The Iowa Senate passed the bill on Monday by a vote of 27-23. Three Democrats joined the Senate’s 20 Republicans in voting against the bill.

On Monday, Culver called on the Senate Democrats to delay the vote so that Iowans could fully explore the ramifications of the proposed changes.

“I believe it’s crystal clear more time is necessary for all Iowans to have a chance to better understand this proposed legislation and be more involved in the process,” Culver said.

“Unfortunately, I don’t think, to date, a genuine effort to find consensus and common ground through constructive dialogue and discussion has occurred.”

Last week, Culver’s press secretary issued a statement saying the governor hadn’t decided whether he will sign the bill into law.

Although Republicans in both chambers were successful in slowing down passage of the bill, its fate has been all but certain from the time that the controversial, sweeping amendment was attached to an innocuous bill last Tuesday. The amendment, introduced in the Iowa House by state Rep. Rick Olson, D-Des Moines, gives unions the ability to request an arbitrator rule on a laundry list of issues, from pay and benefits to uniforms to vacation time to the scope of their job requirements.

Republicans have argued that the bill gives unions too much clout in contract negotiations and places additional burden on taxpayers who will have to foot the additional costs. Democrats have countered by saying that similar legislation has been successfully enacted in 27 states without bankrupting local government. Republicans have been equally vocal about the speed and timing of the debate, which took place on Easter week, a time when many of the elected officials it will affect, particularly school administrators, are on spring break.

The disagreement led to unusual procedural moves in both chambers last week that frayed nerves as lawmakers worked to complete work before the Easter break. In the House, Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, and other Republicans tacked 41 amendments onto Olson’s amendment as a way of trying to vet the legislation. The House debated roughly half the proposed changed before the Democratic leadership used a procedural rule to limit debate on the remaining issues and force a vote.

In the Senate, Republicans asked the Democratic majority for public hearings on the measure and, when they were turned down, threatened to spend the Easter weekend in caucus, which would force the body to stay in session. Republicans spent all night Thursday in caucus before Democrats agreed to delay the vote until Monday.

Culver said in his statement on Monday that the course of the debate was much different than one he urged lawmakers to follow during his condition of the state address in January.

“I challenged the Legislature to try to find consensus, and to not be afraid to debate difficult labor-management issues. I said then that Iowa has always had a tradition of fairness in the workplace, and that Republicans and Democrats proved this when they joined together in a bipartisan effort to pass the state’s first collective bargaining law,” Culver said.

“Our predecessors showed great courage when they found consensus on this, and so many other important labor-management issues. I believe, if we try, we can too,” he said.

In the statement, Culver said it is imperative that local governments and school boards feel like they had a voice in the process. “Upon review by my Administration, I continue to have concerns about making sure that members of the legislative and executive branches, as well as local governments and school boards, fully understand the substance of and potential fiscal impacts of this legislation. This is why more time is necessary for all involved to understand and consider this proposal, to weigh in, and to make necessary changes.”

Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, said Monday that the debate was thorough and pointed out that Culver had spent much of the week out of state and hadn’t had a chance to follow the discussion.

They refused to come back for the rest of the day and into the night, while Democrats stood on the floor and waited.

The legislator typically adjourns on Thursday, but Republicans remained in a conference room behind the senate chambers for more than a day as a way to slow fast-track legislation that would give labor unions more power to negotiate salary and working conditions.

Party leaders reached an agreement to send the bill to committee on Friday and discuss it Monday. The bill was reviewed in the Labor Committee on Friday afternoon and be debated beginning at noon on Monday. Sen. Majority Leader Michael Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, said he’ll limit the time allowed to debate the amendment to six hours.

Courtney Greene, press secretary to Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat, said in a statement that the governor was pleased the two sides had reached an agreement.

“Governor Culver appreciates that the senate leadership on both sides has reached a working agreement that allows for open debate and discussion.  As he said in his Condition of the State address, he believes lawmakers should not be afraid to debate these important issues in a respectful and civil manner.

  “As for the bill itself, he will continue to listen to the debate, and as with all pieces of legislation, he will carefully review and consider it if and when received, and make a decision at that time.”

