Iowa Corn Growers Association and Iowa Renewable Fuels Association say that the landowners who are fighting the use of eminent domain for carbon oxide pipelines — who are fighting FOR property rights in Iowa — are “against corn” and “against ethanol.” If that was true, every one of these landowners would sell out to solar instead. Or data centers. Or turbines. Or developments. And they’d all quit selling to ethanol plants. They’d all quit being members of ethanol plants. They’d all quit using ethanol.
None of it is true. These landowners simply want to protect property rights. If it doesn't stop here... you could be next. Senate leadership is pushing hydrogen and the governor has stated she wants Iowa to have “hydrogen hubs.”
Mineral rights “pooling” bill SF2449 would use eminent domain in its pooling mandates. Senate leadership is pushing loss of local control and is trying to create fewer setbacks, mandated by state regulations (HF2580).
Tell your legislators to protect property rights. Pass HF 2104 in its original version, as passed by the House in the beginning of this session. Senate leadership is stalling.
Kathy Carter, Rockford
You recently published letters to the editor in The Iowa Standard, the Moville Record, and the Cherokee Chronicle Times. I believe they are all the same, so I will only include a link to the most recent, published today in the Cherokee Chronicle Times: https://www.chronicletimes.com/stories/letters-to-the-editor-celebrate-national-ag-week,193068
The Moville Record was kind enough to publish my response to your recent letter. Please see this link: https://www.nwestiowa.com/moville_record/letter-eminent-domain----let-us-proceed-with-great-caution/article_5b728884-64da-4023-806e-4ee30d8226ad.html.
As my letter explains, the 10-mile easement you reference is only one option. The first option is a countywide easement. I've included a link below that depicts this: https://www.facebook.com/iowacarbonpipeline/. I believe this image ran on several pipeline Facebook pages.
I also have concerns about the language you included pertaining to easements. I am not an attorney and did not attempt to address these in my letter, but I did at least want to raise these concerns.
For the foregoing reasons, I am requesting that The Iowa Standard and the Cherokee Chronicle Times run the attached response to your letter to the editor. I believe it is very important that the public understand that easements could span entire counties under the bill in question, encompassing millions of acres of farmland as well as residential and commercial properties.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely, Nancy Dugan
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here