Pipeline Opponents in Iowa Push for a Ban on Eminent Domain for Carbon Pipelines

By Cami Koons

Iowa landowners and pipeline fighters gathered Tuesday at a rally in the Iowa Capitol Rotunda asking lawmakers to ban eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines.

Senate Democrats also pushed for an amendment that would help pipeline and eminent domain bills go to the floor for debate.

The protesters have opposed a large carbon sequestration pipeline, headed by Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions, for several years. The opponents have significant support in the Iowa House, which advanced more than 10 related bills ahead of the legislative funnel deadline, but Iowa senators have historically allowed similar bills to stall in their chambers. 

Folks who attended the rally focused their attention on House File 943 which would prohibit pipelines with liquefied carbon dioxide from using eminent domain.

“Band with all of us to convince our elected officials to be bold, to stand with our constituents and to fight for property rights and ban eminent domain on ag land,” said Iowa landowner Peg Rasmussen. “If they don’t, let’s elect them out and elect somebody that will.”

The pipeline opponents were encouraged by a recent law passed in South Dakota to restrict the use of eminent domain from CO2 pipelines. 

In a statement regarding the new law, Summit Carbon Solutions said the state “changed the rules in the middle of the game.” 

“While this presents obstacles, our project moves forward in states that support investment and innovation,” the statement said.

Jess Mazour, a coordinator with the Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club, said “every person here in a red shirt had the rules changed on them.”

“This bill that we’re fighting for … it does not stop Summit, it protects our property rights,” Mazour said. “If Summit wants to build a pipeline, do it voluntarily, do not abuse our property rights to do so.” 

In a hearing on a different eminent domain bill that did not advance past committee in early March, a Summit lobbyist said even a 90% voluntary easement would be “almost an impossible standard” to meet.

Summit Carbon Solutions plans to lay more than 2,500 miles of pipeline through Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Minnesota. So far, it has received permits in Iowa, North Dakota, and Minnesota for the project, though the Iowa permit is contingent on approval in the other associated states. 

Landowners shared their fears on the pipeline’s impacts to their land, of the dangers if the pipeline ruptures and that Iowa property rights were being taken for corporate gain. 

Randy Albright, a landowner and firefighter from Guthrie County, said the pipeline involves “a lot of risk” for first responders in the event of a rupture. 

“It’s not just stealing our ground from us,” Albright said. “The general public needs to be made aware.” 

Summit Carbon Solutions did not respond to a request for comment.

Several Iowa representatives, including Steven Holt and Charley Thomson, who have pushed for many of the pipeline and eminent domain bills that have advanced in the House, spoke briefly to the gathered attendees. 

“We’re going to keep the fight up, there’s nothing more important than the right of private property,” Holt said. 

Thomson said the project has exposed a “big hole” in Iowa law pertaining to eminent domain. 

“We have got to be sure that this does not happen ever again, and we have to be sure it doesn’t happen this time,” Thomson said. 

Lawmakers and pipeline fighters were confident HF 943 would advance from the House, but worried about its future on the other side of the Capitol.

Senate Debate

Ann Bokelman, an attendee from Worth County, took the podium and looked up through the rotunda center towards the Iowa Senate. 

“Senators, what are you afraid of by bringing it to the floor?” Bokelman said. “Are you afraid of telling us where you stand? Because we’re here telling you where we stand … leave our land alone.” 

Senate Turns Down ‘Freedom to Debate’ Measure

Sen. Tony Bisignano, a Democrat from Des Moines, lamented the lack of debate in the Senate on these issues and told attendees at the rally that “today could be the day” things change.

Bisignano filed an amendment to Senate Resolution 6, the bill stipulating the Senate’s chamber rules, that would require a bill to be brought to the floor for debate if it had a majority support. 

Bisignano, later in the day, implored his colleagues in the Senate to vote for the amendment to restore the “freedom to debate.” 

“We don’t have any freedom in this room; it’s all dictated by the leadership,” Bisignano said.

Bisignano noted that the pipeline route doesn’t cut through his district, but he voiced what other senators’ constituents had said to him.

“These people are your constituents,” Bisignano said. “I can’t imagine having my constituents out in that Rotunda day after day, month after month, year after year, and ignore them.

“This amendment gives you the opportunity to bring the bill– a bill – forward. We can have that debate. You can vote it down. The sad part is, you’re afraid for the people outside to know how you really feel.” 

The amendment was defeated 30-18.

Sen. Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, spoke in support of the amendment, noting that the inability to bring a bill to the floor, despite majority support, has been a barrier for issues outside of the pipeline as well. 

“Senate amendment 3029 is about restoring the ability of every single member of this chamber to have conversations — debates — about bills that affect every single constituent we represent,” Wahls said. “It takes power out of the hands of the insiders and gives it back to the duly elected senators of the state of Iowa.”

Sen. Mike Klimesh, R-Spillville, said the Republican majority voted into the Senate is “more than capable” of “getting the job done” without the amendment. 

“The rights of the voters that voted us into this chamber, to take control of this chamber, and make sure that Iowans are represented by Republican values and principles would be undermined by this,” Klimesh said. 

Bisignano said the senators use the excuse of the issue not going to the floor as a response when their constituents ask. 

“Don’t tell the people out there you would if you could,” Bisignano said. “Because you can — you won’t.” 

Beyond the Iowa Capitol

Dennis King, a landowner from Clay County, said the move by South Dakota shows that the pipeline “can be stopped.” 

“We all realize that the only way to get a hard job done is by putting in the harder work that it takes,” King said. 

In addition to pushing for HF 943, the speakers encouraged members to attend the town halls of their U.S. congressional leaders while they are home this spring and to share their opinions on the pipeline. 

“We need to show up en masse to those meetings as well and make sure that they know that these tax credits are responsible for the theft of our lands,” Mazour said. “These federal tax credits are responsible for the threats of our safety, and these federal tax credits are a waste of our public tax dollars.”

Mazour referenced the 45Q tax credit, which incentivizes carbon capture development, like the pipeline, by offering a tax credit to the project operators based on the amount of CO2 it is able to capture and store. 

The Summit Carbon Solution’s pipeline would capture carbon dioxide emissions from nearly 60 biofuel facilities in Iowa and surrounding states and transport it to underground storage in North Dakota.

Mazour also directed participants to hand deliver a series of objections to the Iowa Utilities Commission. The group demanded the IUC pause the dockets on phase two of the project and to hold separate hearings for each of the submitted dockets. Summit seeks an additional permit for the expanded portion of the project which would add more than 300 miles of pipeline and connect to more biorefineries in Iowa. 

A spokesperson for IUC said the commission received the requests and written comments from members of the public Tuesday. Additionally, the spokesperson said the new law in South Dakota “does not affect the validity of the permit already granted by the IUC to Summit Carbon Solutions.”

“However, the IUC ordered that Summit may not begin construction on any segment of the pipeline in Iowa until it has obtained agency approval for a route in South Dakota,” the statement said. “At this time, the South Dakota law does not affect any petition for a permit that is pending review by the IUC.”

As of Tuesday, only one bill from the House that supporters relate to the CO2 pipeline has advanced to the Senate.

House File 578, which would restore the Office of the Consumer Advocate, soared through the House with unanimous approval and has been assigned a subcommittee within the Senate Commerce Committee. 

Iowa Capital Dispatch is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@iowacapitaldispatch.com. Follow Iowa Capital Dispatch on Facebook and Twitter.