903 resultados para Taxation-State and Local
Resumo:
Lessons Learned and Best Practices is a Rebuild Iowa Office initiative that identifies innovative ideas as well as opportunities for improvement to be shared with our federal, state and local partners. It is designed to provide recovery providers and planners with information and front-line expertise on effective planning, execution and operational practices across the recovery spectrum.
Resumo:
To support, coordinate and maintain state and local homeland security and emergency anagement activities in order to establish sustainable communities and assure economic opportunities for Iowa and its citizens.
Resumo:
The transportation system is in demand 24/7 and 365 days a year irrespective of neither the weather nor the conditions. Iowa’s transportation system is an integral and essential part of society serving commerce and daily functions of all Iowans across the state. A high quality transportation system serves as the artery for economic activity and, the condition of the infrastructure is a key element for our future growth opportunities. A key component of Iowa’s transportation system is the public roadway system owned and maintained by the state, cities and counties. In order to regularly re-evaluate the conditions of Iowa’s public roadway infrastructure and assess the ability of existing revenues to meet the needs of the system, the Iowa Department of Transportation’s 2006 Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) report to the legislature included a recommendation that a study be conducted every five years. That recommendation was included in legislation adopted in 2007 and signed into law. The law specifically requires the following (2011 Iowa Code Section 307.31): •“The department shall periodically review the current revenue levels of the road use tax fund and the sufficiency of those revenues for the projected construction and maintenance needs of city, county, and state governments in the future. The department shall submit a written report to the general assembly regarding its findings by December 31 every five years, beginning in 2011. The report may include recommendations concerning funding levels needed to support the future mobility and accessibility for users of Iowa's public road system.” •“The department shall evaluate alternative funding sources for road maintenance and construction and report to the general assembly at least every five years on the advantages and disadvantages and the viability of alternative funding mechanisms.” Consistent with this requirement, the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) has prepared this study. Recognizing the importance of actively engaging with the public and transportation stakeholders in any discussion of public roadway conditions and needs, Governor Terry E. Branstad announced on March 8, 2011, the creation of, and appointments to, the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission (CAC). The CAC was tasked with assisting the Iowa DOT as they assess the condition of Iowa’s roadway system and evaluate current and future funding available to best address system needs. In particular the CAC was directed to gather input from the public and stakeholders regarding the condition of Iowa’s public roadway system, the impact of that system, whether additional funding is needed to maintain/improve the system, and, if so, what funding mechanisms ought to be considered. With this input, the CAC prepared a report and recommendations that were presented to Governor Branstad and the Iowa DOT in November 2011 for use in the development of this study. The CAC’s report is available at www.iowadot.gov/transportation2020/pdfs/CAC%20REPORT%20FINAL%20110211.pdf. The CAC’s report was developed utilizing analysis and information from the Iowa DOT. Therefore, the report forms the basis for this study and the two documents are very similar. Iowa is fortunate to have an extensive public roadway system that provides access to all areas of the state and facilitates the efficient movement of goods and people. However, it is also a tremendous challenge for the state, cities and counties to maintain and improve this system given flattening revenue, lost buying power, changing demands on the system, severe weather, and an aging system. This challenge didn’t appear overnight and for the last decade many studies have been completed to look into the situation and the legislature has taken significant action to begin addressing the situation. In addition, the Iowa DOT and Iowa’s cities and counties have worked jointly and independently to increase efficiency and streamline operations. All of these actions have been successful and resulted in significant changes; however, it is apparent much more needs to be done. A well-maintained, high-quality transportation system reduces transportation costs and provides consistent and reliable service. These are all factors that are critical in the evaluation companies undertake when deciding where to expand or locate new developments. The CAC and Iowa DOT heard from many Iowans that additional investment in Iowa’s roadway system is vital to support existing jobs and continued job creation in the state of Iowa. Beginning June 2011, the CAC met regularly to review material and discuss potential recommendations to address Iowa’s roadway funding challenges. This effort included extensive public outreach with meetings held in seven locations across Iowa and through a Transportation 2020 website hosted by the Iowa DOT (www.iowadot.gov/transportation2020). Over 500 people attended the public meetings held through the months of August and September, with 198 providing verbal or written comment at the meetings or through the website. Comments were received from a wide array