Letters: Little recourse from outrageous property assessments

Reynolds’ concern for children seems narrow

Gov. Kim Reynolds has signed into law policy to disband hormone options for children under the age of 18, as she feels it is in the “best interest of the kids,” as if their parents cannot make that decision for their own children.

In that vein, maybe she should band fast food sales for any child under 18, or eliminate processed foods or hot dogs at kids sporting events in the “best interest of the kids.” Maybe Reynolds should ban chocolate bunnies at Easter, soda pop sales or ice cream for the “best interest of the kids.”

Maybe she should stop thinking of her own morals and let parents handle their own children's lives. Maybe Reynolds should think about the “best interest of the kids” when she supports a leader who publicly makes fun of disabled people, bullies people and calls names. Maybe when Reynolds thinks of the “best interest of the kids,” she should support any kind of gun control.

Governor, get your story straight when you are making decisions that are in the “best interest of the kids.”

— Theresa Ridout, West Des Moines

Little recourse from outrageous assessments

A recent article drew attention to Polk County property assessments increasing up to 35%. This is an even bigger statewide problem. I live in Hamilton County, town of Stanhope, population around 350. My property assessment increased 50%, from $160,000 to $240,000. Another house in town went up 100%. Monthly tax payments will be $412 a month on top of skyrocketing prices for gas, groceries, electric and water/sewer rates. I’ve read inflation is 7%, but I’ve seen double and triple prices. For some people, how are they going to absorb these taxes when they were already hanging on by a thread?

We are a tiny town in a small rural county. We have usually been a little more shielded from the higher property taxes in Story and Polk counties. But not this time. We've worked hard over the years to provide for our family and update our 100-year-old house. But the more you do, the more you’re taxed.

Technically you can appeal, but an appeal is based on comparable sales. Houses last year sold at premium prices when interest rates were low. Those buyers were willing to pay those prices, not me. Now everyone is penalized. There's no way to appeal this.

— Suzanne Sogard, Stanhope

Thank you for showing Nunn family celebration

Thank you for publishing the picture of Zach Nunn, his wife and children on the day they were adopting two. It is the most joyous picture that we have seen in a newspaper in years.

— Kenan Bresnan, Indianola

Nunn denies others privileges he enjoys

The Register abandons its own ethical standards when reporting only one side of the Zach Nunn adoption story on the front page. Rather than include all sides relevant to the story, the puff piece highlighted only that Nunn was both willing and able to make decisions for his family instead of also including that the congressman has consistently voted to deny women the ability to make health-related decisions for theirs.

For many women, their ability to make decisions about their own health care results in the opposite of a fairy-tale ending, something that the Register would do well to include when reporting on the inconsistency between what the congressman says and does and how he votes.

— Mike Schluckebier, Iowa City

Iowa court went astray in ruling for landlords

I was astonished to read last week’s Iowa Supreme Court case of Des Moines Civil Rights Commission v. Knueven. The court, which has ruled with greatness in such cases as In re Ralph, Mansfield, Coger, Katz, and Varnum, among others, has taken a giant step backward from its rich history as a beacon for equality.

Chief Justice Susan Christensen wrote that the trial judge was overbroad when she instructed jurors to decide if the Knuevens, accused of housing discrimination, “engaged in steering by discouraging the protected tester from pursuing the housing and encouraging someone not of the protected class to pursue such housing.” The court then unanimously determined there was insufficient evidence to submit the case under the proper jury instruction and directed the district court to enter judgment in the Knuevens’ favor.

The court stated the following: “Patrick (Knueven’s) curtness in his phone call with a protected tester in comparison to his more amiable phone conversation with a control tester is inadequate to conclude that Patrick discriminated against the protected tester based on her national origin or religion — even considering Patrick’s 2015 and 2016 treatment of protected testers.” (Emphasis added). The Supreme Court’s own accounting of the facts screams steering, the practice of guiding potential tenants based on a protected factor under the Fair Housing Act. In one 2016 instance, for example, Patrick was allegedly muttering expletives while showing an apartment to a tester in a hijab.

