Iowa governor vetoes bills on eminent domain, psilocybin

Reynolds blocks legislation restricting eminent domain, a key victory for Summit's carbon pipeline project

��vlog EIGHT NEWS STARTS WITH BREAKING NEWS. IT’S A STORY WE CONTINUE TO FOLLOW AT SIX. GOVERNOR REYNOLDS VETOED THE CONTROVERSIAL EMINENT DOMAIN BILL THIS AFTERNOON. IT WOULD HAVE RESTRICTED COMPANIES FROM USING EMINENT DOMAIN TO BUILD PIPELINE PROJECTS UNLESS THEY FOLLOW CERTAIN CRITERIA. ��vlog CHIEF POLITICAL REPORTER AMANDA ROOKER IS HERE WITH US NOW. AMANDA, A SHOCKWAVE OF REACTION TO THIS VETO. THERE IS SO MUCH EMOTION AROUND THIS BEND. AND, STACEY, I’VE BEEN HEARING BOTH OUTRAGE AND RELIEF OVER THIS DECISION. THIS LEGISLATION WAS YEARS IN THE MAKING. I TALKED TO ONE LANDOWNER FROM SHELBY COUNTY WHO SAYS SHE HAS BEEN ASKING LAWMAKERS TO PROTECT HER PROPERTY RIGHTS SINCE 2021, AND SHE SAYS THIS BILL DID THAT, AND SHE’S DISAPPOINTED IN THE GOVERNOR’S DECISION TO VETO IT. WE HAVE A LEGACY IN OUR FAMILY. 125 YEARS THAT LAND HAS BEEN IN OUR FAMILY, SO OUR LEGACY IS THAT LAND AND HER LEGACY IS THAT SHE TOOK BUSINESS AND BIG MONEY OVER THE FARMERS AND THE LANDOWNERS. NOW, LANDOWNER SHERRIE WEBER SAYS SHE WILL BE BACK AT THE STATEHOUSE NEXT SESSION FIGHTING FOR THIS LEGISLATION AGAIN. UNDER THIS BILL, COMPANIES WOULD HAVE HAD TO PROVE THAT THEY WERE A, QUOTE, COMMON CARRIER TO BE ABLE TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN TO BUILD THEIR PIPELINE PROJECT. IT ALSO WOULD HAVE PUT A 25 YEAR LIMIT ON A PIPELINE’S PERMIT, AND COMPANIES WOULD HAVE ALSO HAD TO FOLLOW NEW INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. IN A LETTER RELEASED TODAY, THE GOVERNOR SAID THE BILL SETS A TROUBLING PRECEDENT THAT THREATENS IOWA’S ENERGY, RELIABILITY AND ECONOMY. SHE SAID, QUOTE, WHILE I SHARE THE BILL’S GOAL OF PROTECTING LANDOWNERS, GOOD POLICY SHOULD DRAW CLEAR, CAREFUL LINES, THIS BILL DOESN’T. THE IOWA RENEWABLE FUELS ASSOCIATION IS CELEBRATING REYNOLDS DECISION, SAYING THE LEGISLATION WOULD HAVE HURT IOWANS IN OUR STATE’S ECONOMY. THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY, ENERGY COMPANIES, VARIOUS AG GROUPS VOICED THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL IS BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO DRIVE UP COSTS, ENERGY COSTS ON CONSUMERS WAS GOING TO DRIVE UP INPUTS ON FARMERS WHEN WHEN YOU LOOK AROUND, IT’S NOT THE TIME TO DO THAT. NOW, THE FIGHT OVER THIS MAY NOT BE OVER. HOUSE SPEAKER PAT GRASSLEY IS ASKING LAWMAKERS TO RECONVENE FOR A SPECIAL SESSION TO OVERRIDE THE GOVERNOR’S VETO ON THIS BILL. THAT WOULD REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY IN BOTH CHAMBERS. BUT SENATE MAJORITY LEADER JACK WHITFORD JUST RELEASED A STATEMENT SAYING HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THE BILL WOULD HAVE THE VOTES. HE SAYS, QUOTE, I EXPECT THAT MAJORITY OF OUR CAUCUS WOULD NOT BE INTERESTED IN ANY ATTEMPT TO OVERRIDE HER VETO. NOW, THE TWO REPUBLICAN LEADERS HAVE DISAGREED ON THIS ISSUE ALL SESSION. IT SEEMS LIKE THEY’RE VERY MUCH STILL AT ODDS OVER THIS. BEN. YEAH, IT SEEMS LIKE IT’S SOMETHING T

Updated: 10:11 PM CDT Jun 11, 2025

Editorial Standards ⓘ

Reynolds blocks legislation restricting eminent domain, a key victory for Summit's carbon pipeline project

