Note From Tom Wheeler... He Needs Your Help

Good morning,

This is Tom Wheeler, formerly of the Iowa Film Office. For those of you who might not know, I am the former Film Office manager due to legal actions taken against me by the Attorney General of Iowa. On February 8, 2010, the Attorney General filed "misconduct in office" charges against me for allegedly failing to perform a legal duty.

I disagree with this charge and am defending myself against it.

In my defense, my family and friends have set up the legal defense fund "Fund for Tom" through the web site www.fundfortom.com. At this site, you will find various news articles about the case as well as a link to PayPal for donations.

This defense is very expensive. I welcome whatever can be given including messages of support. Even the most modest contribution is greatly appreciated.

Please visit www.fundfortom.com for more information and to make a contribution.

Also, please feel free to forward this message to whomever you feel is appropriate to get it or reply with "remove" in the message to be removed from this list.

Thanks very much.

Regards,

Tom Wheeler.

Suggestions for a NEW Film Tax Credit Program

A little while back I posted a blog on here about "What is your wishlist" concerning the film tax credit program. I promised I would post what suggestions I was going to send to Senator Dotzler and his study group as they look at the film credits this summer and today is the day. What Senator Dotzler hopes to do is to introduce a new bill in the 2011 session that would replace the present flawed and suspended program. I'd assume it would keep only the elements that worked and I'd hope that it would not only fix what is wrong with the present program but would offer improvements. As I've said before, we aren't going to get a second chance, so let's get it right this time. I've spent a bit of time formulating my suggestions for this very reason.

This (along with copies of the original materials with notes written on them) is what I'm going to send to Senator Dotzler and his study group:

Dear Senator Dotzler and members of the Film Tax Credit study group,

As I understand it, you are working on a new Film Tax Credit bill which would supersede the present one if it is passed in the new legislative session in 2011. I do realize the importance of getting through the November election and getting past the trials that came about as a result of abuse of our present Film Tax Credit program. Timing is very important.

Ever since Governor Culver's freeze of the program in September of 2009, I've been following what has been going on and thinking about solutions. The following suggestions are what I've come up with after talking to others and considering the problems myself. Please understand in presenting these suggestions I'm only representing myself and not any of the various film organizations in the state or any national interests. These simply are my ideas of what I think might work and make this, once and for all, an effective program. (It might not be a bad idea to see what has worked in other states too.)

The following are my suggestions:

I think, to begin with, that we need to rethink what our ultimate objective should be with the film program. There has been so much made by detractors of the program of tax credits being a “race to the bottom” that we need to look at what this program really means. In its present form our program would certainly seem to fit this idea . It's been pointed out that Iowa having the best incentives is only temporary until another state tops us. The present objective has been to simply attract Hollywood productions to the state in order for them to spend money here and hire a few Iowans. In effect it's been to make our state an extension of their backlot.

I would suggest a new farther sighted objective. I think we should approach this as a means to build a permanent film industry inside our borders. I think we should expand the training beyond the lower level support jobs that were encouraged and look toward building a fuller infrastructure of film related businesses including those involved with post-productions and beyond. Our ultimate goal should be a self-sustaining film industry that can keep going long after outside productions have left and to make it possible to gradually phase out the tax credits so that this industry can contribute to the state's budget through taxes.

One thing that could be argued about the Iowa Film Office is that Tom Wheeler did a very good job at the job he was originally hired for – promoting Iowa as a place for productions to shoot and acting as a liaison once they were here. The trouble started when he was expected to do jobs that he was not qualified to do. He did not have a law degree so it was inadvisable that he be expected to be an expert in legal matters and he was not a motion picture accountant so it was not surprising that he was not the person to go over the books of television and motion picture productions using the Film Tax Credit program.

