become valued partners. In recent years, current
Social Services Director Lynette Jacoby has maintained and improved upon all
this success.
What
are the results? The Free Tax Help Program brings over $1.5 million into the
local economy every year. It goes to low-income local workers, who spend it
locally. And it uses no local tax dollars.
Remember
when I said “50 full-time jobs at $15 per hour”? That adds up to a $1.5 million
annual impact, just like the Free Tax Help Program. But the Free Tax Help
Program is actually even better, because it serves over 1,100 Johnson County
tax filers and their families!
Economic
Development can take many forms. I happen to believe the Free Tax Help program
has contributed a lot of good things to the local economy. We have not had any fancy
groundbreakings or ribbon cuttings, but we have accomplished something!
So
if you know Lynette Jacoby, thank Lynette Jacoby. She has done great work! If
you know Joyce Berg, thank Joyce Berg. Her students have given much more back
to this community than they could ever take.
*DID YOU KNOW?
Johnson County is responsible for over 900 miles of roads!
Anyone
interested in learning more about County government should take a look at the
County website-
"Sullivan’s
Salvos" is sent once per week to any interested party. It will give a
brief update on issues of interest to Johnson County residents.
These messages
come solely from Rod Sullivan, and neither represents the viewpoints of the
whole Board of Supervisors nor those of groups or individuals otherwise
mentioned.
If you do NOT
want the weekly E-mail, simply reply to this message, and type
"unsubscribe" in the subject line.
If you know
anyone else who might be interested, just forward this message. They can E-mail
me at rodsullivan@mchsi.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.
As always,
feel free to contact me at 354-7199 or rodsullivan@mchsi.com. I look forward to
serving you!
---Rod
August 22, 2014
Sullivan’s
Salvos 8/26/14
In this edition:
*Labor Day
*Labor Day Picnic
*Sutliff Street Dance
*MRAP
*Did You Know?
*Labor Day
Happy Labor Day next Monday! I love Labor Day. Every Memorial Day
and Veteran’s Day we set aside time to recall the folks whose service has given
us our freedom. I have long felt we need to treat Labor Day in a similar
fashion.
Please take a moment this Labor Day to remember the people who
fought (and often died) to give us child labor laws, 40 hour weeks, weekends,
overtime, vacations, the minimum wage, sick leave, parental leave, OSHA,
employment nondiscrimination, pensions, Social Security, health insurance, and
so much more.
Do not be fooled! These benefits were not GIVEN to workers by
benevolent corporations! They were earned by workers who sacrificed! It is a
shame that so many average Joes have chosen to support our corporate masters
versus supporting those whose efforts really benefit the masses.
Unions continue to provide the best protections working people can
have. I feel as though I have accomplished some good things as a member of the
Board of Supervisors. One of the accomplishments of which I am most proud is
starting an employee appreciation lunch every year the week of Labor Day.
Johnson County employees deserve much more, but this is one extra opportunity
to say thank you.
Trust me – the average person has nothing to fear from unions. We all
benefit when folks have safe and healthy workplaces. We all benefit when
workers get adequate rest. We all benefit when workers receive good training.
We all benefit when folks earn a living wage and have health insurance. Unions
help improve the quality of life for all of us.
One example of a way in which unions benefit everyone: much is
made of the automobile industry expanding into the southern US. While these are
not union plants, workers still have good wages and benefits. Some see this as
an indictment of unions. It is precisely the opposite.
Do not think for a minute that these companies pay $22 per hour
because they WANT to. They would be much happier to pay $4 per hour. And, when
China’s workforce improves in quality to the point that they can do automotive
work, the companies will move there.
Understand – large corporations exist for one reason, and that is
to earn a profit. If the laws allowed slavery, some companies would use it.
Because it is cheaper.
So why do they pay $22 in the southern US? Because of the threat
of the United Auto Workers (UAW). If the wages or benefits ever sink too low,
UAW could unionize those workers. The car companies don’t want that, so they
pay the lowest possible acceptable wage.
