Latest news with #HouseFile639
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa Republican tensions mount following Reynolds' pipeline bill veto
Rep. Charley Thomson chats with attendees at a rally against CO2 pipelines at the Iowa Capitol Mar. 18, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The issue of eminent domain as it pertains to a carbon sequestration pipeline project in Iowa has put Republicans at odds with one another, but Gov. Kim Reynolds' Wednesday decision to veto a bill on the issue has amplified the tensions. On a call with landowners opposed to the pipeline project and upset by the veto, Rep. Steven Holt, a Republican from Denison and one of the lawmakers leading eminent domain and pipeline-related legislation, said there will be 'consequences for the governor's agenda' moving forward. 'The governor's lack of leadership is why we are where we are today, and it will affect her agenda going forward until the end of her term,' Holt said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Landowners on the call were similarly upset by Reynolds' decision, following years of silence on the issue. Peg Rasmussen, who owns land in Montgomery County, said 'a true leader steps in when a problem arises' but 'Reynolds did nothing.' 'The legacy you leave behind is one of bowing down to big business at the expense of Iowans,' Rasmussen said. Tensions around eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines have risen in response to proposed projects in Iowa. Three projects, Navigator CO2, Wolf Carbon Solutions and Summit Carbon Solutions have sought to build carbon sequestration pipelines through Iowa. The first two projects were withdrawn, but the Summit project received a permit from the Iowa Utilities Commission in June 2024 and has more than 1,300 voluntary easements signed for the project. Landowners opposed to the pipelines have lobbied for four years against the projects, and in particular their ability to use eminent domain. This year lawmakers narrowly passed House File 639 to change the definition of a common carrier for hazardous liquid pipelines, increase insurance requirements, set permit limits and add requirements to the IUC. Opponents of the bill said it changed the rules in the middle of the game, had unintended consequences to critical energy infrastructure and would stop Iowa from leading the nation in biofuels production. Landowners also directed their animosity towards Republican lawmakers who opposed the bill, namely at senators who failed to take up the issue for four years, then argued House File 639 was a bad bill. 'The fight for private property rights will continue,' Rasmussen, who was part of a group of landowners regularly lobbying at the State Capitol, said. 'Iowa legislators and Gov. Reynolds, we'll see you at the Capitol in 2026, and we can't wait to tell our legislators how we feel about their votes in the 2026 election.' Holt said the 'leadership void' from the governor and 'civil war' among Senate Republicans has exposed the difference between 'country club Republicans' and 'grassroots Republicans.' Rep. Charley Thomson, a Republican from Charles City who wrote the now-vetoed HF 639, and who, with Holt, has led much of the legislation on the issue, said the opposing Republicans are part of the 'anything-for-a-buck 'wing' of the party' and don't represent the 'vast majority' of Iowa Republicans. 'In the governor's view, constitutional rights, such as eminent domain protections, should not be allowed to interfere with schemes to make money, especially if those schemes are being promoted by her friends, supporters, and contributors,' Thomson wrote in a statement. Bruce Rastetter, founder of Summit Agricultural Group, which started Summit Carbon Solutions, has been a top campaign contributor to Reynolds' campaigns, sparking some of the criticism leveled at the governor. In her explanation of the veto decision, Reynolds wrote the bill had 'vague legal standards' and would impact projects beyond just the use of eminent domain. Reynolds cited the permit limits clause in the bill and increased requirements for insurance as setting a precedent that 'threatens' the state's business reputation. Senate President Amy Sinclair had the same beliefs on the bill. In a recent appearance on Iowa Press, Sinclair said HF 639 'was not a property owners rights bill' but rather a bill 'that's just going to facilitate activists.' 'To say I was a person who opposed property rights, that's 100% false,' Sinclair said on the show. Sinclair and other Republicans who were opposed to HF 639 voted for a re-write amendment to the bill, sponsored by Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, that would have allowed companies to avoid eminent domain and instead pursue voluntary easements outside of the project corridor. It also would have held operators responsible for damage to the land for the project's lifetime. Thomson said Reynolds' stated concerns were a 'polite window-dressing' for the governor's 'real message' that she will 'veto any bill that Summit Carbon Solutions dislikes.' In reaction to the veto, Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton, vowed during a Radio Iowa interview to 'work to kill every single