Politically it is unlikely that he could be hired back to run the Film Office but there are things that could be done to eliminate, or at least minimize, the possibility of the kinds of problems we experienced. I would suggest we separate the original duties of the Film Office from the responsibilities that were added with the tax credits. Additional staff should be hired to process the applications and to process the receipts to make sure that the expenses claimed are qualifying expenses. This staff should be under the oversight of a different department than the Iowa Film Office (the Department of Revenue would be the obvious choice). Furthermore there should be a built-in auditing component to this to double-check the work done. The people hired should know about the norms for the film industry as far as prices and what would be normal production expenses. There should be someone who knows about tax credits – especially film tax credits and any legal questions that aren't obvious should be referred to the Attorney General's Office. Putting the two parts of the film program under separate jurisdictions would prevent undue influence over the awarding of tax credits and keep the Film Office doing what it does best.

Before Governor Culver froze the Film Tax Credit program in September of 2009 a problem with the program was that most prospective Iowa film workers were not aware of productions needing cast and crew until it was too late. The titles and contact information of approved productions was kept confidential and most job seekers could only find out through word-of-mouth or news stories. I would like to suggest then that the titles of films that have applied and have been approved should be made public as soon as the information is available and that the Iowa Film Office website acts as a clearing house for this information. The information would include the title of the project and all of the relevant contacts so that the producers are not inundated with individual requests. I think that the Iowa Film Office should be the source of this information because it would be in the best position to be an honest broker. No film organizations, whether Iowa based or national, should be considered for the dispensing of this information because of the possibility of selectively withholding this information for the benefit of their own members. Likewise, a registry of Iowa film workers should be under the Film Office's control in order to be fair to all Iowans.

When qualifying for tax credits only the portions of a production's budget (specific line items) directly connected to film credits should be open to public scrutiny. The total budget of a film should be a matter for the producers. Instead of a minimum qualifying budget, Iowa should instead require a minimum expenditure of qualifying items. If this threshold is met, then the production would be eligible for tax credits as long as the receipts are in order and the items qualify. Items not qualifying would be excluded from the total. Under the present program having the whole budget subject to public scrutiny has been a bone of contention for producers. This is because it makes public items that have nothing to do with the tax credits and breaks confidentiality agreements with participants. Only expenditures that affect tax payer dollars should be open and transparent. The matter of how much of the budget to make public would affect how much the producers would avail themselves of the tax credits. They would have to balance that out for themselves.

The program should be structured so that films of most budget levels could qualify (low, medium, high). Care should be taken so that a large budget production could not suck up all the resources from other films and that all films have a chance, if requirements are met. At least half the budget should be raised before being considered and an adequate time to raise this money should be built into the program.

There should be a more orderly application process. Something should be done (I'm not sure yet what) to eliminate the bum's rush that the process had become. The idea of steps to complete was a good one but the process needs to be re-examined nonetheless. Make sure receipts are definitely turned in and withhold tax credits if they are not. The loose and easy way the program was run created the problems we have now.

All Film Productions should have to be bonded and have funds in reserve to meet payroll. The awarding of film tax credits would be contingent on meeting payroll obligations. There was at least one film that had qualified for tax credits that still hasn't paid the cast and crew that worked on it and instances of workers having to wait to get paid because of the producers waiting for tax credits. This is certainly not the way we want business conducted in Iowa.

No Credits should be awarded for "Above the Line" Expenses. Above the Line Expenses – that is, the principals of any given (director, producer, lead actors, etc.) are among the most expensive parts of a production and it should be the producers, not tax payers, who bear the risk of recovering the cost of these contracts.

No more "Pass-Through" Companies - The idea of Iowa-based companies being created to purchase or rent items out of state for the purpose of qualifying for tax credits rightly looked like a shell game to tax payers because that is precisely what it was. Get rid of the provision. It doesn't encourage film related businesses to locate here or originate here. It merely provides a dodge from buying and renting film related equipment and supplies from Iowa vendors. I don't know who made this suggestion in the formation of the bill but it was a bad idea from the start.

Credits should only be awarded for expenses incurred inside Iowa borders. Certain pre-production expenses would qualify such as location scouting if it met the requirements. Post-production expenses would qualify if the work was done by Iowa companies. Distribution and marketing expenses would not qualify unless we expand the film tax credits to include Iowa-based entities doing this work.

