The state’s next turn in the national spotlight begins on Tuesday, Dec. 9, when the state Supreme Court hears arguments on same-sex marriage.

The legal drama has been three years in the making. In December 2005, the gay rights group Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit on behalf of six same-sex couples who sought the right to marry in Iowa. The suit was later amended to include three children whose parents were plaintiffs. The lawsuit argued that it would be unlawful to ban same-sex couples from marriage based on the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Iowa constitution. The state’s Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1998 by a 40-9 margin in the Senate and an 89-10 margin in the House, defines marriage as being solely between a man and a woman.

On Aug. 30, 2007, an Iowa District Court in Polk County agreed with the plaintiffs and ruled that it was unconstitutional to deny couples the right to marry.

“Couples, such as [the] Plaintiffs, who are otherwise qualified to marry one another may not be denied licenses to marry or certificates of marriage or in any other way prevented from entering into a civil marriage … by reason of the fact that both persons comprising such a couple are of the same sex,” wrote Iowa District Court Judge Robert Hanson in his ruling.

Although Hanson placed a “hold” on his ruling before even 24 hours had passed, dozens of same-sex couples lined up for licenses. One couple, Sean Fritz and Tim McQuillan, both undergraduates at Iowa State University, were able to maneuver through the system quickly enough to become spouses in Iowa’s first — and only — legal same-sex marriage.

A Polk County attorney appealed the decision to the Iowa Supreme Court, which has scheduled oral arguments next week.

In the weeks prior to the scheduled oral arguments, Lambda Legal and One Iowa, an equality advocacy group, presented public forums to discuss the status of the case and encourage those Iowans who support marriage equality to voice their opinion.

“I think one of the misconceptions is that the lawsuit seeks to change what various religious organizations are doing,” said Camilla Taylor, a senior staff attorney with Lambda Legal who argued the case in District Court. “All we are actually talking about is government-issued marriage licenses. Religious institutions have never been required to perform or condone civil marriage, and this lawsuit doesn’t change that.”

Rev. Rich McCarty, one of the panel members at the Iowa City forum, echoed this sentiment in a tongue-in-cheek fashion by stating that “religious communities are free to discriminate against whomever they want to.”

Those speaking at the forum were hopeful that Iowa, a state that granted the marriage rights of interracial couples more than 100 years before the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Loving v. Virginia, will once again flex its pioneering muscles. It is a hope voiced by Mary Mascher, a Democratic member of the Iowa House of Representatives from Iowa City.

“I think our constitution clearly, clearly prohibits [a ban on same-sex marriage],” said Mascher, one of several legislators and local elected officials who signed on to a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the lawsuit. “[The Defense of Marriage Act] is discriminatory and I voted against that law when it was put on the books for that very reason. I thought it was unconstitutional and I believe that’s what the Supreme Court is going to rule.”

Mascher knows that the issue has become a political hot potato, especially after the November general election when ballot propositions in other states like California were successful in banning same-sex marriage.

A total of 24 friend-of-the court briefs have been filed. Sixteen of those are from organizations and individuals who believe Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1998, is unconstitutional. Eight briefs are supportive of the gay marriage ban, most of them from national organizations.

Sixteen Republican state legislators joined in filing a friend-of-the-court brief in support of banning same-sex marriage in Iowa when the case was before Iowa District Court last year. Only five of the 16 have added their names to similar brief in the Supreme Court case. Citing their interest in “maintaining a proper separation of government powers,” Reps. Dwayne Alons, Carmine Boal and Betty DeBoef joined with Sens. Nancy Boettger and James Hahn on a brief authored by the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance created in 1994 by Focus on the Family and more than 29 additional Christian ministries, as a response to the American Civil Liberties Union, to “aggressively defend religious liberty.”

Jim Campbell, litigation counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, provided the crux of the opposition brief by questioning the lower court’s decision to reject testimony prior to ruling.

“The government should promote and encourage strong families,” Campbell said. “The expert testimony excluded by the court was crucial to establishing why Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act does that and why the act is completely constitutional. The people of Iowa, through their elected legislators, took their stand on marriage as a union of one woman and one man when they passed this Act in 1998.”

Mascher thinks supporters of the gay marriage ban from outside the state “would tread upon our constitution.”

“Part of me says that is their right of freedom of speech and that everybody can come here and say what they want and speak their piece. But at the same time, this is Iowa. I think we as Iowans have definite feelings and opinions about that too. I don’t want to be a part of anything that would take rights away in our constitution. That would be the first time in the history of Iowa that we’ve ever put an amendment to that constitution that took rights away. If you think about the enormity of that, it really gives you pause in terms of thinking that this would be something that we would even consider, and that there are people who would try to destroy our constitution in that way.”

