Legislation to place restrictions on the use of eminent domain for hazardous liquid pipelines reached Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds' desk but won't become law.
Iowa Senate Republicans were divided on the bill, House File 639, and Reynolds announced Wednesday afternoon that she vetoed the bill, along with a bill to open the door to a synthetic version of a psychedelic compound found in mushrooms and a line-item veto of an in-state tuition program the University of Northern Iowa wanted to offer students from neighboring states.
Iowa House Republicans, as well as House Democrats, were united in support for the legislation. Within an hour of the veto, Republican House Speaker Pat Grassley called on lawmakers to sign a petition to reconvene the Legislature in a special session to override the veto — which would require a shift in senators' positions.
"Iowa House Republicans believe landowner rights are a fundamental right in Iowa," Grassley said in a statement Wednesday afternoon.
In a statement explaining her veto, Reynolds pointed to the "a major pipeline project that uses only voluntary easements" at Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy in Council Bluffs.
nonpareilonline.com
Reynolds said the bill would have implemented insurance mandates and an "arbitrary 25-year limit" on carbon dioxide pipelines that "would effectively kill the project — despite the millions that have already been spent on its development."
"There is no clear or logical basis for that time limit — and it would make difficult for companies like SIRE to justify the additional investment," Reynolds said in the statement.
"I understand this was not the intent," Reynolds continued. "Those who crafted the bill said they don't want to stop CO2 pipelines that rely entirely on voluntary agreements. But that is exactly what the bill does. For that reason alone, I cannot sign it."
SIRE CEO Mike Jerke told The Nonpareil in an interview shortly after the veto that he also believes that blocking his company's project was not the goal of Republican state senators. He said he suspect it was "a very frustrating situation" at the end of the legislative session, when HF 639 cleared the Senate on a 27-22 vote.
"I know there were several attempts ... to amend that proposed legislation, HF 639, that ultimately failed," Jerke said, adding he believes "there were misconceptions on what was contained in the bill and what the impacts could or could not be."
The Council Bluffs facility is "really pleased" with the veto, Jerke said.
"As she states in her statement, SIRE has done everything right," Jerke said. "This issue, very important issue around landowner rights, is something that needs to be discussed, needs to be figured out, but in SIRE's case, we have voluntary easements, signed easements for our projects. Landowner rights was not an issue for us, and yet the language contained in HF 639 would have really negatively impacted our project — likely killed it."
Iowa Senate Republicans were divided on the bill, House File 639, and Reynolds announced Wednesday afternoon that she vetoed the bill, along with a bill to open the door to a synthetic version of a psychedelic compound found in mushrooms and a line-item veto of an in-state tuition program the University of Northern Iowa wanted to offer students from neighboring states.
Iowa House Republicans, as well as House Democrats, were united in support for the legislation. Within an hour of the veto, Republican House Speaker Pat Grassley called on lawmakers to sign a petition to reconvene the Legislature in a special session to override the veto — which would require a shift in senators' positions.
"Iowa House Republicans believe landowner rights are a fundamental right in Iowa," Grassley said in a statement Wednesday afternoon.
In a statement explaining her veto, Reynolds pointed to the "a major pipeline project that uses only voluntary easements" at Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy in Council Bluffs.
Governor cites Council Bluffs ethanol plant in veto that's dividing Iowa Republicans
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds pointed to the impact on a Council Bluffs ethanol plant's planned pipeline connection as a reason to veto House File 639.
Reynolds said the bill would have implemented insurance mandates and an "arbitrary 25-year limit" on carbon dioxide pipelines that "would effectively kill the project — despite the millions that have already been spent on its development."
"There is no clear or logical basis for that time limit — and it would make difficult for companies like SIRE to justify the additional investment," Reynolds said in the statement.
"I understand this was not the intent," Reynolds continued. "Those who crafted the bill said they don't want to stop CO2 pipelines that rely entirely on voluntary agreements. But that is exactly what the bill does. For that reason alone, I cannot sign it."
SIRE CEO Mike Jerke told The Nonpareil in an interview shortly after the veto that he also believes that blocking his company's project was not the goal of Republican state senators. He said he suspect it was "a very frustrating situation" at the end of the legislative session, when HF 639 cleared the Senate on a 27-22 vote.
"I know there were several attempts ... to amend that proposed legislation, HF 639, that ultimately failed," Jerke said, adding he believes "there were misconceptions on what was contained in the bill and what the impacts could or could not be."
The Council Bluffs facility is "really pleased" with the veto, Jerke said.
"As she states in her statement, SIRE has done everything right," Jerke said. "This issue, very important issue around landowner rights, is something that needs to be discussed, needs to be figured out, but in SIRE's case, we have voluntary easements, signed easements for our projects. Landowner rights was not an issue for us, and yet the language contained in HF 639 would have really negatively impacted our project — likely killed it."