Below is the original report from Thursday evening:Democrats and Republicans were unable to end a stand-off that has stalled debate over a controversial collective bargaining bill. No action is likely on the Senate floor Thursday evening, Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal announced to reporters at about 8:50 p.m. Thursday night. He said the earliest that debate over the bill could occur is 8 a.m. Friday morning and many members of the body are going home for the night.

Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, said it’s not unlikely that lawmakers will remain at the statehouse through the Easter weekend.

Gronstal said earlier Thursday that he expected debate over the bill to begin at around 5 p.m. But Senate Minority Leader Ron Wieck, R-Sioux City, called his members into caucus just after 4 p.m. Staffers say the Republican senators aren’t coming out until Gronstal agrees to formally delay the vote on collective bargaining until Monday.

Republicans say they want a chance to allow Iowans to learn more about the collective bargaining proposal and to hear from constituents before a final vote is held on the issue.

Gronstal said he had planned to refer the bill to the Labor Committee on Thursday, allow it to be debated and amended, a call for a final vote on it before the Senate dismissed for the holiday weekend.

“We invite them to debate the issue,” he told reporters at about 6:15 p.m. Thursday night. “This looks to me like a stalling tactic (and) I’m willing to stay here all night.”

Senate pages delivered about two dozen pizzas to the Democratic Caucus room at about 6 p.m. Republican senators are reportedly leaving their caucus in small groups to get dinner and enjoy a change of scenery.

Gronstal said that caucus meetings are traditionally held to discuss legitimate issues among party members and that Democrats have never used the meetings as a stalling method.

“Eleven hours in caucus and not one amendment offered,” Gronstal said. “This is a stalling tactic.”

Democrats argued that the bill provides added protection to workers in the state, but Republicans argue that the changes would force local government bodies – school boards, city councils, county supervisors and public hospitals such as Broadlawns in Des Moines – to raise property taxes to pay for the additional costs of employee contracts.

Lawmakers unanimously voted to stand at ease shortly after 2:30 a.m. Thursday morning, ending 12 hours of verbal tussles that at times seemed more like Jerry Springer meets Roberts Rules of Order than a typical legislative session.

The debate began again at 9 a.m. and ended at 11:30 a.m. after House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy invoked a rarely used provision calling for a vote. McCarthy told reporters on Wednesday that he scheduled the vote to prevent the discussion from turning into a days-long debate.

State Rep. Libby Jacobs, R-Des Moines, said the switchboard at the Capitol was flooded with calls from people across the state raising concerns about the bill. Representatives said they were receiving hundreds of e-mails from Iowans asking them to carefully consider the legislation before approving it. Several legislators said they had received word from local elected officials that they would resign from local government bodies if the bill passes because of the way it erases local control and complicates the jobs they are doing.

Gronstal told reporters on Thursday afternoon that the changes in legislation will have only a slight impact on schools’ abilities to control costs. He said the e-mails that legislators read during the House debate on Thursday morning are a result of Republicans scaring Iowans.

“Someone has obviously stirred them up and given them misinformation about the impact of this,” Gronstal said.

Rants, who led the fight to quash the bill in the House, said Gronstal’s assertions are ridiculous.

“Leader Gronstal is trying to sell the same lines to Iowans that he sold to his members — the outrage doesn’t matter,”Rants said. “But the truth is, the outrage DOES matter and the people of this state aren’t buying Leader Gronstal’s lines, only his members are.”

Des Moines City Manager Rick Clark told Jacobs in an e-mail that the shift in power as a result of the bill will increase property taxes in the state by an estimated seven percent.

Although some Republicans privately conceded early on that they had no way of stopping the bill from passage, they offered more than 40 amendments to the legislation. House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, charged that Democrats were trying to ramrod the legislation through both chambers of the Statehouse and send the bill to the governor without offering citizens a chance to comment.

During the often contentious debate, Rants scolded Democrats for sneaking the bill onto the House floor. Rants said he was notified in July that officials with the Public Employment Relations Board would promote non-controversial legislation to tweak the law and clean up minor problems. He reviewed the proposed changes at the time and said Republicans wouldn’t likely stand in the way.

