Mar
26
Final thoughts
March 26, 2007 |
The moment of truth is almost here. A few thoughts before the vote tomorrow…
I don’t think anyone can dispute the fact that our buildings are in bad shape. No one can realistically say we don’t need a new high school. This plan will move us farther down the right path. Will it fix every problem we have? Of course not, but it’s a huge step in the right direction.
Would it make a difference if we put the Dallas County tax money towards a new high school and passed a bond for the other buildings? Does it really matter if a dollar from Dexter is used to fund a new high school? Does it matter if a dollar from Stuart goes towards the middle school in Redfield? The fact of the matter is we need money and we need lots of it. Which town it comes from just doesn’t matter.
You might be pissed at the superintendent for the letters he’s written. You might not trust the board because you think all elected officials are full of it. Think what you will, but this thing is bigger than any individual. These people are not the issue!
This thing needs to get done, and it needs to get done now. We’ve seen how much the cost goes up everytime this doesn’t pass. It’s time to step up and take care of business.
This is in your hands tomorrow. Step up and take responsibility for the future of the district. Put your old allegiances aside and do the right thing. Vote YES!
Polls will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Polling locations are:
Menlo - Community Building
Stuart - First Congregational Church
Dexter - City Hall
Redfield - City Hall
Comments
100 Comments so far
It was 7:52 when I voted this morning and there had already been over 100 people vote. I believe this will be a close one again, and I hope it’s in our favor this time!! YES!!!!
What town Buffy? I talked to someone in Stuart and they had voted when they dropped their kids off at the bus and they were like #38 or 39.
You can hate the plan, but don’t hate the planners. Not everyone is going to agree on 1 idea. The school board is making its best effort.
No matter the result, I think the search for a new superintendent starts tomorrow. Not only for the letters he’s written, but the fact that he doesn’t even live in the district. For someone in that position, district residency ought to be required.
As to the cost, which has been quoted as $4,000 in additional taxes over 20 years, have a little perspective. That wouldn’t even cover 1 year of tuition for 1 student at Dowling. Daycare at $100/week is $5,200 for the year.
the longer you put off building, the more it will cost and in the meantime, we are putting piles of money into old plumbing, and old building. you won’t get any of this back.
You will have a new school for decades.
Hi everybody,
Have you voted? I did at 3:30 today. I was #456. Does that seem like more than usual? I can’t remember what the #’s were last time. I sure hope that this passes this time. I’m afraid that if it doesn’t, somebody in the community might try to get that STUPID coccurrent action started back up. I worked hard to get our school consolidated and I sure wouldn’t want to disect the district. It wouldn’t surprise me if somebody gets a petition started if we can’t pass the bond issue this time. People the longer we wait to do this, the more it will cost. I’m not just talking MONEY. I’m talking about our chidren’s educational opportunities and the future of our communities. Please if you haven’t already, go vote YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I want to thank all of you who supported this issue.
It is now the “no voters” turn.
I want to first say that I did go to Stuart-Menlo, then West Central, then Stuart-Menlo again, and then I graduated from West Central Valley. I am now a college student.
First of all, I will tell you that I voted no. Yes, that’s right, I graduated from WCV recently and I still voted no. You need to understand a few things to understand why.
If this doesn’t pass, which I hope is true, everyone needs to look at the reason that the last 5 have not passed. When you have something voted for and it doesn’t pass, why in the world would you have that same thing put up to vote on 4 more (now 5) times?
Another question, who was the one that came up with the idea to pay for this school with property taxes??? Have you not seen that our community has a lot of farmers in it? Do you want to bankrupt them all? Because that is what you are going to do when you want them to pay this for most of this school. Yes, I know that everyone is going to pay for part of the school, but do you realize that the farmers in our area are going to probably go bankrupt because of this?
Why hasn’t anyone thought of paying for it through income taxes? I would instantly vote yes then, no matter how much the school was going to cost. I completely agree that we need a new school, especially if we are going to keep the teachers that we have. I think that we should pay for this new school through property taxes, so that everyone pays a portion of what they make. By doing it this way, there isn’t a single group that is going to get taxed exponentially more than others. Yes, there will always be people that will pay more than others, but with paying it with regards to income taxes, the people that are paying more CAN AFFORD TO.
I realize that I will probably make people mad by stating my opinion, but I think that’s what opinions are there for, so that you can state yours and listen to other peoples. Also, maybe by stating my opinion, I will hopefully explain to the Yes-voters the reason that some of us voted no.
Respectfully,
a recent WCV grad.
Did you get the message Stuart Special Interest Group? The voters don’t want a new HS on the highway next to your land!
9:03, I like your idea. There are provisions for a surtax on income to use for school districts. I believe Earlham has one as well as VanMeter. That would be somewhat like a sales tax, which I call a consumption tax and is lots more fair than taxing farmers to death who already have plenty of problems making ends meet.
IF we can get rid of this Supt. and the board will listen and get people, not just a select few, either, from each community together a bond might just pass.
Also, I have to admit I hear a lot of talk about the site and the land it was proposed to be built on as a negative.
You have to eliminate the negatives before something positive can happen. Forcing people to do as you say just doesn’t work.
The past needs to be brought up, opened up and gotten rid of. If not, it will sit there and fester like infection forever.
The yes crowd, whom I was one of until the name calling started, have to figure out that people just won’t take that and it turns people off. You can’t run people down and expect them to support you.
We need a new HS, Supt. and possibly an understanding with the board that they represent the public as a whole not the Supt and his ideas and a chosen few who dominate committees, etc.
One thing for sure is Arnold has to be gone and not at the end of the yr.
I would gladly support a new high school, as long as we FIRST focus on the elementary kids, not SECOND!
We are heading in the right direction with the improvements that have been made - but please note that the school is also the kids - not just the buildings. Are all their needs met, aside from the actual structure?
For the past few weeks, I was riding the fence. I could argue both sides and many days, did. I couldn’t figure out what would be best. Then it hit and I realized that I couldn’t justify having the current superintendent being responsible for overseeing this project. He does not have a vested interest in our communities! I’m not sure about anything with him, anymore! For the “mud” he slings, he sure does not have anything solid to stand on!
What part of NO don’t you understand “gang of 3″?
School bond fails for sixth time!
Voters in the West Central Valley district reject plans for a new high school in Stuart.
who is the gang of 3?
I would like to know who the gang of 3 is also. I keep hearing about them but no one seems to know who they are. By the way this last bond proposal was designed by the school board not a gang of 3.
Can you BELIEVE it?! There are 3 people in Stuart who can control the minds and actions of so many people… and the people do not even know their names! AMAZING.
…
You “no” people are absolutely absurd and DUMB!
…
Last I knew, I was able to think for myself.
2:39, This bond proposal wasn’t designed or pushed by the school administration. The gang of 3 pushed this onto the board. A board member told me all the details.
Which board member, which details? I bet you don’t honestly respond to that question?
The board is controlled by Arnold. Short meetings are the proof of that. All agree with Arnolds agenda and are complete bobble heads. It’s clear they were not responsible for coming up with this last proposal. None of them could ever answer any questions but would always refer you on to Arnold. It’s a fact; the special interest group (gang of 3) brought this bond to the vote. Have they learned anything from this? I would say within 6 months they will be back with the same old tired proposal. Get a clue, propose to build a district wide elementary school first then proceed on with additions and retrofitting the present HS building.
So true about the meetings. Unless they were discussing facts and individual issues outside a public forum, which if a quorum existed is illegal, then they had nothing to do with the bond issue as presented. It was Arnold’s pure and simple. And pure and simple he needs to say oops, you found me out!! Bye, Bye, suckers!! Oh, but you WILL pay me for the rest of this yr as per my contract. I sure as H*** hope he doesn’t have a multi-year contract that we have to buy out.
So 3 people control 50% of the public and 4 people control the other 50%. But 1 person controls 7 board members, and that one person is controlled by 3 people, but the 4 people can’t control the one person who controls the 7 board members, so the 4 people have no control over the 7 board members. And the 7 board members elected by the public have no control over themselves.
And we need a new high school, but not in Stuart, or not on the new land, or maybe on the new land, but not too big or too small, or too expensive or too low quality, or not overtaxing, or maybe remodel the current building, or add on, but the building’s no good, or not good enough, or in good shape, or would make a good elementary, or we need a big elementary in Dexter, or Menlo’s about to implode, or we just need to fix it.
I know I’ve left something out (and someone will point it out, because they always do), but you get the point that this all makes perfect sense.
Maybe we should rehash all of this again for another 5 years and everything will work itself out.