Only equipment purchased in Iowa and that remains in Iowa should qualify for credits. Anything that the production should already own would not qualify and all uses would have to be proven to be related to the production of the film. Rentals also would have to be done with Iowa based companies to qualify as well as purchase of supplies and expendables.

The percentage of tax credits awarded should reflect the percentage of Iowans employed. Workers would have to provide proof of residency in order to affect the amount of credits awarded. In addition to this, no tax credits should be awarded for any film until Iowa film workers and Iowa vendors have been paid. This would encourage a higher percentage of Iowans being employed on a project by producers.

I would like to suggest that there be no Iowa Income Tax exemption for film workers. Potential workers hardly need any incentive to get into the film business. The work is well paying and there is a perceived aura of glamour (although the actual work is different). The most crucial factor affecting whether Iowans leave their present jobs for employment in the movies is whether there is enough work to sustain a career. Exemptions on state income tax does not affect this at all and is not needed. In fact it holds back unnecessarily the benefits of films being shot in Iowa from the state treasury. I can't speak for others but I would expect that most would be willing to forgo the income tax exemption if it meant that the program could move forward and jobs could be created. Again, I have no idea who suggested this particular idea for the program but it is a flawed concept.

All approved productions should have locked in tax credit contracts. All contracts should have a maximum amount of qualifying expenses set with amounts over this totally the producer's responsibility. No amending. If the maximum set is not sufficient, producers should have to apply for a new contract from scratch with the application of such made public.

Motor vehicles used in productions would have to meet requirements in order to qualify for tax credits. This was very vague in the original film tax credit incentive bill. No purchased vehicle would be eligible unless it was an expendable item (destroyed as part of the making of the film) or it was for use in a permanent Iowa film business. A permanent Iowa film business would be one with a location either purchased within the state or with at least a five year lease in an Iowa location and being based in Iowa. Otherwise only leased and rented vehicles used specifically for the needs of the production would qualify.

No credits should be awarded for anything where money does not change hands. The whole idea of the program is to have productions add to the Iowa economy, isn't it?

No credits should ever be given for expenses incurred in selling the awarded tax credits. The tax credits are a benefit to the producers and it should be their expense, not the tax payers, to sell them to other companies.

No tax credits should be awarded until all relevant receipts have been turned in and reviewed. This might have already been inferred above but it bears repeating.

The program should be reviewed every year. It should be obvious by now that the program as it stands right now was not perfect. No matter how carefully a new program is designed it is unlikely that every kink will be worked out and every loophole closed if and when it is reinstated. It is also not clear if the staffing will match the needs for a given time period. For that reason I suggest reviewing the program each year and making adjustments as needed so that the debacle that just happened can never happen again.

Lastly I'd like to suggest that you give the Film Tax Credit program at Least 5 Years to work. Lots of people seemed very quick on the draw to scuttle the program and we have little idea how well it actually worked. I think it should be given at least 5 years to prove itself. Unlike how something like farm subsidies have been handled (which, by the way, has continued long past when they were needed), I think the tax incentives should be designed with the idea in mind that eventually they should be reduced and then eliminated.

The film tax incentive program should be thought of as a form of scaffolding for this bridge to potential prosperity that is this infant Iowa film industry. Right now it needs the support in order to be built and to gain strength but eventually it should be expected to stand on its own. It should remain standing and be self-supporting even if productions from outside the state cease to shoot here.

-David Thrasher

Nick Bertelsen Sends Great Article..Thanks, Nick!

I know Nick from when he ran Cinequipt in Des Moines, a movie equipment rental company. Now he's in film school in California and he STILL keeps an eye open for articles like this one:

http://www.mafilm.org/2010/02/11/umass-film-industry-boosts-local-jobs-and-businesses/

gino

Bush Man Speaks

Honest comments from a hidden bush man.

Clyde Hoffman, Jr. Speaks

It is my belief that people got to learn to live without so many extras, such as in movies. Movies is a waste of time and my tax money. Hollywood people just want my money and they promises just stuff they want to. We have plenty of jobs in Iowa and do not need strangers stealing from us and making movies here. Iowa people just need to take the fine jobs at the casinos and the insurance companies and they need to take a good look at the corporate hog farms and smell the success they give us. Creative people should take their culture ideas and leave us alone so we can just do our work good.