See? The UAW does not represent the workers at those plants. But
they have driven up the wages and benefits for the workers there all the same.
I am proud to be a member of Local 716 of the American Federation
of Teachers, an affiliate of the Iowa City Federation of Labor. Happy Labor
Day!
*Labor Day Picnic
The Iowa City Federation of Labor,
AFL-CIO, will host its annual Labor Day picnic on Monday, September 1, starting
at noon at Upper City Park, shelter 2. Burgers, brats, veggie options and
beverages provided. Please bring a dish to share. Political speeches and a good
time guaranteed. Free to all Friends of Labor.
*Sutliff Street Dance
The
Sutliff Bridge Authority is holding its 30th Annual Street Dance fundraiser on Sunday,
August 31 in beautiful downtown Sutliff.
Gates
open at 12:00 noon - $5 donation requested. Music by Between Monsters from 1-5
pm. Food provided by the Johnson County Pork Producers. Limited beverages
provided by Baxa’s Sutliff Store and Tavern. No coolers please.
*MRAP
You may have heard that law enforcement agencies in
Johnson County are now in possession of an MRAP (Mine-Resistant, Ambush
Protected) truck. The 58,000-pound, six-wheeled vehicle was built for the military.
With recent military disengagements, MRAP vehicles are being made surplus.
While many are being scrapped, others are being made available through a
federal program to local law enforcement agencies.
There
has been a public stir around this vehicle, and I understand why. I wish they
had never accepted the vehicle. I think it is a bad idea on at least two
counts. But first…
A
disclaimer – it is not easy to be a cop. You are charged with protecting and
serving everyone – including the real assholes. These officers are our friends
and family members. They are public employees – most are union employees. They
deserve our respect, and they deserve to be safe when doing their jobs.
There
are always a few who behave badly in a group situation, whether you have a
group of 100 protesters or 100 law enforcement officers. Those “bad apples” can
cause a lot of trouble for both groups.
In
addition, the citizenry of the US is more heavily armed than the militaries of
most countries. How can we continue to urge all citizens to “arm up” and not
expect law enforcement to do the same?
The
problem is, every interaction a citizen has with a police officer puts the
citizen’s civil rights on the line. If an officer wants to find a reason to
take that citizens liberty (and sometimes life) that officer can find a reason.
That is why the job is SO important, and why we must make certain that officers
understand the gravity of their positions. It is also why law enforcement must
be accountable to voters (like the Sheriff) as opposed to insulated from those
they serve (like Police Chiefs). But trust me, I get it - the job is important and not easy!
As
for the reasons I am concerned…
First,
and most importantly, I am concerned about the militarization of our local
police forces. Look no further than Ferguson, Missouri to see how things can
devolve. I am afraid that having this unit available will lead to using it at
inappropriate times. As the old saying goes, when you have a hammer, everything
begins to look like a nail.
I
can understand why a unit might need to be dressed out in military gear. Active
shooters, hostage situations… I see the value. Unfortunately, agencies are
tending toward using this equipment for routine drug investigations, serving
warrants, and other routine tasks. This simply increases the chance of
conflict.
Secondly,
I am concerned about future financial impacts. There could (probably will) be
costs for storage, repair, etc. I just don’t see any reason to have the MRAP in
the first place, so why take on those costs?
Sheriff Pulkrabek has pointed out
that no local tax dollars were used in this process; the transportation,
painting and equipping was all forfeiture money from the Johnson County Drug
Task Force. While that partially addresses my second concern, it fails to
recognize that the forfeiture money could have been spent in other areas (such
as training) that might have been a better use of funds.
God forbid, but it has also been
pointed out that there may be situations where a bomb-proof vehicle could come
in handy. Thank goodness that has not happened. It should be noted that some of
the same folks who are complaining about the equipment feel Johnson County
should have a plan in case of a bomb threat. What is that plan? What equipment
should they use? How would you suggest law enforcement approach the situation?
I still don’t want the MRAP – but this stance seems hypocritical to me.
