Iowa Senators Advance Bill to Limit Eminent Domain for Carbon Pipelines

The proposed legislation would require pipeline companies to exhaust voluntary easement options before using eminent domain.

Jan. 29, 2026 at 5:47pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Iowa senators have advanced a bill, Senate File 2067, that would require hazardous liquid pipeline operators to prove they had exhausted feasible voluntary easement opportunities before they could use eminent domain. The bill aims to allow companies to avoid the use of eminent domain by looking outside of the proposed route to find willing landowners, but opponents argue it does not adequately protect private property rights as pipelines would still have the ability to use eminent domain.

Why it matters

The bill is seen as a compromise between landowners who oppose the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines and the pipeline companies that need to acquire land for their projects. It highlights the ongoing tensions between private property rights and the need for critical infrastructure development.

The details

Senate File 2067 would allow pipeline companies to look for voluntary easements anywhere within the county or within five miles of an initially proposed route. The companies would also be able to reach out to more landowners in the vicinity of the planned pipeline rather than only reaching out to those in the proposed corridor. The company must show it had made a 'diligent effort' to develop a route entirely from voluntary easements before it can request the authority to use eminent domain.

  • The Senate Commerce Committee voted on Wednesday to rewrite a House-passed bill, House File 2104, that would have banned the use of eminent domain for carbon capture pipelines.
  • The amended bill, SF 2067, is now eligible for Senate debate.

The players

Senate File 2067

A bill advanced by Iowa senators that would require hazardous liquid pipeline operators to prove they had exhausted feasible voluntary easement opportunities before they could use eminent domain.

Summit Carbon Solutions

A company registered as undecided on the bill, but has opposed sections that 'create new processes' and said the bill does not provide a 'clean corridor expansion' that the company had requested.

Mike Klimesh

The Republican Senate Majority Leader who introduced the bill, stating it 'protects property owners' rights' and 'allows property owners to say no' while also allowing pipeline companies to find willing landowners and voluntary easements.

Mike Bousselot

The Republican senator who chaired the subcommittee, stating the legislative process 'is meant to take time' and that he believes 'we need to get something done' on the bill.

Janet Petersen

The Democratic senator who opposed the bill, stating she 'fail(ed) to see where the compromise here is in this legislation.'

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This will raise costs and extend timelines, neither of which this project can support at this time.”

— Jake Ketzner, Lobbyist for Summit Carbon Solutions

“(This) pipeline plan to protect property rights is actually a bill to advance and protect pipeline companies' rights.”

— Cynthia Hansen, Shelby County Landowner

“We think that of all the legislation we've seen, this obviously is a good, balanced approach that our membership has asked for. Is it perfect? No, but I think this is a great starting point.”

— Nathan Hohnstein, Representative, Iowa Corn Growers Association

What’s next

The amended bill, SF 2067, is now eligible for Senate debate, where further changes or compromises may be made.

The takeaway

This bill represents an attempt to balance the competing interests of private property rights and the need for critical infrastructure development. While it may not be a perfect solution, it demonstrates the ongoing challenges in finding a path forward that satisfies all stakeholders.