of individuals. The public comments demonstrated overwhelming support for increased funding for Iowa’s roads. Through the public input process, several guiding principles were established to guide the development of recommendations. Those guiding principles are: • Additional revenues are restricted for road and bridge improvements only, like 95 percent of the current state road revenue is currently. This includes the fuel tax and registration fees. • State and local governments continue to streamline and become more efficient, both individually and by looking for ways to do things collectively. • User fee concept is preserved, where those who use the roads pay for them, including non¬residents. • Revenue-generating methods equitable across users. • Increase revenue generating mechanisms that are viable now but begin to implement and set the stage for longer-term solutions that bring equity and stability to road funding. • Continue Iowa’s long standing tradition of state roadway financing coming from pay-as-you-go financing. Iowa must not fall into the situation that other states are currently facing where the majority of their new program dollars are utilized to pay the debt service of past bonding. Based on the analysis of Iowa’s public roadway needs and revenue and the extensive work of the Governor’s Transportation 2020 Citizen Advisory Commission, the Iowa DOT has identified specific recommendations. The recommendations follow very closely the recommendations of the CAC (CAC recommendations from their report are repeated in Appendix B). Following is a summary of the recommendations which are fully documented beginning on page 21. 1. Through a combination of efficiency savings and increased revenue, a minimum of $215 million of revenue per year should be generated to meet Iowa’s critical roadway needs. 2. The Code of Iowa should be changed to require the study of the sufficiency of the state’s road funds to meet the road system’s needs every two years instead of every five years to coincide with the biennial legislative budget appropriation schedule. 3.Modify the current registration fee for electric vehicles to be based on weight and value using the same formula that applies to most passenger vehicles. 4.Consistent with existing Code of Iowa requirements, new funding should go to the TIME-21 Fund up to the cap ($225 million) and remaining new funding should be distributed consistent with the Road Use Tax Fund distribution formula. 5.The CAC recommended the Iowa DOT at least annually convene meetings with cities and counties to review the operation, maintenance and improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system to identify ways to jointly increase efficiency. In direct response to this recommendation, Governor Branstad directed the Iowa DOT to begin this effort immediately with a target of identifying $50 million of efficiency savings that can be captured from the over $1 billion of state revenue already provided to the Iowa DOT and Iowa’s cities and counties to administer, maintain and improve Iowa’s public roadway system. This would build upon past joint and individual actions that have reduced administrative costs and resulted in increased funding for improvement of Iowa’s public roadway system. Efficiency actions should be quantified, measured and reported to the public on a regular basis. 6.By June 30, 2012, Iowa DOT should complete a study of vehicles and equipment that use Iowa’s public roadway system but pay no user fees or substantially lower user fees than other vehicles and equipment.
Resumo:
Pavement marking technology is a continually evolving subject. There are numerous types of materials used in the field today, including (but not limited to) paint, epoxy, tape, and thermoplastic. Each material has its own set of unique characteristics related to durability, retro reflectivity, installation cost, and life-cycle cost. The Iowa Highway Research Board was interested in investigating the possibility of developing an ongoing program to evaluate the various products used in pavement marking. This potential program would maintain a database of performance and cost information to assist state and local agencies in determining which materials and placement methods are most appropriate for their use. The Center for Transportation Research and Education at Iowa State University has completed Phase I of this research: to identify the current practice and experiences from around the United States to recommend a further course of action for the State of Iowa. There has been a significant amount of research completed in the last several years. Research from Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Ohio, and Alaska all had some common findings: white markings are more retro reflective than yellow markings; paint is by-and-large the least expensive material; paint tends to degrade faster than other materials; thermoplastic and tapes had higher retro reflective characteristics. Perhaps the most significant program going on in the area of pavement markings is the National Transportation Product Evaluation Program (NTPEP). This is an ongoing research program jointly conducted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and its member states. Field and lab tests on numerous types of pavement marking materials are being conducted at sites representing four climatological areas. These results are published periodically for use by any jurisdiction interested in pavement marking materials performance.At this time, it is recommended that the State of Iowa not embark on a test deck evaluation program. Instead, close attention should be paid to the ongoing evaluations of the NTPEP program. Materials that fare well on the NTPEP test de cks should be considered for further field studies in Iowa.