The Supervisors were not consulted
on this deal – nor are they required to be. But in the future, it might make
sense to ask us what we think. Preferably ahead of time.
I am all for the public speaking out
on this issue. But the Board of Supervisors did not authorize the funding, nor
can we take it away. A Supervisors meeting on the topic would amount to little
more than political grandstanding.
Should the Sheriff hear about it?
Absolutely! But I see no benefit to the
Supervisors organizing a public roasting of the Sheriff. That is simply
showboating. If you want to complain to his office, you should by all means do
so.
But
let me be clear – we have an EXCELLENT Sheriff! Lonny is a very good human
being who cares about people. We are extremely lucky to have him in office.
That does not mean he and I will never disagree; we disagree here. We have
disagreed in the past. We’ll disagree in the future. But I am not interested in
trying to show him up. He deserves better.
In
addition, the Sheriff’s Office is but one of 5 local law enforcement agencies
that combined on the vehicle. Whatever displeasure one might have should also
be directed in equal parts toward North Liberty, Coralville and Iowa
City as well as EMA and the University of Iowa’s Public Safety Department.
I
do not like the purchase of the MRAP. I think it was a bad idea. But I am not
sure a public flogging of the Sheriff helps in any way.
*DID YOU KNOW?
The first observance of Labor
Day is believed to have been a parade on September 5, 1882, in New York City,
probably organized by Peter J. McGuire, a Carpenters and Joiners Union
secretary. By 1893, more than half the states were observing a "Labor
Day" on one day or another, and a bill to establish a federal holiday was
passed by Congress in 1894. President Grover Cleveland signed the bill soon
afterward, designating the first Monday in September as Labor Day.
Anyone
interested in learning more about County government should take a look at the
County website-
"Sullivan’s
Salvos" is sent once per week to any interested party. It will give a
brief update on issues of interest to Johnson County residents.
These messages
come solely from Rod Sullivan, and neither represents the viewpoints of the
whole Board of Supervisors nor those of groups or individuals otherwise
mentioned.
If you do NOT
want the weekly E-mail, simply reply to this message, and type
"unsubscribe" in the subject line.
If you know
anyone else who might be interested, just forward this message. They can E-mail
me at rodsullivan@mchsi.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.
As always,
feel free to contact me at 354-7199 or rodsullivan@mchsi.com. I look forward to
serving you!
---Rod
August 15, 2014
Sullivan’s
Salvos 8/19/14
In this edition:
*Happy Birthday Loshika!
*Happy Birthday BJ!
*Back To School
*Tiffin Fest
*Cosgrove Pork Day
*Landlocked Film Festival
*More On LOST
*Did You Know?
*Happy Birthday Loshika!
Our
foster daughter Loshika turns 19 on August 20. Lolo has begun a new chapter of
her life, as she starts her freshman year at Kirkwood on her birthday!
Happy
Birthday Lolo!
*Happy Birthday BJ!
Our
baby turns 18! I guess there are no more children in our house, as our son BJ
turns 18 on August 22. He begins his senior year just a few days earlier.
If
you do not know BJ, you should. I’m very, very proud of him. He is a good human
being. At the most basic level, that is really every parent’s biggest concern.
Is the young person I’m raising going to grow up to be a good person? I am
lucky, because I can say yes. Unequivocally, yes!
Happy
Birthday, BJ! I love you!
*Back To School
I
am feeling a bit melancholy of late. My son BJ is starting his senior year at
City High. While it is great seeing him grow up to be a hard working, funny,
charming, kind, and caring man, there is some sadness here, too.
BJ
is our youngest. So each event that takes place is a “last”. Last time
registering for school. Last first day of school. Last senior photos. Last Back
to School night. It has been a good ride, and it is sad to have this phase of
life come to an end.
That
said, Melissa and I have plenty of things we can do. I am sure we will find a
way to stay busy! Meanwhile, I’m going to enjoy this “victory lap”.
