Iowa landowner bill goes to governor’s desk; federal legislation could override state protections
After hours of heated debate, the Iowa Senate passed a bill to protect landowners from carbon pipelines that might seek to condemn private property through eminent domain.
Eminent domain is a procedure that allows the government to “condemn” or take property for a public project such as a road or public water project, if the landowner doesn’t choose to comply with voluntary easement offers. Under eminent domain, the landowner is paid “fair market value” based on the court’s determination.
On Monday, May 12, Iowa Senators approved House File 639 In a 27-22 vote. This, after four years of some Iowa landowners seeking protection from the threat of eminent domain from a proposed carbon pipeline. The Iowa Utilities Commission has issued a conditional permit to Summit Carbon Solutions. The permit language allows the company to build if and when building permits are obtained from South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska and Minnesota – which are all along the proposed pipeline route.
Summit proposes to capture CO2 from ethanol plants throughout those states and sequester it in Western North Dakota near Beulah. “Green” tax credits would finance the project, which would allegedly lower the carbon score of the ethanol plants, thus increasing the value of their fuel.
While many pipeline supporters in those states have voiced their skepticism over the concept that carbon is causing harm to the environment, they say the project is financially sound due to 45Q tax credits available at the federal level and the possibility of upping the value of the ethanol those plants produce by lowering the carbon score.
The bill is a conglomeration of several bills, said Doyle. It protects property owners from a “rogue” Iowa Utilities Commission and it gives the court details on how to look at eminent domain after the IUC has reviewed a case.
The bill also protects landowners who are unable to secure insurance due to a pipeline, he said.
The bill is now on its way to the Governor’s desk. Doyle Turner who is active with the Free Soil Coalition, a pro-landowner organization, urges Iowans to call the Governor’s office to ask for her signature. Doyle said, unless some Senators change their positions on the bill, the Senate doesn’t have the 2/3 support needed to override a governor’s veto.
Republican Kevin Alons (R-Salix) said with his party holding a super majority in the senate, and many of those with an “R” after their name supporting pro-pipeline legislation, he and some other republicans realize they would have to work with democrats in order to succeed on this issue.
“The idea of letting a private company use eminent domain for private gain – if we let that happen, we’re left with nothing,” said Alons.
While Alons himself is not a landowner and is not personally affected by the pipeline, he said it’s an important issue for his state. “It’s a hill I’ll die on,” he said.
With just 13 Republicans willing to vote for the bill, Alons knew he would need more support.
Senators Mike Pike (R-Des Moines), Mark Lofgren (R-Muscatine), Dennis Guth (R-Klemme), Lynn Evans (R-Aurelia), Kevin Alons, Dave Sires (R-Cedar Falls), Cherielynn Westrich (R-Ottumwa), Jeff Taylor (R-Sioux Center), Sandy Salmon (R-Janesville), Dave Rowley (R-Spirit Lake), Doug Campbell (R-Mason City), Charlie McClintock (R-Alburnett) and Julian Garriott (R-Indianola), along with 14 democrats voted for the bill.
Liz Bennett (D-Linn Co.), Tony Bisignano (D-Polk Co.), Matt Blake (D-Polk Co.), Molly Donahue (D-Linn Co.), William Dotzler, Jr. (D-Black Hawk Co.), Izaah Knox (D-Polk Co.), Janet Petersen (D-Polk Co.), Herman Quirmbach (D-Story Co.), Art Saed (D-Linn Co.), Thomas Townsend, (D-Dubuque Co.), Trone-Garriott (D-Dallas Co.), Zach Walls (D-Johnson Co.), Janice Weiner (D-Johnson Co.), Cindy Winckler (D-Scott Co.) Mike Zimmer (D-Clinton Co.) also voted in favor of the bill.
“In the end, I just had to take it on faith that the democrats could stand together and charge forward,” he said.
Alons calls himself a social conservative and said that his coalition of a baker’s dozen republicans plus 14 democrats (there are 15 democrats in the senate) gained some unlikely allies such as the Sierra Club as they worked for passage of the bill. He credited Bisignano, who he called a “JFK-type democrat” for leading his party in doing what he calls “the right thing.”
