Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.
A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.
The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.
The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.
The Iowa Supreme Court ruled today that Des Moines Public Schools properly handled money collected from a 1999 sales tax increase for school construction.
Iowa Supreme Court Building in Des Moines.
Eight parents sued the board in 2005, saying it acted illegally when it approved expenses that were not spelled out in a spending plan shown to voters. A district judge ruled that the courts should not intervene, and the parents appealed to the Supreme Court.
The school board modified the 10-year tax plan by deciding to close four elementary schools and sell a central facility that provided advanced secondary education and technical training courses. The modification included additional spending on new facilities that was not part of the original plan. The board also approved hiring a construction firm to create a management plan in connection with the infrastructure projects. This expense was not specified in the original plan, either.
The court ruled that the board was not outside its jurisdiction to make changes to the plan because the plan presented to voters in 1999 allowed for adjustments.
“Contrary to the taxpayers’ assertions, the board’s initial 10-year plan was not set in stone,†the ruling said. “The plan made clear it was preliminary and subject to change.â€
According to the ruling, while the plan identified the needs of all of the then-existing schools in the district, it noted the plan was subject to budget constraints, demographic changes and program needs. The law the parents used in bringing the case to trial, the court said, wasn’t even in place until 2003, when the Legislature passed an amendment that requires voter approval before a school district can change the use of the revenue generated from a local option sales tax.
“While we sympathize with the taxpayers and their desire to maintain their neighborhood schools, the board has the authority to determine the number and location of schools and appropriate the necessary resources to maintain them,†the ruling said. “The taxpayers failed to demonstrate the board acted illegally or exceeded its jurisdiction.â€
Follow Jason Hancock on Twitter
Do you know where to vote on Election Day? Do you know what to bring with you? Get comprehensive voter information for your state here.
Sign up for our email newsletter