Mr. Hoffman's Newest Gubernatorial Endorsement

Iowa gambling proponent and corporate hog farm investor Clyde Hoffman, Jr., endorses Iowa's current governor and hopes for the permanent removal of creativity and culture in this state, favoring instead careers in insurance, banking, and hog lots.

Our Worthy Opposition Speaks

We must all work hard to fight against these people who are so opposed to the film program in Iowa!

gino

Just Another Film Program Casualty

Here's an account of a film program casualty. Dave Thrasher (pictured). He and I made a year's worth of public access t.v. episodes and got a couple of awards along the way. The show, "Art Roamer's TV Round-Up", was sketch comedy, and featured Des Moines radio personality Cal Bierman and Lee Cole, stand-up comedian and magician.

Dave also created the set, and helped produce a t.v. pilot for, "The Little Woody Show", that made it to national television on the TMZ show.

Dave and I have co-written several short films and he edited those and co-produced them, too. One made it to a national film festival in New York and California, and Dave got a nice award from the festival in California.

He worked on a movie shot in Iowa, "Splatter", and made a tidy sum which helped him catch-up on some bills.

Then the film freeze came along and now he's just doing his ordinary job again, knowing that the next film he'll work on is out of view, below the horizon. Sad stuff, because Dave loves the art of movie-making.

Wish some of the people in Iowa's acting community would share their stories. It would help in the fight to get a new film program going again. Remaining silent is not a good thing.



gino

You Think My HAIR is thin: You should see my Patience!

Forgive me for whining, but I just want the film-makers to return to Iowa and I want Iowa Senator Bill Dotzler, Jr., to come-up with a great new film project bill before the next legislative session begins in January of next year. If he fails to craft a new bill, with input from actors, producers, crew, and others in the film industry, we will not have a film program, because the one in place now has a three year suspension. Three years is the same as death for films. It's just like sentencing an old man to ten years in prison... he'd die there.

To bolster credibility we need to have a concerted effort to have our needs heard and known. The Busbees and Neil Wells and Jay Villwock and Dave Thrasher and Doug Miller and Eric Freese and others have done their utmost to help, but the hundreds and maybe thousands of others out there in the Iowa film world have only peeked from behind trees and doors with one eye.... HEY! YOU! Yes, YOU! Come ON! TALK!!! Say something! Tell us why film-making is essential for YOU!

Are you happy now? Now I am going to over-eat because I'm worried.

gino

Interesting Article on Tax Credit Programs

Hooked on Hollywood dreams: As they angle for movie deals, states escalate the price of bait

From The Mecklenberg Times

By Sam Boykin

Hollywood studio executives made Gov. Beverly Perdue an offer she couldn’t refuse.

Upon returning from her visit to Los Angeles last month, she said film executives told her North Carolina wasn’t doing enough to win their business.

Although the General Assembly, with Perdue’s vehement urging, increased the state’s tax credit for film and television production companies from 15 percent to 25 percent, she is now proclaiming that, to stay competitive, North Carolina must also eliminate limits on certain incentives that sweeten the state’s offer.

North Carolina is caught up in an escalating incentives war as states try to one-up each other to entice Hollywood to sprinkle some of its magic dust within their borders.

“The film tax credit is like a race to the bottom for taxpayers,” said North Carolina state Sen. Edward Goodall, R-Weddington, one of 18 senators who voted against the bill to expand the film credit.

The General Assembly passed the bill last August, and it took effect in January.

“We’re giving movie producers $25 for every $100 they spend on a film whether they make money or not,” Goodall said. “And we’re racing other states to (increase) the tax credit. Where does it stop? The argument is, the higher the credit, the more moviemakers will come to the state. Using that logic, why not apply that to every business sector there is? Why single out the movie industry?”

There’s no denying that a community can profit when a movie or TV production company shows up.

The cast and crew spend heavily on hotels, rental cars, restaurants, equipment rentals, and local vendors. And being a co-star can bolster a city’s image and profile.

But the debate still rages over whether such productions create any long-term economic benefits to justify the giveaways.