Good luck with that. The parents are very concerned with the state of our district. Lets get something done now. Stop these childish games. Stop the conspiracy theories. Right or wrong about the solutions to our problems, the constant bickering is detrimental to us all. If you don’t have something productive to say, stop talking.
Very good post 7:09 a.m. I hope we don’t hash it out another five years because that just keeps costing money. People keep complaining how they don’t want to pay the taxes for a new school but your going to pay for it sooner or later, hopefully sooner. These schools can’t last forever especially the Menlo building. If we would have passed this bond 4 years ago it propably would have saved us over 4 million dollars. If we get new schools more people will move to the district and that will help pay the taxes.
True, the buildings won’t last long if they are poorly maintained as they have been in the past. Leaving the buildings in disrepair to pass a bond is criminal. If they have no respect for the older buildings, why would anyone believe they would take any better care of a new one.
Maintaining the old buildings like the Menlo one can cost an unknown amount of money each year. Something major is always going wrong. For everyone that voted no you should have to spend all day in the Menlo building or Redfield building. You better not eat a big breakfast though because the plumbing might break and you might not be able to use the bathrooms. In the Menlo building in the beginning and end of the school year it might get a little too hot for you on the third floor. I heard last year during one school day it was 98 degrees in one of the classrooms. Kids that are younger than 10 years old have to sit through that and so do teachers who might be making less than 30k a year. Maybe you should put yourself in there shoes and quit being so selfish. If you want to take it easy and sit in the high school for a day you might have to move your chair to avoid the water dropping from the ceiling. No voters I dare you to sit through any of that for a day. Our school kids have to sit through this crap for 180 school days a year. The kids don’t get to vote though.
Tell me another sob story 10:37. My children are not telling me any of those horror stories. People in this district have sent a message to this present superintendent and board. Do your job and maintain our buildings before you come knocking for a blank check!
Let’s just keep patching everything. It’ll save us a ton of money.
My family went to open house at the high school one year and it was so incredibly hot in that building my younger child got sick and vomitted. It was absolutely horrible. My kids come home from school drenched in sweat and exhausted from the heat.
It’s long been known that a fire in the cafeteria in Menlo would be an absolute catastrophe if kids are having lunch when that boiler blows. Recently Menlo experienced a massive water leak from broken pipes. It is common to visit the high school during the rainy season and see garbage cans all over the place catching the leaking water from the ceiling. The older portion of the Redfield building is unbearable in warm weather also. Those big beautiful windows the Redfield gang’s so proud of create a terrarium effect in the classrooms. The condition of our buildings is a DISGRACE and each and every no voter should be ashamed of yourselves. Although, I doubt you have to good sense to feel shame at your utter disregard for the welfare of the students and teachers in our district.
11:54
Did you know that on Monday at Menlo, the carpet in a 3rd grade classroom was still so wet from the burst water pipe over spring break that it was squishy? When the kids kicked their foot, water flew off. How many days has that been like that now? Over a week. Do you know how moldy that probably is now? And can you imagine the smell? Would you let the carpets in your house be like that? No.
Oh, and did you know that the bathroom ceiling tile fell down this week while people were in there? Luckily, it fell in the unoccupied stall, but there was someone in the next one over. What if that had fell on that person? You think it’d be a cheap lawsuit?
So, you really think putting a bandaid on that is going to heal it? No. It’s falling apart. I realize you have no problems like this because your kids most likely go to the nice, remodeled, newer, air conditioned Dexter or Redfield building but there are people in this district that do.
Don’t open your mouth and spread your ignorance until you go and see for yourself. Go spend tomorrow at Menlo. Learn. Because your ignorance is sickening.
Get a grip 1:48. Nothing that happened at the Menlo building is that bad. The sky is falling!! Good maintenance on the building would have prevented this latest episode.
I’ve been in new office buildings where pipes have burst, tiles have fallen and no one was proclaiming the end is coming.
I would suggest the school administration starts doing their jobs and take care of these little things before they get to the point they have now.
Ya like now can we put bathroom stall doors in for the high school. I know Mrs. Wilson said they were terribly expensive but I didn’t see them addressed anywhere in the plans for the updated elementary. All they were getting was new furnace, air, and chair lift and elevator. Now that’s what I call an updated modern makeover!!!! Just one of the many reasons people did not buy into this!!
7:57- Not replacing the bath room stall doors was just another one of the many items the school administration chose not to address. As in the past they thought this made a good argument for a new building. Now, get busy administrators and get this honey do list completed!
I don’t think anyone, or very few let’s say, agree that we need a new HS and in Stuart. No matter what town you live in. I haven’t heard that at all.
It’s just very clear and becoming clearer after the Supt. said we will go after another vote in 6 months in the paper without having a meeting discussing it with the board members. Like one said, oops, shouldn’t have said that, he could have at least added with the consent of the board. But he evidently truly controls the board, except maybe the pres., and I hear they are fast friends. So a wake up call needs to go to all, that another vote with the same proposal is doomed before it even starts.
If the HS is as bad as has been mentioned then how is their proposed remedy going to fix what has been said.
It’s funny that in 15yrs. which is a short period of time in the long run of the life of a building, that the Menlo building went from receiving high praise from Guy Ghan of the state when it was inspected to the point of falling down and a danger to everyone involved. Hey, #1 get that carpet up and thrown away. There’s a floor under there, no matter what it looks like. Or is that the idea so people can complain and make the bond more viable. Do you think the kids will be able to move out of the Menlo building immediately? It takes time to get projects done. As far as A/C, I went to Dexfield way back and the third floor never got as hot as you say and we never got out when a teacher broke a sweat as they do nowadays. No one I can ever remember passed out of got ill even from the heat. How could that have changed so drastically?
A new HS in Stuart is fine with me, but not as proposed. Call the board and come down on them hard, don’t call names or they will probably hang up on you. But they need to start leading. The Supt. is the CEO as outlined in Iowa Statute. The school is a quasi-corporation, I believe it’s stated, so in that manner he runs the show as the board tells him too, NOT as he wants to and tells the board he is going to do it this or that way. The fault lies with the board as much as the Supt. although he seems to have a bad case of foot-in-mouth-disease and has a terrible memory of facts that he states. I would like to repeat. I don’t think a bond would have any trouble passing for a new HS in Stuart if it was on a different site and came in considerably under the proposed figure from the last proposal. I still don’t believe costs have gone up that much and as bad as so many of you hate them, and I’m not one of them, can you dispute the $1.46/ sq.ft.? That being the highest around and should be able to be done for much less. Hey that didn’t even include a land charge, so something is totally amiss somewhere. And so many ask why people voted no. Was the roof at the present HS included in the figures of the last bond for repair? I don’t think it was.
Just too many things that didn’t add up. And when you treat people like they are stupid you offend them and then they think you are trying to pull something over on them so NO becomes the correct vote with the information that was supplied and the questions that went unanswered. I talked to a board member and they told me they didn’t know facts that they should have. Were they not telling me the truth? I really don’t think so, I honestly believe they were just going along with the Supt.’s proposal and they bit hook,line and sinker. One hour meetings make no sense to me as has been mentioned before. Especially when discussing facts and getting answers. Did the architect and engineer, etc. just meet with the Supt. and board pres. and the rest of the board just voted yes? Makes you wonder doesn’t it? Get that carpet out of the Menlo building, shore up the leaks, cause they can’t move tomorrow unless you know of some secret place that they can go too.
bad ommission, I apologize. I mean I think very few DON’T agree we need a new building.
To the people arguing that there needs to be another site for the proposed high school, what other site would you suggest?
I’d like to see the present site used for the HS. There is plenty of room for expansion. First thing, have a detailed feasibility study done on the present building and site. This type of study has never been done in the past. Have architects with a competent history of renovation complete this task.
Well, lets see how many people I can make mad with this. But you asked for ideas.
Why not take the HS parking area plus the area where the offices are now and try to reasonably buy what you can to the west and south and possibly the old church(sorry not trying to make people mad, just ideas) and construct a building there? When you get moved, either tear down the old HS or renovate it for an elementary or combine k-5 and HS in the new building and tear down the old one using that space for an auditorium? I know parking would be an issue, but that isn’t as big as you think. To the south we already own the bus barn and bus parking area.
I don’t know who owns the building on the corner East of the post office. Running N to S
would be a large area. If it were feasible I would like to see it South of the tracks also, by the athletic field, but some have said there are issues there. NH3 tanks, etc. could be stored elsewhere and have locks on them(I think they do already or soon will). So there are other ideas besides the site that’s always mentioned. Sell it and use the proceeds to buy other property as I mentioned and probably have some left over. That way with the first idea the move would be basically across the street, saving time and money, and add to downtown. You would have to lose a couple streets for a block but I really don’t think that would effect traffic that much. Take a look at the area and it’s larger than you think, I believe. But watch the surrounding land owners gouge you to death if you try to buy. Sorry, sad but true.
