Sand and Lahn offer competing plans for schools, taxes and Iowa’s workforce

The candidates met at KTIV’s studios for a discussion moderated by Matt Breen, Dave Price and Justin Rust. Much of the evening turned on how their proposals would work: how to pay for tax relief and school funding, how quickly Iowa could expand local food purchasing, and how to supply the workers needed for a proposed steel mill in Lee County. Watch KTIV’s full debate

The budget: Sand’s revenue changes and Lahn’s spending review

Sand argued that Iowa’s use of reserves to cover the difference between spending and recurring revenue was unsustainable. Asked whether legalizing and taxing recreational cannabis and ending tax breaks for data-center equipment would be enough to balance the budget, he said those two changes alone would not be enough.

He added two other priorities: restoring an income limit for state-funded private-school tuition assistance and requiring cities, counties and school districts to participate in the auditor’s Public Innovations and Efficiencies program, known as PIE. Sand said reviewing the program’s menu of cost-saving ideas each year would encourage more local governments to use them.

Lahn likewise opposed data-center tax breaks, but made government spending transparency central to his answer. He proposed using blockchain technology to create a public ledger of government transactions, allowing residents to scrutinize expenditures and identify waste, fraud or preferential deals. He would begin with state government and expand the approach to lower levels of government. Neither candidate supplied a complete, itemized budget showing the combined effects of his proposals.

Property taxes: a goal without a final financing plan

Lahn said his first choice, if Iowa could eliminate one of its major taxes, would be property taxes on primary-residence single-family homes. He described the pressure property taxes place on older homeowners with fixed incomes and younger people starting families, while saying essential services would still need funding.

His proposed starting point was to identify government savings and direct them toward property-tax relief. When a moderator noted that property taxes are principally a local issue, Lahn said the transparency effort should begin at the state level before expanding. He also argued that lower property taxes could encourage people to remain in Iowa or move here.

Pressed on replacing the lost revenue, Lahn acknowledged that he had not released the exact mechanism. He mentioned a sales-tax increase floated by others, then expressly said it was not his proposal. That distinction matters: he presented an eventual property-tax goal, not a commitment to that particular tax swap. Sand’s tax-relief discussion focused on government efficiency and his broader budget priorities.

School funding: a 5% commitment versus targeted changes

Sand repeated his pledge to seek a 5% increase in supplemental state aid for public schools in his first year. He said he could not make the same promise for year two because the state’s finances would need to be reassessed.

He argued that cannabis revenue, ending data-center tax incentives, income limits on private-school accounts and greater efficiency would cover the increase and reduce the budget gap. When asked what would happen if those changes failed, Sand said the state was already drawing on reserves and that public education should be a higher spending priority. His answer was a statement of priorities and projected financing, rather than a guarantee that the proposed revenue changes would pass.

Lahn declined to give a percentage, including after a follow-up question. He said the state should first identify the changes schools need and calculate their costs. His priorities included innovation zones that would give educators more flexibility, different instructional options within public schools, and additional support for students whose behavior disrupts classrooms.

He proposed nonpunitive, individual or small-group assistance for those students, with the goal of returning them to the classroom. He also emphasized phonics-based reading instruction and argued that improving results required changes in practice as well as money. The clearest difference was Sand’s specific first-year funding commitment versus Lahn’s insistence on defining and costing particular reforms before setting an aid increase.

Private-school accounts and keeping teachers

The candidates also differed over education savings accounts. Sand said the wealthiest households should not receive public money for private-school tuition they would otherwise pay themselves, and called for restoring an income limit. Lahn defended the accounts as a way to give parents more control over where their children attend school and how education dollars are spent. He also said the governor must be a strong advocate for public-school students.

Both raised teacher retention, but emphasized different remedies. Lahn called for better compensation and merit-based pay, alongside classroom changes that would let teachers focus on instruction. Sand welcomed the increase in starting-teacher pay but argued that experienced teachers also need a reason to stay. He cited a teacher who, he said, could earn substantially more across the Mississippi River in Illinois, and made that example part of his case for greater public-school investment.

School meals: local purchasing and universal access

Lahn defended his long-term goal of having 80% of food served in public schools grown in Iowa. A moderator relayed superintendents’ concerns about supply and federal school-meal requirements. Lahn acknowledged the difficulty and proposed a gradual approach, changes to federal purchasing rules and a procurement platform connecting farms with school districts.