Justice Potter Stewart, when asked to describe his test for obscenity, said, “I know it when I see it.” Those of us who have been victims of discrimination know it when we hear it. Unfortunately, the Iowa Supreme Court failed to adjust the volume.

— Alfredo Parrish, Des Moines

Essay stoked division needlessly

As I watched the Lousiana State-Iowa women’s basketball national championship game, I was rooting for the white girls. After all, I live in Iowa, so the Hawks are "my team." But I was also wondering if somebody was going to make a deal out of it.

So it was no surprise in the April 9 Register to see an essay with the headline "Reactions put white privilege on display."

This was written by Joseph N. Cooper, whom the Register describes as a researcher at University of Massachusetts-Boston who specializes on the nexus of sport, education, race and culture. In other words, he makes his living off of racism.

Racism certainly exists, and we should fight it. But Cooper's exploitation of a clueless gaffe and an unfortunate end-of-game gesture does more to promote racism than to fight it.

— Jim Todd, Boone

Conservation money comes from feds

In Monday's Des Moines Register there was a story on businesses getting money for conservation. The subheadline was "State money to be used for conservation efforts." The article goes on to quote Gov. Kim Reynolds about Iowa's history of improving water quality. It is not the state which should get credit for conservation efforts, but President Joe Biden. The money Reynolds is giving out comes from the American Rescue Plan that Biden, and the Democrats were able to pass over the objection of most Republicans. Give credit where credit is due. Thank you, President Biden!

— Jean Richey, West Des Moines

Bird’s move adds to women’s trauma

We are disappointed that the recently elected Iowa attorney general and chief law enforcement officer, Brenna Bird, does not seem to understand the dynamics of the violent crime of sexual assault. She has recently paused the payment of the Plan B medication that is sometimes given to sexual assault victims by the physician who completes the forensic examination after a violent assault.

When a female victim arrives at an emergency room, she is experiencing acute trauma as control of her life and body was taken from her by a violent perpetrator who used sex as a weapon in an attack. The focus of the emergency room staff is to create a safe and quiet environment for the victim as they gather the forensic evidence that may be used by law enforcement to identify the perpetrator and later by the prosecutor at a trial. She is often met by a professional crisis counselor whose sole purpose is to support her emotional well-being.

The focus of all who interact with her is to reduce secondary trauma for the victim. After the forensic exam is completed, the physician and the patient discuss medications she may want to take to prevent any infections passed to her by the perpetrator and if she does not have a form of birth control, if she wants to take Plan B. If she has physical injuries, they will discuss aftercare for those injuries. Plan B is part of the aftercare to reduce the trauma of the assault by eliminating the worry of pregnancy from the violent attack.

We believe that politics has no place in this emergency exam and treatment process and in no way helps anyone but the patriarchy who want to stop women's rights to control their bodies, much like violent sex offenders.

— Carole Meade, Clive, founding director of Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault, and Dianne Fagner, Des Moines, founding director of the Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence

God is love

In his April 9 letter, Steve Lame said he found it difficult to find the message in Sarah Trone Garriott's story despite rereading it numerous times.

Perhaps I can help. Toward the end of the story, after she had recounted the many hurtful and, yes, mean things she had thought, Trone Garriott said "Now faith, hope, and love abide - these three - and the greatest of these is love. And I realized that the scripture lesson was for me."

I don't think she needs the letter writer to explain things to her; she knows she was imperfect and a sinner, but she was, in that story, confessing to God and to us that those lines of scripture that she read transformed and healed her. Indeed, as Steve said, God is love.

— Dan Douglas, Ames

Unfettered eminent domain doesn’t seem conservative

I lived the first 50 years of my life in Michigan and do not remember hearing the phrase "local control" as a major political issue. But when my husband and I moved to Iowa we realized how different state politics can be. Suddenly "local control" was a framework applied frequently. It struck us two city people as an idea based in the agrarian history of Iowa and the strong sense of connection that farmers have to their land, an asset that cannot be moved or manufactured or easily replaced. Land differs from other assets in those ways and in the emotional ties people, especially those who live off the land, have to their property.