So there are other alternatives, I believe. As mentioned this should add vitality to downtown and give it new life. I believe it would work and I honestly believe it might pass if the price isn’t what was brought to us per sq.ft. for this last proposal. Something there is amiss. By the way I live in the country in the old Dexfield district. I agree with the earlier poster, I don’t feel any animosity anymore to the HS being in Stuart.
I’m not prepared to go in front of the board with this because of pre-posted reasons, of which I totally agree. I won’t be beat up about it, it’s not worth it. I have other ideas how to add/delete small items, but have said enough. I will NOT go in front of the board and THAT SUPT. with any idea. In my opinion, if he is still around, nothing will fly. Tear it apart as you wish, but a poster asked for ideas and so has MR.Broman, who has been open and candid with his ideas and remarks/replies. Have at it, I fully expect to be bashed, called names and spit upon.
A follow up to my 10:18 post: If it were found
possible to build where mentioned, the water, sewer, elec., etc. would all be close by, and should be a big savings in that area. I realize it wouldn’t be a rectangle or square but I personally like a contemporary feel and look about things.
The fingered shapes could also isolate areas for programs to teach their own areas.
Perhaps I’m stupid, if so I will surely be told.
Arnold has to go though, that is a given from almost everyone I talk with the school about.
yeah, maybe what’s offices now could somehow be saved and built around. Not sure what they are like. But getting anything out of that building is gonna be hard to do compared to what it probably’s actually worth. Hope the board is listening.
Another thing I’ve always wondered about is why there can’t be a basement in school building? Is it because the floor is too heavy? Would be a good storm shelter, I’d think.
basements are probably not built because of ADA reasons. The expense for a lift of some kind may be to great. I don’t know. That is a great thought though.
I got new monster! cool
At least someone is thinking positively. I really like the idea, if I’m have it in my mind right. That way Stuart and not just because it’s Stuart would have an all new building if the k-5 and HS were in the same building and the ages of all 3 remaining locations would be fairly new.
I’m wondering if anyone has ever looked into this? I really think it should be.
The savings on utilities construction should be really big and we already own most if not all the property that was being talked about.
I don’t care if the person is from the east-side and is negative to the SUPT., I really think it deserves to be thought about.
The poster above has made some good points and the ideas are surely something to think about if they would fit.
Question—WERE the utilities figured in the failed bond issue? I assume they were. Do we realize how much running a sewer or building a sewer system for a building that size would cost? Not to mention the cost for running water and electricity out there. That could save a lot of money having it next to the old school and in town, I’m thinking.
I would like to see the above idea looked at and seriously considered. I think it would be a center piece for downtown and lead to more community pride and more business development. Also, maybe this would finally pass, since the building site seems to be a big item with so many. Plus, build more realistic to size that is needed and you can add on later when and if it’s called for. I believe 10% oversize should be plenty for now.
The area would look so much better and be easily found by other schools coming to events. It just has a lot of plusses. I wish the poster wouldn’t have put that he lives in the Dexfield area. I’m betting that closed a lot of minds right there.
I shouldn’t say he because we all know that we gals have the best ideas, right? Just kidding.
Would those people who argued that the proposed HS was too big, please tell me where was the “wasted” space?
This is a serious request.
Thanks.
I can’t answer you question Tod. I want to say one thing though and I’m through with this.
Just because I live in the old Dexfield district doesn’t mean I’m dumb,stupid or live in DEADFIELD!
I will not vote yes again for the same proposal. I’m sick and tired of this name calling. I’m starting to take it personally and shouldn’t let it bother me, but it just doesn’t let up. We apparently can’t get along, so let the schools crumble and the state step in.
All I hear about is the building site and the Supt’s actions and words. Those are big stumbling blocks and no one even commented about the above posters ideas, and no they weren’t mine. But at least someone was thinking positively. So that must mean public input truly isn’t wanted. It’s the only conclusion I can draw.
I truly believe the site is as big of a block to passage as the money.
Still waters run deep? I think that’s appropriate here and you can draw your own conclusions of what I mean.
There are a lot of names to call Stuart too but I’m not lowering myself to that level.
There was(as published) a 42% voter turnout. Stuart and Menlo actually lost ground as far as yes voters. So call the east-siders what you will. Have fun, but don’t be the first ones to cry foul when the next bond that will probably be identical to this fails. Remember, there were 258 no votes in the S-M area. I’m sick of it and will never vote yes again. I’m considering stopping doing all business in Stuart, which is considerable. Let the state take care of it. I’ve had enough.
I misspoke before,sorry.
There were 258 no voters in STUART.
There were 174 no voters in MENLO.
Add them up, and keep blaming the east-side.
And 58% didn’t vote. Way to go board and your PR man DR.whatever.
Just leave us alone, jerk.
The big obstacles are the site and the size. When will the administration realize that the voters want the HS to stay on the present site with additions and renovations? They also want a district wide elementary. They have wasted how much of our money on these ridiculous bond referendums for the same old thing. This money would have been better spent on building maintenance which the administration has totally ignored.
The more I look at the one public idea put forth the more I like it, IF, like one poster said it would fit or there be enough room.
I’m not sure if k-5 and HS being combined in one location is legal, but don’t know why it wouldn’t be.
I think we need two elementaries to keep the little ones off the busses if for no other reason, and to allow pre school and after school in two locations for the parents’ or familys’ convenience. I realize one elementary would be easier to manage with all teachers and supplies etc. in one location, but that should be a small price to pay.
My personal opinion is renovation of the present HS is throwing money away that could go to a new structure.
I totally agree with 11:40 that the site and size are the big obstacles.
Why have another vote asking the same thing?
After awhile people get tired of being basically told it’s this way or nothing.
Stop spending the money on referendums.
Get a different architect, please, and please muzzle the Supt.!
I apologize 11:40 for repeating most of what you had to say.
First thing we need is a feasibility study to determine just what can be done with the present site. Contrary to what some say this has never been done. Architects with a success history in this application are the one’s needed for this job. Present lots in the SE corner of the present site could probably be purchased. I don’t remember if this was mentioned but the whole half block west of the present parking and tennis courts excluding Warren Varley’s office could add addition footage to the site. Can you imagine the new life this would add to the business district?
I find this whole idea of using the present site very appealing. In my opinion the land east of town has been the bone of contention in all the past elections.
Some years ago, there was a site study on the current location. It had mentioned closing N. Main and building out towards the parking lot. I don’t know where the results of that study is, but I do know it was before Dr. Arnold and Mr. Rogers.
Be careful though…if the lots are covered with buildings, then we lose valuable parking space, thus, forcing people to park along public streets. Some of you may think that is not an issue, but it would.
It’s good to see people are giving ideas but I have a few comments:
1. The present high school site isn’t big enough. If we ever needed to expand, there wouldn’t be anywhere to go and then we’d have the problem again of what do we do. Not to mention that there is already so much traffic congestion before and after school at the present high school that cutting out and down on the parking is a bad idea.
2. I’m not really sure people are thinking this district wide elementary out very well. That would put about 500 (if not more) kids 10 and under in one spot. The current senior class is about 90 kids. I’m assuming the other grades are as big or bigger. So, for a whole grade to be able to do things, such as field trips, that means nearly 100 kids are going to be at one spot at the same time. That will be expensive.
For recess, it will actually be more than that because there are 2 grades out at the same time with a 3rd grade over lapping for 5-10 minutes. So that will put about 200 kids up to 300 at recess at one time. Is the playground going to be big enough? Is the gym for inside recess? What about the fact that it’s going to be harder than H*ll to keep an eye on that many kids. I can see kids getting into a lot more trouble and being in a lot more danger - whether it’s being picked on, fights, or wandering off.
There’s a reason big districts such as Des Moines don’t have that many kids in one spot. Most Des Moines elementaries have under 300 kids. That’s why they have so many. Our current population in each elementary is ideal. I really think we need the 2.
3. I honestly feel the school plan before this last that had the middle school in Dexter was by far the best plan. It gave each side an elementary and made it so the furthest the little kids would have to go is the town over (Stuart to Menlo/Menlo to Stuart and Dexter to Redfield). If nothing else, it’s a lot less bussing over all. I think that plan needs to be reintroduced. Redfield would still have a school as would the other towns including Menlo. The newer addition of the Menlo building would be great for the alternative school.