A perhaps strange bedfellow in all of this is Gov. Chet Culver. Prior to the November general election — indeed, prior to the beginning of the 2008 legislative session — Culver claimed he was in favor of calling a special legislative session to deal with a Supreme Court verdict that would allow same-sex marriage in Iowa.

Mascher, while not completely convinced that Culver has ruled out this strategy, cautions that it could be politically unwise.

“What I think the governor has to understand and appreciate is that he is one branch of government and our legislature is another branch of government,” Mascher said. “In order for anything to happen and occur, it can’t just happen with his signature. He doesn’t have any kind of veto power over a constitutional amendment. He can call us back. We don’t have to come. We don’t have to do anything. So, I think he would do that at his own peril because it would be embarrassing to call us back and then not have anything be done. I don’t think that politically he is willing to take that kind of a risk.”

Oral arguments are expected to begin at 10 a.m. on Dec. 9 in the Iowa Judicial Branch Building in Des Moines. The opposing parties will have 30 minutes in which to make their arguments.

More information regarding oral arguments, the trial court ruling and other proceedings can be found on the Iowa Judicial Branch Web site. There is no mandated time frame for the court to make its ruling following the oral arguments. Most close to the case anticipate it will take several months.

The Iowa Department of Education tracked 231 items of interest during the 2007 legislative session. When the gavel hit for the last time, only 27 of those went to the desk of Gov. Chet Culver. Each of the 27 affects Iowa schools, students, staff or administrators. Three, in particular, have had far-reaching affects throughout the state either by bill content or media coverage.

HF 611 — Research-Based Health Curriculum

The Committee on Education first introduced House File 611 in late February, although it would not be sent to Culver for signing until late April. Floor managers were Sen. Joe Bolkcom, D-Iowa City, and Rep. Mary Mascher, D-Iowa City.

The bill makes changes to sections 256 and 279 of the Iowa Code and calls upon all school districts to provide “age-appropriate and research-based” curriculum in the area of human growth and development that is “free of racial, ethnic, sexual orientation and gender biases.”

The Iowa Department of Education is charged with development of examples and resources that the school districts will compare their existing programs against. According to a source within the Department of Education, there is currently a staff vacancy which must be filled before the guidelines can be developed.

“At this time — without having the new guidelines — we just don’t know if our health curriculum will need to be adjusted,” said Diane Ostrowski, supervisor of community services for Council Bluffs Community School District.

Elaine Watkins-Miller, communications director for the Iowa Department of Education, said she anticipates those guidelines being passed to the school districts “later this fall.”

The bill was specifically designed not to interfere with abstinence-only sexual education and there is a provision within the bill that explicitly states “to the extent not inconsistent… an accredited nonpublic school may also choose curriculum in accordance with doctrinal teachings” and “nothing in this section… shall be construed to prohibit a school or school district from developing and making available abstinence-based or abstinence-only material.”

Rhonda Chittenden, executive director of FutureNet, an Iowa network for adolescent pregnancy prevention, parenting and sexual health, says the law, while not banning abstinence-only education, will create some concerns for that curriculum as outlined by the Federal government.

“It depends on how you are using the term,” she said. “If you are saying ‘abstinence only’ without a dash in between the words — in other words, if they are only going to teach about the topic of abstinence and they are only going to do so in a medically accurate way then, yes, they could do that. If a school is going to use the Federal mandates outlined in the abstinence-only funding — some of those points have been identified as not being medically accurate. There is a difference in saying ‘The only topic we’re going to teach about is abstinence’ or ‘We receive abstinence-only funding and we’re going to teach according to those standards.’”

HF 877 — Voluntary Preschool Program

If there was one piece of legislation that created a mad shuffle of activity in education circles, this bill mandating and funding voluntary preschool for 4-year-olds across the state was it.

The bill, placed on the appropriations calendar in late March, creates a statewide voluntary preschool program for any Iowa child who is age 4 by Sept. 15 of the given year. There are also special allowances for younger children to be included in the program if space allows.

While the legislature created the program and appropriated $15 million for the 2007-2008 school year, details such as class size, teacher-to-child ratios and learning standards were left to the Department of Education. The bill was signed on May 10. That same day, the State Board of Education held a meeting to discuss the process and content of the program. On June 1, applications and directions were available to school districts with letters of intent due back to the state on June 15. Full applications were due to the state on July 2. Nearly 150 applications were read by the state and, of those, 52 were selected to receive awards.

Council Bluffs Community and Iowa City Community school districts, both with existing preschool programs, were among the recipients.