And if North Carolina does continue to sweeten its incentive package, what happens when Virginia, South Carolina or Georgia turn around and do the same?

“The governor has said multiple times that she would love to see all states call a truce, to put away their arms, in regard to incentives,” said Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson. “But because every other state attracts and woos businesses using incentives, in order for North Carolina to remain competitive, she feels we must have that as one of the tools in our toolbox.”

Greg LeRoy doesn’t agree. He is the executive director of Good Jobs First, a Washington, D.C.-based national policy-resource center that promotes corporate and government accountability in economic development.

LeRoy said the escalating economic war among states to attract film companies is a “sum-zero race” that benefits film and TV companies at the expense of state and local budgets already struggling to pay for such necessities as schools and health care.

“It’s a classic case,” he said, “of the unholy intersection of Hollywood and politics.”

“The nature of film production is transitory,” LeRoy said. “They come in for six or eight weeks and then they’re gone. The question is: What’s left? Where’s the permanent residual benefit to the state economy to offset the temporary nature of the productions?”

North Carolina’s film-incentives package states that film and TV production companies must spend at least $250,000 to receive a refundable tax credit of up to 25 percent on in-state spending for goods, services and labor. There is also a $1 million limit per person on the amount a production can get back from wages, and a per-project limit of $7.5 million, the maximum amount a company can receive, regardless of how much is spent.

When Perdue and 20 North Carolina Commerce Department officials traveled to Los Angeles in mid-March for a three-day visit with film-studio executives, she came back insisting that the state had to eliminate the caps.

Hollywood, Perdue said, considers North Carolina’s caps stingy, so big budget movies go to such states as Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan and New Mexico, which don’t have caps and offer more generous incentive packages.

“One of the reasons the governor takes trips to Hollywood is to talk directly to the people involved,” Pearson, the Perdue spokeswoman, said. “What she heard is that it would be very difficult for North Carolina to compete for the large, big-budget movies without some changes taking place. And certainly eliminating the incentive limits was one of the biggest concerns she heard about.”

As far as which film executives Perdue met with, her people aren’t saying. Department of Commerce spokesperson Kathy Neal said all economic development information is confidential. “We don’t want our competitors to know who we’re talking to,” Neal said. “This goes for all of our economic development plans.”

Neal did say the state budgeted $11,000 for the three-day trip, but added that the exact cost hasn’t been tallied yet.

Canada, once the movie industry’s darling destination because of incentives, lost its luster when the currency-exchange rate changed. When Canada faded, a number of states modified their tax codes to woo film companies. Today, 42 states offer incentives, including Michigan, which, in 2008, jacked up its refundable tax credit to 42 percent, the highest in the country.

“As production started coming back to the U.S., Hollywood found out how easy it was to get the states to enact these credits, and they played them against each other,” said LeRoy with Good Jobs First. “Cost-benefit analysis just seemed to fly out the window.”

For a long time, North Carolina didn’t play ball, keeping its tax credit at 15 percent, while neighboring states including Georgia and South Carolina offered a 30 percent tax credit for film projects.

Still, Charlotte landed some notable films, such as “Leatherheads,” “Talladega Nights,” and “The Patriot.” According to the Charlotte Regional Partnership, the film industry employs more than 2,500 statewide, and in 2008, the industry spent $91 million in the state.

“Our incentives do not have to be the highest, but they must be competitive,” said Beth Petty, director of the Charlotte Regional Film Commission. “Filmmaking is a business like any other. They have to look at where they can conduct business in the most cost-effective way. Incentives help that. We’re not giving the film industry money. We are taking less from them when they’re here.”

And in such an increasingly competitive environment, desirable locations, a crew base, accessibility and other amenities are no longer enough to lure new films projects. It now has become a game of keeping-up-with-the-Joneses just to try to level the playing field.

But not every state is jumping on the show business bandwagon, and some overzealous incentive packages have backfired. (See sidebar “Iowa, Connecticut have buyer’s remorse,” below.)

Pearson, Perdue’s spokeswoman, said the governor has not yet made a final decision regarding eliminating the incentives caps, but her staff is reviewing the options.

