Iowans Testify in Support of Bill to Prohibit Eminent Domain for Carbon Pipelines

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Jan. 27, 2026

Iowans Testify in Support of Bill to Prohibit Eminent Domain for Carbon Pipelines

Des Moines – Today, Iowa State Senate Commerce subcommittee members voted to move HF2104, known as the Property Rights Protection bill, forward for a full committee vote. Sens. Klimesh (R-Winneshiek) and Bousselot (R-Polk) recommend the legislation move forward with amendment, while Sen. Petersen (D-Polk) voiced support for the bill so long as it did not include the amendment which had not been made available to the public.

While landowners targeted for eminent domain applaud the decision to support HF2104 and urge the Senate to accept the bill without amendment, discussion on the legislation was cut short, resulting in many Iowans being denied the opportunity to testify.

A collection of snippets from the prepared, but undelivered, testimony on HF2104 is below:

“HF2104 is the clean bill that Governor Reynolds asked for last year. It is a win-win bill. Property rights are protected while carbon pipelines are still able to be constructed. The tactics of Senator Klimesh in limiting testimony by providing little advance notice, reserving the smallest possible room, and cutting testimony short knowing there is no other chance for the public to address Senators in a formal setting is disappointing and reminiscent of the strong-armed tactics landowners have faced from CO2 pipeline companies for years. HF2104 needs to proceed without amendments,” said Cindy Kruthoff, Crawford County landowner.

“I support economic development in Iowa. I support ethanol plants and use ethanol in my vehicles. I also support the Constitution of the United States and the Iowa Constitution where it states private property can only be taken for public use. A CO2 pipeline is not a public use. In my experience, it has been public abuse. It is time for that abuse to stop. Please vote Yes on HF2104. Please stand up for property rights and the Constitution,” said Nancy Erickson, Kossuth County landowner.

“I am a fifth-generation landowner in Hardin County. We grow corn, among other things. I strongly support this bill to prohibit eminent domain for carbon oxide pipelines. This bill protects property rights while not preventing such pipelines from being built. Other states don’t eminent domain for such projects, yet pipelines can be and are still routed successfully using voluntary easements. As a Hardin County Century-Farm owner I’m asking that landowner property rights be upheld. We must be allowed to say “no” to the placement of a private-profit carbon-dioxide pipeline and its associated soil and other damage, disruption, and liability to our land and businesses. Property rights must be protected, respected and upheld for our system of governance to succeed in the long run,” said Beth Richards, Hardin County landowner.

“Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain. If you read those words, then repeat them, there is a sense of freedom and protection. However, many farmers and landowners have felt a sense of extreme disappointment in the sense that our rights have been taken from us. The right to say “NO” has not been honored. In fact, eminent domain has become a weapon against us. “All of your neighbors have signed,” “You need to sign or we’ll take it,” and “We’re going to get it anyway, so sign and make more money” are all words that we have heard. Our family has owned our land for over 126 years. Family history, our legacy, and memories are rooted in this land. Caring for the land started as soon as the deed was signed and has continued all these years. Please pass HF2104 as submitted by the House. This is a simple and fair bill. Please look at us as concerned parents, grandparents, farmers and landowners that love our land, and Iowa citizens that love our State. We need your support,” said Sherri Webb, Shelby County landowner.

“This is a hearing on HF2104, a hearing on protecting MY property rights. HF 2104 is a simple bill with 20 lines of print, but one line says it all, “No eminent Domain for CO2 pipelines”. It should be my choice of what is good or not for my land. HF2104 does not stop a carbon pipeline company from building in the state. HF2104 does not stop ethanol plants from creating low-carbon fuels. The Corn Growers say a pipeline will make them happy. Labor Unions will be happy with the pipeline. But, I’m not happy because my property rights are under attack so long as we allow eminent domain for carbon pipelines,” said Wendell King, Clay County landowner.

“Farmers create employment opportunities year after year, not through a one-time construction project. Farmers are small business owners being asked to support a private business project they did not ask for. Temporary construction jobs cannot justify the permanent taking of private property. Short-term employment cannot justify the permanent taking of private property. The government is not tasked with picking winners and losers. It exists to protect constitutional rights, not to advance select interests of a private business at the expense of landowners and small businesses,” said Colleen Tucker, Worth County landowner.