4. The newspaper article in the Des Moines Register last week was wrong. It said it was 18 miles from one end of the district to another. Well, I think they were going from the town of Menlo to the town of Redfield. I MapQuested my address (I’m in the country south of Menlo) to Redfield where my kid goes to school and it was 26 miles. If you are all familiar with MapQuest, you know it gives you the shortest distance from point A to point B. So that 26 miles (which would be about a half an hour on the bus) doesn’t include all the extra milage it takes to get the other rural kids. Also, the district extends a good 5+ miles south and even more miles west of my house so 26 miles isn’t even accurate. There are kids who go further than mine have to.
Now, most parents/adults commute to Des Moines to work and are probably thinking that the amount of time my kid has to spend on a bus (not to mention the other kids) isn’t a big deal. Well, you need to consider there isn’t air on the busses. There isn’t heat. The trip is a lot rougher and rugged than the drive on the smooth, straight shot interstate.
I’m sure I’m going to be torn apart for saying this but it’s all important information to have. I just hope you will consider it in your plan making.
its real easy to say let the state step in and take care of the high scholl situation when you already have new facilities in dallas county. way to go
I’m the poster from 3-30, 10:18am about perhaps a new combination school by the present HS. I appreciate it being talked about and admit it was an idea without facts as to size, etc. I would like to see it thought about if at all feasible, not because it’s my idea, but because I think it really might get a referendum passed and I truly believe if all available ground was boughten and used it would fit after having looked at it several times. Just my viewpoint. Everyone would have new to fairly modern buildings and maintenance should be much less for a number of yrs. I realize parking would be a problem but I had envisioned it on the South end or wherever lots could be purchased to centralize an area. Thanks again for replying.
I didn’t want to make anyone mad. I just really don’t feel anything will ever pass at the site that is being planned for now. One point about traffic at school let-out. There would be such an influx on Hwy 6 or WhitePole Rd. that I’m afraid a danger lurks there. I can envision kids heading West and trying to pass and not having clear sight of oncoming traffic, especially when the sun would be in their eyes at certain times of the yr and in their eyes in the morning at certain times of the yr.
Mr. Broman I’ve thought about your space question and I certainly have no answers. I do though, believe there was a lot of uncertainty when the Supt. mentioned one figure at a meeting and then another figure at another meeting. Then those figures conflicted with state enrollment projections. Just conjecture on my part, but it confused me, but I’m easily confused.
I’ve been pushing a few numbers and please note these aren’t exact and I don’t remember the exact amounts. One note, I don’t belong to any group, just the general public.
IF, for example, the cost/sg.ft. could be brought down from $1.46 to say $1.20, $1.20/$1.46=82.2% times $12.3 million = $10.11million. If it could go to $1.10 the figure would be $9.27 million. I truly believe that would fly and groundbreaking would happen in a hurry. I don’t know how much extra the elementary would add but you could do away with the renovation money and have to replace it with money for demolition. It’s been shown though that at the proposed site it won’t fly. My saying that comes from the results of past votes. To repeat, and persist with that, that site is one of, if not the main sticking points of passing anything. You can do the math for an elementary, I have no idea how much more space would be involved, just that if the old HS were gone you have a whole block there minus one house. As far as recess, I envisioned the main entrance set back with a Westerly frontage. I was thinking an area there or to one side or both could be used for recess and an attractive entrance. I know there are people’s property in the area. I hoped that could be dealt with. As mentioned we have the bus parking area and bus barn and they don’t really have to be even on the North side of the Highway. I hope this doesn’t come across as my trying to hard sell anything. It just fits in my mind as the right location if it would physically fit there. The savings in utilities and moving, and on and on would add up substantially and very significantly I’m guessing. I’ve thought and thought of an area. This one gives the opportunity for town kids to walk to school and hopefully a pre school and after school program would be included. Also, being in town leads to more safety in my mind. You know from past statements, I don’t even live in the Stuart district, but I think it would add a lot to Stuart and the whole district. I feel for Menlo, I don’t know what can be done there. Maybe putting it in town would help their feelings some. I’m hard selling and don’t mean to. I apologize if I’ve stepped on anyone’s toes, it wasn’t intended. I could continue but it’s already too wordy. Thanks.
6:27 again.
I’m sorry about posting so much. My post isn’t organized like I wanted and I keep forgetting to say things.
One or two other financing methods are available as I understand it.
The board can ask for a PPEL number one. It would have to be voted on unless they aren’t using the entire amount they can not needing a vote, but I’m guessing they are.
Secondly, there used to be the ability to have an income surtax. As I understood it at the time, for example if you passed a 10% surtax, for every $100 you owed in state taxes you would pay $10 more. I believe there used to be a 20% maximum or thereabouts. It had to be voted on.
If I’m wrong, someone please correct me.
I apologize for being so monopolizing of the blog.
Hey everybody,
I have an idea or 2 for you all to ponder. If the site is the problem, then why not try to build a new high school adjacent to the sports facility? There is some property that is owned by the city(called the east pond. There is no water there, why it’s called a pond is beyond me) we could trade the land that we currently own for the land owned by the city. There would be no busy highway or railroad tracks to cross. It would also save some money, because there wouldn’t be a need to develope a sports facility. We could just improve the current one. The kids would be close to the grocery store for open lunch. There would be room to add on in the case of enrollment increases. This would be a gesture of good faith. Why not give it a whirl? That would leave the current high school building empty for the students that now attend the center in Menlo. The current high school building isn’t bad, it’s just technologically inadaquit. It’s crowded, space not used to it’s optiman extent, and has wasted space.
Even as it now stands, it would be better than the Menlo building. So once a new high school was built, the west side elementary students could transfer to the current high school. Or the high school and the Dexter buildings could be used as District wide elementary sites. Put pre-K through 2nd or 3rd grades in one building and 2nd or 3rd through 5th in the other. There are many solutions to this problem, but we ALL have to be willing to forgive and forget and then compromise and progress. We must focus on the children. I truely believe that there are 2 sides to every story and that we all had our reasons for voting the way we did. Hopefully we can all grow up and stop the name calling. It’s not helping our situation. It only cuts deeper. Yes, we are all sick and tired of this, but we have to forge on for the future of our children’s educations! Please no matter where you live or how hurt or sick & tired you are, please continue to focus on our children! We are adults and we should act like we are. Please share your ideas, because if you do we can ALL win. United we will succeed, divided we will fall flat on our faces and we will FAIL. Let’s all commit to try. Let’s realize that there will always be some that will call us names and not like what we are doing, but if we focus less on ourselves and more on our problems, we can find resolutions and new friends with common goals. So no matter what names you’ve been called, please step up and forgive. Thanks for reading this. I hope that I might have made some sense. Sorry for spelling errors.
Hey, let’s study this idea. I’m the guy with the other idea but whatever is best and works best would be OK with me. Makes sense with it by the athletic field.
I have to repeat the other east site isn’t going to fly, I honestly believe that. Sam, Thank You very much, for your time and insights and thoughts. I think we can all work together if it makes sense and like Sam said the name calling stops and we can forgive and forget. Let’s hear all ideas and get them out in the open. Thanks again, Sam, it sounds like a very good idea to study. There ARE ideas out there, they just need to be put into words, I think. Please Board and Supt. don’t feed us the same old issue to vote on. And please keep the costs down, if other schools can we can too.
Yes, it would be great to have the school next door to the athletic fields. It would be easier for Mr. Pease and his PE classes, plus, not having to cross the tracks to get to the fields.
Back in 1993, there was a proposed bond issue for a new HS across the road, to the south, from the East pond. McD’s owns that land. Anyway, it was proposed to have the parking lot on the site of the East pond.
The bond issue failed miserably. One of the arguments was that supposedly there are/were chemicals/batteries buried there and some people were concerned about exposure, etc.
The railroad crossing on South Madison would have to be fixed to allow buses and other vehicles to safely cross it.
I voted yes for that bond issue by the way.
In a historical sense, the reason it is called the East pond is that is where they stored water for the locomotives. The site of the athletic fields is where they had a roundhouse and a place to repair engines.
I say let’s study things and come up with something. I like the idea by the athletic fields. I assume sewer and utilities are close by and it would be off the road about the right distance.
Thanks, Mr. Broman for commenting. You give things insight and give information to those of us who are without the facts.
I like the idea of having a complex and working it out so the kids don’t have to cross the tracks.
Question, Mr. Broman? Would you happen to know if those plans are still around someplace? I hate to burden you with things beyond your teaching. Just wondering if you have knowledge of them.
