Fourteen Republican members of the Iowa Legislature appeared in Charles City Wednesday to voice support for a lawsuit claiming the Iowa Utilities Commission acted unconstitutionally when it approved a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions' planned carbon capture pipeline.
Known as the Republican Legislative Intervenors for Justice, the group is made up of lawmakers from both the Iowa House and Senate. They have grown from 19 members to nearly 40 in a matter of months.
According to Jefferson Fink, legal counsel for the group, the IUC made an error in interpreting Iowa law when it granted eminent domain for Summit's project.
“In our reading of Iowa code and prior case law, the Iowa Utilities Commission wrongly interpreted their code sections granting them power to use eminent domain," Fink said. "It’s our belief that the board is there to protect people from companies, and not vice versa.”
The IUC's order prevents Summit from beginning construction until regulatory agencies in South Dakota and North Dakota approve the pipeline.
The lawsuit could prove to be a setback for the area’s ethanol industry. The pipeline is designed to transport CO2 emissions from ethanol plants to storage wells in North Dakota, which is meant to allow ethanol producers to sell to buyers seeking low-carbon biofuels. The proposed pipeline would connect 57 ethanol plants across five states. One of those plants is on the outskirts of Charles City.
Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, represents the area and is one of the primary authors of the suit. He believes that Iowans’ constitutional rights should never be secondary to the industry’s bottom line.
“If eminent domain is, as we say in this instance, a violation of the law, ethanol — good as it is — would need to be a secondary consideration," Thomson said. "We follow the law, we follow the Constitution and then we start looking at business considerations.”
Sen. Dennis Guth, R-Klemme, believes the same. He is a farmer who represents District 28, which is tucked between Mason City and Fort Dodge.
“My constitutional rights are not for sale — for any amount of money,” Guth said.
The issue is a slippery slope: the private gain from eminent domain can continue to be expanded upon, and that’s the danger.Rep. Mark Cisneros
The lawsuit has found support beyond northeast Iowa, as well. Although his district hasn’t been affected by the decision, Rep. Mark Cisneros, R-Muscatine, said it sets a dangerous precedent should it stand.
“If they can take the property of my neighbor, I’m next,” Cisneros said. “The issue is a slippery slope: the private gain from eminent domain can continue to be expanded upon, and that’s the danger.”
Landowners directly affected by the IUC's decision also attended the lawsuit announcement, including Kathy Stockdale, a farmer who made the hour drive north from Hardin County.
“The original pipeline would be cutting our farm in half,” she said. “Seven-hundred feet from our house, and 1,000 from our son’s.”
Stockdale is concerned that Summit doesn’t properly understand the risk the pipeline poses to land that her family has farmed for over 100 years.
“One year, it was flooded for three months, and that’s right where they want to put this pipeline. It’s by the railroad tracks — highly erodible land.”
Alongside Stockdale was another affected century-farmer, Kim Junker, who said the lawsuits are a step forward for landowners in the region.
“It’s a godsend,” she said. “People are starting to catch on.”
The pair have been weekly regulars at the Capitol during the past three legislative sessions to voice their concerns to lawmakers. Proposals to limit eminent domain have been brought up in the House but have failed to pass the Senate.
With suits filed in several district courts in Iowa, as well as at the federal level, Rep. Thomson is optimistic that could change in the upcoming session.
“There will absolutely be bills introduced — and they’ll probably pass the House — to change how the IUC does things, and to change how we handle eminent domain," he said. "The Senate is elected, reads the newspapers and recognizes that 80% of Iowans have grave concerns about this proposed taking of private land for tax credits for already wealthy people.”