*Tiffin Fest
One
of eastern Iowa’s fastest growing communities is also home to one of eastern
Iowa’s fastest growing festivals! The 7th Annual Tiffin Fest is this
weekend, August 22-24.
The
people of Tiffin have really done a great job with this. The list of activities
and events is remarkable! See it for yourself at: http://tiffinfest.org
*Cosgrove Pork Day
If
you find Tiffin a bit too large, but still want a small-town festival, check
out St. Peter’s Pork Day in Cosgrove on Sunday, August 24.
Cosgrove
is a small, unincorporated village about 8 miles west of Iowa City, and 7 miles
south of Oxford. It is home to St. Peter’s Catholic Church, the Cosgrove
Institute, and lots of cool people! I urge you to join them for fellowship,
food, beer, and fun!
*Landlocked Film Festival
Iowa
City’s very own film festival runs August 21-24 at several venues in downtown
Iowa City.
I
LOVE the Landlocked Film Festival! I’ll be there when I can; I hope you’ll join
me! For more information and a full schedule, see: http://www.landlockedfilmfestival.org
*More On LOST
Johnson
County had more discussion on the proposed local option sales tax (LOST). There
were really three things at issue. Here is the scoop:
1.)
Coralville balked at putting 10% toward the proposed courthouse annex, so the
Board decided to decouple those two items. Now no city will be asked to
contribute 10%. I believe this is a very good thing; I always wanted the
courthouse annex to succeed or fail on its own, independent from the LOST. I
fear that these issues were becoming linked, and more importantly, getting
confused. Confused voters tend to vote no.
I
understand that Coralville thought the county’s letter sounded like a threat. I
agree. The whole thing was a mess. We would have been much better off never
requesting anything in the first place.
But
methinks Coralville doth protest too much. I don’t think they really want a
conversation about tax fairness or how municipalities use tax dollars. If they
do, I’m game. Meanwhile, I hope we can just move on from this debacle.
2.)
The Board reaffirmed an earlier commitment as to how to use any LOST revenues,
spending 90% on roads, and 10% on the courthouse. Supervisors Harney, Neuzil,
and Etheredge favored this approach; Supervisor Rettig and myself called for a
different allocation that included human services funding. (The papers portray
us monolithically, as though being on the losing end of a 3-2 vote means you
endorse the action that was undertaken.)
3.)
The Board decided to put the LOST on the ballot for ten years. Supervisors
Harney, Neuzil, and Etheredge wanted a ten-year sunset. Supervisor Rettig is
opposed to the LOST, and is therefore voting “no” on ten years.
I have a hybrid view – like Supervisor Rettig, I oppose the LOST,
and I will be voting “no” in November. But I also see no reason to shaft the Iowa
City Council. They asked for ten years; even though I disagree, I see no reason
why the Board should stop them. (Again, the papers portray us monolithically,
as though being on the losing end of a 3-2 vote means you endorse the action
that was undertaken.)
Don’t
get me wrong; I HATE the way Iowa City did this. It was all backdoor with no
public discussion whatsoever. It was forced down our throats. And we already
had a courthouse annex on the ballot. Iowa City screwed the county on this.
Plain and simple.
I
am going to work against the LOST, and I’ll be happy when it fails. Then perhaps
the next time they want to do this, they will consult with the Board. Though I
doubt it. Iowa City would never lower itself to work with the great unwashed in
Johnson County. And a public meeting is out of the question.
But
it seems to me that the honorable way to defeat the LOST is at the ballot box,
and not through a quirk in State law that allows counties to set the sunset
date.
It
is ironic; State law favors cities over counties in almost every imaginable
way. Cities can (and do) take county revenues, land – whatever they want,
really. Counties are powerless to stop them. The counties are completely
ignored at the Iowa Legislature. Then you have this one tiny quirk in State law
that actually gives counties power over cities. I can see why my colleagues
decided to try to use this leverage; it is the only leverage they have ever
had!