Please don’t take this wrong anyone, that’s not my intent, honestly. But does the roof on the HS need or be going to need some work soon? My point being perhaps to consider Sams’ idea with the elementary included in a new structure, then a new building would be in place and the school would also have almost two blocks of city property to sell for housing or businesses, if the old building were gone. Hopefully, we could get figures for both ways(keeping and renovating HS for elem. or building all new). I jump on bandwagons so take that into consideration when I’m talking, but get excited about concluding this and having it done and done right. Please board as mentioned try to get the price down and if needed maybe ask for a surtax for a few yrs, if building all new. We wouldn’t be faced with HAVING to build new athletic fields right away, but as we could afford them. Let’s work together and get this done. To repeat Sam’s feelings some, please stop calling names and causing hurt. It’s really destructive to the whole district.
The 1993 bond was community driven, but it is possible that the plans may still be in the Admin. office buried somewhere.
I can tell you that the plans did not include an auditorium and the vocal dept. would have their practice room on the stage. The stage did open up into a commons area.
I think the bond was asking for $5.6 (?) million, but the supporters only got 25% of the vote.
I’m hoping these ideas and maybe others can be seriously looked at and figures obtained. We can’t pass a referendum on the one site so let’s look at these and see what comes up. First off we have to at least TRY to get along. Breaking up won’t help anyone, I don’t think. All four communities and areas need input and facts and time to think about them.
We in other towns and areas besides Stuart need to realize that is the location for the HS, just make it comparable in costs to others and do a good job selling it, not just tell us this is it, take it or leave it. I truly believe there is no or very little talk of building a new HS anywhere else but Stuart.
These ideas both show a lot of thought and what can be done when people try to do positive things. Just my opinion.
On Channel 13 news this morning - the DSM Schools are planning an info meeting for anyone interested in giving input to the direction of some schools (not sure on all the details) but think how many different opions are in the DSM schools and they still welcome input. Can we do the same? If everyone involved can be respectful - that will go a long way! We will not ever be able to come up with a solution that will satisfy 100% - but atlease listen and sell your ideas. If you give as much info as you possibly can - people will be able to make an informed decision.
To the 6:55post on April 2, 2007 9:39 pm…
When I first started to read your posts I thought hey, this is a nice person trying to offer suggestions in a polite way. But… The more you talk, the more I am wondering what your intentions are. You seem to be trying to sweet talk everyone into these new proposals of yours. I’m not sure why. You say you aren’t from her but say “we need this” and “we need that.” If you aren’t from here shouldn’t it be “you need this” and “you need that?” Plus you say you live in the country outside our district but yet you know a lot about the layout of Stuart.
Are you one of the infamous “hate group” members? Or perhaps one of the “bond buster” monetary contributers? Or are you both just trying to use a new tactic in hopes to achieve your plan… whatever that is.
I’m not meaning to be mean, but I think people need to really consider who you might be and what your intentions are. Some of the things you have said don’t really add up.
7:55 I’m really sorry you are so skeptical. I am not a member of any group. Swear to God on my Mother’s grave. I don’t live in the old S-M
district but do live in the old Dexfield district. My point I was trying to make there, and shouldn’t have I guess, was that I was not from Stuart trying to sell a building for Stuart. So that’s why I say ‘we’. I’m a resident of the WCV district. I really don’t know what you are referring to as far as things not adding up. My first idea wasn’t meant in any mean fashion, if you took it that way, I apologize. I’m just trying to get along and am really tired of all the name calling. But I have to admit, I am sick of this SUPT and the Board for shoving things down our throats. I guess you CAN wonder about me because I AM talking out of both sides of my mouth there. I just want the people to get along. I do business in Stuart, so know the area a little and how it’s laid out but not beyond the athletic fields and had no knowledge of Sam’s pond area. I like her idea and was trying to throw out an idea when I made mine that might save some money. I’m trying to promote some good will and if that makes me sound phony, again I apologize. Yeah, I can see why you say I’m trying to sweet talk. I am trying to sell the idea of people getting involved and bringing forward their ideas. That’s all, there’s no ulterior motive. I asked Mr. Broman a question or two and he was kind enough to give me some answers and facts I didn’t know. So, if I made you or anyone else leery or suspicious, I apologize again and won’t post anymore. I just think building on the site East of town will never pass. I’ve said all of that, I believe. I really wish you could give me some specifics of what I said or did wrong. I would like to keep posting though in a positive manner, since I think the majority of this whole thing has been so negative. Things such as the surtax and PPEL are public knowledge and can be found on Google, but I do have some knowledge from attending board meetings way back in whole grade sharing days.
Again, sorry. If you could respond and tell me what I’ve done wrong, I would appreciate it. If you read my first post you will find how I felt and feel about coming public, this is just an example why people don’t. Sorry, not trying to be a smarta** but just the truth.
7:55–If you are referring to my statement about the roof, I was afraid that would be taken wrong. I have to admit I have heard there are leaks in it. I should have just come out and asked if that were true, but was trying to not be controversial. Guess I didn’t handle that right. My wife and I just want to get this done, but done right. I’m repeating myself so will stop. She has posted on here too but was afraid of saying anything that might be taken wrong. Sorry again. Maybe we aren’t ready for public input.
Thinking of the site by the Catholic church - wasn’t there something about a pipeline running in the back of the property? I’m not trying to start something here, but was wondering if anyone knows anything for sure. Was it a large gas line?
To the poster on April3, @10:40AM: Don’t give up;I warned you that there will always be folks that will critisize and tear apart good ideas. The thing is, most people are talking in a positive manner. Don’t doubt your ideas, you never know which one or combination of several ideas just might be the perfect one for our situation. Keep sharing, keep asking questions. Maybe we will find a solution. Maybe we can become proactive instead of reactive. It is my goal to have a new high school and safe, nice, newer learning centers for all of WCV students. To create environments that are condusive to learning. To provide the best that we can for the children of our district, to offer them the best educational opportunities as we can. To take responsibility for our districts future, to have pride and a sense of ownership and an identity. These are all things that have become lost in our struggles to get our own ways. In order to achieve these goals we must make compromises. Together we can have SUCCESS! So, I will repeat myself, DON’T GIVE UP. If we do, we fail.
The current HS has an ENTIRE new roof. Was done in 2 or 3 stages but is new within the last 5 years.
12:11- if I recall the map, there is a gas line running through the northern part of the land. I THINK it cut through the NW corner of the lot.
I thought there was a natural gas bulk plant out in that area.
This is 10:48 and I deeply apologize for my misinformation and mention of the roof. Thank you, Sam, for your words and support. However, right now I feel like why make the effort? Evidently, because we don’t live in a predefined area, our ideas are suspect. I have to repeat that is one of the reasons why I would never go public or in front of anyone. Someone would always suspect an ulterior motive. Right at this moment in time, I feel the state should step in and tell the district what is going to happen and what isn’t. I have to say the Supt., in my mind, helped divide the public, did great damage with his comments, and is probably getting things the way he wanted them. We will probably see, even with ideas like yours, the same old tired referendum as was just voted on. I won’t vote for it, not because I’m stubborn or mad, it just isn’t the right site and the figures were inflated for some reason. So just let the Dept. of Ed. step in and do their job. The suspicious people can then blame the state and no one else but themselves. Just my opinion, if I make someone mad, so be it, I already caused suspicion by simply trying to be a cheerleader of sorts for some public input. The roof comment was bad information evidently and as mentioned, I deeply apologize for having mentioned it. Sorry to have stepped on any toes, it wasn’t our intention, but looking back we did know better than to say anything. Stuart wants business and support of the whole district, but they don’t seem to back up that statement when push comes to shove. An outsider has to have an ulterior motive, it’s just not possible to do some critical thinking without being a citizen of the town. So the only active we intend to be is inactive and go back to our quiet selves and know our place. Sorry again, I hope your idea grabs hold and flies, Sam, it’s a good one. We would vote for it in a second if the Supt. and board don’t mess with it and make it impassable. Thank you, also, Mr. Broman for answering my questions, you are a class act.
After re-reading what I posted, I again made an error. IF the state ever comes in and says how it’s going to be, the suspicious people won’t blame the state.
They will blame everyone but themselves and say they told us so and call us every name in the dictionary that is demeaning and insulting.
I couldn’t go to bed with that omission in my post. Have a great night and those that call names start calling out some ideas instead of stirring the pot and causing hard feelings.
Sorry we ever had an idea enter our minds.
There’s no need to apologize for having ideas. Don’t let a few knotheads keep you from making your ideas public.
No one said stop posting. They just said it seems you are basically seeming pushy (for lack of a better word) in a nice way. (Just what I got from it.) Nate, why are they “knotheads” for voicing their concern? Is it because they are asking questions and motives at the beginning of a bond process and not the end? That’s kind of unfair namecalling. Best to have it all out now otherwise it’s going to be just as vicious at the end.
I just re-read an earlier post by you 7:48 and some of the ideas are asking people who are independent of the school to bear part of the burden of the bond. It really isn’t fair asking businesses like Pelgas (who’ve been there longer than I’ve been alive) and homeowners to move or change up their organization in anyway.