But at about 3 p.m. on Tuesday, State Rep. Rick Olson, D-Des Moines, filed a 14-page amendment that greatly increases the subjects that can be included in collective bargaining. Rants said much of the business at the Statehouse had been concluded for the day and his concerns about the broad implications of the bill prompted Republicans to file 41 amendments to Olson’s proposed changes.

Republicans say their biggest concern about the bill is its potential impact on property taxes. In collective bargaining, when a government entity and an employee union can’t come to terms on an agreement, a third-party arbitrator is called in to listen to arguments and attempt to find common ground. In some cases, Republicans contend, that could mean an arbitrator could make determinations that, from a budgetary standpoint, are unaffordable and the costs would be passed on to taxpayers.

“We all know that when these issues reach arbitration, it will almost always mean the property taxes will go up,” Rants told fellow lawmakers.

Republicans are equally upset that the debate came up without any type of public hearing and that scores of public administrators, particularly at Iowa’s schools, are on spring break this week and can’t be reached on short notice to offer input on the bill.

Rants said he first learned about the amendment to a non-controversial bill when it was filed by Democrats at about 3 p.m. Monday. He told fellow lawmakers that he was introducing a series of amendments to try to stanch what he predicted would be widespread implications of the bill.

Rants and fellow Republicans also expressed frustration that the amendment was being debated less than 24 hours after first being filed, that it was never discussed in a committee meeting, or that the public had virtually no time to offer input.

Democrats, who hold a majority in both chambers of the legislature, had hoped to pass the new version of the bill in the House on Wednesday and turn it over to the Senate for ratification on Thursday.

Republicans were upset the proposal was debated so soon after being introduced in the House and before they believed its implications could be fully known.

As lawmakers tired, tempers flared on both sides of the aisle, adding drama to a day punctuated by the unusual. In the afternoon, lawmakers were forced to temporarily evacuate the Statehouse after a fire alarm went off. Later in the day, State Rep. Tyler Olson, a first-term Democrat from Cedar Rapids, received word that his pregnant wife had gone into labor. Although it appears that the bill will still pass, even without Olson, the debate was contentious enough that his potential departure was seen as a possible liability.

In the end, Olson left the chambers at about 9:30 p.m., predicting to reporters before he left that due to the slow pace of the debate over several amendments, he’d still have time to get back to the Statehouse before a final vote is held.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy told reporters, “The work we’re doing here tonight is important, but it’s even more important for him to be with his wife tonight.”

At about 10:30 a.m. Thursday, state troopers were called in to remove from the House floor a member of the Sioux City School Board after he tried to comment on the bill. Rants said Doug Batcheller had come to Des Moines with other school board members to lobby against the bill.

Rants said Batcheller had told him that he will resign from the school board on Saturday if the bill passes both chambers of the House because of the way it will stymie elected officials’ ability to make decisions regarding the school.

In the end, Democrats had enough votes to kill all the amendments offered by Republicans.

Democrat leaders in both chambers predicted in a meeting with reporters on Thursday that the compromise legislation likely will include bars and restaurants in the smoking ban, but were uncertain whether casinos will be included. Once a compromise is reached, lawmakers in both chambers will be asked to approve the final version of the bill, but under legislative rules, no additional amendments can be made.

State Sen. Staci Appel, D-Ackworth, floor manager for the bill, urged the Senate to reject the House version during brief remarks prior to the vote. The bill failed 27-23 and mostly followed party lines with a majority of Democrats voting to kill the revised legislation.

“The amendment goes against the intent of the bill. It does nothing to protect the health of those who patronize or work in these establishments,” Appel said.

Earlier in the day, House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, an opponent of the smoking ban, expressed frustration that so much time has been spent this session debating the anti-tobacco legislation.

“This is a session that seems to be revolving around only one issue: smoking,” Rants said during his weekly press conference with reporters.
Rants said lawmakers continue to drag their feet in regards to working on the final budget.

The debate, which lasted for about two hours, centered mostly on how an all-out smoking ban would impact bars and restaurants in rural Iowa, where small town taverns that offer lunch and dinner are often the only local gathering spot in the community.

State Rep. Dave Heaton, R-Mount Pleasant, said tavern owners in his district have warned him that an all-out smoking ban would be devastating to their business. “This is about giving these business owners a choice.”

