Meeting Public Comments

Kathy Carter

PLEASE think long and hard about this! During debate last year on HF639, Senator Klimesh expressed concern about "unintended consequences". This bill would have unintended consequences. This bill allows eminent domain, in a slightly different version, without actually using the term. Any project that FORCES a landowner to participate is just that: eminent domain. The search for minerals or hydrogen may endanger the aquifers that the drilling descends through. If hydrogen is found in a "harvestable" quantity, how will it be transported from drill site to the processing/use site? Most likely by pipeline, again raising the same scenario that property owners have been pushing back on since 2022. Landowners again could be forced into "hosting" unwanted pipelines. And yet, by Iowa code, landowners own to the center of the earth.We again would have increased safety risks to Iowans, to YOUR constituents. The minerals / hydrogen will still be there a year from now.

Patty Beyer [Cherokee County Lsndowner]

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.

Candice Brandau Larson

Im a little bit concerned about the speed at which this is being pushed without any public understanding of the consequences but the thing that worries me the most is the 25% threshold. Not even a simple majority. The people this will affect at this point are completely unaware so we need to protect those land owners. Once again if a company is willing to be a good neighbor, then they can pay accordingly. if not, the land owner should have their choice as to whether to say no thank you.

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