That’s why the current proposed site is ideal. There are no businesses or home owners to impose on. It has enough room for expansion or making it a type of K-12 campus (which I know will never happen). If you are concerned about having the entrance on highway 6, then it can be changed to come out at All Saints Road. Or if that isn’t feasible, a stoplight can be put up at the highway 6 entrance.
I think the whole utilites thing is taken care of. I think the school approached the city council and asked them to annex that land which means the city would pay at least part of the water, sewer, and electric extensions to the site. I could be wrong. Maybe Tyler can correct me if I am. He seems to know the city stuff.
As to the gas pipe… so? I doubt the school will be built right on top of it. Gas pipes run all over this town and aren’t hurting anything. I really don’t think that is an issue, unlike building in the east pond (which is currently the city dump if you didn’t know) which is right next to all the anhydrous tanks.
Just opinions and ideas. Nothing more….
The knotheads are the ones who criticize simply for the sake of criticizing.
I’m not going to speak for 7:48, he is very capable to do that himself. I live in Stuart and think questioning his motives stinks to put it bluntly. If we don’t stop calling names and hurting people who the Hell is the REAL hate group? You have to think the Supt. is a member or some group of that type if you want to take it in the same way.
The site that has been voted on was bought for that purpose but it’s been voted down 6 times now. You have to be realistic. It ain’t gonna fly evidently. My idea is every site is going to have a drawback, there’s no perfect site. But let’s vote on one that might pass.
When is someone going to come up with a good site that will pass? Everyone complains about the current site but can’t come up with a better one.
How about north of Stuart around the racetrack? Or south of the interstate around Quail Run?
There would be a greater safety issue if you build a school out by Quail Run (in my opinion). There are some students who do walk to school and it is not safe for pedestrians to cross the interstate bridge, plus they would have to cross the entrance/exit ramps.
Out around the race track is hillier (sp?) than east of town. I am not sure about the utilities out there (esp. sewer).
Just my opinions.
I told myself I wouldn’t post again, but here I am anyway. Here’s a website to look at for a surtax and some other information.
http://www.state.ia.us/government/drf/taxlaw/taxtypes.html#school
Iowa Individual Income School District Surtax
Description: Upon voter approval, school districts may initiate educational improvement programs where school boards may raise an additional portion of the state cost per pupil. This enrichment amount is raised through a surtax (not to exceed 20% of state income tax liability) and through an accompanying property tax.
Tax Rate: Not to exceed 20% of state income tax liability. Rate is different for each school district. Lists are available on our income tax forms page.
Distribution of Funds: Local school district imposing the tax
Due Date(s) of Returns: Tax is collected with the individual income tax return. Returns are due the last day of the 4th month following the end of the tax year. See individual income tax forms.
IOWA COUNTIES, SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBERS, SURTAX RATES FOR 2006
01-ADAIR
0018 Adair-Casey …………….. 8%
0252 Anita ………………………. 10%
2673 Nodaway Valley ………. 7%
4978 Orient-Macksburg ….. 20%
6264 West Central Valley … 1%
02-ADAMS
0914 C and M …………………. 10%
1431 Corning ………………….. 11%
1503 Creston ……………………. 0%
2718 Griswold ………………… 12%
3609 Lenox …………………….. 17%
4978 Orient-Macksburg ….. 20%
5328 Prescott …………………… 0%
6651 Villisca …………………….. 5%
03-ALLAMAKEE
0135 Allamakee ……………….. 8%
1638 Decorah …………………… 3%
1972 Eastern Allamakee … 10%
4419 MFL-Mar-Mac ………….. 8%
5310 Postville ………………….. 9%
04-APPANOOSE
(see footnote below)
0081 Albia ………………………. 11%
1071 Centerville ………………. 5%
4491 Moravia ………………….. 13%
4518 Moulton-Udell ………… 13%
5895 Seymour ………………… 11%
05-AUDUBON
0018 Adair-Casey …………….. 8%
0252 Anita ………………………. 10%
0387 Atlantic ………………….. 15%
0414 Audubon ………………….. 8%
1413 Coon Rapids-Bayard .. 7%
2016 Elk Horn-Kimballton . 14%
2151 Exira ………………………… 9%
2754 Guthrie Center ………… 7%
4014 Manning ………………… 10%
06-BENTON
0576 Belle Plaine …………… 10%
0609 Benton …………………….. 6%
1062 Center Point-Urbana .. 7%
1337 College ……………………. 0%
3105 Independence …………. 9%
4777 North Linn ……………….. 6%
1935 Union ………………………. 7%
6660 Vinton-Shellsburg ……. 6%
07-BLACK HAWK
1044 Cedar Falls ……………… 0%
1719 Denver …………………….. 4%
1791 Dike-New Hartford …… 9%
1908 Dunkerton ……………….. 8%
2502 Gladbrook-Reinbeck 10%
3042 Hudson ……………………. 9%
3186 Janesville ………………… 8%
3204 Jesup ………………………. 0%
1935 Union ………………………. 7%
6660 Vinton-Shellsburg ……. 6%
6762 Wapsie Valley ……….. 11%
6795 Waterloo ………………….. 0%
6840 Waverly-Shell Rock …. 6%
08-BOONE
0472 Ballard …………………….. 0%
0729 Boone ……………………… 7%
1967 East Greene ………….. 10%
2466 Gilbert ……………………… 0%
3942 Madrid ……………………… 7%
4779 North Polk ……………….. 5%
4878 Ogden ……………………… 7%
5184 Perry ……………………….. 3%
5643 Roland-Story …………… 4%
6096 SE Webster-Grand ….. 6%
6095 South Hamilton ……….. 4%
6246 Stratford ………………….. 9%
6561 United ……………………… 7%
7110 Woodward-Granger …. 8%
09-BREMER
1719 Denver …………………….. 4%
1908 Dunkerton ……………….. 8%
2349 Fredericksburg ………. 10%
3186 Janesville ………………… 8%
4599 Nashua-Plainfield ….. 11%
6273 Sumner ……………………. 8%
6471 Tripoli ……………………. 11%
6762 Wapsie Valley ……….. 11%
6840 Waverly-Shell Rock …. 6%
10-BUCHANAN
1963 East Buchanan ………. 14%
3105 Independence …………. 9%
3204 Jesup ………………………. 0%
4777 North Linn ……………….. 6%
4869 Oelwein …………………. 11%
6175 Starmont …………………. 0%
1935 Union ………………………. 7%
6660 Vinton-Shellsburg ……. 6%
6762 Wapsie Valley ……….. 11%
6950 West Delaware Co. …. 5%
11-BUENA VISTA
0072 Albert City-Truesdale . 0%
0171 Alta ………………………….. 9%
0423 Aurelia …………………….. 8%
2376 Galva-Holstein ………… 4%
3537 Laurens-Marathon …… 8%
4644 Newell-Fonda ………….. 0%
5823 Schaller-Crestland … 14%
6048 Sioux Central ………….. 0%
6092 South Clay …………….. 10%
