As the Iowa Legislature continues to debate property tax reform, Iowans are right to expect transparency, fairness, and responsible stewardship of public resources. Those are values we share at Iowa Valley Community College District. We understand the motivation behind these proposals and recognize that the broader effort is intended to provide relief and predictability for taxpayers.

However, the portions of these bills that affect community colleges tell a different story. While they play only a very small role in overall taxpayer relief, they carry outsized and damaging consequences for colleges and the students we serve.

Community colleges were built on a foundation like our K 12 partners, with local property tax support serving as a critical component of how we operate. Unlike Iowa’s Regent universities, we are not funded at the same level or through the same model. Local property tax support is not supplemental for us. It is essential.

At the same time, our share of a typical property tax bill is quite small. Community colleges represent only about 2 to 3 percent of the average homeowner’s property tax bill. Limiting our levies does not materially change what families pay, but it does significantly impact our ability to serve students.

Statewide, Iowa’s community colleges collect these tax dollars to support costs related to property, facilities, insurance, liability, and equipment. These are restricted by law to cover these costs and they are not discretionary. They are essential to maintaining safe campuses and delivering high quality education.

Many of these expenses are also driven by factors beyond our control, including rising insurance premiums and increasing construction costs. The proposals under consideration do not reduce these underlying costs. Instead, they limit our ability to pay for them in the way the system was designed.

The Senate proposal would cap growth on levies that are already rate limited. The House proposal goes even further by capping growth on all community college levies, including those tied to specific purposes like insurance and equipment. In either case, the result is the same. Costs continue to rise, while the ability to meet those obligations is constrained.

When that happens, community colleges are left with very few options, and all of them directly affect students and communities.

We will see higher tuition and fees. We will be forced to scale back or delay new workforce and career programs. We will postpone replacing aging equipment that is essential for hands-on training. We will defer maintenance and fall behind on infrastructure improvements.

Over time, these impacts reduce access to affordable education and weaken the workforce pipeline that Iowa employers rely on.

There is another important point that deserves attention. K 12 school districts are not subject to the same levy caps being proposed for community colleges. Like our K 12 partners, we provide essential public education and serve as a critical link between education and the workforce. If flexibility is necessary for K-12 districts to meet their mission, community colleges should be afforded that same consideration.

Iowa Valley serves multiple counties, relying on modest contributions across a broad region. While our share of any individual tax bill may be small, the collective impact of that support is significant. It allows us to keep tuition affordable, respond to workforce needs, and provide opportunities that change lives.

Property tax relief can and should be achieved without undermining community colleges. Policymakers can recognize that the college portion of the tax bill is small, while its impact on education, workforce development, and rural communities is substantial.

This is not simply a discussion about tax policy. It is a discussion about access to education, economic opportunity, and the future of our communities.

Our share of your tax bill may be small, but the return on that investment is anything but.

——-

Dr. Anne Howsare Boyens is the president of the Iowa Valley Community College District.