piece of legislation that has [Reynolds'] name on it.' The governor's office did not respond to a request for comment on the attacks from lawmakers. Summit Carbon Solutions, in a statement following the veto, said it looks forward to 'continued discussions with state leaders' as the project advances. Thomson and Holt said they are supportive of House Speaker Pat Grassley's call to petition for a special session in order to override the veto of the bill. The motion for a special session, and to override the veto, would require support from both chambers, which Senate majority leadership indicated Wednesday would be unlikely. Corey Cerwinske, a Bremer County Supervisor attending the virtual press conference, said lawmakers should introduce articles of impeachment on the governor for her 'malfeasance.' Holt said while the veto 'may violate' the constitutional rights of Iowans, the governor's action 'probably doesn't rise to the level of impeachment.' In her veto explanation, Reynolds asked the Iowa Utilities Commission to implement a section of the bill that required attendance at informational meetings and during live testimony. This was a problem brought up by landowners and lawmakers during the proceedings for the Summit Carbon Solutions permit. They alleged IUC would send representatives to meetings rather than commissioners, and that all three commissioners were not present during live testimony. The IUC in a Thursday press release said it 'fully supports' the 'transparency goals' the governor requested and 'will begin implementing' the practices. The release said the commission will also reinstate its public, monthly commission meetings beginning in August. 'The IUC remains dedicated to fair, transparent, and accountable governance of Iowa's energy and utility infrastructure,' the statement read. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa governor vetoes bill restricting private pipelines' use of eminent domain
Gov. Kim Reynolds vetoed a bill Wednesday aimed at CO2 pipelines and eminent domain. She's pictured at her 2025 Condition of the State Address Jan. 14, 2025. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Gov. Kim Reynolds Wednesday vetoed a controversial bill pertaining to eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines in Iowa. House Republican leaders initiated an effort to reconvene the Legislature to override the veto, but Senate GOP leaders indicated that was unlikely. House File 639 would have increased insurance requirements for hazardous liquid pipelines, limited carbon pipeline permits to one 25-year term and changed the definition of a common carrier for pipelines, making it more difficult for the projects to use eminent domain. Reynolds, in a statement, said she shared the bill's goal of 'protecting landowners' but the bill lacked the 'clear, careful lines' drawn in good policy. 'It combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets,' Reynolds said in a letter announcing her decision to veto. Reynolds followed her critique of the bill by noting that Iowa could lose its 'leadership position' as a top biofuel production state if legislation stopped the infrastructure necessary to enter ultra-low carbon markets. Central to the bill is a carbon sequestration pipeline project led by Summit Carbon Solutions that would transport liquid carbon dioxide, captured from biorefineries across Iowa, to underground storage in North Dakota. Farmers and the biofuels industry have been supportive of the Summit pipeline, and therefore opposed to the bill, because it would give Iowa access to the carbon capture and sequestration technologies necessary to make products like sustainable aviation fuels. In a statement following the governor's veto, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw said without carbon capture projects, and entry to ultra-low carbon fuel industry, Iowa could face 'very real, very severe economic consequences.' 'This is a classic example of why our system of government has checks and balances,' Shaw said. 'Any thoughtful review of this bill would determine that it would lead to higher energy prices for Iowans, hamper future economic development, hold back job creation, and stifle new markets for Iowa farmers. IRFA thanks Gov. Reynolds for listening to Iowans, studying the actual legislation, and ignoring the rhetoric that was as inaccurate as it was loud.' A press release from Iowa Corn Growers Association said entrance to the aviation fuel industry alone could result in nearly 6.5 million bushels of new corn demand, which it said is necessary for farmers dealing with high input costs and decreased profit margins. Farmers 'need expanded market growth and access to continue raising corn profitably; allowing them to continue growing Iowa's agricultural industry and economy,' the statement said. Opponents of the bill, including several lawmakers, argued the bill was aimed solely at carbon sequestration projects, rather than protecting landowners from eminent domain as supporters claimed. 