But State Rep. Janet Peterson, D-Des Moines, one of the leading advocates for an all-out smoking ban, said during debate that the amendment defeated the original purpose of the bill, which was to protect all Iowans from the dangers of second-hand smoke.

“I’m kind of a purist on this issue,” she said. “I can’t support the amendment.”

The Smokefree Air Act will still cover a long list of restaurants, bars, private businesses and public gathering places, but doesn’t offer the comprehensive coverage that was approved in the Senate.

Senators will get one more crack at crafting a compromise, but legislators now expect the bill will end up in conference, where representatives from both chambers will hammer out an agreement on the legislation.

The award will include $1 million for redevelopment of the Mason City library, creation of an interpretation center at the Wright-designed Stockman Home, and the construction of the East Park Performing Arts Pavilion. Mason City entities will provide about $16.5 million in funds, most of it in the form of a $7.6 million library bond issue approved by voters last November.

The announcement is expected when Lt. Gov. Patty Judge and members of the Vision Iowa board meet on Wednesday to make what has been characterized as a major announcement

A media advisory e-mailed to statehouse reporters on Tuesday didn’t identify the recipient of the Vision Iowa grant, but the board has been in negotiations with the Mason City group for several weeks and a contingent of local leaders plans to be at the meeting in Des Moines Wednesday.

Mason City will become the 13th Iowa city to receive funding through the Vision Iowa program. About $220 million has been awarded to major projects in Burlington, Clinton, Council Bluffs, Davenport, Des Moines, Dubuque, Ottumwa, Des Moines, Sioux City, Storm Lake and Waterloo/Cedar Falls.

In addition, millions of additional dollars have been awarded to smaller projects. In order to receive the grants, communities are required to prove the viability of the project and secure local matching funds. In Mason City, a large portion of the project will be funded through the sale of $7.6 million in bonds.

Although Wright is perhaps best-known for his work in designing homes in the Prairie Style, his portfolio also included several businesses, including seven hotels around the world. The other six, all modeled after the Park Inn, have been demolished.

Mason City is already considered an important repository of Prairie School architecture in the Midwest and the Rock Glen / Rock Crest neighborhood is one of the largest groups of such houses anywhere.

Wright’s Stockman House is already a popular attraction in Mason City. In addition, five Prairie School houses in the neighborhood were designed by Walter Burley Griffin, two houses by Francis Barry Byrne, one by local architect Einar Broaten, and one by Curtis Besinger. On the south edge of Rock Crest is another Prairie style house by William Drummond when he was in the supervising the last months of construction of the Park Inn Hotel.

The Park Inn Hotel and City National Bank buildings were listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1972. Because of its deteriorated condition the Park Inn Hotel was listed on the `Ten Most Endangered Historic Properties’ by the Iowa Historic Preservation Alliance in 1999. The Park Inn Hotel was designated as a `Save America’s Treasures’ official project by the White House Millennium Committee in 2000.

Below the fold: a video interview with Rep. Donovan Olson, D-Boone.

Democrats managed to kill a resolution that could have led to a ban of same-sex marriages in the state by refusing to vote on it in committee. A last ditch effort by House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, failed Tuesday when representatives voted down a motion, 50-6, to bring the issue to the House floor.

However, lawmakers resurrected an expanded bottle bill, a top priority for Gov. Chet Culver, and advanced legislation requiring workers to show a state-issued identification card when applying for a job and students to stay in school through the age of 17.

Rep. Donavon Olson, D-Boone, the floor manager of a new bottle bill, said his proposed legislation, which is being endorsed by the governor, would keep the deposit on cans and bottles at five cents but would divert two cents to redemption centers and would expand the definition to include juice, water and tea containers.

Olson said the new bill would eliminate about 20 percent of roadside trash in the state and would make redemption centers more economically viable.

House Speaker Pat Murphy, D-Dubuque, told reporters that the Democrats are pleased with their work so far. “We got out all the major bills we wanted to,” he told reporters on Thursday.

But Rants said he was baffled by the Democrats’ inability to produce a final budget showing expenditures and revenues and is surprised that the bottle bill and legislation requiring comprehensive reporting for businesses remains on the table.

