Shipley, Moore hear from constituents

Iowa Sen. Tom Shipley and Iowa Rep. Tom Moore were in Red Oak Feb. 8 for the first legislative briefing of 2025. The event was held at the Montgomery County Family YMCA.
The two lawmakers shared a legislative update before opening the briefing to audience comment. The first to speak was Red Oak Schools superintendent Ron Lorenz, who brought up the issue of supplemental state aid. Lorenz said both legislators were champions for education, which Lorenz appreciated, and if any of his comments were critical, it was against the legislature as a whole.
“I know the governor has recommended a 2% increase in the per pupil amount. The Senate has passed that, at least passed that out of the education committee, so I’m assuming that that has momentum on the floor. I know that the House has put forth a bill that would increase that to 2.25%. There’s a lot of good stuff in that bill, things that some people might feel are kind of small things, but they’re big things for us.  My concern is this, 2% is just not sufficient. 2% is less than the rate of inflation in the state of Iowa, which I believe is 2.9%. It’s less than the amount that we would be held to if teacher negotiations were to go to arbitration. that’s 2.6%,” advised Lorenz. “Now, I live in the world of declining enrollment, which means we are subject to the budget guarantee. A 2% supplement is going to put 159 school districts on the budget guarantee. For me, it probably doesn’t matter where you set SSA from the sense that we’re not going to get any money. We’re going to get 1% more than what we had last year.”
Lorenz said whatever the supplemental amount was, the difference would have to be made up in other areas.
“The lower that number, the higher we have to levy property taxes in order to meet that 101% budget guarantee. My concern is this. There are a lot of people in Des Moines that are spending a lot of time patting themselves on the back, saying, look what we’ve done in terms of lowering taxes. Really what they have done is pawned it off on school districts and cities and counties to have to raise taxes because they’re not getting enough of an allocation. And then the folks in Des Moines continue to say, look at those people raising your property taxes and what they’re doing to you. I don’t know what to do about that,” Lorenz commented. “As a school administrator, I don’t feel like the people that need to be listening are listening to me. They feel that I’m whining. They feel that I’m just begging for more. I don’t know how to advocate aside from talking to you guys. And I know that you’ve got a tough road to hoe.”
The other issue was the supplemental state aid needed to be set quickly. Lorenz expressed his frustration that the legislature put forth bills that seek to hold school boards and superintendents and teachers accountable, and there was a statutory requirement that SSA must be set within 30 days of the opening of the legislative session, yet it doesn’t happen very often. Lorenz asked how to hold the legislature accountable to abiding by the very laws that they set.
Shipley said the best way to hold the legislature accountable was to put people like them in place to advocate for his position.
“A 2% supplement, number one, I’m not supportive of it, because it’s not enough. And secondly, it makes over half of my school districts on the budget guarantee. And people are going to say, well, they’re small. They’re not small, there’s three of them, Red Oak and two others of similar size that are going to be on that budget guarantee. In total, I’ve got 22 schools in my district, and 12 of them, I think, are going to be on budget guarantee,” stated Shipley.
Moore agreed that the supplemental state aid amount was not enough.
“We in the House have caucused as a Republican group six times on SSA. I don’t have anybody that has stood up and said that they’re in favor of 2 percent. Nobody in the Republican caucus in the House. In fact, I would say there are probably 20 that have stood up and said we’ve got to have 3% or more. The Senate has a love affair with the governor, and the governor is locked in on 2%. I guess we’ve just got to start firing people by not voting for them and getting people in there that have like minds. This proposal by the House, which will come on to the floor next week, so it will meet the 30-day mandatory structure of setting SSA. This House proposal sets a 2.25%. That’s not what I want. I guarantee you we’ve caucused on this six times, and six times I stood up and said it’s not enough. We’ve got to have 3 percent or more,” Moore said. “It increases the per-pupil equity by $10. Now, what that is, is when the state aid formula was set up, there are some schools that get less per-pupil than others do. That was how the formula was set up. That $10 increase in per-pupil equity will help get districts get closer. The bill will also increase school transportation, which will help almost all of my school districts, to the statewide average of $430, which is an increase of $5.3 million statewide. It will also increase the operational sharing budget from 21 to 25 positions. Now, if there’s one thing that I think affects all of my districts tremendously, it’s operational sharing. And I will do everything I can to improve operational sharing.”
Still Moore said he’d vote no on the House’s 2.25% package, because even though it was an improvement, it still wasn’t enough.
“I want all these other things to happen, but when it comes down to negotiating between my leadership and their leadership, we are trying to, by putting 2.25 in there. We know the Senate’s not going to move off of 2% and we know that the governor’s not going to move off of 2%, so that’s all we’re going to get. The hope is by passing this that we’re showing that we’re willing to negotiate, and we’re going to try to get districts as much extra as we can. I am for every one of those other things, but I’m not for the 2.25, and I’m not going to vote for it,” Moore advised.