'Eminent domain' allows the government to force private landowners to allow use of their property, for a fee set by the courts, for infrastructure projects deemed in the public interest. Eminent domain has long been used projects such as public roads and utilities. Leadership from Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, or SIRE, said its CO2 pipeline project connecting to Nebraska's Tallgrass Trailblazer pipeline would be impacted by the bill's insurance and permit limit clauses, even though the SIRE project secured voluntary easements for 100% of its path in Iowa. Reynolds cited this example in her explanation, and said the 'arbitrary' term limits and insurance requirements would make it 'difficult for companies like SIRE to justify the additional investment' in Iowa. 'Those who crafted the bill said they don't want to stop CO2 pipelines that rely entirely on voluntary easements,' Reynolds said. 'But that is exactly what the bill does.' Summit Carbon Solutions thanked the governor for her 'thoughtful and thorough review' of the bill. In a statement, the company said the pipeline project 'opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America's energy dominance for the long term.' 'Summit remains committed to working with landowners through voluntary agreements—just as we have with more than 1,300 Iowa landowners to date, resulting in $175 million in payments,' a spokesperson said in the statement. 'We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project.' Opponents to the pipeline project, who were supportive of HF 639, argue the pipeline would negatively impact their properties and health, and that sequestering CO2 does not constitute a 'public use' deserving of eminent domain rights. Landowners opposed to the project lobbied state lawmakers for four years before a bill was debated, and ultimately passed, in the Senate and sent to the governor. Since the bill landed on the governor's desk, landowners have encouraged Reynolds to support Iowa GOP values on protecting property rights. Reynolds said the debate of when the government, or companies with government approval, can take private property is a 'debate as old as the Republic.' 'I've consistently said that if eminent domain is used, it must be rare, fair and a last resort,' Reynolds said. 'But HF 639 isn't just about eminent domain.' Reynolds said the bill sets a precedent that 'threatens' the state's 'energy reliability, economy and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence.' Mary Powell, a Shelby County landowner opposed to the pipeline, said the veto shows that the state motto of, 'Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain' are 'just empty words' to the governor. 'Governor Reynolds chose to support the millionaires and billionaires at the expense of Iowans and their property rights,' Powell said in a statement. Another landowner, Don Johanssen from Cherokee County, said the governor's decision was 'beyond words,' especially as the bill would have given landowners 'some liability coverage' from hazardous pipelines. The bill would have required pipeline operator to carry insurance that covered any loss or injury from accidental, negligent or intentional discharges from the pipeline, and to cover insurance increases that landowners face due to the pipeline. 'This is a sad day for Iowa that will be long remembered,' Johanssen said. Reynolds said the bill would impact 'more than just CO2 infrastructure' and would change permitting rules 'across the board,' giving 'uncertainty into critical energy projects.' Opponents of the bill called the insurance requirements 'untenable.' The American Petroleum Institute's Midwest Regional Director Mike Karbo said the bill had 'unprecedented and unfeasible requirements' that would have hindered future projects in the state. 'Since there are no refineries in the state, critical energy infrastructure, such as pipelines, are crucial in ensuring Iowans have a reliable source of energy, and certainty is needed to develop the infrastructure network,' Karbo said. 'We thank the Governor for doing what is right for the future of energy development in the state.' Reynolds said HF 639 included 'a few helpful provisions' and the surrounding debate 'highlighted' areas for progress. 'I agree we can do more to limit the use of eminent domain, promote transparency, and ensure responsible land restoration,' Reynolds said. 'We can do better.' Reynolds, who is not running for reelection in 2026, said she is 'committed' to working with legislation to 'strengthen landowner protections, modernize permitting and respect private property.' Taking one element from HF 639, Reynolds will ask the IUC to require all commissioners to be present for live testimony and ensure at least one commissioner is present at every informational meeting. In a statement from Iowa House Republicans, Speaker Pat Grassley said he has requested members sign a petition to reconvene the Legislature in a special session. 'This veto is a major setback for Iowa,' Grassley said in the statement. 'It is a setback not only for landowners who have been fighting across Iowa, but for the work the House of Representatives has put in for four years to get legislation like HF 639 passed. We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain.' Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said he was 'very disappointed' in the governor's decision and that he was supportive of a special session to override the veto. Two-thirds of the Legislature must sign a petition to request a special session, and to override a veto, two-thirds of the members from each chamber must vote to pass the bill again. Sen. Jack Whitver, R-Grimes, the majority leader for the chamber, said he expects most of his caucus will 'not be interested in any attempt' to override the governor's veto. The bill likely would not have advanced in the Senate had it not been for a dozen Republican senators who vowed to block necessary budget legislation until the chamber debated eminent domain. The 12 were also joined by Senate Democrats in pushing for amendments, which were ultimately defeated, and approval of the bill. Senate Democrats said the fight for property rights will continue. 'I'm disappointed by the governor's veto of HF639, but, unfortunately, I cannot say I'm surprised,' Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, said. 'There is simply no amount of political posturing or legislative stonewalling that can deny the fact that Iowans' right to private property should never be infringed upon for private gain.' One of the 12 to disagree with the Senate majority, Sen. Kevin Alons, R-Salix, said signing the bill was 'the single option available' to protect the rights of impacted landowners. Alons pledged to 'never quit working' on the issue, but said that means 'very little' to landowners who have been impacted by the 'unprecedented, and unconstitutional land grab.' 'To be clear: the Iowa government has given this private company the right to take people's land for one reason: corporate earnings,' Alons said in a statement. 'This has nothing to do with public use. It's absolutely not necessary for the ethanol industry in our state … And it certainly is not what the founders had in mind.' Alons said when the Legislature returns in January, he and other lawmakers 'will use every tool at our disposal' to 'return property rights back to the people.' Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, who sponsored the legislation, wrote in a social media post he was 'profoundly disappointed' by the veto. Holt said the state constitution and the Republican platform are clear in their message that eminent domain is for public use projects. 'Today the Governor has chosen to ignore landowners, the vast majority of the Legislature, the Republican Party Platform and the Iowa Constitution by choosing the economic development argument of special interests,' Holt wrote. Holt said Reynolds, and the Senate had opportunities of the past several years to offer their own suggestions to the eminent domain issue instead of opposing House legislation. 'On behalf of the people of Iowa and their fundamental property rights, the Governor's veto should be overridden,' he wrote. 'This fight for who we are as Republicans is far from over.' House Democratic Leader Rep. Brian Meyer said parties in the House collaborated to 'protect property rights.' 'At the end of the day, there is only one group to blame for the failure of the eminent domain bill: Iowa Republican lawmakers,' Meyer said in a statement. The first phase of the Summit Carbon Solutions project was approved by IUC nearly a year ago, which granted Summit the right to condemn easements from landowners who do not want to voluntarily sign agreements to put the pipeline on their land. Per the Iowa permit, Summit still needs a permit from South Dakota, which it has been denied twice, to begin construction. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A legacy-defining moment for Gov. Kim Reynolds
Gov. Kim Reynolds talks to reporters May 17, 2022, after signing legislation dealing with biofuels at a farm near Prairie City. (Photo by Kathie Obradovich/Iowa Capital Dispatch) As she considers whether to sign legislation limiting the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines, Gov. Kim Reynolds faces a decision that will forever define her legacy in the Iowa Republican Party: whether to uphold the constitutional rights and the property rights of Iowa landowners, or whether to put ethanol industry profits ahead of those rights. The party platform unequivocally supports landowner rights. The Iowa House and Senate, both controlled by Republicans, have passed bipartisan legislation that would protect those rights. This should not be a difficult choice. However, there are many special interest groups urging the governor to veto House File 639, claiming it would harm the ethanol industry and derail future economic development opportunities in the state. But if those claims were true, why do nearly 30% of Iowa's ethanol plants choose not to participate in this risky CO₂ pipeline venture? Why is Summit Carbon Solutions suing multiple Iowa counties over zoning ordinances, the very tools those counties use to guide and protect local economic growth? The self-serving arguments of the ethanol industry do not stand up to scrutiny. Privately owned carbon dioxide pipelines do not align with the constitutional definition of 'public use' necessary for eminent domain, and they do not justify using the government's 'takings' power to force private landowners to participate in a speculative business enterprise. Essentially, these special interests