“Summit Carbon Solutions has a permit in Minnesota where eminent domain is not allowed for their pipeline. If the pipeline can be built in Minnesota where there is no eminent domain, it can be built in Iowa without eminent domain. The pipeline could already be built in Iowa if the landowners were just allowed to negotiate with Summit instead of being threatened with eminent domain. When my wife and I asked to change terms of the easement, there were no negotiations. We were told to sign the easement as is or they would take our property through eminent domain. That happened in June of 2022. We are still waiting for the legislature to stand up for our property rights,” said Doug Swartz, Kossuth County landowner.

“My husband and I own a Century Farm in Palo Alto that is doomed by a risky carbon pipeline. We do not want a hazardous CO2 pipeline on our land. Please pass HF2104. We simply just want the right to say no thank you. This will not kill the project. They will just have to find people who want it on their land. Minnesota and South Dakota do not allow eminent domain for this project, don’t we deserve the same protections? I have heard Nebraska has a CO2 pipeline and it was done by voluntary easements. We could do the same. Please pass HF2104,” said Jill Williamson, Palo Alto County landowner.

“Please vote yes on HF 2104. It is the “clean bill” that the Senate and Governor Reynolds asked for last year. This bill is the compromise – carbon pipelines can be built and landowners can say yes or no. HF2104 prevents the heavy hand of the government from creating unfair easement negotiations,” said Vickie Beck, Dickinson County landowner.

“We have attempted numerous times to have conversations with a pipeline company regarding the positioning of a pipeline on our property. They wish to install the hazardous pipeline 300 feet from our farmhouse, 300 feet from our grain bins, and 50 feet from our drinking well. They would not come to the table and discuss moving it to a more desirable location on our property. It wasn’t until a hearing with the Iowa Utilities Commission where my father-in-law testified to this point that the company finally returned his calls and said they would be happy to discuss moving it. He agreed to a meeting and said he would bring his attorney. The company never responded after that. Does that sound like a company willing to negotiate in good faith or use eminent domain as a “last resort”? Would you accept those terms on your own property, for your business, or your personal home? HF2104 is simple. It levels the playing field for negotiations and upholds the rights of all property owners in the state to prevent eminent domain abuse,” said Lindsay Maher, Page County.

“HF2104 protects property rights and SF2067 does not. Either Senator Klimesh cares about property rights or he does not. Both the Republican and Democratic platforms are against the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines. If HF2104 passes with amendment, it will be clear that leadership doesn’t listen to its own party, just big business and well-paid lobbyists,” said Jess Mazour, Conservation Director for the Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club.

“Our government needs to stop telling Iowans what is best for our land and our futures and let us decide. Landowners should not be forced into unwanted negotiations with the guillotine of eminent domain hanging over their heads. The majority of Iowans favor the exact protections and affirmation of property rights that HF2104 stands for – it’s time to get it done,” said Emma Schmit, Bold Alliance’s Pipeline Fighters Director.

About Bold’s Easement Action Teams:
The Easement Action Teams are a project of the Bold Education Fund. The EATs work with local communities to provide immediate legal representation to landowners facing pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure. Our first priority is to protect landowners’ property rights and water. We believe landowners should have the ultimate right of what does and does not happen on their land. We stand against the use of eminent domain for private gain. (https://easementteams.org)

About Bold Pipeline Fighters Hub:
The Bold Pipeline Fighters Hub, a project of the Bold Education Fund, provides technical, legal, story telling and organizing assistance to any community fighting pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure, with the goal of protecting the land and water. (https://pipelinefighters.org)

About Bold:
The Bold Alliance and Bold Education Fund are coordinating state-based groups with our Pipeline Fighters Hub and landowner legal groups called the Easement Action Teams to stop carbon pipelines from using eminent domain for private gain. We believe that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is unproven and overly expensive and wastefully incentivized approach to climate change, and that the carbon pipelines needed for CCS are poorly planned, under-regulated, and risky infrastructure. These huge and complex projects should not move forward until counties, states and the federal government prove first that they are a better climate solution than renewable energy, and second that safety, planning, and routing standards are in place to avoid inefficient chaotic development driven by wasteful federal spending. (https://boldalliance.org)

# # #