He suggested beginning with smaller annual benchmarks and said Iowa’s livestock producers offered a practical starting point. His argument was both nutritional and economic: school purchasing could create markets for smaller farms and help rural communities. He did not offer a completed statewide supply or cost plan during the exchange.

Sand supported expanding local and regional food systems, connecting that idea to the Working Lands program and efforts to turn vulnerable cropland into grazing land. He said longer-term purchasing contracts with schools, and potentially county hospitals, could help beginning farmers obtain financing. He also argued that expanding grazing on suitable land could improve water quality.

Sand separately advocated breakfast and lunch at no charge to all public-school students. He said additional federal support could help finance the approach, reduce families’ meal bills and make it easier for students to learn. The discussion established shared interest in more local food, while distinguishing Lahn’s procurement target from Sand’s universal-meal proposal.

Workforce: train Iowans, but how open should the door be?

A question about the proposed Lee County steel mill exposed a difference over recruitment. Lahn called the project a major opportunity for southeast Iowa and emphasized community colleges, the trades and training residents for the jobs it could create.

He proposed tying higher-education funding to the share of students who are Iowans and exploring public-private partnerships for trades tuition forgiveness tied to work in rural communities. He said Iowa should build its own workforce rather than rely on bringing workers from other countries.

Lahn also clarified the scope of his H-1B position. He proposed ending such hiring at public universities and state institutions, where he said a governor could act, while acknowledging that immigration policy is federal.

Sand said prioritizing Iowans was reasonable, but argued that eliminating the visa option could leave necessary positions unfilled when qualified applicants are unavailable. He said Iowa should welcome people who want to move here and stay.

On the steel mill itself, Sand urged a project labor agreement and requirements that the development benefit Iowa workers, including training and hiring them. He noted that an agreement the company had made elsewhere would not automatically carry over to Iowa. The exchange contrasted Lahn’s emphasis on a homegrown workforce with Sand’s combination of local hiring commitments and continued outside recruitment.

Data centers: shared opposition to incentives, different safeguards

Both candidates said data centers should pay their own way without tax incentives. Lahn supported state-level ground rules while leaving counties a major role in negotiating local terms.

He called for protections against higher electricity bills, safeguards for water, and stronger community benefits. His suggestions included negotiating for nitrate-removal facilities and using additional property-tax revenue to reduce residents’ tax burden. He also supported counties imposing moratoriums when they need time to evaluate proposals.

Sand focused on transparency. He opposed agreements that prevent local elected officials from telling constituents which company wants to build a project or what is proposed. He argued that the public should be able to participate in those discussions rather than learn about major developments after officials have negotiated in secrecy.

Accountability and the candidates’ governing messages

The questioning began with a request to avoid personal attacks. Both agreed to focus on issues and offered respectful comments about the other’s work and family. Their later answers nevertheless showed distinct arguments for changing state government.

Sand repeatedly returned to accountability, drawing on his work as a prosecutor and auditor. He criticized restrictions on his office’s access to records and argued that individuals responsible for serious misconduct should bear financial responsibility instead of leaving taxpayers with the bill. He also advocated restrictions on elected officials’ stock trading, mandatory town halls, prison time for stealing taxpayer money and greater participation rights for independent voters.

Lahn framed his candidacy around reducing the influence of large companies, lobbyists and established political interests. Alongside his spending-ledger proposal, he emphasized family farms, keeping young Iowans in the state and making government decisions serve residents rather than corporate interests.

Why they chose their running mates

Sand said he chose Crawford County Supervisor Dave Muhlbauer for his farming background and ability to win support in a heavily Republican county. He described cooperation across party lines as an important qualification for governing.

Lahn said state Rep. Derek Wulf understood agriculture and the pressures facing family farms. He pointed to Wulf’s work on local food, corporate tax incentives and right-to-repair legislation as consistent with his own priorities.

Their closing statements returned to those larger themes. Lahn promised to challenge entrenched interests and address long-term problems involving farms, education, population retention and cancer. Sand stressed checks on political power and a government more accountable to ordinary Iowans.

Watch the full October 14 debate on KTIV · Compare the candidates