6219 Storm Lake ……………… 3%
12-BUTLER
0009 AGWSR …………………. 16%
0153 Allison-Bristow ………… 7%
0279 Aplington-
Parkersburg ……………. 9%
1215 Clarksville ……………… 15%
1791 Dike-New Hartford …… 9%
2664 Greene …………………….. 0%
2781 Hampton-Dumont ……. 3%
4599 Nashua-Plainfield ….. 11%
6840 Waverly-Shell Rock …. 6%
13-CALHOUN
4023 Manson-NW Webster 12%
4644 Newell-Fonda ………….. 0%
5301 Pomeroy-Palmer ……. 10%
5323 Prairie Valley …………. 10%
5625 Rockwell City-Lytton .. 0%
3411 Southern Cal …………… 0%
14-CARROLL
0355 Ar-We-Va ………………… 8%
0999 Carroll ……………………… 0%
1413 Coon Rapids-Bayard .. 7%
2520 Glidden-Ralston …….. 10%
4014 Manning ………………… 10%
3411 Southern Cal …………… 0%
6741 Wall Lake View
Auburn ……………………. 4%
15-CASS
0252 Anita ………………………. 10%
0387 Atlantic ………………….. 15%
0914 C and M …………………. 10%
2016 Elk Horn-Kimballton . 14%
2151 Exira ………………………… 9%
2718 Griswold ………………… 12%
6750 Walnut …………………….. 7%
16-CEDAR
0603 Bennett ………………….. 10%
1926 Durant ……………………. 10%
3744 Lisbon ……………………… 9%
4269 Midland ………………….. 12%
3691 North Cedar …………… 10%
6408 Tipton …………………….. 10%
6930 West Branch ………….. 10%
6975 West Liberty ………….. 11%
7038 Wilton ……………………. 10%
17-CERRO GORDO
1233 Clear Lake ………………. 5%
2295 Forest City ………………. 4%
4131 Mason City ………………. 0%
4266 Meservey-Thornton .. 10%
4761 Nora Springs-
Rock Falls ………………. 0%
4772 North Central …………… 7%
5616 Rockwell-Swaledale … 8%
5697 Rudd-Rockford-
Marble Rock ……………. 0%
5922 Sheffield-Chapin ……. 15%
6633 Ventura ……………………. 8%
18-CHEROKEE
0171 Alta ………………………….. 9%
0423 Aurelia …………………….. 8%
1152 Cherokee …………………. 4%
2376 Galva-Holstein ………… 4%
3348 Kingsley-Pierson …….. 3%
4068 Marcus-Meriden-
Cleghorn …………………. 10%
1975 River Valley …………… 14%
6048 Sioux Central ………….. 0%
5157 South O’Brien ………….. 9%
19-CHICKASAW
1116 Charles City …………….. 9%
2349 Fredericksburg ………. 10%
3029 Howard-Winneshiek . 13%
4599 Nashua-Plainfield ….. 11%
4662 New Hampton ………….. 7%
6273 Sumner ……………………. 8%
6471 Tripoli ……………………. 11%
6509 Turkey Valley ………….. 0%
20-CLARKE
1211 Clarke ……………………… 5%
1970 East Union …………….. 15%
3119 Interstate 35 ……………. 0%
4505 Mormon Trail …………. 13%
4572 Murray …………………… 15%
21-CLAY
1218 Clay Central-Everly …. 5%
2862 Hartley-Melvin-
Sanborn ………………….. 7%
4890 Okoboji ……………………. 2%
5724 Ruthven-Ayrshire …… 12%
6048 Sioux Central ………….. 0%
6092 South Clay …………….. 10%
5157 South O’Brien ………….. 9%
6102 Spencer …………………… 0%
6345 Terril ……………………… 10%
22-CLAYTON
1080 Central Clayton ……… 10%
1989 Edgewood-Colesburg 8%
2763 Clayton Ridge …………. 5%
4419 MFL-Mar-Mac ………….. 8%
5310 Postville ………………….. 9%
6175 Starmont …………………. 0%
6591 Valley ………………………. 6%
6961 Western Dubuque Co. 4%
23-CLINTON
0918 Calamus Wheatland … 7%
0936 Camanche ……………….. 0%
1082 Central Clinton ………… 6%
1278 Clinton …………………….. 7%
1675 Delwood ………………… 10%
1965 East Central ……………. 0%
4041 Maquoketa …………….. 10%
4269 Midland ………………….. 12%
4773 Northeast ………………. 11%
5337 Preston ……………………. 0%
24-CRAWFORD
0355 Ar-We-Va ………………… 8%
0504 Battle Creek-
Ida Grove ……………….. 7%
1917 Boyer Valley ………….. 14%
1134 Charter Oak-Ute ……. 15%
1701 Denison …………………… 8%
3996 IKM ………………………… 19%
4014 Manning ………………… 10%
4033 Maple Valley ………….. 11%
4860 Odebolt-Arthur ………… 8%
5832 Schleswig ………………… 7%
6741 Wall Lake View
Auburn ……………………. 4%
25-DALLAS
0027 Adel-DeSoto-Minburn 0%
1576 Dallas Center-Grimes 0%
6264 West Central Valley … 1%
1953 Earlham …………………… 0%
3942 Madrid ……………………… 7%
5121 Panorama ………………… 6%
5184 Perry ……………………….. 3%
6615 Van Meter ……………….. 5%
6822 Waukee …………………… 0%
6957 West Des Moines ……. 0%
7110 Woodward-Granger …. 8%
26-DAVIS
0977 Cardinal …………………… 8%
1619 Davis County …………… 0%
0657 Eddyville-Blakesburg 14%
4491 Moravia ………………….. 12%
4518 Moulton-Udell ………… 12%
6592 Van Buren ……………… 10%
27-DECATUR
1093 Central Decatur ………. 0%
1211 Clarke ……………………… 5%
3465 Lamoni …………………… 12%
3705 Lineville-Clio …………. 10%
4505 Mormon Trail …………. 13%
4527 Mount Ayr ………………… 6%
4572 Murray …………………… 15%
28-DELAWARE
1989 Edgewood-Colesburg 8%
4043 Maquoketa Valley ……. 0%
4446 Monticello ……………….. 4%
4777 North Linn ……………….. 6%
6175 Starmont …………………. 0%
6950 West Delaware Co. …. 5%
6961 Western Dubuque Co. 4%
29-DES MOINES
0882 Burlington ……………….. 0%
1602 Danville …………………. 10%
2322 Fort Madison …………… 0%
4203 Mediapolis ………………. 7%
4509 Morning Sun ……………. 7%
4689 New London ……………. 9%
6759 Wapello …………………… 3%
6937 West Burlington ………. 0%
7047 Winfield-Mt. Union ….. 0%
30-DICKINSON
1218 Clay Central-Everly …. 5%
2124 Estherville-Lincoln
Central ……………………. 10%
2846 Harris-Lake Park ……… 0%
2862 Hartley-Melvin-
Sanborn ………………….. 7%
4890 Okoboji ……………………. 2%
6120 Spirit Lake ………………. 4%
6345 Terril ……………………… 10%
31-DUBUQUE
1863 Dubuque ………………….. 0%
4041 Maquoketa …………….. 10%
4446 Monticello ……………….. 4%
6961 Western Dubuque Co. 4%
32-EMMET
0333 Armstrong-Ringsted . 12%
2124 Estherville-Lincoln
Central …………………… 10%
2556 Graettinger ……………. 14%
6345 Terril ……………………… 10%
33-FAYETTE
2349 Fredericksburg ………. 10%
4774 North Fayette ………….. 8%
4869 Oelwein …………………. 11%
5310 Postville ………………….. 9%
6175 Starmont …………………. 0%
6273 Sumner ……………………. 8%
6509 Turkey Valley ………….. 0%
6591 Valley ………………………. 6%
6762 Wapsie Valley ……….. 11%
6943 West Central …………. 10%
34-FLOYD
1116 Charles City …………….. 9%
2664 Greene …………………….. 0%
4599 Nashua-Plainfield ….. 11%
4761 Nora Springs-
Rock Falls ………………. 0%
4995 Osage ……………………… 5%
5697 Rudd-Rockford-
Marble Rock ……………. 0%
35-FRANKLIN
0009 AGWSR …………………. 16%
0108 Alden ……………………… 10%
0594 Belmond-Klemme ……. 3%
0916 Cal …………………………. 12%
1854 Dows ……………………….. 0%
2781 Hampton-Dumont ……. 3%
3150 Iowa Falls ……………… 10%
4266 Meservey-Thornton .. 10%
5922 Sheffield-Chapin ……. 15%
36-FREMONT
2205 Farragut …………………. 13%
2369 Fremont-Mills ………… 14%
2772 Hamburg ………………….. 4%
5976 Shenandoah ……………. 9%
6003 Sidney ……………………. 10%
37-GREENE
1413 Coon Rapids-Bayard .. 7%
1967 East Greene ………….. 10%
2520 Glidden-Ralston …….. 10%
6096 SE Webster-Grand ….. 6%
3195 Jefferson-Scranton ….. 7%
5121 Panorama ………………… 6%
5139 Paton-Churdan ………… 9%
5184 Perry ……………………….. 3%
5323 Prairie Valley …………. 10%
3411 Southern Cal …………… 0%
38-GRUNDY
0009 AGWSR …………………. 16%
0279 Aplington-
Parkersburg ……………. 9%
0540 BCLUW ………………….. 11%
1791 Dike-New Hartford …… 9%
