Published: November 16, 2007 10:39 pm      

School district considers lawsuit against the state

CLINTON — The Clinton School District is one of several districts across the state of Iowa considering a lawsuit against the state to seek greater equality in the property taxes residents must pay.

According to Superintendent Randy Clegg, Clinton residents must pay disproportionately high property taxes, as compared to other districts in the state, to generate the same amount of useable dollars to fund the school system.

“Iowa’s funding process for schools is based primarily on property value and property taxes,” Clegg said. “So property-poor districts like Clinton pay a much higher property tax rate to afford the same educational opportunities.”

According to Clegg, funding for all Iowa schools comes in part from a uniform tax levy, of $5.40 per $1,000 of assessed property value, that every property owner in the state must pay. State aid then steps in, providing essentially up to 87 percent of each district’s budget. The remaining 13 percent must be raised locally by additional property tax levies.

“We have no choice in increasing or decreasing this,” Clegg said. “We have to levy it.”

According to Clegg, Clinton is what is referred to as a property-poor district, meaning when all assessed property values within the district are added up and then divided by the number of students in the district, the amount available is considerably less than in other areas of the state.

“The community is paying a penalty for being a property-poor school district,” Clegg said. “Clinton is at a distinct disadvantage tax-wise, and economically.

“And that does have a huge impact on the adequacy and what we can offer our children.”

According to Clegg, Clinton residents must pay a total property tax rate of $7.60 to generate the last 13 percent of the school system’s operating budget, while residents in Okoboji, a property-rich district, must pay $1.45 in property taxes to generate the same operating funds.

“Clinton, one of the poorer school districts, with some of the highest at-risk needs, has to pay a higher rate,” Clegg said. “The quality of education and the educational opportunities that are afforded to you as a child should not become dependent on what your zip code is.”

Clegg feels the problem is compounded even further by the fact that, communities that must tax themselves at extraordinarily high rates to fund the basic educational program, are statistically reluctant to support optional referendums and levies in support of their local schools.

“About 15 school districts in the state of Iowa are exploring the options of seeking a legislative and/or judicial solution to the property tax inequity that exists across the state,” Clegg said. “We’re just at the study stage. Our group is working towards trying to formalize our relationship and explore what we need to do and what kind of information the legislature needs in order to understand this problem.”

Clegg suspects some Iowa legislators are aware of the problem, but added, “I do not believe the legislature as a whole fully comprehends the disparity that currently has become apparent in the state of Iowa.”

According to Clegg, the districts are working on a formal agreement to outline goals and purposes, with plans to eventually invite other districts to participate and become signatories to the agreement.

The group is hoping to gather a strong enough case to present to the Iowa Supreme Court, and hopes the issue can be resolved by the legislature.

“We do realize if we can’t get a legislative solution, (a lawsuit) may be the next step,” Clegg said. “There’s a lot of research that has to be done, and a lot of thinking out of costs.”

Clegg noted a similar lawsuit in Kansas took more than seven years to prosecute and cost in excess of $3 million.

“Do we have that kind of funds amongst the school districts to pursue a lawsuit?” Clegg asked. “That’s going to be a huge question for us.”

According to Clegg, a four-year plan approved by the Iowa House of Representatives in April 2006 has helped alleviate some of the property tax burden, but much more needs to be done.

“It’s not a permanent fix,” Clegg said. “And it’s only contingent on the legislature appropriating the money in the future.”

The participating districts feel an ideal solution would be the equalization of all school-supporting tax levies across the state, and perhaps a uniform system of common schools. The idea draws on the “common school” concept outlined in the Iowa Constitution, which refers to public schools that are equally shared throughout the state.

Clegg wonders if that concept should be expanded to include the cost of education.

“Should that (cost) be shared equally across the state, and not dependent on which community you live in, in terms of how much it’s going to cost your parents to be able to send you to school there?” Clegg asked.

Clegg admitted the idea may not accepted by everyone.

“There are schools districts in the state that do not want to see this change, because they are the low property tax districts,” Clegg said. “If you start equalizing this across the state, somebody’s going to have to pay more, and somebody’s going to have to pay less, so there is not a uniform voice in the state about this issue. But for districts like Clinton, this is huge.”

Clegg acknowledges the issue of property tax equality is not one with an easy resolution, but is one that needs to be looked at more closely.

“This isn’t going to be a quick fix by any means,” Clegg said. “But we feel strongly that it’s an issue that must be addressed, because it’s beginning to drive a wedge between the haves and the have-nots in this state.”