Resumo:
The Office of the Drug Policy Coordinator is established in Chapter 80E of the Code of Iowa. The Coordinator directs the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy; coordinates and monitors all statewide counter-drug efforts, substance abuse treatment grants and programs, and substance abuse prevention and education programs; and engages in other related activities involving the Departments of public safety, corrections, education, public health, and human services. The coordinator assists in the development of local and community strategies to fight substance abuse, including local law enforcement, education, and treatment activities. The Drug Policy Coordinator serves as chairperson to the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The council includes the directors of the departments of corrections, education, public health, public safety, human services, division of criminal and juvenile justice planning, and human rights. The Council also consists of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, substance abuse prevention specialist, substance abuse treatment program director, judge, and one representative each from the Iowa Association of Chiefs of Police and Peace Officers, the Iowa State Police Association, and the Iowa State Sheriff’s and Deputies’ Association. Council members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The council makes policy recommendations related to substance abuse education, prevention, and treatment, and drug enforcement. The Council and the Coordinator oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive State of Iowa Drug Control Strategy. The Office of Drug Control Policy administers federal grant programs to improve the criminal justice system by supporting drug enforcement, substance abuse prevention and offender treatment programs across the state. The ODCP prepares and submits the Iowa Drug and Violent Crime Control Strategy to the U.S. Department of Justice, with recommendations from the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The ODCP also provides program and fiscal technical assistance to state and local agencies, as well as program evaluation and grants management.
Resumo:
Description of the Proposed Action The Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) propose to improve a 3.9-mile segment of Iowa Highway 86 (IA 86) from Iowa Highway 9 (IA 9) to near the Minnesota border within Dickinson County, Iowa (the Project). The existing IA 86 has narrow travel lanes and shoulders, steep foreslopes, and poor vertical alignment. Environmental Assessment Availability The Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project was signed on June 30, 2011, and distributed to selected federal, state, and local resource agencies on July 5, 2011, for review and comment. A Notice of Public Hearing and Environmental Assessment Availability was published in the legal section of the Estherville Daily News on July 5, 2011, and the Ocheyedan Press-Melvin News and Dickinson County News on July 6, 2011. Review and Comment Period A review and comment period was established for receipt of comments on the EA, with an expiration date of August 8, 2011. A public hearing for the Project was held at the Dickinson County Courthouse on July 21, 2011. The public hearing used a combined open forum and formal format. A transcript of this meeting has been prepared and is available upon request.
Resumo:
Pavement marking technology is a continually evolving subject. There are numerous types of materials used in the field today, including (but not limited to) paint, epoxy, tape, and thermoplastic. Each material has its own set of unique characteristics related to durability, retroreflectivity, installation cost, and life-cycle cost. The Iowa Highway Research Board was interested in investigating the possibility of developing an ongoing program to evaluate the various products used in pavement marking. This potential program would maintain a database of performance and cost information to assist state and local agencies in determining which materials and placement methods are most appropriate for their use. The Center for Transportation Research and Education at Iowa State University has completed Phase I of this research: to identify the current practice and experiences from around the United States to recommend a further course of action for the State of Iowa. There has been a significant amount of research completed in the last several years. Research from Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Ohio, and Alaska all had some common findings: white markings are more retroreflective than yellow markings; paint is by-and-large the least expensive material; paint tends to degrade faster than other materials; thermoplastic and tapes had higher retroreflective characteristics. Perhaps the most significant program going on in the area of pavement markings is the National Transportation Product Evaluation Program (NTPEP). This is an ongoing research program jointly conducted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and its member states. Field and lab tests on numerous types of pavement marking materials are being conducted at sites representing four climatological areas. These results are published periodically for use by any jurisdiction interested in pavement marking materials performance. At this time, it is recommended that the State of Iowa not embark on a test deck evaluation program. Instead, close attention should be paid to the ongoing evaluations of the NTPEP program. Materials that fare well on the NTPEP test de cks should be considered for further field studies in Iowa.
Resumo:
The 2012 Iowa Code section 324A.4, subsection 2, states the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) “shall biennially prepare a report to be submitted to the general assembly and the governor prior to December 15 of even-numbered years. The report shall recommend methods to increase transportation coordination and improve the efficiency of federal, state, and local government programs used to finance public transit services and may address other topics as appropriate.” Iowa has long been a leader in transportation coordination, from designated public transit agencies covering all 99 counties with little duplication, to requiring any agency receiving public dollars for the provision of transportation to first coordinate with the local public transit agency before providing the transportation on their own, to the creation of the Iowa Transportation Coordination Council. Coordination allows Iowa to provide much needed transportation services to the citizens of Iowa with the most efficient use of public funds. Coordination has been an important topic in Iowa for many years, but during these times of economic constraint and restraint and Iowa’s changing demographics, coordination of transportation services becomes even more critical.
