Continuity of Government Planning Interim Study Committee, March 2007

The Legislative Council established the Continuity of Government Planning Interim Study Committee in 2006 and authorized the Committee to meet during the 2006 Legislative Interim. The Committee was given the following charge: Examine issues relating to the continued functioning of state government following a disaster, including gubernatorial succession, replacement of constitutional officers and department heads, legislative elections to fill vacancies, and continued funding of state government if the General Assembly is unable to meet and pass a budget.

Guidleines for Removal of Traffic Control Devices in Rural Areas, October 2005

It is commonly regarded that the overuse of traffic control devices desensitizes drivers and leads to disrespect, especially for low-volume secondary roads with limited enforcement. The maintenance of traffic signs is also a tort liability concern, exacerbated by unnecessary signs. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Traffic Control Devices Handbook provide guidance for the implementation of STOP signs based on expected compliance with right-of-way rules, provision of through traffic flow, context (proximity to other controlled intersections), speed, sight distance, and crash history. The approach(es) to stop is left to engineering judgment and is usually dependent on traffic volume or functional class/continuity of system. Although presently being considered by the National Committee on Traffic Control Devices, traffic volume itself is not given as a criterion for implementation in the MUTCD. STOP signs have been installed at many locations for various reasons which no longer (or perhaps never) met engineering needs. If in fact the presence of STOP signs does not increase safety, removal should be considered. To date, however, no guidance exists for the removal of STOP signs at two-way stop-controlled intersections. The scope of this research is ultra-low-volume (< 150 daily entering vehicles) unpaved intersections in rural agricultural areas of Iowa, where each of the 99 counties may have as many as 300 or more STOP sign pairs. Overall safety performance is examined as a function of a county excessive use factor, developed specifically for this study and based on various volume ranges and terrain as a proxy for sight distance. Four conclusions are supported: (1) there is no statistical difference in the safety performance of ultra-low-volume stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersections for all drivers or for younger and older drivers (although interestingly, older drivers are underrepresented at both types of intersections); (2) compliance with stop control (as indicated by crash performance) does not appear to be affected by the use or excessive use of STOP signs, even when adjusted for volume and a sight distance proxy; (3) crash performance does not appear to be improved by the liberal use of stop control; (4) safety performance of uncontrolled intersections appears to decline relative to stop-controlled intersections above about 150 daily entering vehicles. Subject to adequate sight distance, traffic professionals may wish to consider removal of control below this threshold. The report concludes with a section on methods and legal considerations for safe removal of stop control.

Guidelines for Removal of Traffic Control Devices in Rural Areas, TR-527, 2005

It is commonly regarded that the overuse of traffic control devices desensitizes drivers and leads to disrespect, especially for low-volume secondary roads with limited enforcement. The maintenance of traffic signs is also a tort liability concern, exacerbated by unnecessary signs. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Traffic Control Devices Handbook provide guidance for the implementation of STOP signs based on expected compliance with right-of-way rules, provision of through traffic flow, context (proximity to other controlled intersections), speed, sight distance, and crash history. The approach(es) to stop is left to engineering judgment and is usually dependent on traffic volume or functional class/continuity of system. Although presently being considered by the National Committee on Traffic Control Devices, traffic volume itself is not given as a criterion for implementation in the MUTCD. STOP signs have been installed at many locations for various reasons which no longer (or perhaps never) met engineering needs. If in fact the presence of STOP signs does not increase safety, removal should be considered. To date, however, no guidance exists for the removal of STOP signs at two-way stop-controlled intersections. The scope of this research is ultra-low-volume (< 150 daily entering vehicles) unpaved intersections in rural agricultural areas of Iowa, where each of the 99 counties may have as many as 300 or more STOP sign pairs. Overall safety performance is examined as a function of a county excessive use factor, developed specifically for this study and based on various volume ranges and terrain as a proxy for sight distance. Four conclusions are supported: (1) there is no statistical difference in the safety performance of ultra-low-volume stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersections for all drivers or for younger and older drivers (although interestingly, older drivers are underrepresented at both types of intersections); (2) compliance with stop control (as indicated by crash performance) does not appear to be affected by the use or excessive use of STOP signs, even when adjusted for volume and a sight distance proxy; (3) crash performance does not appear to be improved by the liberal use of stop control; (4) safety performance of uncontrolled intersections appears to decline relative to stop-controlled intersections above about 150 daily entering vehicles. Subject to adequate sight distance, traffic professionals may wish to consider removal of control below this threshold. The report concludes with a section on methods and legal considerations for safe removal of stop control.

Iowa Prison Industries Five Year Transition and Business Plan 2011-2015, 2011

IPI is comprised of three divisions. Private Sector funds are handed over to the General Fund. Traditional Industries and Farms funds are managed by IPI. The auditor of the state provides oversight on policies, procedures, and compliance with state law. Each year, the auditor is responsible for providing the Governor, legislature, Director of Corrections, and the public the findings of their comprehensive audits. IPI has received a clean bill of health and has not been cited for any violations in ten (10) years. IPI operates under the guidance of an advisory board, comprised of seven members. The advisory board meets at least four (4) times per year at a location of the board‟s choice, generally at a different prison each quarter. The board reviews the financials, policies, approves any new private sector ventures and offers comprehensive guidance on issues that will impact correctional industries as well as the public and local businesses. Each member serves for two (2) years and may be re-appointed. IPI has found that retaining board members has helped immensely with the continuity of transition and has afforded IPI with superb leadership and guidance. IPI is 100% self-funding. We receive no appropriations from the general fund. We hire our staff, pay their salaries, and pay the stipend of the offenders. We pay for our raw materials, equipment, and construct our buildings all from the proceeds of our sales. We operate with a revolving fund and retain any earnings at year-ends. The retained earnings are used for expansion of our work programs.

Building World-Class Schools for Iowa: A Legislative Brief, January 14, 2013

The Iowa Department of Education has joined the Office of the Governor to prepare a set of legislative proposals that will bring Iowa closer to its goal of providing a world-class education to all children, no mater where they live. This legislative brief serves as an overview of the legislation, which I encourage you to read and discuss in greater detail. the goals behind these policies are straightforward: Comprehensive and systematically raise and support the teaching profession while expanding efforts to customize instruction to every student's passion and talents. Iowa's children deserve the best education can provide so they leave our schools with the knowledge and skills necessary for successful and rewarding lives. Iowa has many good schools with hard-working, talented educators who deserves our respect and appreciation. While we honor the past work of generations of Iowans who built a strong foundation, it is our responsibility - and our turn - to make a focused, dedicated effort to improve Iowa's schools. We stand at a pivotal moment in Iowa storied education history, in which we have the opportunity and will as community to make the transition from being "good" to being "great".