“To some extent it would be a calculated risk,” Pearson said. “But in North Carolina we’ve seen the film industry flourish, and the governor believes there’s a lot of potential there. And if tweaking the laws could bring more jobs to North Carolina, she is very willing to consider that.”

How it works

The following is a breakdown of the increased tax credit that took effect in January and is aimed at luring more film and TV productions to North Carolina:

• The incentive is a 25 percent refundable tax credit not to exceed $7.5 million.

• Eligible productions include film, television, direct-to-video/DVD features, episodic TV series, TV mini-series, theatrical, animation productions and commercials.

• Spending for goods (fuel, food, airline tickets, etc.) purchased or leased from an in-state business is eligible for the credit if purchases are made in North Carolina for an in-state production.

• Also eligible for the credit are the costs of production-related insurance, compensation and wages paid to employees and payments for per diem and fringe benefits (to the extent they are included in the recipient’s taxable wages subject to withholding).

• North Carolina must receive on-screen credit.

Iowa, Connecticut have buyers’ remorse

In 2007 Iowa adopted a program that allowed movie companies to recoup up to 50 percent of their tax payments. But amid reports of irregularities and poor record-keeping in the program, the state’s economic development director resigned, the head of the state film office was fired, and the tax-credit program was suspended. It remains suspended.

And in Connecticut, the fiscal watchdog group Connecticut Voices for Children released a report showing that the state’s film tax credits have largely been subsidizing out-of-state personnel and businesses, and that the state’s costs exceeded the credits’ economic benefits.

Subsequently, in her 2009 budget proposal, Gov. M. Jodi Rell called for capping the credits at $25 million a year.

Jeffrey R. Beckham, Rell’s undersecretary for legislative affairs, said that although the cap proposal was dropped, the General Assembly made some changes to the film credit package that made it a little less generous and more limited in terms of the state’s liability and tax expenditures.

“We put a fair amount of economic development money out there,” Beckham said, “and it just didn’t make sense to have an open-ended, unlimited commitment to one particular industry when we have so many other industries we’re also trying to support, as well as things like education and transportation.”

Connecticut’s Legislature in 2009 tightened the program by increasing from $50,000 to $100,000 the minimum investment a film company must make before it qualifies for the tax credit. The Legislature also established a sliding scale for the tax credit based on production costs. Before the change, the state granted a flat rate of 30 percent.

“Studios now have to do more actual brick and mortar investment in the state, as opposed to just coming in, filming on location and taking off,” Beckham said. “It’s favoring more permanent types of investments in the state.”

What is Your Wishlist?

There's a small chance - at least a tiny chance that the film tax credit program could come back in some form, probably in the form of a new bill in the Iowa Legislature. There's word that Senator Dotzler is going to form a group this summer to study the issue and come up with a new bill to replace the present flawed one. This is our chance, however slim it may be, to get it right. There certainly won't be any additional chances for quite a long time.

There are two factors affecting a new bill: what happens as far as legal actions concerning the tax credit scandal and the election this November.

So far we know of three trials that are set to take place: the trial of Tom Wheeler who ran the Film Office until he was fired following the scandal, and two trials for the two people who produced the movie "The Scientist" (the one with the $200 brooms). Considering that no legal actions have been taken against "South Dakota" or "Children of the Corn" for the purchases of those luxury vehicles that opened the floodgates of this scandal, you can bet that there are more trials to come. Considering the fact that Attorney General Tom Miller is running for re-election this November, you can be sure that additional prosecutions timed, of course, to be as beneficial to his re-election campaign as possible.

There are other elections happening in November too. Besides the Governor, there are a number of senators and representatives running for re-election and because when people think of film tax credits they think scandal, these politicians are staying as far from this issue as possible (if they voted for them in the first place) and aren't likely to want to revisit the issue until they are safely back in office.

Where does that leave us? As far as the present tax credit program it makes little difference. It's suspended and most of the projects that are in that pipeline are in limbo with many of them tied up in the AG's investigation. With that uncertainty not many are likely to return to complete their projects and since film productions are time sensitive affairs, that probably means any shooting in Iowa is canceled. New projects are most likely out of the question too because trust is at a low.

