1. An instructional support program that provides additional funding for school districts is established. A board of directors that wishes to consider participating in the instructional support program shall hold a public hearing on the question of participation. The board shall set forth its proposal, including the method that will be used to fund the program, in a resolution and shall publish the notice of the time and place of a public hearing on the resolution. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be published not less than ten nor more than twenty days before the public hearing in a newspaper which is a newspaper of general circulation in the school district. At the hearing, or no later than thirty days after the date of the hearing, the board shall take action to adopt a resolution to participate in the instructional support program for a period not exceeding five years or to direct the county commissioner of elections to submit the question of participation in the program for a period not exceeding ten years to the registered voters of the school district at an election held on a date specified in section 39.2, subsection 4, paragraph “c”. If the board submits the question at an election and a majority of those voting on the question favors participation in the program, the board shall adopt a resolution to participate and certify the results of the election to the department of management.
2. a. If the board does not provide for an election and adopts a resolution to participate in the instructional support program, the district shall participate in the instructional support program unless within twenty-eight days following the action of the board, the secretary of the board receives a petition containing the required number of signatures, asking that the question to approve or disapprove the action of the board in adopting the instructional support program be submitted to the voters of the school district. The petition must be signed by eligible electors equal in number to not less than one hundred or thirty percent of the number of voters at the last preceding regular school election, whichever is greater. The board shall either rescind its action or direct the county commissioner of elections to submit the question to the registered voters of the school district at an election held on a date specified in section 39.2, subsection 4, paragraph “c”. If a majority of those voting on the question at the election favors disapproval of the action of the board, the district shall not participate in the instructional support program. If a majority of those voting on the question favors approval of the action, the board shall certify the results of the election to the department of management and the district shall participate in the program.
b. At the expiration of the twenty-eight day period, if no petition is filed, the board shall certify its action to the department of management and the district shall participate in the program.
3. Participation in an instructional support program is not affected by a change in the boundaries of the school district, except as otherwise provided in this section. If each school district involved in a school reorganization under chapter 275 has approved an instructional support program, and if the voters have not voted upon the question of participation in the program in the reorganized district, the instructional support program shall be in effect for the reorganized district that has been approved for the least amount and the shortest time in any of the districts. 89 Acts, ch 135, §18; 92 Acts, ch 1171, §1; 95 Acts, ch 67, §53; 96 Acts, ch 1112, §1, 2; 2008 Acts, ch 1115, §32, 33, 71 Referred to in §257.27, 257.29 \n
Notes of Decisions
Lewis Consol. Sch. Dist. v. Johnston, 127 N.W.2d 118 (Iowa 1964).
· cites it 30× “Section 257.18 defines certain duties and responsibilities of the state superintendent of public instruction.”
Petersen v. Davenport Cmty. Sch. Dist., 626 N.W.2d 99 (Iowa 2001).
· cites it 12× “Iowa Code § 257.18 (2) (1993). Plaintiffs circulated petitions to obtain the necessary signatures for a special election.”
Alexander v. Randall, 133 N.W.2d 124 (Iowa 1965).
· cites it 12× “the state department made false statements, widely circulated among Coralville voters, that if “all our standards are not met” the department would remove the Coralville school system from “the approved list”; the statements were designed to influence the voters to vote…”
Berent v. City of Iowa City, 738 N.W.2d 193 (Iowa 2007).
· cites it 2× “Further, all of the cases involved judicial intervention in different statutory and factual contexts.”
State v. Rivera, 149 N.W.2d 127 (Iowa 1967).
· cites it 2× “It is the legislature, not the commission, that has made it a crime to cross a yellow line while passing.”
Bd. of Directors v. Iowa State Bd. of Pub. Instruction, 106 N.W.2d 670 (Iowa 1960).
· cites it 2× “” Section 257.18(10) gives this as a responsibility of the state superintendent: “when practicable, amicably adjust and settle such controversies * * * as may be submitted to him, directly or by appeal, by all persons directly concerned, to hear and decide appeals as provided by…”
Michael Joseph Berent, Michael Steven Romp, Jeff Wayne Thorne, Paul Bryson Ingram, Nichelle Aline Thompson, Rodney Edward Sullivan, Sara Lillis Epstein, Sara Crane Swisher, Bette Jayne Mayes, Caroline M. Dieterle, Matt Blizek, Mori Constantino, Amanda Coyne, Lolly Eggers, Ellen Haywood, Jon Klinkowitz, Karen Kubby, Bob Thompson, James Walters, Roberta Till Retz & Jennie Louise Embree (Iowa 2007).
· cites it 2× “13 Further, all of the cases involved judicial intervention in different statutory and factual contexts.”
— Iowa Code § 257.18(10) — 1 case
Bd. of Directors v. Iowa State Bd. of Pub. Instruction, 106 N.W.2d 670 (Iowa 1960).
“” Section 257.18(10) gives this as a responsibility of the state superintendent: “when practicable, amicably adjust and settle such controversies * * * as may be submitted to him, directly or by appeal, by all persons directly concerned, to hear and decide appeals as provided by…”
— Iowa Code § 257.18(12) — 1 case
— Iowa Code § 257.18(13) — 2 cases
Alexander v. Randall, 133 N.W.2d 124 (Iowa 1965).
“the state department made false statements, widely circulated among Coralville voters, that if “all our standards are not met” the department would remove the Coralville school system from “the approved list”; the statements were designed to influence the voters to vote…”
— Iowa Code § 257.18(2) — 3 cases
Petersen v. Davenport Cmty. Sch. Dist., 626 N.W.2d 99 (Iowa 2001).
“Iowa Code § 257.18 (2) (1993). Plaintiffs circulated petitions to obtain the necessary signatures for a special election.”
Berent v. City of Iowa City, 738 N.W.2d 193 (Iowa 2007).
“Further, all of the cases involved judicial intervention in different statutory and factual contexts.”
Michael Joseph Berent, Michael Steven Romp, Jeff Wayne Thorne, Paul Bryson Ingram, Nichelle Aline Thompson, Rodney Edward Sullivan, Sara Lillis Epstein, Sara Crane Swisher, Bette Jayne Mayes, Caroline M. Dieterle, Matt Blizek, Mori Constantino, Amanda Coyne, Lolly Eggers, Ellen Haywood, Jon Klinkowitz, Karen Kubby, Bob Thompson, James Walters, Roberta Till Retz & Jennie Louise Embree (Iowa 2007).
“13 Further, all of the cases involved judicial intervention in different statutory and factual contexts.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.