Resumo:
The Missouri River floods of 2011 will go down in history as the longest duration flooding event this state has seen to date. The combination of above normal snowfall in the upper Missouri River basin followed by the equivalent of nearly one year’s worth of rainfall in May created an above normal runoff situation which filled the Missouri River and the six main reservoirs within the basin. Compounding this problem was colder than normal temperatures which kept much of the snowpack in the upper basin on the ground longer into the spring, setting the stage for this historic event. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) began increasing the outflow at Gavin’s Point, near Yankton, South Dakota in May. On June 14, 2011, the outflow reached a record rate of over 160,000 cubic feet per second (cfs), over twice the previous record outflow set in 1997. This increased output from Gavin’s Point caused the Missouri River to flow out of its banks covering over 283,000 acres of land in Iowa, forcing hundreds of evacuations, damaging 255,000 acres of cropland and significantly impacting the levee system on the Missouri River basin. Over the course of the summer, approximately 64 miles of primary roads closed due to Missouri River flooding, including 54 miles of Interstate Highway. Many county secondary roads were closed by high water or overburdened due to the numerous detours and road closures in this area. As the Missouri River levels began to increase, municipalities and counties aided by State and Federal agencies began preparing for a sustained flood event. Citizens, businesses, state agencies, local governments and non‐profits made substantial preparations, in some cases expending millions of dollars on emergency protective measures to protect their facilities from the impending flood. Levee monitors detected weak spots in the levee system in all affected counties, with several levees being identified as at risk levees that could potentially fail. Of particular concern was the 28 miles of levees protecting Council Bluffs. Based on this concern, Council Bluffs prepared an evacuation plan for the approximately 30,000 residents that resided in the protected area. On May 25, 2011, Governor Branstad directed the execution of the Iowa Emergency Response Plan in accordance with Section 401 of the Stafford Act. On May 31, 2011, HSEMD Administrator, Brigadier General J. Derek Hill, formally requested the USACE to provide technical assistance and advanced measures for the communities along the Missouri River basin. On June 2, 2011 Governor Branstad issued a State of Iowa Proclamation of Disaster Emergency for Fremont, Harrison, Mills, Monona, Pottawattamie, and Woodbury counties. The length of this flood event created a unique set of challenges for Federal, State and local entities. In many cases, these organizations were conducting response and recovery operations simultaneously. Due to the length of this entire event, the State Emergency Operations Center and the local Emergency Operations Centers remained open for an extended period of time, putting additional strain on many organizations and resources. In response to this disaster, Governor Branstad created the Missouri River Recovery Coordination Task Force to oversee the State’s recovery efforts. The Governor announced the creation of this Task Force on October 17, 2011 and appointed Brigadier General J. Derek Hill, HSEMD Administrator as the chairman. This Task Force would be a temporary group of State agency representatives and interested stakeholders brought together to support the recovery efforts of the Iowa communities impacted by the Missouri River Flood. Collectively, this group would analyze and share damage assessment data, coordinate assistance across various stakeholders, monitor progress, capture best practices and identify lessons learned.
Resumo:
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that 58 percent of roadway fatalities are lane departures, while 40 percent of fatalities are single-vehicle run-off-road (SVROR) crashes. Addressing lane-departure crashes is therefore a priority for national, state, and local roadway agencies. Horizontal curves are of particular interest because they have been correlated with increased crash occurrence. This toolbox was developed to assist agencies address crashes at rural curves. The main objective of this toolbox is to summarize the effectiveness of various known curve countermeasures. While education, enforcement, and policy countermeasures should also be considered, they were not included given the toolbox focuses on roadway-based countermeasures. Furthermore, the toolbox is geared toward rural two-lane curves. The research team identified countermeasures based on their own research, through a survey of the literature, and through discussions with other professionals. Coverage of curve countermeasures in this toolbox is not necessarily comprehensive. For each countermeasure covered, this toolbox includes the following information: description, application, effectiveness, advantages, and disadvantages.
