Meeting Public Comments

Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

Comments Submitted:

04-20-2026

Kathy Carter

Think about this very carefully, people. What you do now will have repercussions for years to come. This is very simply and very clearly just a slightly different version of eminent domain. If, for example, hydrogen is found, how would it be transported to the point of processing/ use? Most likely, by pipeline. This is additional safety risk to YOUR constituents and to multitudes of Iowans. This is additional risk to the aquifers that will be drilled through. This is additional risk to property rights protection. This bill is being "forced" through chambers just like it would be FORCED onto landowners (when technically we own to the center of the earth!) The minerals, the hydrogen, whatever else is found will still be there next year. Don't rush into something we will all regret.

04-20-2026

Patty Beyer [Cherokee County Landowner]

SF2490 is problematic as proposed. It contains several provisions that prioritize corporate speed over the safety and rights of Iowans.First, the 25% threshold for forced pooling is unacceptably low. Traditional mineral unitization typically requires 50% to 70%; a low 25% bar creates an unfair advantage for developers. Furthermore, granting the DNR Director unilateral power to waive rules sets a dangerous precedent. Any such waivers must, at a minimum, require the formal involvement of the State Geologist to ensure decisions are based on science, not administrative convenience.Additionally, the fiveyear secrecy window for critical data far exceeds industry standards and hinders transparency.The hydrogen beneath our soil is a stable asset; it isnt going anywhere. We must avoid a kneejerk approach to complex legislation. I urge a moratorium on hydrogen drilling to allow for a measured, professional framework that puts Iowans first. It's far better to wait than to codify a bad law.

04-20-2026

Lisa Ritzert

Regarding: SF2490 It was stated last week that this bill addresses a topic from prior years and is very important. If both of these things are true, then why was a bill of this impact to the people of Iowa, this consequence to landowners, and setting this precedent not introduced at the beginning of this legislative session? Is this what transparency looks like? And, if that reasoning is enough for passing this bill, then why is the topic of eminent domain circulated for years, very important, and actually was introduced at the beginning of the session still sitting at "the starting gate"?

04-21-2026

Deb Freeman [Landowner of Heritage Farm, retired RN, retired LBSW, mother, grandmother, wife.]

The proposed forced pooling bill sounds like what it is forcing a corporate greed project onto landowners. How deep are Iowa Aquifers? Will hydrogen extraction affect water tables/ contaminate? Is the pipeline for this being bored from DesMoines?? What are the details? Bousselot said 10 miles deep, where did he get his information? I agree with other comments made!Wait and think this through!

04-21-2026

Penney Morse [Iowa CCI]

Why is this bill being rushed through at the end of the session? There has been no time to explore the impacts and ramifications of this legislation on land owners. You were elected to represent your constituents, not large corporations looking to exploit the resources of Iowa for their gain. It would be prudent to defer action on this legislation until next year when you would have more time to understand it's impact on land owners and residents of Iowa. Please do not pass this legislation this session.

04-21-2026

Marta Burkgren

I urge the House to either vote against SF 2490 or make major changes that correct the following problems with the bill. Despite overwhelming opposition by citizens who testified at the subcommittee, Senate leadership force through SF2490. A majority of Iowans have no idea what forced pooling is and the implications it has. Iowans are not asking for this bill hydrogen companies are. The abuse of eminent domain has been a major problem in Iowa over the last five years, and this bill is another version of eminent domain abuse. Iowa needs to protect property rights, not throw them away. Among the many problems with this bill are Leaving the final say up to the DNR Director who is appointed, not elected Allowing the DNR director to go around current rules, laws and orders without public input Allowing oil, gas and hydrogen companies to keep important information confidential This bill does not allow someone to say no Penalizing nonconsenting landowners

04-21-2026

Ron Morgan

As a citizen, farmer and land owner, I am very concerned about the way this bill is being pushed through so quickly with a lack of transparency. I urge the House to vote against this bill and take time to study the ramifications. It is another form of eminent domain abuse. I agree with the other people who have posted concerns. Property rights matter.