Consumer Advisory Bulletin, Caution: Watch What You Sign, October 2003

The Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division receives hundreds of calls and consumer complaints every year. Follow these tips to avoid unexpected expense and disappointments. This record is about: Caution: Watch What You Sign

Council Bluffs Interstate System Improvements Project Pottawatomie County, Iowa and Douglas County, Nebraska Project Number: IM-029-3(62)54-13-78, November 2004

The Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT), Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) are proposing to improve the interstate system around Council Bluffs with improvements extending across the Missouri River on I-80 to east of the I-480 interchange in Omaha, Nebraska, see Figure 1-1. The study considers long-term, broad-based transportation improvements along I-80, I-29, and I-480, including approximately 18 mainline miles of interstate and 14 interchanges (3 system1, 11 service), that would add capacity and correct functional issues along the mainline and interchanges and upgrade the I-80 Missouri River Crossing. These improvements, once implemented, would bring the segments of I-80 and I-29 up to current engineering standards and modernize the roadway to accommodate future traffic needs. In 2001, Iowa DOT and FHWA initiated the Council Bluffs Interstate System (CBIS) Improvements Project. The agencies concluded that the environmental study process would be conducted in two stages; that is, a tiered approach would be applied. The project is being conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1502.20, and FHWA 23 CFR Part 771.111, that permit tiering for large, complex NEPA studies. Tier 1 is an examination of the overall interstate system improvement needs, including a clear explanation of the area’s transportation needs, a study of alternatives to satisfy them, and broad consideration of potential environmental and social impacts. The Tier 1 evaluation is at a sufficient level of engineering and environmental detail to assist decision makers in selecting a preferred transportation strategy. Tier 1 includes preparation of a draft and final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that would disclose the potential environmental and social effects (evaluated at a planning level that considers a variety of conceptual designs) of the proposed improvements. The final EIS will conclude with a Record of Decision (ROD) that states the preferred plan for improvements to be implemented. Essentially, the Tier 1 document will establish the planning framework for the needed improvements. Because the scope of the overall system improvements is large, the interstate improvements would be implemented as a series of individual projects that fit into the overall planning framework. The Tier 1 Area of Potential Impact, which is discussed in detail in Section 4 is an alternative that considers a combination of the most reasonable concepts that have been developed, buffered by approximately 100 or more feet to ensure that any Tier 2 design modifications would remain inside the outer boundary.

Record of Decision Council Bluffs Interstate System (I-29, I-80 and I-480) Improvements Project TIER 1 Environmental Impact Statement Council Bluffs, Iowa to Omaha, Nebraska FHWA-IA- EIS-04-01F Project Number: IM-029-3(62)54—13-78 Submitted Pursuant to 42 USC 4332(2)(c) and 49 USC 303, October 2008

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approves the selection of the Reconstruction of All or Part of the Interstate (Construction Alternative) as the Preferred Alternative to provide improvements to the interstate system in the Omaha/Council Bluffs metropolitan area, extending across the Missouri River on Interstate 80 to east of the Interstate 480 interchange in Omaha, Nebraska. The study considered long-term, broad-based transportation improvements along Interstate I-29 (I-29), I-80, and I-480, including approximately 18 mainline miles of interstate and 14 interchanges (3 system, 11 service), that would add capacity and correct functional issues along the mainline and interchanges and upgrade the I-80 Missouri River Crossing. FHWA also approves the decisions to provide full access between West Broadway and I-29, design the I-80/I-29 overlap section as a dual-divided freeway, and locating the new I-80 Missouri River Bridge north of the existing bridge. Improvements to the interstate system, once implemented, would bring the segments of I-80 and I-29 (see Figure 1) up to current engineering standards and accommodate future traffic needs. This Record of Decision (ROD) concludes Tier 1 of the Council Bluffs Interstate System (CBIS) Improvements Project. Tier 1 included an examination of the area’s transportation needs, a study of alternatives to satisfy them, and broad consideration of potential environmental and social impacts. The Tier 1 evaluation consisted of a sufficient level of engineering and environmental detail to assist decision makers in selecting a preferred transportation strategy. During Tier 1 a Draft EIS (FHWA-IA- EIS-04-01D) was developed which was approved by FHWA, Iowa DOT, and Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR) in November 2004 with comments accepted through March 15, 2005. The Draft EIS summarized the alternatives that were considered to address the transportation needs around Council Bluffs; identified reconstruction of all or part of the interstate, the “Construction Alternative,” as the Preferred Alternative; identified three system-level decisions that needed to be made at the Tier 1 level; and invited comment on the issues. The Final EIS (FHWA-IA- EIS-04-01F) further documented the Construction Alternative as the Preferred Alternative and identified the recommended decisions for the three system level decisions that needed to be made in Tier 1. This ROD defines the Selected Alternative determined in the Tier 1 studies.

