Wally Taylor is the Legal Chair of the Sierra Club Iowa chapter.

For four years the Sierra Club has been working with impacted landowners to pass legislation that would restrict the use of eminent domain for hazardous liquid pipeline projects. In 2022, 2023 and 2024, we were able to get legislation through the Iowa House with strong bipartisan majorities, but Republican leaders in the Iowa Senate blocked all of those bills.

This year the House approved two bills, again with strong bipartisan majorities. House File 943 was a short bill, which would have banned the use of eminent domain for hazardous liquid pipelines. It was referred to the Iowa Senate Commerce Committee and never got a subcommittee hearing.

The other bill, House File 639, would have changed state law on pipelines and eminent domain in several ways. It likely would have died, but was eventually brought to the Senate floor after twelve Republican senators pledged “to vote against any remaining budget bill until a floor vote occurs on the clean HF639 bill.”

After a wild Iowa Senate debate, the chamber approved House File 639 by 27 votes to 22, with fourteen out of fifteen Democrats and thirteen out of 34 Republicans voting for it. But Governor Kim Reynolds vetoed the bill on June 11.

Before we take apart the governor’s veto message, let’s describe what was in the bill. First, the bill added two new definitions to the eminent domain section of the Iowa Code. “Commodity” is defined as “a product that is used by an individual consumer or is used to produce a product used by an individual consumer.” So carbon dioxide destined to be buried would not be a commodity. “Common carrier” is defined as a commercial enterprise engaging in transportation of goods or passengers for hire and transporting them indifferently. In addition, a common carrier must carry a commodity in which the carrier has no ownership interest. That’s important because only a common carrier can have the right of eminent domain.

The bill also required all Iowa Utilities Commission (IUC) members to attend all of the evidentiary hearings on public utility permits, and stipulated that at least one commission member must attend informational meetings in pipeline cases. The bill also makes clear who has a right to intervene in pipeline cases.

In addition, the bill imposed insurance requirements on pipeline companies to protect landowners from damage. And finally, the bill stated that a carbon dioxide pipeline permit shall be permitted to operate for no longer than 25 years and the permit cannot be renewed.

Now let’s look at the governor’s veto message (available here and enclosed in full below). She claimed that the issue is how to balance property rights with the need to build infrastructure that modern life depends on. But she did not say how modern life depends on carbon dioxide pipelines. She claimed that if eminent domain is used, it must be “rare, fair and a last resort.” But when is eminent domain for a carbon dioxide pipeline fair? She doesn’t say.

And what percentage of eminent domain for a project is rare? 50 percent of the parcels desired, 25 percent, 10 percent? Again, Reynolds did not say. Her words are just political cover.

Next the governor’s veto message said that the bill would threaten Iowa’s energy reliability, economy, and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence. As an example, Reynolds cited a pipeline project involving the Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy facility in Pottawattamie County. But that is not the Summit Carbon Solutions project. It is a different pipeline with only a few miles in Iowa.

The governor claimed the insurance mandates and the 25-year limit on a pipeline permit would kill that project. But she cited absolutely no proof of that assertion. And what about farmers and their economic interests? The farmers who are impacted by pipelines are part of an important Iowa industry, too.

The veto message went on to say that the safety concerns raised by pipeline opponents are unfounded. Reynolds said she knows this because she contacted the Trump administration’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). PHMSA assured her that carbon pipelines are subject to “robust regulations.” Of course, any assurance from the Trump regime is suspect. And if the regulations are so robust, why was PHMSA preparing new, more robust rules, before Trump came back into office?

The governor was also concerned that the bill would apply to all hazardous liquid pipelines, not just carbon dioxide pipelines. She specifically pointed to oil, gas, and fertilizer pipelines. However, oil pipelines are by federal definition, common carriers, so they would be able to use eminent domain. Gas is not a hazardous liquid, and all aspects of interstate gas pipelines are regulated and permitted by the federal government. Fertilizer is a hazardous liquid, but is carrying a commodity and would be a common carrier.

Finally, the governor bought into the ethanol industry’s argument, which was convincingly refuted in the IUC hearing, that not having the pipeline would put Iowa’s ethanol industry at a disadvantage. She claimed that Nebraska, Illinois, and North Dakota are moving forward with carbon capture projects. The fact is that Illinois stopped the Navigator project and the state has laws limiting eminent domain. She conveniently omitted South Dakota from that list of states—perhaps because South Dakota has twice denied a permit to Summit Carbon Solutions and has enacted a law banning eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines.

To mollify the proponents of the bill, the governor claimed to be committed to working with the legislature to strengthen landowner protections and private property rights. So where has she been the last four years? Even this year, she could have supported and worked for passage of the House bill that simply banned eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines. Those were just empty words. But Sierra Club and the landowners will be back at the legislature next year demanding that the governor carry out her alleged commitment.

---

Appendix: Full text of Governor Kim Reynolds’ veto letter, the attached letter from a federal official discussing CO2 pipeline safety, and the text of House File 639.

Top photo of Governor Kim Reynolds is cropped from an image originally published on her official Facebook page on October 30, 2024.