Meeting Public Comments

Patty and Craig Beyer [Affected Landowners]

The pipeline companies are free to pursue their CO2 pipeline goals using the free and fair market system. We ask that you make these companies truly negotiate with landowners without the thumb of eminent domain on the scale. Allow landowners the freedom of choice and the freedom to exercise their constitutional rights. If Summit, and the other pipelines, can convince landowners to give up property rights and accept liability for damage to their families, neighbors, communities and land, then, as much as we might disagree, that is the landowners choice to make. Likewise, please dont trample on our right to say no to these pipelines. We ask you to support legislation that will ban the use of eminent domain for these dangerous, unproven, hazardous liquid carbon dioxide pipelines. Unfortunately, SF346 does not currently provide that needed protection for landowners, and we ask that you substitute the stronger language in SF101 into SF346.Thank you.

Pat & Dale Mennenga [Affected Landowners ]

We need a much stronger bill to actually prevent the big business CO2 pipelines companies from using eminent domain now and in the future. We need the Senate and House of Representatives to come together and support property rights of landowners. We do not support SF 346.

Lindsay Maher []

If we were a democracy then this bill might make some sense, but we are not. The idea that once a percentage of parcels or miles is achieved for a project can then allow eminent domain to be invoked and take private property away is mob rule. There is not clause in the constitution that says you have a right to private property, unless 2/3 or 90% say they need it. These pipelines can still build here in Iowa if they so choose. Nothing is stopping them from doing that. SF101104 wouldnt have stopped that either and are much better bills. Please defend rights for a change and stop the erosion of individual rights in favor of industry, as this seems to be a recurring theme the past 3 years if not longer. After all, what is the role of government? Amend this bill to ban eminent domain for these pipelines period or give SF101104 a sub Senator Brown!

Sylvia Spalding []

As an affected landowner (currently adjacent to preferred route but given survey notice and told route may change), I ask the subcommittee members to oppose SF346. Over the decades our family has been threatened by eminent domain during the permit processes for four LNG lines, an electrical line, an oil pipeline and now this hazardous CO2 pipeline. When will this stop? We have lost acres of forest due to easements that have been granted under the threat of eminent domain. My grandparents were not compensated to their satisfaction by damages done by pipeline companies to their crop and pastureland and this impacted my grandfathers health. My great uncle joined others to sue against multiple pipelines being laid parallel to each other on their properties, but they lost. Please make this the time when Iowa lawmakers support the states family farmers and their right to use and not use their property as they see fit.

Amanda Stamp []

My family is impacted by Navigator Heartland Greenway in Emmet County, Iowa, and while I appreciate Senator Guths efforts, SF 346 misses the mark. There are 3 CO2 pipeline proposals crossing Iowa, and this bill would not help any of the thousands of people currently impacted. A 66% threshold for eminent domain usage is not appropriate. A threshold should be 95%. Otherwise, you are enabling infrastructure companies to conduct negotiations that would always subject your constituents to accept economics and terms they otherwise would never agree to in a free will negotiation. This would be a government sanctioned abuse of Iowans. Why are outside investors given preference in the eminent domain discussion over the thousands of family farms and businesses that have invested locally for generations? Who do the legislators represent? Is this the best the elected representatives could do when the legislative priority of the Iowa Republican Party is We oppose government using eminent domain to take private property away from the owner for the use of another private party. Please reconsider this bill and truly legislate for the people who sent you to the capitol.