"WTF? It’s in the Code!" Your letters June 9, 2026

Readers sound off on Iowa issues: June 9, 2026

On payments offered to attend Vance Iowa rally:

“If they can pay people to protest, why not offer incentives to listen to something worth hearing and then forming their own opinions about?” — Catherine D.

Are cities ignoring housing code?

“I live in a rental condominium. My immediate landlord is a good guy. He fixes what he is responsible for in a timely manner. When it [is] necessary, we negotiate a timetable to get things done so the costs don’t break him.

The HOA, who has responsibility for the common areas, is another matter. …

There are three issues I take seriously: Trash containment and removal, snow removal, and fire safety systems. All of them clearly common-sense issues, and well-defined and -regulated concerns for public safety. When I have an issue, I report it to the management company, engaged by the HOA to perform maintenance. When it’s not done, I call the city for enforcement, and am referred back to the HOA—who has done nothing.

My most recent experience took place Monday night. There was a general power outage. Shit happens, you are prepared, hunker down and wait it out. … However, when the dog had to go out, I opened my door to a pitch-black hallway and descending stairway. The code-mandated, battery-operated emergency lighting package was not functioning. I reported it to the city, whose enforcement officer referred me to the HOA, which allowed the situation to happen.

WTF? It’s in the Code!

My question is, how can the local and state governments shirk their regulatory enforcement responsibilities? …

There is probably a good statewide story in this, as the HOAs have fallen under the sway of large investment groups with no connection to the community.” — Douglas N.

Three strikes law signed:

“Gov. Reynolds sign[ed] House File 2542. Iowans deserve a clear accounting of what it will cost—and what it will not deliver.

The [law] imposes a mandatory seven-year minimum sentence on anyone with three felony convictions, eliminating a judge’s ability to defer or suspend based on the facts of the case. It covers every felony on the books—an amendment limiting strikes to violent offenses was voted down. Iowa’s habitual offender statute carries no time limit on prior convictions, so a 55-year-old with two youthful felonies from decades ago could be sentenced to prison until age 62, with no judge able to weigh the intervening years.

The House voted before the Department of Corrections had completed its fiscal analysis; the bill was then rewritten in the session’s final hours. The final price tag: a projected $1.97 billion in one-time construction costs and $115.6 million in new annual operating expenses, as the prison population is expected to grow by 4,363 individuals—a 49 percent surge—by FY 2030. Iowa’s prisons are already nearly 27 percent over capacity with more than 120 correctional officer vacancies today.

What does Iowa get in return? Decades of research say: not much. A Council on Criminal Justice task force co-chaired by former federal prosecutors concluded that broad mandatory minimums are ineffective deterrents and recommended shifting resources toward law enforcement and prevention instead. People who commit crimes are more influenced by whether they think they’ll get caught than by the length of the sentence they might face.

Iowa’s numbers tell the same story. The state has driven its recidivism rate down to a ten-year low, achieved a violent crime rate well below the national average, and done it while confining residents at a rate nearly a quarter below peers nationally. That record was built through measured policy—not mandatory minimums. Utah, meanwhile, just invested its public safety dollars in front-end law enforcement capacity: more homicide detectives, better forensics, higher case clearance rates.

Taking public safety seriously means following the evidence. On that measure, House File 2542 falls short—at a cost Iowa’s taxpayers will be paying for years.” — Marc A. Levin and Khalil Cumberbatch, Council on Criminal Justice

Reader survey feedback:

“I did not notice an ‘add comments’ box so let me add a few.

I appreciate ISL’s uniqueness. I read various things: Iowa Capital Dispatch, Bleeding Heartland, Politico, New York Times, and so on. ISL content covers topics and presents info not done in others.

Excellent editing may be the best way to describe it.” — Patrick W.

“I have found the past content of your email heavily favoring liberal leftist views. I would consider reading it more if you had conservative view points or non-biased view points. I work in rural Iowa, where the dominant viewpoint is conservative.

I am writing because I did not feel the survey questions adequately captured the feedback I wanted to give to you.

I was excited to first receive your newsletter, but when reading the content, I could tell it does not favor the conservative viewpoint and so was pretty disappointed. Thanks for listening.” — Gina P.

“You didn’t have a section for written comment. Well, I like a lot of things about the newsletter. The overall tone really makes it hard to always read it and always seems a negative tone. I understand what’s trying to be done, but a lot of people don’t wanna turn on and just hear about protest and negativity and all that.” — Anthony E.

“I’m from central IA but moved to Oregon 45 years ago. I am appalled by what has happened. I applaud your work.

Marshalltown is a place you might try organizing events. The progressives in all the little towns around would probably come too.” — Lynn J.