In order to move the bill out of committee, twelve republican senators signed a pact to withhold their votes on the state’s budget bill until SF 639 was allowed a floor debate. An unsupportive committee chair can prevent a bill from being discussed in that committee, thus never allowing for floor debate, said Alons. “the leadership doesn’t have to allow anything to be debated if they don’t want to,” he said.
I considered it an act of providence that we were able to get it (HF 639) to a vote,” said Alons.
Alons said “pressure” from landowners had been intense over the years. “Landowners had been coming to the capitol year after year. They drive here on their own dime. They are voicing their opinion. Eventually, the pressure point hit a high note.
Republican State Senator Tim Kraayenbrink, Fort Dodge, has served as the Appropriations chairman for 6 years, and is serving his 11th year in the Senate.
Kraayenbrink had concerns about SF 639, partly because he sympathized with landowners who had already signed an easement with Summit Carbon Solutions – he said Summit could sue those landowners or even the state if the pipeline project is never completed. The corporation will likely want compensation for the easement payments it has already made to an estimated 1,300 landowners, he said.
Because the state of Iowa granted a conditional permit, Kraayenbrink believes the “horse is already out of the barn” and that the state shouldn’t impede progress of the pipeline at this point.
“I’m for property rights,” said Kraayenbrink. “But what about the ones who thought this would give them more per bushel for their corn, and they wanted this pipeline?”
Kraayenbrink said Senators Mike Klimesh (R- Spillville) and Mike Bousselot (R-Ankeny) offered amendments that he believes would have been property rights-friendly. Some ideas in amendments that were offered would have provided broad protections for those who might be affected by a transmission line, wind farm or natural gas lines in the future. He said he and his fellow group of senators do not necessarily want carbon pipelines to use eminent domain.
“It was obvious that the bill’s (SF 639) only job was to shut down the Summit pipeline,” he said.
“Iowa is supposed to be open for business and now we’re making it more difficult for companies to apply for permits,” he said.
Federal bill could overrule state eminent domain protections
While Iowa citizens await action from their governor on the bill, a the federal House Energy and Commerce Committee released its version of the Budget Reconciliation bill which includes language with the potential to override state and local protections for landowners. The language comes in the form of an amendment to the Natural Gas Act.
South Dakota Speaker Pro Tem Karla Lems, R-Canton, said the federal bill could pre-empt state law. She said if the federal bill passes, it would effectively overrule HB 1052, Lems’ bill that simply prohibits a carbon pipeline from using eminent domain in the state of South Dakota.
Former Iowa Congressman Steve King, echoed Lems’ thoughts. “This language (in the federal reconciliation bill) wipes out property rights in front of any one pipeline that carries anything that fits the definition of liquid or gas. That is anything that goes through a pipeline,” he said.
“If something like this goes through, there will be militias forming in the states. It’s such an assault on the founders of our constitution,” he said. “This is a cross between Marxism and fascism.”
King points out that Summit Carbon Solutions is greatly owned by Chinese and South Korean investors.
He urges Iowa citizens to call their Congressional representatives, especially Marionette Miller-Meeks who serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to ask for the Natural Gas Act language (within section 41001 – relating to certain inflation reduction act programs) to be removed. He expects the bill as a whole to “move fast” so time is of the essence.
“The language in the reconciliation bill is breathtaking in its overreach,” he said. “If they can do this for pipelines, they can do it for wind turbines, they can put solar panels on your land and there won’t be a thing you can do about it,” he said.
The language adds “carbon dioxide pipeline” as a “covered pipeline” and it adds the following language:
SEC 7A: (under SEC 41006)
“EFFECT OF LICENSE” – Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the Commission issues a license under subsection (c) (1) of this section and the license is in compliance with such license, no requirement of State or local law that requires approval of the location of the covered pipeline with respect to which the license is issued may be enforced against the licensee.”
“This is unconstitutional. I don’t know how anyone who has taken an oath to uphold our constitution can support this,” said King.
“In the end, if you paint a picture of who is associated with this pipeline, it’s a picture of corruptness,” he said.
