Iowa voters approved 22 of 26 public measures on September 8, including 14 of 18 Physical Plant and Equipment Levy (PPEL) questions, all four school Revenue Purpose Statements (RPS), and all three city and county tax measures.

The results included several notable decisions. Dubuque voters approved doubling the district’s PPEL after rejecting a $70 million bond last year. Clarinda voters rejected another school tax proposal even after the district substantially reduced its request. Webster City voters approved two PPEL questions that together provide maximum taxing authority for roughly 13 years. And in Van Meter, a PPEL renewal passed by just two votes.

Yet perhaps the most consistent story was turnout. Average turnout among the individual contests was only 12.2%, once again demonstrating how relatively few voters can determine significant and sometimes long-term tax decisions.

Source: County Auditors; all results are unofficial. For details on each public measure, read this article.

Most School Property-Tax Measures Passed

Seventeen school districts had proposals to renew, increase or add to their PPEL property tax, with Webster City putting two separate questions before voters. Four measures failed: Clarinda, Kingsley-Pierson, Maquoketa and Tri-County.

Among those that passed, Roland-Story’s renewal received the greatest support at nearly 90%. At the other extreme, Van Meter’s renewal passed 152-150. Only about 10% of the district’s registered voters participated, meaning two votes determined whether the tax continued.

The four RPS questions also passed, ranging from 62% approval in Webster City to nearly 95% in Osage. An RPS determines how a district may use the revenue from the statewide SAVE penny. All four measures extend district authority following the Legislature’s extension of SAVE through 2070.

Outside the school measures, Ankeny voters approved a new 1-cent local-option sales tax, Wayne County voters renewed their 1-cent tax indefinitely, and Reinbeck voters approved a new property-tax levy for capital improvements.

Dubuque: PPEL After a Failed Bond

Dubuque voters rejected a $70 million middle-school bond referendum in November 2025. The district subsequently scaled back the project, and in May the school board approved up to $30 million in revenue bonds backed by future SAVE revenue to expand Roosevelt Middle School.

On September 8, voters approved of another source of capital revenue, doubling the district’s PPEL from $0.67 to the $1.34 maximum. The levy, expected to generate approximately $7.2 million annually, passed with 65.5% support and 16.4% turnout.

The two votes involved different financing mechanisms, but the contrast is notable. Dubuque voters rejected the larger general-obligation bond in 2025, while approving the PPEL increase less than a year later.

Kingsley-Pierson: Temporary Means Temporary

Kingsley-Pierson voters approved a temporary additional $0.67 PPEL in 2023, allowing the district to reach the $1.34 maximum for three years. After that authority expired, the district returned this September asking voters to restore it for another 10 years.

Voters overwhelmingly rejected the proposal, with nearly 68% voting no.

But only 68 people voted, representing 4% of registered voters. Just 46 no votes were enough to defeat a 10-year taxing authorization.

The result is nevertheless noteworthy. Voters agreed to a temporary increase in 2023 but declined to make that higher level of taxing authority long-term.

Webster City: $1.34 for the Next 13 Years

Webster City voters faced two PPEL questions. The first increased the district’s existing $0.77 levy by $0.57, bringing it to the $1.34 maximum for the final three years of its current authorization. The second authorized $1.34 for another 10 years beginning in FY2031.

Both passed, effectively providing the district authority to levy the maximum PPEL rate for roughly 13 consecutive years.

The measures are tied to a major high-school facilities plan, for which officials had previously considered a combination of general-obligation bonds and SAVE-backed borrowing. Unlike many jurisdictions in the election, Webster City saw relatively strong participation, with turnout exceeding 20%.

Different Approaches to Property Tax and Income Surtax

Three districts also illustrate how differently local boards—and their voters—approached the mix of property tax and income surtax used to fund PPEL.

South Winneshiek voters approved eliminating the district’s 3% income surtax while increasing its property tax PPEL from $0.30 to $1.34. The measure received 59% support with nearly 28% turnout, the highest participation among the tax contests.

Tri-County proposed a similar shift away from the income surtax and toward property tax, but received the opposite result: 72 % voted no. However, only 47 people participated, or 4.7% of registered voters.

West Sioux went the other direction, adding an income-surtax option to shift the burden from a previously approved property tax. Voters approved the proposal with 62% support.

The contrasting results demonstrate the flexibility districts have not only in how much PPEL authority they seek, but in how the tax burden is distributed.

Clarinda Voters Say No Again

Clarinda voters rejected bond proposals in March and November 2023, followed by PPEL proposals in March and September 2024. The district subsequently secured private funding for some facility improvements.

This year, the district returned with a substantially smaller request. Instead of the $1.34 PPEL proposed in 2024, voters considered a $0.50 levy expected to generate approximately $200,000 annually.

They rejected it again, 59% to 41%.

Unlike several other failed measures, turnout was not exceptionally low. More than 25% of Clarinda’s registered voters participated, the second-highest turnout among the tax contests. After five unsuccessful bond or PPEL proposals since 2023, the latest result provides a fairly clear indication that Clarinda voters remain reluctant to authorize additional school taxing authority. Yet comments from the superintendent and board members following the election indicate the district may ask voters again.

Special Elections Have Long-Term Consequences

Special elections may receive less attention, but the tax decisions made can last for years. With turnout remaining low, a relatively small number of voters can determine whether their communities take on new or continued tax obligations.

Taxpayers have a voice in these decisions, but that voice only matters when they vote.