“We were very excited,” said Ostrowski. “We had been providing a preschool as a part of a five-year pilot program that utilized a generous private donor and Federal funding. The new initiative through the state is going to allow us to continue what we’ve started.”

Using funding through the state that Ostrowski described as “significant,” the western Iowa district will establish two additional preschool classrooms.

Dr. Lane Plugge, superintendent for Iowa City Community School District, is also optimistic about what the preschool program will help his district provide to residents.

“We’re hoping to serve 44 preschool students,” he said, indicating the district partners with two community organizations: HandiCare and Neighborhood Center of Johnson County.

“It is a challenge — especially with timing being so tight,” he added. “Since preschool isn’t a full-day program, it is necessary to find wrap-around programs for families.”

The fast turnaround for applications coupled with a desire to best serve residents is what led Mount Pleasant Community School District to take a pass — for this year.

“We decided to take a year and plan so that we could be sure we are serving the needs of our community,” said Director of Instruction Dave Christensen. “We need hard data — who’s not going and why.”

The Mount Pleasant district has a group of four individuals who will be mining the community for preschool data. Once they’ve developed figures and information, a task force will be convened to determine if the preschool program is needed or if residents are being adequately served by existing Head Start, private providers and the district’s existing developmental preschool for special needs students.

Despite approaching the program from different angles, all the administrators agree that preschool is something that can benefit students longterm.

“This program is just exceptionally critical,” said Ostrowski. “Since we’ve been providing preschool, we’ve been able to see the positive impact as students progress in the school system.”

SF 61 — Antiharassment and Antibullying Policies

The changes to school antibullying policies when combined with changes to the Iowa Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity provided some of the most heated exchanges in Des Moines during the past legislative session.

Accredited nonpublic schools and public school districts were directed by the bill to adopt policies by Sept. 1 that state “harassment and bullying in schools, on school property, and at any school function, or school-sponsored activity regardless of location… as against state and school policy.” In addition, the schools are required to develop and maintain a system to collect harassment and bullying incidence data.

Most Iowa schools already had similar policies in place. For Des Moines, the legislation codified some of the polices that were already implemented.

“In many ways, we’ve been in front on this issue,” said Phillip Roeder, director of community relations and legislative liaison for Des Moines Public Schools. “We have had teachers and administrators working on this issue for the past several years to raise awareness among staff, parents and students about the ramifications of bullying. This has included everything from holding workshops to visibility within the schools to creation of our initial policy.”

For Iowa City, the process involved taking separate policies for staff and students and rolling them into a single policy with new language. Staff training will occur throughout the year.

“Having a policy is only one part,” said Plugge. “Implementation is what actually makes for safer schools.”

Christensen at Mount Pleasant agrees.

“We have a group in our community that is primarily concerned about diversity,” he said. “We are bringing in a program called ‘Rachel’s Challenge,’ and while we understand that one event won’t change things, we hope this will prompt discussion and conversation within the community.”

Rachel’s Challenge is a tribute to Rachel Scott, the first person killed at Columbine High School on April 20, 1999. The program includes video and audio footage of her life and of the Columbine tragedy followed by an interactive 45-minute training session.

In Mount Pleasant — only one district among many in the area that will be employing the Rachel’s Challenge group — meetings will be held with high school students, middle school students, student leaders and, in the evening, with parents.

“It will be one big day,” Christensen said. “We are optimistic about having the program here, especially since our student leadership will be involved. We’ve had great success when we incorporate student leaders.”

Additional Legislation

As school districts throughout Iowa work on the three mandates outlined above, they along with parents, partners and students must also react to the 24 other items passed by the legislature in the spring — and keep an eye on what might be headed their way during the next session. Some of the other items passed during the past legislative session include:

• HF 158 — Requires that children receive a blood lead test by age six or prior to enrollment in an elementary school.
• HF 317 — Permits the school budget review committee to recommend that the Department of Education send an accreditation team into a school district for an on-site fiscal review if a school district exceeds its authorized budget or carries a negative unspent balance for two or more years.
• HF 154 — Requires the Department of Education to conduct a study regarding the student information systems that are currently in use throughout the state.
• HF 618 — Allows elections commissioners to appoint certain high school students to serve as precinct election board members.
• HF 808 — Provides accountability for entities and boards (28E agreements) created for joint exercise of governmental powers.
• HF 906 — Requires children enrolling in elementary or high school to have a dental screening.
• SF 277 — Related to educational standards for teacher librarians, teachers, administrators and qualified guidance counselors. (Teacher Quality Program)
• SF 358 — Established prelicensing and continuing education requirements for used motor vehicle dealers.
• SF 447 — Changed incentives for school district reorganization and dissolution and shared operational functions between school districts and political subdivisions.