Politics and higher property taxes

By The Gazette Editorial Board

When the state cuts aid to public schools, local property taxes often rise.

That's the nature of Iowa's school funding system, which relies on a combination of state dollars and property taxes. This year, when lawmakers cut $156 million from promised state aid, according to the non-partisan Legislative Services Agency, school districts responded with $133 million in property tax increases to help cover their budgets.

Schools can do that because when lawmakers took away aid, they did not take away districts' spending authority.

Democrats who run the Statehouse insist the decision to raise property taxes is really up to local school districts. School districts say it's the state's fault that tax increases are necessary. Round and round goes the finger-pointing.

And in an election year, candidates get into the act.

Republican candidate for governor Terry Branstad contends that the property tax increase is emblematic of Gov. Chet Culver's budget mismanagement. Branstad argues that Culver failed to heed warnings that economic conditions threatened to bust the state's budget, leading to the need for emergency cuts that led to higher property taxes.

Clearly, Culver and legislative Democrats are responsible for what happens on their watch. Culver insists that his administration did what it needed to do to balance the state budget. But the governor did sidestep repeated warnings of trouble before the economic downturn.

Still, this is hardly new. School aid was cut three times earlier this decade while Republicans controlled the Iowa House and Senate. Those cuts also led to property tax increases. Passing on state budget problems to local governments is a bipartisan tradition.

The real question: How can we break the spending-cutting-property-tax-raising cycle?

Branstad has suggested the state pay more toward school budgets and county mental health services in hopes of reducing property taxes. He also wants to slice corporate income taxes by 50 percent and reduce overall cost of state government by 15 percent. He has not explained how to reduce the size of government while also taking on large, new responsibilities.

Culver has pointed to his efforts to weather the latest budget storm, including significant savings from government reorganization efforts. But his budgetary vision beyond this rough patch is cloudy.

A serious discussion on what Iowans want government to do and not do is needed, but the candidates haven't stepped forward to lead it.

State government spending is not sustainable, long-term. And it's well past time to seriously consider whether Iowans should be paying to maintain a 19th century system of local government.

Otherwise, it's business and politics as usual. And higher property taxes.