But
two (or 40 million?) wrongs do not make a right. I just wish the cities of
Coralville and Iowa City would sit down with Johnson County in a public
meeting. Encourage the public and the press to attend. Why must I continue to
make this plea, a decade after I began?
This whole thing stinks. How is that for a summation?
*DID YOU KNOW?
There are about 29,000 people under age 18 in Johnson County. (Source:
US Census Bureau.)
Anyone
interested in learning more about County government should take a look at the
County website-
"Sullivan’s
Salvos" is sent once per week to any interested party. It will give a
brief update on issues of interest to Johnson County residents.
These messages
come solely from Rod Sullivan, and neither represents the viewpoints of the
whole Board of Supervisors nor those of groups or individuals otherwise
mentioned.
If you do NOT
want the weekly E-mail, simply reply to this message, and type
"unsubscribe" in the subject line.
If you know
anyone else who might be interested, just forward this message. They can E-mail
me at rodsullivan@mchsi.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.
As always,
feel free to contact me at 354-7199 or rodsullivan@mchsi.com. I look forward to
serving you!
---Rod
August 8, 2014
Sullivan’s
Salvos 8/12/14
In this edition:
*RIP Patrick Hughes
*Happy Birthday Melissa!
*LOST Discussions
*Did You Know?
*RIP Patrick Hughes
Johnson
County lost a real giant with the passing of Patrick Hughes. Much has already
said about his life… I’ll just add one thing.
As
you go through the next few weeks, try to view everything through this lens: Which
Side Are You On? Think of Patrick as you do that.
*Happy Birthday, Melissa!
My
wife Melissa celebrates her birthday on August 17th. Those of you
who know her know that I am a very lucky man!
Happy
Birthday, Honey! I love you!
*LOST Discussions
As
you probably know, the City of Iowa City has called for an election on a Local
Option Sales Tax (LOST). State law allows any city to make this decision so
long as that city holds 50% or more of the population in their county. Iowa
City makes up 52% of the population of Johnson County. So the vote will be on
the November ballot.
I
have already written at length about my philosophy in terms of sales taxes
versus property taxes (and income taxes). I am no fan of sales taxes. But the
piece today is more about the mechanics of the LOST and discussions held to
date.
First
the distribution formula: LOST revenues are distributed using a formula that allocates
the revenues 75% on population and 25% an antiquated property valuation formula.
Some of my Coralville friends feel this is very unfair; their argument is, “We
have invested in this retail area; we should reap the benefits.” That is a
legitimate argument. The formula should really be 75% population, 25% point of
sale.
On
the other hand, many of the things that have contributed to Coralville being a
retail center have been provided by the state and federal governments. This
includes I-80, I-380, Highways 965, 6, and 218; other state and federal highway
funds; state investment in Oakdale Research Park and the IRL; I-Jobs funding,
state flood recovery dollars, state money for sewer and water projects, federal
Brownfield money… the list goes on and on. All taxpayers funded these projects,
not just residents of Coralville.
In addition, we have seen how badly “point of sale” has worked in
other states. Until they made some changes, Illinois had some cities with huge
property tax rates while retail rich cities had virtually no property taxes at
all. This created a situation where the rich continued to get richer, and
disparities grew to the breaking point.
Plus, people from all over pay the tax, not just Coralville
residents. Take unincorporated Johnson County, for example. There are about
22,000 unincorporated residents, but very few retail outlets. Under a point of
sale system, rural residents would pay the tax but accrue very few benefits.
Finally, it is just difficult for someone who works for Johnson
County to listen to anyone from Coralville complain about issues of tax fairness.
There are 40 million reasons that argument does not work. That is a whole
different discussion, and not one to be held today, but it cannot be ignored.
So while I understand and respect the Coralville argument, I feel
a 75-25 formula is a pretty fair way to distribute the LOST revenues.
Moving
on from the formula to the vote: The LOST vote is held separately in the
unincorporated areas, Swisher, Shueyville, Oxford, Hills, and Lone Tree. If it
passes in any of those places, that city gets a share of the revenue. Iowa
City, Coralville, North Liberty, Tiffin, and University Heights vote as a bloc.