Iowa Criminal and Juvenile Justice Plan, 1998

Pursuant to Iowa Code 216A, subchapter 9, CJJP is required to issue an annual report containing long-range systems goals, special issue planning recommendations and research findings. CJJP’s 1998 response to its reporting requirement is replicated in the manner of the distribution of the 1997 Update. Again this year, CJJP is issuing one large document which contains many separate reports. Single-issue 1998 Update reports will be made available based on reader interest and need. Having utilized this disseminating approach of CJJP research and reports in 1997, it proved to be cost effective and responsive to the planning activities and information needs of Iowa’s policy makers, justice system officials and others.

Iowa Criminal and Juvenile Justice Plan 1997

Pursuant to Iowa Code 216A, subchapter 9, CJJP is required to issue an annual report containing long-range system goals, special issue planning recommendations and research findings. CJJP’s 1997 response to its reporting requirement is different from past years. Rather than issuing one large document containing many separate reports, single-issue 1997 Update reports now are being made available based on reader interest and need. It is hoped this approach to disseminating CJJP research and planning reports will be more cost effective and more responsive to the planning activities and information needs of Iowa’s policy makers, justice system officials and others.

Aging Watch, May 25, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 3

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Aging Watch, May 25, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 3

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Aging Watch, May 25, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 3

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Aging Watch, June 22, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 4

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Aging Watch, June 29, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 5

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Aging Watch, July 27, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 6

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Aging Watch, September 28, 2012, Vol. 12, no. 7

The reintroduction of the Iowa Department on Aging legislative and policy update, now known as “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.

Iowa Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force Report to the Iowa General Assembly, January 15, 2007

