Get the Facts CR

Another State Loophole (Iowa Code 423B.10)  Click Here!

Senate File 2217 - signed into law April 2012

IT GETS WORSE!

Our City leaders will most likely use 
OUR UPCOMING LOSST 
to pay for even MORE of
the "private investors" projects. 
There will be major street and sewer reconstruction 
for the Casino and Westdale Mall, 
and the ballot language allows US taxpayers to pay for all of it! 

Each phase requires a Local Match. 

From your experience of how this city operates, do you think the "private investors" are going to pay for this? The City - on April 24, 2013 - finally obligated $13,165,000 of our current LOSST toward flood protection. Those funds can be used for the State's required "Local Match"  for any of these projects if a part is for flood protection. 

That means the City will be using YOUR current LOST to provide a Local Match for the "investors" of the Casino and the Mayor's employer, CRST, for the building they're building in the current parking lot next to City Hall.

What does this mean to us? That means that if ANY part of a major project, like the Casino, amphitheater or upcoming CRST building on 1st Street SE, has a"flood protection" phase in their entire project, then WE, the taxpayers, can be paying, through this Iowa Law, up to $15 million for each phase of the major project. Observing the City's "reconstruction"since the flood, we all know that the City can break down a major project into many phases or subprojects. These can include parking lots, coffee shops, landscaping, ... 
(Did you know our new Public Library has a drive-thru coffee shop?)  
   

Do you ever wonder how 
we always end up subsidizing the wealthy? 

Well, there are all sorts of City, State and Federal "loopholes," and our Mayor and City Council take advantage of as many of them as they can. They even lobby the State and Federal Governments to get them! 
  Senate File 2217 was pushed through the Legislature by our Mayor and City Council in 2012. Although lobbyists and the media told the legislators and the public that it was $30 million per year over 10 years ($300 million), the fact is that it was for 20 years, and therefore $600 million!
  The bill was disguised as being for "flood protection." However, the loose language of the bill allows these funds to be used for nearly any project located next to the river.

In short, if any part of a major project counts as "flood protection," then ALL phases and subprojects of that major project also qualify for funding under this law.

"A project may consist of one or more phases of construction or reconstruction that are contracted for separately if the larger project, of which the project is a part, otherwise meets the requirements of this subsection."