2007 Eldora-
New Providence ……… 7%
2502 Gladbrook-Reinbeck 10%
2727 Grundy Center …………. 6%
39-GUTHRIE
0018 Adair-Casey …………….. 8%
0414 Audubon ………………….. 8%
1413 Coon Rapids-Bayard .. 7%
2151 Exira ………………………… 9%
2754 Guthrie Center ………… 7%
5121 Panorama ………………… 6%
6264 West Central Valley … 1%
40-HAMILTON
3033 Hubbard-Radcliffe …… 0%
4775 Northeast Hamilton .. 18%
5643 Roland-Story …………… 4%
6095 South Hamilton ……….. 4%
6246 Stratford ………………….. 9%
6867 Webster City ……………. 2%
41-HANCOCK
0594 Belmond-Klemme ……. 3%
1206 Clarion-Goldfield …….. 8%
1449 Corwith-Wesley ……… 20%
2295 Forest City ………………. 4%
2403 Garner-Hayfield …….. 11%
4266 Meservey-Thornton .. 10%
6417 Titonka …………………… 10%
6633 Ventura ……………………. 8%
0819 West Hancock ……….. 12%
7083 Woden-Crystal Lake 17%
42-HARDIN
0009 AGWSR …………………. 16%
0108 Alden ……………………… 10%
0540 BCLUW ………………….. 11%
1359 Colo-Nesco ……………. 11%
2007 Eldora-
New Providence ……… 7%
3033 Hubbard-Radcliffe …… 0%
3150 Iowa Falls ……………… 10%
5643 Roland-Story …………… 4%
43-HARRISON
0441 A-H-S-T …………………. 10%
1917 Boyer Valley ………….. 14%
2826 Harlan ……………………… 8%
3798 Logan-Magnolia ………. 7%
4356 Missouri Valley ……….. 7%
6460 Tri-Center ………………… 0%
6969 West Harrison ……….. 11%
6987 West Monona ………….. 4%
7092 Woodbine ………………. 18%
44-HENRY
1602 Danville …………………. 10%
2169 Fairfield …………………… 5%
2322 Fort Madison …………… 0%
2834 Harmony ………………… 14%
4536 Mount Pleasant ……….. 5%
4689 New London ……………. 9%
6700 Waco ……………………….. 0%
7047 Winfield-Mt. Union ….. 0%
45-HOWARD
3029 Howard-Winneshiek . 13%
4662 New Hampton ………….. 7%
5508 Riceville ………………… 12%
6509 Turkey Valley ………….. 0%
46-HUMBOLDT
1206 Clarion-Goldfield …….. 8%
1944 Eagle Grove …………….. 7%
2493 Gilmore City-
Bradgate ………………. 15%
3060 Humboldt …………………. 0%
3897 Lu Verne ………………… 14%
6516 Twin Rivers ……………. 20%
6921 West Bend-Mallard … 11%
47-IDA
0504 Battle Creek-
Ida Grove ……………….. 7%
1701 Denison …………………… 8%
2376 Galva-Holstein ………… 4%
4033 Maple Valley ………….. 11%
4860 Odebolt-Arthur ………… 8%
1975 River Valley …………… 14%
5823 Schaller-Crestland … 14%
5832 Schleswig ………………… 7%
48-IOWA
0576 Belle Plaine …………… 10%
0609 Benton …………………….. 6%
1221 Clear Creek-Amana . 10%
1647 Deep River-
Millersburg ……………. 12%
2097 English Valleys ……… 19%
2766 HLV ……………………….. 10%
3154 Iowa Valley ……………. 15%
4271 Mid-Prairie ………………. 6%
6462 Tri-County ……………… 15%
7029 Williamsburg ……………. 8%
49-JACKSON
0243 Andrew ………………….. 15%
0585 Bellevue ………………….. 4%
1675 Delwood ………………… 10%
1863 Dubuque ………………….. 0%
1965 East Central ……………. 0%
4041 Maquoketa …………….. 10%
4269 Midland ………………….. 12%
5337 Preston ……………………. 0%
6961 Western Dubuque Co. 4%
50-JASPER
0513 Baxter ……………………. 12%
0720 Bondurant-Farrar …….. 3%
1332 Colfax-Mingo …………… 8%
1350 Collins-Maxwell ……….. 3%
3582 East Marshall ………… 13%
2709 Grinnell-Newburg ……. 8%
3906 Lynnville-Sully …………. 8%
4725 Newton ……………………. 3%
5319 PCM ………………………… 5%
5166 Pella ………………………… 4%
6101 Southeast Polk ………… 5%
Rates for residents of
Appanoose County
include a 1 percent local
option surtax for
Emergency Medical
Services.
*
17 ô€€› Expanded instructions are at http://www.state.ia.us/tax
IOWA COUNTIES, SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBERS, SURTAX RATES FOR 2006
51-JEFFERSON
0977 Cardinal …………………… 8%
2169 Fairfield …………………… 5%
4536 Mount Pleasant ……….. 5%
5163 Pekin ……………………….. 8%
6700 Waco ……………………….. 0%
6768 Washington ……………. 11%
52-JOHNSON
1221 Clear Creek-Amana . 10%
1337 College ……………………. 0%
2977 Highland ………………… 11%
3141 Iowa City …………………. 5%
3744 Lisbon ……………………… 9%
3816 Lone Tree ………………. 10%
4271 Mid-Prairie ………………. 6%
4554 Mount Vernon ………….. 6%
6093 Solon ……………………….. 6%
6930 West Branch ………….. 10%
6975 West Liberty ………….. 11%
7029 Williamsburg ……………. 8%
53-JONES
0234 Anamosa …………………. 6%
3744 Lisbon ……………………… 9%
4269 Midland ………………….. 12%
4446 Monticello ……………….. 4%
4554 Mount Vernon ………….. 6%
3691 North Cedar …………… 10%
4905 Olin ………………………… 10%
6961 Western Dubuque Co. 4%
54-KEOKUK
2097 English Valleys ……… 19%
2367 Fremont …………………… 7%
3330 Keota …………………….. 10%
5163 Pekin ……………………….. 8%
6012 Sigourney ………………… 6%
6462 Tri-County ……………… 15%
55-KOSSUTH
0126 Algona …………………….. 8%
0333 Armstrong-Ringsted . 12%
1449 Corwith-Wesley ……… 20%
3897 Lu Verne ………………… 14%
0873 North Iowa …………….. 15%
4778 North Kossuth ……….. 18%
5868 Sentral …………………… 16%
6417 Titonka …………………… 10%
6516 Twin Rivers ……………. 20%
6921 West Bend-Mallard … 11%
56-LEE
1079 Central Lee ……………. 11%
2322 Fort Madison …………… 0%
2834 Harmony ………………… 14%
3312 Keokuk …………………….. 0%
4536 Mount Pleasant ……….. 5%
57-LINN
0099 Alburnett …………………. 0%
0234 Anamosa …………………. 6%
1053 Cedar Rapids ………….. 6%
1062 Center Point-Urbana .. 7%
1089 Central City …………….. 0%
1337 College ……………………. 0%
3715 Linn-Mar ………………….. 0%
3744 Lisbon ……………………… 9%
4086 Marion ……………………… 4%
4446 Monticello ……………….. 4%
4554 Mount Vernon ………….. 6%
4777 North Linn ……………….. 6%
6093 Solon ……………………….. 6%
6138 Springville ……………….. 5%
58-LOUISA
1368 Columbus ………………. 17%
2977 Highland ………………… 11%
3816 Lone Tree ………………. 10%
3841 Louisa-Muscatine ….. 10%
4203 Mediapolis ………………. 7%
4509 Morning Sun ……………. 7%
6700 Waco ……………………….. 0%
6759 Wapello …………………… 3%
7047 Winfield-Mt. Union ….. 0%
59-LUCAS
1107 Chariton …………………… 8%
1211 Clarke ……………………… 5%
4505 Mormon Trail …………. 13%
5715 Russell …………………….. 7%
6094 Southeast Warren …. 10%
6854 Wayne ……………………… 8%
60-LYON
0747 Boyden-Hull …………….. 5%
1095 Central Lyon ………….. 11%
2457 George-Little Rock … 17%
5607 Rock Valley ……………… 0%
5949 Sheldon …………………… 5%
6983 West Lyon ……………… 10%
61-MADISON
0027 Adel-DeSoto-Minburn 0%
1953 Earlham …………………… 0%
1970 East Union …………….. 15%
2673 Nodaway Valley ………. 7%
3119 Interstate 35 ……………. 0%
4122 Martensdale-
St. Marys ………………… 9%
4978 Orient-Macksburg ….. 20%
6615 Van Meter ……………….. 5%
7056 Winterset …………………. 4%
62-MAHASKA
0657 Eddyville-Blakesburg 14%
2367 Fremont …………………… 7%
3906 Lynnville-Sully …………. 8%
4776 North Mahaska ………… 0%
5013 Oskaloosa ……………….. 0%
5166 Pella ………………………… 4%
6462 Tri-County ……………… 15%
6512 Twin Cedars ……………. 6%
63-MARION
1107 Chariton …………………… 8%
3375 Knoxville ………………….. 5%
4212 Melcher-Dallas ………… 7%
5319 PCM ………………………… 5%
5166 Pella ………………………… 4%
5256 Pleasantville ………….. 11%
6101 Southeast Polk ……