All of this delay does is buy us some time and we've got lots of it now. With Senator Dotzler's study group we do have a chance to have film return to Iowa but we've got to get it right or forget about ever having the level of activity we had ever again. To do it right we must look at the present program and identify what went wrong and come up with solutions to prevent those things from ever happening again. And it is not just fixing things. We need to improve the program so that it serves Iowans and is not just simply a burden on the taxpayers. Additionally we've got to consider the state's current budget shortfall and be able to answer objections that have come up.

I, myself, am coming up with a list of suggestions to make this thing work which I intend to get to Senator Dotzler and his group. I intend to post it here before I submit it. I hope that you can think of things too. I encourage you to participate in this so we can make a new bill bulletproof and have it work perfectly for once. Simply post comments (link directly below this post) to this post with your ideas. We need to hear from you.

Article by D M Register Reporter, Jason Clayworth

Gov. Chet Culver is the nation's most endangered incumbent governor, according to MSNBC's "First Read."

The analysis lists Iowa as ninth on a list of possible gubernatorial takeovers in November. In the states ranking higher, no incumbent is running.

Here's what the site said about Iowa:

"Chet Culver (D) remains the most endangered incumbent governor this cycle. And he's hoping the GOP primary wounds top challenger Terry Branstad (R)."

Like other incumbents, Culver is battling dissatisfaction over the economic downturn and state budget cuts.

Culver was asked Friday about the listing. Here's what he said:

"I think that Iowans love underdogs. Just look at UNI and what happened there. They upset Kansas. The race hasn't even started. I am looking forward to getting out there and telling our story. Talking about my vision for the future for this great state. Talking about our record of accomplishment when it comes to veterans services, health care for kids, teacher pay increase. We have a really strong record that I will run on, but I will also talk about how we are going to continue to make Iowa the best state in the nation to live, and to work, and to do business, and I look forward to that opportunity."

In an Iowa Poll in February, Culver's job approval had dipped to 36 percent, down from 60 percent in January 2009. And in the poll's hypothetical matchups with potential GOP governor candidates, Culver trailed both former Gov. Terry Branstad and Sioux City business consultant Bob Vander Plaats.

- Jason Clayworth

My Story - The Quick Version

I've wanted to make my living in motion pictures since the time I was in junior high school. When the film tax credits came along it appeared that I had a chance of doing that and doing it right here in Iowa. I cautiously felt my way into it and ended up with a peripheral job on the movie "Splatter" shooting documentary footage of the location shoots. I was ready to investigate other opportunities, perhaps even have something more directly to do with the quality and success of a movie when our Governor, the "great" Chester Culver, the "Big Lug" himself, Culverized the film business in Iowa by imposing a freeze on the film tax credit program. Since then this state has turned into a ghost town as far as feature film production is concerned and because of how this was handled it is going to be a long time before producers consider coming back here. I've never wanted to make my living working the typical "straight jobs" that Iowa offers so I've been trying to come up with my own income producing opportunity that does not depend on an employer. Film is still a ways off for me.

Beware of Gubernatorial Candidates' Promises

Republican Iowa gubernatorial candidates have begun their quest to replace our beloved governor, Mr. Big Lug. Candidate Terry Branstad, Iowa's governor for four terms in years past, said getting rid of tax credits was a bad idea and that Iowa philanthropist John Pappajohn agreed that tax credits were vital to creating jobs for Iowans. Candidate Bob Vander Plaats alluded to eliminating all tax credits.

I attended a private meeting with Vander Plaats a few months ago and at that time he made me feel that he was a friend of film-makers and would be in our corner on the tax credit issue. Guess my assumption was way off.

It seems very obvious that our present governor will be easily replaced by a republican candidate and my vote would go for Mr. Branstad because of his past support of films in Iowa and because of Vander Plaats being a bit out of step with the majority of Iowans in important issues and also because of his disappointing position regarding tax credits. As for Mr. Roberts, he just seems like a wax statue.