If 50% plus one of the voters in that bloc vote “yes”, the tax is in place for
the whole bloc.
So
theoretically, every city but Iowa City could vote against the LOST, but if
Iowa City voters outvoted them, the LOST is in place. Conversely, Iowa City
voters could turn down the LOST, but voters in the other cities could pass it
over their objections. City boundaries do not matter; in this election, those 5
cities will be voting as one.
Each city in the county plus the county itself gets to determine
how any LOST revenues will be spent. But the plan for the money must be spelled
out in ballot language. It can be as vague as “any lawful purpose”, but it must
be spelled out.
Moving
on to the duration of the tax: State law gives the County Board of Supervisors
the sole power to set the duration of the LOST. The duration is the same for
all cities who pass the tax. Iowa City has requested ten years; in informal
discussions, elected officials from other communities said they would like to
see it go even longer. Meanwhile, Coralville officials indicated they would
prefer 7 years. I suspect every city will be sharing thoughts with the Board
soon.
Moving
on to the timing: Ballot language from every city (and the county) is due
August 27, as is the question of duration. The Board of Supervisors is likely
holding a public hearing on the LOST at our August 14 evening meeting, and will
likely take formal action at 9 am on August 21. Technically, we could act up
until August 27th, however.
Moving
on to the county uses of the LOST: As I mentioned, each city decides how to
spend its share of the LOST revenue. The same goes for the county, which
decides how to use its share.
This
was complicated a bit when the county requested that all the cities put 10% of
their LOST revenues toward the proposed Courthouse Annex. Obviously, cities
would not be obligated to do so, but doing so would reduce property taxes for
all county residents. Iowa City had indicated an interest in doing so, so long
as the other cities in the “bloc” (Coralville, North Liberty, Tiffin, and
University Heights) do the same. Those cities still need to hold those
discussions.
I’m
not certain how I feel about this. I think it high time our cities helped the
county with SOMETHING. I did not think it would even be worth asking; I was
surprised when anyone said they would consider it. Unfortunately, I have come
to expect cities doing anything and everything they wish, with no thought to
the county whatsoever.
I’m
not thrilled with the “threat” the county used, potentially holding the
duration of the LOST hostage to city cooperation. I’m sick and tired of being
treated badly by cities, but I’m not certain returning the favor is the way to
go.
The
issue was complicated even further when Iowa City Councilor Kingsley Botchway
asked each entity to consider designating 10% of the LOST revenues toward affordable
housing projects. (Iowa City has already decided to do this.) It is unclear if
other cities will make this move.
Understand
– my saying that these two efforts have “complicated” the LOST discussions does
not mean I am opposed. We SHOULD be having long and complex discussions between
local governments. I simply say this to point out that there are many moving
parts to this thing.
As for the county’s own discussions about allocating the revenues:
Each Supervisor put forth her/his own personal ideas for the revenue. I wanted
to spend 40% on roads and bridges, 20% on public safety, 20% on debt reduction,
and 20% on health and human services. (In my thinking, debt reduction includes
the Courthouse Annex, and health and human services includes affordable
housing.)
Supervisor Rettig came up with a proposal very similar to mine,
which is interesting, because we never spoke a word about it. Supervisors
Harney and Etheredge wanted 90% for roads and 10% for the Courthouse Annex.
Supervisor Neuzil started there, and offered to consider 10% for affordable
housing, but only if that money was used exclusively in the unincorporated
areas.
I
could not see using affordable housing money only in the unincorporated areas.
First, everyone has paid the tax; it would accrue to the General Fund, not the
Rural Fund. Secondly, we do not need more affordable housing in the
unincorporated areas. That is not a cop-out; it just doesn’t work well. Affordable
housing should be accompanied by public water, public sewer, public transportation,
and other public services. When it is not (see Regency) very bad things can
happen. I think Johnson County should definitely be funding affordable housing
– just not in the unincorporated areas.