Resumo:
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that 58 percent of roadway fatalities are lane departures, while 40 percent of fatalities are single-vehicle run-off-road (SVROR) crashes. Addressing lane-departure crashes is therefore a priority for national, state, and local roadway agencies. Horizontal curves are of particular interest because they have been correlated with increased crash occurrence. This toolbox was developed to assist agencies address crashes at rural curves. The main objective of this toolbox is to summarize the effectiveness of various known curve countermeasures. While education, enforcement, and policy countermeasures should also be considered, they were not included given the toolbox focuses on roadway-based countermeasures. Furthermore, the toolbox is geared toward rural two-lane curves. The research team identified countermeasures based on their own research, through a survey of the literature, and through discussions with other professionals. Coverage of curve countermeasures in this toolbox is not necessarily comprehensive. For each countermeasure covered, this toolbox includes the following information: description, application, effectiveness, advantages, and disadvantages.
Resumo:
The Office of the Drug Policy Coordinator is established in Chapter 80E of the Code of Iowa. The Coordinator directs the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy; coordinates and monitors all statewide counter-drug efforts, substance abuse treatment grants and programs, and substance abuse prevention and education programs; and engages in other related activities involving the Departments of public safety, corrections, education, public health, and human services. The coordinator assists in the development of local and community strategies to fight substance abuse, including local law enforcement, education, and treatment activities. The Drug Policy Coordinator serves as chairperson to the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The council includes the directors of the departments of corrections, education, public health, public safety, human services, division of criminal and juvenile justice planning, and human rights. The Council also consists of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, substance abuse prevention specialist, substance abuse treatment program director, judge, and one representative each from the Iowa Association of Chiefs of Police and Peace Officers, the Iowa State Police Association, and the Iowa State Sheriff’s and Deputies’ Association. Council members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The council makes policy recommendations related to substance abuse education, prevention, and treatment, and drug enforcement. The Council and the Coordinator oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive State of Iowa Drug Control Strategy. The Office of Drug Control Policy administers federal grant programs to improve the criminal justice system by supporting drug enforcement, substance abuse prevention and offender treatment programs across the state. The ODCP prepares and submits the Iowa Drug and Violent Crime Control Strategy to the U.S. Department of Justice, with recommendations from the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The ODCP also provides program and fiscal technical assistance to state and local agencies, as well as program evaluation and grants management.
Resumo:
A survey was sent to over 200 Federal, State, and local agencies that might use streamflow data collected by the U. S. Geological Survey in Iowa. A total of 181 forms were returned and 112 agencies indicated that they use streamflow data. The responses show that streamflow data from the Iowa USGS stream-gaging network, which in 1996 is composed of 117 stations, are used by many agencies for many purposes and that many stations provide streamflow data that fulfill a variety of joint purposes. The median number of respondents per station that use data from the station was 6 and the median number of data-use categories indicated per station was 9. The survey results can be used by agencies that fund the Iowa USGS stream-gaging network to help them decide which stations to continue to support if it becomes necessary to reduce the size of the stream-gaging network.
Resumo:
The Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) currently performs wetland mitigation on a project-by-project basis. At the same time, other agencies like the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and Natural Resource Conservation Service are performing wetland restoration projects, and counties and cities may be mitigating wetland losses as well. This project examined the feasibility of developing cooperative wetland mitigation projects in order to utilize state and local resources more efficiently to benefit both Iowa and local communities. The project accomplished the following objectives: (1) Identified and characterized cooperative wetland mitigation programs nationwide; (2) Developed a needs assessment through a survey of state, county, and large city agencies in Iowa to describe wetland mitigation programs and determine challenges with mitigation and program improvements, including long-term risks associated with maintenance and monitoring programs; (3) Surveyed state, county, and city agencies and organizations to identify resources available for developing cooperative mitigation projects and procedures; (4) Developed a conceptual framework for cooperative wetland mitigation.
Resumo:
The past fiscal year brought some improvements in the Iowa economy that should position the state for stronger hiring in the year ahead. The housing market is on solid footing, and hiring is broader in scope, including a number of the service-providing industries that had been on hold for some time. State and local government fiscal conditions have also stabilized due to a rise in tax revenues. This means that government cutbacks will be less of a drag on overall job growth. During FY 2013, Iowa’s non-farm jobs advanced by 19,200 (+1.3 percent) compared to 23,000 (+1.6 percent) for the prior fiscal year. Although manufacturing continued to post the largest over the year job gain at close to 5,600, job growth shifted away from manufacturing to the service providing industries by mid-year. Annual job gains of 2,000 or more were reflected in professional and business services, education and health, leisure and hospitality, retail trade and financial activities. Statewide non-farm employment averaged 1,517,700 in FY 2013, the highest level achieved since the record of 1,524,800 in FY 2008.