Note from film-maker Lonnie Schuyler

Thanks to film-maker Lonnie Schuyler who sent me this note regarding Tom Wheeler:

"he is getting the shaft and he definitely didn't act alone. who in their right mind would put a junior state employee in charge of passing out 300 mil without supervision?"

thanks, Lonnie... I must admit that I'm getting a bit mad... I mean, just look at my picture!

gino

Article in today's Des Moines Register: Tom Wheeler

My opinion: Tom Wheeler's a nice guy who was the victim of political shenanigans. Copy and paste the following for the full article: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100407/NEWS10/4070363/1001/NEWS/Fired-film-chief-I-erred-but-so-did-many-others

Dead Weight

Things have not been looking too good for the last several months for this thing we call an Iowa film industry. First Governor Chester Culver freezes the film tax credit incentive program because of abuses leaving the production of movies in limbo then it takes a lawsuit to supposedly get films already in the pipeline going again. Since then - nothing. Much of it is gummed up within the Iowa Attorney General's Office and most recently the Iowa State Legislature has voted to suspend the program for 3 years.

In all this time since September 2009, when the freeze went into effect, it has been only a very tiny minority of those who got jobs in films in Iowa or who otherwise benefited from money brought in who have made the effort to save our fledgling film industry. I worked on a movie this summer and the number of people who showed up at the craft services tables on a typical day easily outnumbered the small number who had tried to stand up for our industry since September.

Why has this been so? It was fun while films were still being made. Everyone enjoyed seeing the stars on location. Those that worked enjoyed the food, the hanging out with fun people, the glamor, and the MONEY. But where are those people now? Were they even serious about making a living in film or was it simply a fun experience like backpacking across Europe?

I'm afraid what we have in Iowa is APATHY and, unless I'm proven wrong about this, you can kiss a viable Iowa film industry goodbye. Hollywood producers certainly aren't attracted to the place under these circumstances and won't be unless you are willing to fight for it. Prepare for the new wave of the Iowa film future: volunteerism where for all films you have to work for free and the quality of productions adjusts downward accordingly.

With this future in mind, here is a suggestion for our new state slogan: "Iowa - Bland is our brand".

Of course for those who really cared about having a film industry in Iowa and lots of Hollywood producers we already have an unofficial state slogan: "Iowa - A four-letter word".

Lonely On Top of the Steaming Heap

It's lonely at the top.... of this steaming heap of disappointments. Sure, I went to the Iowa legislature several times a week for three months with Jay Villwock, and others sometimes, too, and to see a small response from the film community makes me blue..... wah, wah, wahhhhhhhh! SEE????? Now come ON, put your fingers to the keyboard and type a letter telling us how you've suffered because of what Chester did. Or tell us why it was fun to help make a movie. I personally want to know and others do, too. I'm gonna meet with Senator Dotzler between now and the next legislative session to make a new movie bill, so YOUR input is so important. Do NOT force me to get nervous and then start over-eating again!!!! gino

The Art Store: Owner Joe Domeier: Movies' Impact

Joe Domeier Gene, We saw people from production companies stopping in The Art Store weekly. They purchased product on the spot! It's my understanding that the Q. Ford building just south of us was to be sold to a studio. Scat hit the fan and the deal fell through. The Art Store really needs traffic. This was a revenue stream that ...was at it's infancy for us. This time both the baby and the bathwater were thrown out.

today's Des Moines Sunday Register article

To counter the damaged Iowa film-making industry image, please send accounts of how movie-making in Iowa positively affected YOU. This is vitally important and will assist all who will help re-design the film program bill this spring or summer under the direction of Iowa Senator and film friend, Bill Dotzler, Jr.

Here's the link to the article in today's Des Moines Sunday Register: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100404/NEWS10/4040334/1001/NEWS/New-signs-surface-of-film-credit-abuse-

YOUR input is IMPORTANT, so WRITE Now!

Writing is easy if you treat it like a spoken conversation. Tap into your memories of movie-making and do send them so others can see the impact you experienced. Did being in movies change your life, lead to making new friends? Did the freeze by You-Know-Who hurt you financially?

Thanks!

gino