are asking the governor to pick economic winners and losers at the expense of constitutional rights. Importantly, HF 639 does not stop the pipeline project, nor does it prevent voluntary easements. In fact, Summit has already secured all necessary voluntary agreements in Minnesota and must now do the same in South Dakota to meet Iowa Utilities Commission conditions for construction here. Iowa landowners deserve the same rights as landowners in our neighboring states. If this project truly serves a vital economic need and garners legitimate support, it can move forward through the free market—without coercion, and without undermining the rights of landowners. I commend Gov. Reynolds for engaging a broad range of stakeholders in this conversation. Listening to the public and not just to special interests is essential for crafting sound public policy, but it does not change the dilemma facing the governor: constitutional rights vs. special interest profits. By signing HF 639, Gov. Reynolds would uphold constitutional rights, curb the misuse of eminent domain for private profit, demonstrate her commitment to the Republican Party's property rights platform, protect landowners from inadequate insurance coverage, and strengthen the public accountability of the Iowa Utilities Commission. It would ensure she is forever remembered as a champion of the Republican Party's commitment to constitutional rights and private property rights.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa Legislature adjourns 2025 session with many GOP priorities checked off
A portion of Iowa Capitol rotunda as seen May 14, 2025. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The Iowa Legislature adjourned Thursday at 6:01 a.m. in the Senate and 6:31 a.m. in the House, finishing the 2025 legislative session with many priorities from the majority party met — but with several major goals, including property taxes, not making the cut. While leaders reflected on successfully moving forward on many of their top objectives, the final few days of the 2025 legislative session were tense between some members of the majority party. Twelve Republican senators had announced they would not vote in support of any budget bills until the Senate voted on House File 639, a bill containing multiple measures related to the use of eminent domain in carbon sequestration pipeline projects. On Monday, the bill passed the Senate 27-22 following hours of heated debate and days of closed-door meetings discussing the measure, which included many barbed comments traded between Republicans. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, told reporters he believed the eminent domain legislation was the most pivotal bill to move during the 2025 session. 'The fact that it was finally taken up in the Senate certainly sticks out to me,' Holt said. 'But unfortunately, it also sticks out to me … as a Republican, the unfortunate debate that occurred in the Senate, in terms of Republicans sort of going after one another. It's something that we don't normally see, and I hope we never see again.' Holt said he was 'confident' that Gov. Kim Reynolds will sign the bill into law, though other lawmakers have expressed doubts that she will grant the measure final approval. While the pipeline bill was brought up for debate, another high-profile measure from the session was not — the Republicans' property tax proposal. The Senate Ways and Means Committee approved Senate File 651, the most recent version of the proposal eliminating Iowa's 'rollback' system of calculating local property taxes, in a meeting earlier in May, but the measure was not brought for floor debate in either chamber. Here's what Iowa lawmakers did on marathon final day of session House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst said her biggest takeaway from the 2025 legislative session was that lawmakers did nothing to lower costs for Iowa families. 'If anything, all they did was raise costs, especially when it comes to property taxes, that now could go up and count the districts across the state because they didn't fund public education enough,' Konfrst said, referring to the K-12 funding package that Democrats said will trigger property tax increases in many Iowa public schools. 'They did nothing, nothing for housing … They did nothing to fix health care costs, except put 182,000 people, their health insurance at risk. They did absolutely nothing to help the economy.' Reynolds said in a statement early Thursday property taxes would be a top issue in the 2026 session, alongside further government efficiency efforts. 'I look forward to continuing this work next session — especially when it comes to reducing Iowans' property tax burden,' Reynolds said in the statement. 'And to make sure tax cuts remain sustainable, even as we continue to make smart investments, we'll keep streamlining government. Our alignment efforts, so far, have already saved taxpayers more than $250 million, and we're just getting started.' Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver said the Legislature did take action to lower costs for Iowans as the the state's economy 'is under a lot of pressure from outside issues,' pointing to the bill passed Thursday to reduce unemployment insurance taxes, a priority of Reynolds. 