So,
negotiations ceased, and Supervisors Harney, Etheredge, and Neuzil voted to use
the money 90% for roads, 10% for the Courthouse Annex.
Where
do we go from here? It will be interesting to see what, if any, conversations
we might have with other elected bodies. As I wrote last week, the discussion
over the LOST was the best intergovernmental discussion in my ten years on the
Board.
What
will I do? As I said, I am philosophically opposed to the LOST. In order to
vote for it, I need to see a great deal of willingness to invest some of the
revenues in ways that benefit low-income folks. Right now, I do not see enough
of that. It appears that on the Board of Supervisors (and elsewhere) they have
the votes. So they do not NEED to negotiate with me. We will see if anyone
reaches out.
Meanwhile,
it is going to require some more progressive action for LOST proponents to earn
my vote.
*DID YOU KNOW?
The last LOST vote (2009) passed by 7 votes in Iowa City, and failed by 8
votes in Coralville. That was a special, flood-related LOST in which the cities
did NOT vote as a block.
Anyone
interested in learning more about County government should take a look at the
County website-
"Sullivan’s
Salvos" is sent once per week to any interested party. It will give a
brief update on issues of interest to Johnson County residents.
These messages
come solely from Rod Sullivan, and neither represents the viewpoints of the
whole Board of Supervisors nor those of groups or individuals otherwise
mentioned.
If you do NOT
want the weekly E-mail, simply reply to this message, and type
"unsubscribe" in the subject line.
If you know
anyone else who might be interested, just forward this message. They can E-mail
me at rodsullivan@mchsi.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.
As always,
feel free to contact me at 354-7199 or rodsullivan@mchsi.com. I look forward to
serving you!
---Rod
August 1, 2014
Sullivan’s
Salvos 8/5/14
In this edition:
*Time To Merge
*Great Joint Meeting!
*Mental Health Region
*How Much Should Electeds Talk?
*Did You Know?
*Time To Merge
If
you have listened to anything our local city councils have said recently, or
read anything their staffs have written, you know what I am about to say is
true.
The
“competition” is on! Iowa City CANNOT make a move unless Coralville does the
same. Coralville CANNOT make a move unless North Liberty does the same. And so
forth, and so on. Every city is paralyzed by fear of what the others may or may
not do.
Given
the current state of affairs, perhaps it is time to discuss a series of
government mergers. Louisville, Indianapolis, Nashville, Jacksonville – Duvall,
Charlotte - Mecklenberg… there are several examples of successful government
mergers.
Do
we need 4 transit systems? 5 parks systems? Are there savings that could be
realized? Perhaps it is time to consider radical change?
I’m
not being facetious here. It would be in the public’s best interests to at
least have some discussions. Maybe you do not have any full-fledged mergers,
but you may find some savings.
No one will listen to me on this front, so it will have to be
suggested elsewhere. Chamber of Commerce? ICAD? League of Women Voters? Anyone?
*Joint Meeting
While
I am a frequent critic of local governments, I also feel an obligation to point
out when folks get it right. Local governmental entities held their quarterly
“Joint Cities” meeting on July 28, and it was BY FAR the finest such meeting I
have experienced in my ten years on the Board of Supervisors.
A
bit of background – when the ICCSD began building Van Allen Elementary and
North Central Junior High in 2003, they did not account for the cost of roads
and sidewalks. Those expenses ended up being covered by Coralville, North
Liberty, and Johnson County, each of which felt as though they had been caught
off guard. Ever since, elected officials from those bodies (plus Iowa City)
have met regularly. In recent years, Clear Creek Amana Schools and the smaller
towns in Johnson County have been added to the mix.
Unfortunately,
these meetings have typically been a big waste of time. The most critical
topics are usually avoided, and substantive discussions rarely take place.
But
July 28 was different. There was discussion of the details of the Local Option
Sales Tax, as well as potential uses. We discussed school plans, affordable
housing, and animal facilities. It was a really good meeting!