Over the last several years, lawmakers have been responding to several highly publicized child abduction, assault and murder cases. While such cases remain rare in Iowa, the public debates they have generated are having far-reaching effects. Policy makers are responsible for controlling the nature of such effects. Challenges they face stem from the need to avoid primarily politically-motivated responses and the desire to make informed decisions that recognize both the strengths and the limitations of the criminal justice system as a vehicle for promoting safe and healthy families and communities. Consensus was reached by the Task Force at its first meeting that one of its standing goals is to provide nonpartisan guidance to help avoid or fix problematic sex offense policies and practices. Setting this goal was a response to the concern over what can result from elected officials’ efforts to respond to the types of sex offender-related concerns that can easily become emotionally laden and politically charged due to the universally held abhorrence of sex crimes against children. The meetings of the Task Force and the various work groups it has formed have included some spirited and perhaps emotionally charged discussions, despite the above-stated ground rule. However, as is described in the report, the Task Force’s first set of recommendations and plans for further study were approved through consensus. It is hoped that in upcoming legislative deliberations, it will be remembered that the non-legislative members of the Task Force all agreed on the recommendations contained in this report. The topics discussed in this first report from the Task Force are limited to the study issues specifically named in H.F. 619, the Task Force’s enabling legislation. However, other topics of concern were discussed by the Task Force because of their immediacy or because of their possible relationships with one or more of the Task Force’s mandated study issues. For example, it has been reported by some probation/parole officers and others that the 2000 feet rule has had a negative influence on treatment participation and supervision compliance. While such concerns were noted, the Task Force did not take it upon itself to investigate them at this time and thus broaden the agenda it was given by the General Assembly last session. As a result, the recently reinstated 2000 feet rule, the new cohabitation/child endangerment law and other issues of interest to Task Force members but not within the scope of their charge are not discussed in the body of this report. An issue of perhaps the greatest interest to most Task Force members that was not a part of their charge was a belief in the benefit of viewing Iowa’s efforts to protect children from sex crimes with as comprehensive a platform as possible. It has been suggested that much more can be done to prevent child-victim sex crimes than would be accomplished by only concentrating on what to do with offenders after a crime has occurred. To prevent child victimization, H.F. 619 policy provisions rely largely on incapacitation and future deterrent effects of increased penalties, more restrictive supervision practices and greater public awareness of the risk presented by a segment of Iowa’s known sex offenders. For some offenders, these policies will no doubt prevent future sex crimes against children, and the Task Force has begun long-term studies to look for the desired results and for ways to improve such results through better supervision tools and more effective offender treatment. Unfortunately, much of the effects from the new policies may primarily influence persons who have already committed sex offenses against minors and who have already been caught doing so. Task Force members discussed the need for a range of preventive efforts and a need to think about sex crimes against children from other than just a “reaction- to-the-offender” perspective. While this topic is not addressed in the report that follows, it was suggested that some of the Task Force’s discussions could be briefly shared through these opening comments. Along with incapacitation and deterrence, comprehensive approaches to the prevention of child-victim sex crimes would also involve making sure parents have the tools they need to detect signs of adults with sex behavior problems, to help teach their children about warning signs and to find the support they need for healthy parenting. School, faithbased and other community organizations might benefit from stronger supports and better tools they can use to more effectively promote positive youth development and the learning of respect for others, respect for boundaries and healthy relationships. All of us who have children, or who live in communities where there are children, need to understand the limitations of our justice system and the importance of our own ability to play a role in preventing sexual abuse and protecting children from sex offenders, which are often the child’s own family members. Over 1,000 incidences of child sexual abuse are confirmed or founded each year in Iowa, and most such acts take place in the child’s home or the residence of the caretaker of the child. Efforts to prevent child sexual abuse and to provide for early interventions with children and families at risk could be strategically examined and strengthened. The Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force was established to provide assistance to the General Assembly. It will respond to legislative direction for adjusting its future plans as laid out in this report. Its plans could be adjusted to broaden or narrow its scope or to assign different priority levels of effort to its current areas of study. Also, further Task Force considerations of the recommendations it has already submitted could be called for. In the meantime, it is hoped that the information and recommendations submitted through this report prove helpful.

Iowa Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force Report to the Iowa General Assembly, January 15, 2008

