Update from July 9, 2007

Dear Friends,

Regarding tomorrow’s vote on the proposed local option sales tax for Polk, Dallas and Warren counties . . . we’ve been asked to share our opinion on the matter.  (For those outside the Des Moines metro, this may be relevant in your community some day, so please bear with us.)  After lots of study and dialogue, we’re recommending a “no” vote, but not without significant excitement about the plan itself.

Yes, we need to do a lot more for culture, the arts and trails.  Investing in these amenities will help make Iowa and the Des Moines metro even more dynamic and sustainable places to live and work.

However, the trails discussion has been almost exclusively about recreation.  The focus should be on trails as part of our biking transportation infrastructure.  Like other places that take biking seriously (the Netherlands and Portland, Oregon), there’s absolutely no reason the Des Moines metro couldn’t see 25% of its commuters getting to and from work by bike most of the year.

Sure, trails are a part of that conversation; but the focus should be on biking-as-transportation, addressing issues of road safety, bike lanes, bike racks, trail and lane maintenance, etc. Driving one’s car to ride one’s bike on a trail does nothing to reduce auto dependence or carbon emissions.  Biking as recreation is important, but if we truly are committed to becoming more environmentally-friendly communities, developing an infrastructure that supports biking as transportation is essential.

Our main problem with Destiny is the funding stream.  It is simply flat-out wrong to pay for these improvements by increasing the sales tax, which is the most regressive of all taxes.  With a sales tax increase, the biggest businesses and wealthiest individuals will see reductions in their property taxes while the poor and middle-class will pay more.

So, what should happen?  First and foremost, Destiny proponents should join with those of us who have been working for years to support a slate of legislative reforms that would provide more than enough money to pay for Destiny-type projects, not just in central Iowa but across the state.  Build a statewide coalition to:
 
•    Allow local governments to enact an income surtax to pay for Destiny-type improvements;
•    Require most tax-exempt property owners to pay for police and fire protection;
•    Limit the use (and abuse) of tax increment financing (TIF) and tax abatement;
•    Restructure the road-use-tax-fund to shift money away from new highway projects (the proposed northeast Polk County beltway and the Dallas County beltway) toward bike, pedestrian, bus, light rail and rapid train transit options; and
•    Provide more funding for arts and culture.

Second, there’s plenty that can be done even without legislative changes:
•    As stated above, amend the Destiny proposal to focus improvements for biking on transportation, not specifically recreation;
•    Build a broader pro-Destiny coalition by addressing the concerns that Destiny opponents have raised;
•    Use the current vehicle tax (“wheel tax”) provision of the Iowa code to pay for Destiny;
•    Agree to limit campaign spending in support of Destiny to $25,000.
•    For those who contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to the pro-Destiny campaign, pledge that amount to the Destiny plan itself instead of spending it on pricey consultants, brochures and advertising.  

For those who are interested, that’s our take in a nutshell.  It’s a tough position to take, because a lot of our friends have worked hard on both sides of this issue.  If it fails tomorrow, we’d be willing to be part of the discussion on where to go from here.  Thanks,

Ed Fallon and Lynn Heuss