At
one point, two Council Members from Iowa City argued with a Council Member from
Coralville. But you know what? The world did not end! As a matter of fact, the
argument was handled very respectfully.
Most
importantly, it was done IN PUBLIC. No backroom deals between staff – this was
elected officials discussing things in public. As it should be!
This
is EXACTLY what the people of Johnson County need and deserve! We can do this!
Bravo to all involved!
*Mental Health Region
Iowa’s
counties recently merged Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities services
into 15 regions across the state.
Johnson
County ended up in a very odd 9-county geographical region – we are combined
with Benton, Iowa, Linn, and Jones Counties – that comes as no surprise. What I
would not have guessed is that we are also teamed up with Buchanan, Bremer,
Dubuque, and Delaware Counties.
The
region is governed by a 9-member board, consisting of one Supervisor from each
county. I am Johnson County’s appointee to this group. We had been meeting for
over a year in anticipation of our actual merger, which took place July 1st.
The Board has worked well together. Staff people have been great. And I’m
pleased to report that aside from a few computer glitches, the transition went
smoothly.
This
transition changes the financing considerably. Medicaid is primarily a Federal
funding stream, but it has a local match. In the past, counties paid the cost
of this local match. Now the state is paying the non-local match for Medicaid.
Meanwhile, county property tax dollars pay for all the non-Medicaid services.
Another
big financial change is the elimination of Legal Settlement. Here is an example
of how Legal Settlement worked: A person with a disability born and raised in a
more rural county often moves to Johnson County to get services, seek VA
services, work, attend school, access public transit, etc. Under Legal
Settlement, the rural county paid for those services even though the person had
moved here. Now that Legal Settlement is gone, we pay for all residents,
period. Obviously, given the many things that attract people to our region, the
elimination of Legal Settlement will find us paying for many more people than
in the past.
The idea behind the creation of regions is to increase the
available services, while making services consistent statewide. While these are
admirable goals, the changes we have implemented do not get us there.
The actual solutions to our mental health crisis are actually
quite simple: 1.) We need to roughly triple the available funding, 2.) We need
to reduce bureaucratic rules, and 3.) The state should run the system equitably
across Iowa.
The state wants #3, but they are completely unwilling to act upon
#1 and #2. Until we do so, we are simply moving resources around.
I
am sure the region will continue to do its best. I am sure people in need will
continue to receive services. But is this change to regions going to transform
mental health services in Iowa? No, unfortunately it is not.
*How Much Should Elected Officials
Talk?
Years
ago, Karen Kubby “revolutionized” local politics by insisting that she would
explain her votes on controversial issues. She felt the public deserved to know
not just HOW she was voting, but WHY.
This
really did revolutionize local politics. Ever since, elected officials know
that this will be expected of them, at least once in a while. Elected officials
have an increased responsibility to inform the public. This is an example of an
elected official talking that is good.
On
the other hand, elected officials can often talk rather than listen. This is
very unhealthy, and probably needs no further explanation.
But
what is the right balance? I often find myself wanting my colleagues to talk
more; I often find myself wanting them to speak less. And I often wonder if my
own “balance” is a good one.
So
what do you think? Do you want your elected officials to talk more, less, or
keep it the same? Does it depend? If so, on what?
*DID YOU KNOW?
Johnson County traditionally served just under 2,000 MH/DS clients
annually.
Anyone
interested in learning more about County government should take a look at the
County website-
"Sullivan’s
Salvos" is sent once per week to any interested party. It will give a
brief update on issues of interest to Johnson County residents.
These messages
come solely from Rod Sullivan, and neither represents the viewpoints of the
whole Board of Supervisors nor those of groups or individuals otherwise mentioned.
If you do NOT
want the weekly E-mail, simply reply to this message, and type
"unsubscribe" in the subject line.
If you know
anyone else who might be interested, just forward this message. They can E-mail
me at rodsullivan@mchsi.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.
As always,
feel free to contact me at 354-7199 or rodsullivan@mchsi.com. I look forward to
serving you!
---Rod
|