Lorenz said if 2% is chosen, the district will be looking at every efficiency possible and looking at every position that comes available and asking the question, does it absolutely have to be refilled. Declining enrollment cost the district 87 students, or around $700,000 in funding. Lorenz said he was resigned to the 2% SSA, but it meant that property taxes would be going up so the district could meet its 101% budget guarantee.
Red Oak city administrator Lisa Kotter also addressed the legislators, stating while everyone was looking to lower taxes, the reality of the tax cuts and the reality of what happens at the state is difficult at the city government level.
“There’s nothing to cut unless you want to cut services, and no one wants to pay more taxes. In Red Oak, we have a $3.6 million general fund. About 39% of that is funded with property taxes at a $1.4 million number. Of the $3.6, $1.4 million comes from the levy. We are allowed next year to go up $22,000 under your rules. There’s not a thing we can do with $22,000. And there’s really nothing to cut. People want to have nice things downtown like a speaker system. Where does that money come from when you just have to pay for the basics? Rep. Moore said that 2.25% is not enough for schools and you would vote no, but the legislature voted for us that we get 1.5%. When only 39% of that 1.5% increase helps fund the general fund, it’s easy to sit in Des Moines and say you want less property taxes,” Kotter said.
Moore said his position all along has been he will not vote for property tax reductions that aren’t supplanted for our counties and cities, elsewhere.
“Do we have to go to an increase in sales tax? Do we have to increase income tax, which we’re not going to do, obviously. I’m not going to vote for a decrease in property taxes unless that money that you guys are getting, as small as it is right now, is supplanted somewhere else,” commented Moore.
Mary Gohlinghorst of rural Montgomery County addressed the legislators about the Summit Carbon Pipeline project, advocating against the project and the use of eminent domain.
“They’re going to take your land forever. You won’t have any rights to that land other than if you can throw a crop on it, if it’s decent when they get done with the construction, to put the crop on the land. I don’t want anybody to take my land. I’m paying for it, my parents have paid for it, my grandparents have paid for it, for generations, we’ve paid for it. I don’t want a company to break the Constitution, use our water, to make money off of someone who’s paid their debt, paid their dues, for years.
Moore said the situation was difficult, and was a no-win vote, if they even got the chance to vote on it at all.
Whichever side we choose, the other side is going to be unhappy. Am I going to choose for the corn grower in Iowa, which is a benefit of the people. They are going to get better crop prices because of it. Or am I going to choose for the landowner, and his right to his property? I’ve come down on the side of the landowner. That’s where I’m at,” said Moore.
Shipley was also against eminent domain, and had signed on a bill that would put a hard limit on eminent domain.
“Last year, I wanted to have it brought to a vote. I advocated for getting it brought to a vote, and it didn’t. It never came out,” Shipley stated. “I don’t give this whole deal more than a 50% chance of happening.”
The legislators were asked why Governor Reynolds has increased funds to private schools. Meanwhile, our educational system in Iowa keeps failing. Moore said he felt it came down to the ideal that government should support every kid’s education.
“There’s a misconception that, I believe, that our private schools do a better job of educating their students than the public schools do theirs. I believe that’s misdirected for a couple reasons. Not all of the private schools, but some of them, get to choose their clientele. Not only that, but when they were unfunded by government, the people who paid for it were able to pay for it. I’m sorry, but we know that socioeconomic status is an indicator of your intellectual capabilities, and so those kids that were going to those private schools would have better test scores. Just the other day I read something where the governor said, you know, our private schools are doing so much better job educating our kids. Well, I disagree to a certain extent. Do our public schools have problems? Yeah. I think it comes down to the fact that this movement within education, and it’s not just in Iowa. I don’t know how many states we have now that have some type of voucher, ESA, school choice, whatever. But I believe that’s the belief that government should fund education for all and not just for the public school,” Moore said.
Shipley said he has two private schools in his district, both of them K-8. He had hardly anybody ask him to support that, even in those areas.
Also under the blanket of education was a proposed bill to limit the use of cell phones, which Moore said many superintendents wanted the legislature to pass. Lorenz said he had been supportive of the bill, but hadn’t advocated.
”The reason I’m supportive is that we have, in Red Oak, restricted the use of cell phones and devices during instructional time. When we did it, we got roasted. I can remember just nasty things being said. I’m an idiot, this is all me, that stupid school board. Social media is just full of that. I heard two people who were supportive of the changes when we were making them. Nobody said a word when we were doing it. Now they’ve come up afterwards and said, hey, good job. We like what you’re doing, that’s making a difference. But when we were sitting there taking arrows, crickets,” explained Lorenz. “Now there are districts that are going even further than we have. Now the talk is about what a good thing this is. And there’s times when I sit back and think, well, I wish that rhetoric would have been out two years ago. But to your point, it is helpful, because there are so many pressures, as you know, against schools. If the legislature would have passed a cell phone bill or the cell phone device bill, it’s probably not going to have a significant impact on our district because we’ve already done that. But I am going to sit back and say, it’s a good thing.”
The next legislative coffee is slated for 8 a.m. on March 8 at the Montgomery County Family YMCA at 101 E. Cherry St.