Rants said Democrats also locked up legislation that would have required illegal immigrants to remain behind bars until they are deported. Republicans have called the current system, which allows immigrants to be released from jail after arrest, a “catch-and-release” program.

In addition to the bottle bill and the compulsory school attendance requirements, other bills that remain on the agenda include: the creation of a statewide database to track to sale of cold medicine used to produce methamphetamines; a program that would provide grants for fuel pumps that dispense ethanol; a $1 million fund to market statewide attractions; a bill requiring families to obtain health insurance for their children; a bill increasing vehicle registration fees and using the money for transportation infrastructure repair; and bills offering tuition and tax breaks for military veterans.

Legislation that died this week included bills that would have offered property owners additional protection from condemnation, required state and local government to take additional steps to prevent disclosure of social security numbers, prevent state agencies from using tax dollars to advocate for new laws, and prevent libraries from lending R-rated videos to children under the age of 17.

Minority Leader Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City, used the rare procedural move because Democrats who control the House Judiciary Committee have stalled discussion of the resolution until the state supreme court rules on the constitutionality of such laws later this spring.

Rants requested the vote at the beginning of the day Tuesday to move the House resolution out of committee and onto the floor. A vote in favor of Rants’ proposal would have been just one step for proponents of the amendment; House members would still have been required to vote on the actual resolution and then send it to the Senate.

Because of the nature of the procedural move, the vote came without any of the heated debate that has typically accompanied all previous discussions. At about 9:30 a.m., Rants called made a motion from the floor asking that the resolution be withdrawn from the Judicial Committee.

“We’ve not reached the halfway point of the session and nothing has been done,” he said.The debate over a gay marriage amendment has been hotly debated in the halls of the legislature but hasn’t received any attention on the floor of the House or the Senate. That’s because both chambers of the legislature are controlled by Democrats who are generally opposed to a vote on the amendment.

Democrats hold a 53-47 majority in the House and Rants said on Monday he expected most Republicans to vote in favor of his motion. In addition, some Democrats were co-sponsors of a resolution last year to force the statewide vote. Rants said at least seven Democrats have expressed support for such an amendment in the past.

The issue of gay marriage became a focus of conservative activists in August, when Judge Robert Hanson ruled that the state’s marriage law is unconstitutional and ordered Polk County to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The decision is awaiting appeal at the Iowa Supreme Court.

Democatic leaders in both chambers have said that they don’t think it is appropriate to debate the issue until the high court has had an opportunity to review Hanson’s ruling.

Amendments to the Iowa Constitution need to be approved by simple majorities in both chambers in two consecutive general assemblies and then be approved by voters in the next general election. The earliest a final vote could be taken on a constitutional amendment is 2010.

Rants said he will request a vote at the beginning of the day Tuesday to move the House resolution out of committee and onto the floor. A vote in favor of Rants’ proposal on is just one step for proponents of the amendment; House members would still be required to vote on the actual resolution and then send it to the Senate.

“We’ll know by 10 o’clock whether it’s successful,” Rants said. “I think it’s important to enough Iowans to bring it to a vote.”

The debate over a gay marriage amendment has been hotly debated in the halls of the legislature but hasn’t received any attention on the floor of the House or the Senate. That’s because both chambers of the legislature are controlled by Democrats who are generally opposed to a vote on the amendment.Democrats hold a 53-47 majority in the House and Rants said he expects most Republicans to vote in favor of his motion. In addition, some Democrats were co-sponsors of a resolution last year to force the statewide vote. Rants said at least seven Democrats have expressed support for such an amendment in the past.

“So the question is whether they vote their conscience or blindly follow the leadership,” he said.

The issue of gay marriage became a focus of conservative activists in August, when Judge Robert Hanson ruled that the state’s marriage law is unconstitutional and ordered Polk County to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The decision is awaiting appeal at the Iowa Supreme Court.

Democatic leaders in both chambers have said that they don’t think it is appropriate to debate the issue until the high court has had an opportunity to review Hanson’s ruling.

Amendments to the Iowa Constitution need to be approved by simple majorities in both chambers in two consecutive general assemblies and then be approved by voters in the next general election. The earliest a final vote could be taken on a constitutional amendment is 2010.