So we watch with dismay and confusion as the issue of local control seems to be not just ignored but overthrown by the current Senate in its refusal to deal with House File 565. Eminent domain would appear to be the Darth Vader, the dark countervailing force to the notion of local control. How can conservatives, whose political belief set usually includes the idea that government should interfere/intervene/participate less in our personal lives rather than more, support a policy like eminent domain? Why not support the majority of Iowans who want this bill to pass rather than support having the government serve as the enabler of large corporate interests? How is refusing to bring this issue to the Senate floor conservative?

Even if one takes a sort of originalist position, the Constitution was written by men who were wary of concentrated power in any form. The word “corporation” does not appear in the Constitution, but many passages address issues of how individuals are protected from overreach by government. In this case, eminent domain is overreach by government to serve the interests of corporations. I ask Republicans to explain how allowing large corporations to harness the government's power to override individuals’ rights over their own property is a conservative position.

— Sue Ravenscroft, Ames

'To serve and protect' our children

A few weeks ago, Register editor Carol Hunter reminded us of the police shooting of 16-year-old Trevontay Jenkins on Dec. 26. Des Moines police had been called to the home apparently because Trevontay was handling a gun. After just four minutes and 20 seconds, Trevontay was shot 14 times and killed by officers after a report of raising his gun towards the officers.

As a father and grandfather I am haunted by the shooting of a teen in distress. I am also an Iowa psychiatrist and graduate of the Des Moines citizens academy, as well as the FBI Citizens Academy.

To truly serve our citizens we must have police who are willing to risk their own lives to save the life of a child or teen who is acting in a threatening manner. At what age of our children — 8,10, 12, 14? — can we expect our law enforcement to talk, take charge if needed, and take control of a child who possesses a weapon without shooting? We must support the training of our local police and sheriff’s department deputies to put their guns aside to save the lives of our children.

— David E. Drake, D.O., Des Moines

What do you say to a child?

My college roommate from back in Kentucky asked for advice about what to say to his 7-year-old grandson. On Monday morning, young Henry and his friend were dropped off at school by the friend’s dad, Mr. Barrick, who also was their little league basketball coach. A short time later, Josh Barrick, a senior vice president at Old National Bank in Louisville, was killed by bullets from a rifle. My old roommate is at a loss for words. So am I.

I don’t think Henry cares about an expanded interpretation of the Second Amendment. I don’t think comments about “thoughts and prayers” or mental illness are much comfort. Like his parents, family, friends, and entire community, he is shocked at what happened and wants to know why. Henry doesn’t understand that someone with mental health problems can easily purchase a weapon of war to settle his grievances. He doesn’t understand that our elected representatives might have prevented this and other tragedies had they instituted background checks and banned the most powerful weapons. He doesn’t understand the influence of political contributions from the gun lobby. He only knows that his basketball coach is gone, and his good friend is “not going to have a dad.”

My old roommate has a question for Sens. Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul of Kentucky. I have the same question for all our legislators. When someone like 7-year-old Henry asks “why?” what do you say?

— Thomas Cook, Iowa City

Natural gas is important in energy plans

“More blackouts are a bad bet for Iowa” (March 12) highlighted the need to balance energy reliability and environmental progress. While the author is correct to caution against a rushed energy transition, he missed a critical piece of the puzzle: natural gas produced here in the U.S.

American natural gas is the largest source of electricity in the country, supplying 38% of U.S. electricity generation in 2022. As demand continues to grow, our nation must prioritize new exploration and infrastructure to help ensure American energy remains affordable, reliable and ever-cleaner.

Natural gas is both a reliable source of energy and a key part of our nation’s commitment to reducing emissions. For example, between 2005 and 2021, nearly 60% of power-related CO2 emissions reductions came from fuel switching to natural gas. Through programs like the Environmental Partnership, companies are working together to develop technologies and share best practices that will lower emissions even more.

As the Hawkeye State charts its energy future, Iowa policymakers need to recognize American natural gas as a big part of their plans.

— Dustin Meyer, Washington, D.C., vice president of natural gas markets at the American Petroleum Institute

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Letters: Little recourse from outrageous assessments