'At the start of this legislative session, we told Iowans, 'We hear you,'' Whitver said in a statement on his closing remarks for the session. 'We hear your concerns about the high costs in our everyday lives, the concerns about costs and access to health care, and concerns about safe communities.' In the final days of session, the Legislature approved some of the top proposals laid out by Reynolds for the 2025 legislative session, including the unemployment insurance taxes, as well as the bill on paid parental leave for government employees and another aiding rural health care and expanding medical residency slots. Several of the goals she laid out in her January Condition of the State address — like the two bills restricting cellphone use during class time and behind the wheel of a car, and her bill providing natural disaster aid for communities impacted by 2024 floods and tornadoes, were all signed into law earlier this session. But there were some bills that did not make it to her desk. The House did not take up Senate File 445, the governor's child care infrastructure bill to shift funding from Early Childhood Iowa (ECI) and some federal funds to establish a new grant program for preschool and child care centers providing full-day care for children, though it was passed by the Senate. Her energy proposal that would have given existing utility companies the right of first refusal to new transmission projects — which received pushback from the U.S. Department of Justice — also did not advance. The first measure signed into law in 2025 was the repeal of gender identity protections under the Iowa Civil Rights Act. The law came up in budget discussions in the days before session ended, as the health and human services spending bill included a restriction on Medicaid coverage for sex reassignment surgery and hormone replacement therapy for transgender individuals. Some GOP lawmakers said this limit is now legal because of 'gender identity' was removed as a protected class under state civil rights law, but Democrats argued the measure remains unconstitutional — as ruled previously in courts — under the Equal Protections Clause. Republican legislative leaders did not mention the gender identity law in their closing comments, but did praise the passage of a bill setting Medicaid work requirements on Iowa's expanded Medicaid program. The bill sent to Reynolds Wednesday would set an 80-hour work requirement per month for people on the Iowa Health and Wellness Plan, or IHAWP, to retain eligibility for health coverage. IHAWP provides Medicaid coverage for low-income, able-bodied adults between ages 19 to 64. The bill passed includes certain exceptions to the work requirements. It also includes 'trigger' language that would end the program if the federal government first allows Iowa to enact work requirements and then later revokes approval. The governor and Iowa Department of Health and Human Services have independently pursued IHAWP work requirements, submitting a federal waiver for similar requirements at 100 hours per month to keep health coverage with exceptions. Senate President Amy Sinclair said in her closing comments for the session work requirements are 'common sense.' 'There is dignity in work, and the vast majority of Iowans know this,' Sinclair said in the written comments. 'Having a sense of purpose and accomplishment is not only good for one's well-being, but it is good for our state. Enacting policies that help put people back to work, like work requirements for able-bodied Iowans on assistance programs, provides opportunities for Iowans to earn a living, find a sense of purpose, and contribute to the growth of our economy.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Four years and another day': Senators punt long-awaited eminent domain debate
Landowners opposed to carbon sequestration pipelines shout at senators for declining to debate an eminent domain bill Friday. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) 'Shame, shame, shame,' a red-shirted group chanted from a Senate gallery after a full day waiting for senators to debate a bill impacting carbon sequestration pipelines. A group of landowners has been pushing lawmakers to take up the issue around property rights for four years. They, along with farmers and union workers in favor of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, showed up to the Capitol in droves Friday, expecting to hear debate on House File 639. After breaking for a closed-door caucus after almost every action on the floor, senators decided to adjourn until Monday, without having debated the eminent domain bill or budgets. 'You're disrespecting our time,' a landowner yelled from the gallery following the pound of the gavel. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX HF 639 would set requirements for pipeline insurance and permit limits and change the definitions of common carrier in the state to require hazardous liquid pipeline operators prove they will transport commodities owned by shippers not affiliated with the carrier. The Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, which was granted eminent domain by the Iowa Utilities Commission in June, would connect to nearly 60 ethanol facilities and stretch around 2,500 across Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska. The pipeline would transport sequestered carbon dioxide from the facilities to underground storage in North Dakota. Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, proposed a major amendment to the bill in committee, and an additional amendment Friday that removes many parts of the version passed from the House. Under Bousselot's amendment, which must be approved on the floor, projects could seek voluntary easements from outside of the project corridor, which he said would allow them to avoid using eminent domain. His amendment also requires the project operators to repair damaged land for the lifetime of the project. The Iowa Utilities Commission would have to make a decision on permit applications within one year and members would have to be present at hearings under the amendment, which would apply to all projects seeking eminent domain. Sen. Kevin Alons, R-Salix, proposed a strikethrough amendment Friday that instead added language similar to House File 943, to ban the use of eminent domain for pipelines carrying liquified carbon dioxide. 'I guess four years and another day is what we will be doing again next Monday,' Sherri Webb, a landowner opposed to the pipeline said following the adjournment. 'We're just gonna have to wait another day, and it's not right.' Farmers and biofuel advocates who gathered in the Capitol rotunda earlier in the day said the carbon sequestration capabilities offered by the pipeline would open the door to expanded biofuel markets, like sustainable aviation fuel. A number of farmers were among the more than 1,300 landowners who have already signed easement agreements with Summit. Kelly Nieuwenhuis, a signed landowner and corn farmer in O'Brien County, said he signed easement agreements with Summit for nearly three miles of pipeline through his property. 'We need to get this project done for a positive future for not only farmers, but the biofuels industry and good-paying jobs for rural America,' Nieuwenhuis said. Farmers pointed to low corn prices from lack of market demand as a strong reason for the pipeline, as it would make it easier for ethanol producers in Iowa to enter the ultra-low carbon ethanol market. The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association earlier this week published a study highlighting the same issue. While the ethanol industry had another good year in 2024, the study said the associated economic effects of biofuels were diminished by the 'stagnant' corn market. 'This project, hooking these plants onto it, is going to change and open up markets,' Mark Wigans, a signed landowner and an ethanol plant president, said at the rally. 'Agriculture's in terrible shape right now, and we need change and this is going to give it to us.' Also in attendance were members from several union locals, in favor of the pipeline for the construction jobs it would supply. The 110-day legislative session was scheduled to end May 2, marking the end to some per diem payments to lawmakers. The failure to bring an eminent domain bill to the Senate floor likely sets back efforts to end the session early next week. Though the Senate did not vote on the eminent domain bill Friday, lawmakers did approve one measure, House File 856, a ban on diversity, equity and inclusion activities and offices in state agencies and community colleges. The Senate amended the bill to remove private colleges from the measure and returned it to the House. The chamber also voted along party lines to confirm three of the governor's appointees – Cheryl Elsloo to the Iowa State Civil Rights Commission, Christine Hensley to the Iowa Board of Regents and Whitney Smith McIntosh to the state's Human Rights Board. However, there were several other measures on the calendar – including budget bills – that were not brought up for debate. Senate File 645, the economic development budget, Senate File 646, the agriculture and natural resources budget and Senate File 647, the education budget were not brought up before the chamber adjourned Friday. There were amendments filed on these three bills to reflect the budget compromise reached with House Republicans Thursday. While these amendments are spending figures that represent an agreement between House and Senate Republicans, the majority caucuses in both chambers, the Senate would not be able to pass these or other budget bills before getting the support of the 12 GOP senators who pledged to vote against appropriations bills until the eminent domain legislation is brought to the floor. Most of the spending bills for fiscal year 2026 have not yet been approved in either chamber. The House Appropriations Committee is scheduled to meet Monday, May 12 to discuss four budget bills. The Senate Appropriations Committee also still must hold a meeting to approve standings appropriations bill that includes the State Supplemental Aid (SSA) per-pupil funding for Iowa's K-12 system, the House priority of $14 million for paraeducator pay, and other various state spending obligations. Robin Opsahl contributed to this report. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