Over the last several years, lawmakers have been responding to several highly publicized child abduction, assault and murder cases. While such cases remain rare in Iowa, the public debates they have generated are having far-reaching effects. Policy makers are responsible for controlling the nature of such effects. Challenges they face stem from the need to avoid primarily politically-motivated responses and the desire to make informed decisions that recognize both the strengths and the limitations of the criminal justice system as a vehicle for promoting safe and healthy families and communities. Consensus was reached by the Task Force at its first meeting that one of its standing goals is to provide nonpartisan guidance to help avoid or fix problematic sex offense policies and practices. Setting this goal was a response to the concern over what can result from elected officials’ efforts to respond to the types of sex offender-related concerns that can easily become emotionally laden and politically charged due to the universally held abhorrence of sex crimes against children. The meetings of the Task Force and the various work groups it has formed have included some spirited and perhaps emotionally charged discussions, despite the above-stated ground rule. However, as is described in the report, the Task Force’s first set of recommendations and plans for further study were approved through consensus. It is hoped that in upcoming legislative deliberations, it will be remembered that the non-legislative members of the Task Force all agreed on the recommendations contained in this report. The topics discussed in this first report from the Task Force are limited to the study issues specifically named in H.F. 619, the Task Force’s enabling legislation. However, other topics of concern were discussed by the Task Force because of their immediacy or because of their possible relationships with one or more of the Task Force’s mandated study issues. For example, it has been reported by some probation/parole officers and others that the 2000 feet rule has had a negative influence on treatment participation and supervision compliance. While such concerns were noted, the Task Force did not take it upon itself to investigate them at this time and thus broaden the agenda it was given by the General Assembly last session. As a result, the recently reinstated 2000 feet rule, the new cohabitation/child endangerment law and other issues of interest to Task Force members but not within the scope of their charge are not discussed in the body of this report. An issue of perhaps the greatest interest to most Task Force members that was not a part of their charge was a belief in the benefit of viewing Iowa’s efforts to protect children from sex crimes with as comprehensive a platform as possible. It has been suggested that much more can be done to prevent child-victim sex crimes than would be accomplished by only concentrating on what to do with offenders after a crime has occurred. To prevent child victimization, H.F. 619 policy provisions rely largely on incapacitation and future deterrent effects of increased penalties, more restrictive supervision practices and greater public awareness of the risk presented by a segment of Iowa’s known sex offenders. For some offenders, these policies will no doubt prevent future sex crimes against children, and the Task Force has begun long-term studies to look for the desired results and for ways to improve such results through better supervision tools and more effective offender treatment. Unfortunately, much of the effects from the new policies may primarily influence persons who have already committed sex offenses against minors and who have already been caught doing so. Task Force members discussed the need for a range of preventive efforts and a need to think about sex crimes against children from other than just a “reaction- to-the-offender” perspective. While this topic is not addressed in the report that follows, it was suggested that some of the Task Force’s discussions could be briefly shared through these opening comments. Along with incapacitation and deterrence, comprehensive approaches to the prevention of child-victim sex crimes would also involve making sure parents have the tools they need to detect signs of adults with sex behavior problems, to help teach their children about warning signs and to find the support they need for healthy parenting. School, faithbased and other community organizations might benefit from stronger supports and better tools they can use to more effectively promote positive youth development and the learning of respect for others, respect for boundaries and healthy relationships. All of us who have children, or who live in communities where there are children, need to understand the limitations of our justice system and the importance of our own ability to play a role in preventing sexual abuse and protecting children from sex offenders, which are often the child’s own family members. Over 1,000 incidences of child sexual abuse are confirmed or founded each year in Iowa, and most such acts take place in the child’s home or the residence of the caretaker of the child. Efforts to prevent child sexual abuse and to provide for early interventions with children and families at risk could be strategically examined and strengthened. The Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force was established to provide assistance to the General Assembly. It will respond to legislative direction for adjusting its future plans as laid out in this report. Its plans could be adjusted to broaden or narrow its scope or to assign different priority levels of effort to its current areas of study. Also, further Task Force considerations of the recommendations it has already submitted could be called for. In the meantime, it is hoped that the information and recommendations submitted through this report prove helpful.

Aging Watch, December 20, 2013, Vol. 13, no. 14

Aging Watch is provided in the spirit of information and education. The opinions expressed by the contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the Department or its programs. The Department shall not be liable for any damages that may result from errors or omissions in information distributed in this publication. Aging Watch will be published regularly during the legislative session and monthly in the interim by the Iowa Department on Aging. “Aging Watch.” The Department is providing this update to better inform you about policy affecting older Iowans. In addition to policy updates from the statehouse and the nation’s capitol, you’ll learn about Department programs and changes affecting the landscape. As you’ll learn reading this and future editions, big changes are coming for the Iowa Aging Network. Over the next year the Department will be reducing the number of local Area Agencies on Aging, as required by legislative action. Not surprisingly, this is a major change for everyone.