Okay I read this editorial in the Press-Citizen. What drew my attention was the following:



4. Economic growth



• WHAT HAPPENED: Considering the weak rural economy, budget and tax priorities this year should have been geared toward economic growth.



That wasn't the case. And as a partisan snub, lawmakers failed to establish a permanent funding method for the Iowa Values Fund, the economic development program that brought the guarantee of millions in dollars of new businesses, company expansions and accompanying jobs to the Iowa City-Cedar Rapids Technology Corridor and elsewhere.



During the session's final days, lawmakers did approve dollars for Vision Iowa and Community Attractions and Tourism Program. That opens the way for the proposed Iowa Environmental/Education project in Coralville to receive state dollars. Unfortunately, the funding mechanism for Vision Iowa isn't based on bonds, threatening to nullify much of the financial gain from the benefits that fund brings.



Though the local economy is strong, we're dependent on state funding for the University of Iowa. As Iowa goes, so Iowa City goes. The state must regear its economy to attract the growing and prosperous biotech, biomass and information-services industries for which we are perfectly positioned.



• GRADE: D



• NEXT TIME: Lawmakers should fully commit to funding the $500 million Iowa Values Fund and find other ways to encourage business expansion and relocation to Iowa.



It appears to be saying the only thing that saved them from getting an F was their paving the way to fund the fake rainforest in Coralville? And the reason why they got a D was their failure to provide "permanent funding" for Vision Iowa, to fund whatever project fits their "vision" next?



Hey, you Board members - I have a Vision! I think my own yard would be greatly enhanced with a fake ocean and tropical beach. We could buy up the neighbor's land and put it under an 18-acre dome, keeping it precisely heated to a sunny 83 degrees with a fresh breeze blowing up off the surf. I could invite neighborhood children over and teach them how Caribbean cultures eat fresh seafood and drink margaritas. After hours, I could invite all kinds of other interesting people over to study the celebratory rituals of Antigua, St. Kitt's, or Martinique. It would be very educational. I would only charge a nominal fee as the resident caretaker. Of course, you would have to get an additional grant to subsidize my PADI certification before I could lead the dive classes.



Anyway, the article tallies with the Gazette piece Cedar Pundit blogged on yesterday, which states in part:



"While it would have been criticized as radical, the Vision Iowa board should have continued to "award" whatever a project deserved, based on its merits. If the award exceeded funds available, an IOU marked "payable by the Legislature" could have been attached. Of course, the board had no authority to do such a thing, but it would have sent a strong message to the Legislature about the enormous and growing grass-roots support for the program and the need to assure this becomes a permanent program. Communities should be able to count on this state partnership whenever a visionary project is developed, not just if it happens to come at the right time during a funding cycle."



What part of 'fiscal insanity' do these publications not understand? Yes, we do want growth in our state, but the "Vision Iowa" board has apparently already shown itself to be fiscally nutty based on the fake rainforest idea. The idea of giving them authority to fund whatever wacky visionary project they like regardless of the state of our budget is like handing your personal credit card over to Tootsy the Clown.



C'mon. Who on your editorial board has stock in this project? You can tell us. At least then we could believe you have a rational reason to support these ideas.