Updated: 10:11 PM CDT Jun 11, 2025

Editorial Standards ⓘ

Iowa Gov. Reynolds has vetoed two bills on Wednesday, including a bill that would have restricted companies from using eminent domain projects unless they qualify as a "common carrier," a designation determined by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.House File 639 was a key piece of legislation passed this spring by the Iowa House and Senate. Proponents said it would strengthen private property rights. To qualify as a "common carrier," pipeline companies would have to agree to serve the public fairly and transport resources like gas or carbon dioxide for other people or companies, not just themselves.Iowa landowners have been fighting for this legislation for years, as Summit Carbon Solutions continued work on its proposed $8.9 billion, 2,500-mile carbon capture pipeline, which would run through Iowa and other states.In a statement released after vetoing the legislation, Reynolds said HF 639 was about more than eminent domain and would set a "troubling precedent that threatens Iowa's energy reliability, economy and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence."Reynolds said she shares the bill's goal of protecting landowners, but that the policy didn't "draw clear, careful lines.""Iowa leads the nation in biofuels. We are at the forefront of turning corn into low-carbon energy -- a leadership position we risk losing if we block the infrastructure that makes it possible. Other Midwestern states, like Nebraska, Illinois and North Dakota, are already moving forward with carbon-capture projects that would put Iowa at a competitive disadvantage if this bill became law," she said.In her statement, Reynolds said the eminent domain bill would block the Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy CO2 pipeline project, which is in its final stages of construction “with not a single acre condemned.” She said HF 639’s “arbitrary 25-year limit” on CO2 pipelines “would effectively kill the project.”Reynolds said the bill “combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets,” but that she agrees that more can be done to limit the use of eminent domain, while promoting transparency and ensuring responsible land restoration.Though she vetoed HF 639 in its entirety, Reynolds is asking the Iowa Utilities Commission to implement two provisions that were in the bill – requiring all commissioners to be present for live testimony and ensuring at least one commissioner attends every informational meeting.Even with the relief from Reynolds' veto, Summit will likely have to readjust plans after South Dakota's governor signed a ban on the use of eminent domain — the government seizure of private property with compensation — to acquire land for carbon dioxide pipelines. Summit's permit application was also rejected in South Dakota.The project has permit approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota but faces various court challenges.House GOP leader calls for special session to override vetoIowa House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, shared a statement shortly after the announcement, calling for the legislature to reconvene in a special session to override the veto."Iowa House Republicans believe landowner rights are a fundamental right in Iowa. With the Governor's veto of House File 639, I have sent a request to all members to sign a petition to reconvene the legislature in a special session to override the Governor's veto," Grassley said."This veto is a major setback for Iowa. It is a setback not only for landowners who have been fighting across Iowa, but for the work the House of Representatives has put in for four years to get legislation like HF 639 passed. We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain."The Iowa Constitution states that a request for special session from two-thirds of both chambers, or the governor, can bring lawmakers back to Des Moines. Two-thirds of both chambers would need to vote for an override for the bill to become law without the governor's approval.Iowa Democratic leader reacts to Reynolds' veto“I’m disappointed by the governor’s veto of HF639, but, unfortunately, I cannot say I’m surprised,” said Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, the Senate Democratic Leader. “There is simply no amount of political posturing or legislative stonewalling that can deny the fact that Iowans’ right to private property should never be infringed upon for private gain."Previous eminent domain bill veto overriddenAccording to RadioIowa, in July 2006, the Iowa Legislature voted "overwhelmingly" to override then-Gov. Tom Vilsack's veto of an eminent domain bill restricting cities and counties from condemning land for economic development projects.At that time, it had been more than 40 years since the Iowa Legislature voted to override a governor's veto. That was the last time the Legislature voted to override a governor's veto.Eminent domain bill opponents share statementsSummit released the following statement after the governor announced her veto:"We thank the Governor and her staff for their thoughtful and thorough review of the bill. Summit remains committed to working with landowners through voluntary agreements—just as we have with more than 1,300 Iowa landowners to date, resulting in $175 million in payments. We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project. At a time when farmers are facing increasing pressures, this project opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America’s energy dominance for the long term."The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association shared this statement:“IRFA is deeply grateful for Governor Reynolds’ veto of HF639,” said Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) Executive Director Monte Shaw. “This is a classic example of why our system of government has checks and balances. Any thoughtful review of this bill would determine that it would lead to higher energy prices for Iowans, hamper future economic development, hold back job creation, and stifle new markets for Iowa farmers. IRFA thanks Gov. Reynolds for listening to Iowans, studying the actual legislation, and ignoring the rhetoric that was as inaccurate as it was loud.”Iowa Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver, R-Knoxville, said, "I support the decision Governor Reynolds made to veto HF 639. Based on the votes on that bill in the Iowa Senate, a significant majority of our caucus supports a better policy to protect landowner rights. I expect that majority of our caucus would not be interested in any attempt to override her veto."Tom Buis, CEO of the American Carbon Alliance, said, "Governor Kim Reynolds has once again proven she’s an unwavering champion for Iowa’s farmers and ethanol producers, standing tall as a national leader in defending rural America and advancing its full economic potential.“Her bold veto of HF 639 is a clear victory for Iowa’s agricultural heartland, farmers, and the ethanol industry. It sends a strong message rejecting the misguided efforts of environmental extremists who pushed this legislation. These groups have done everything in their power to undermine agriculture, ethanol, and America’s energy dominance with their anti-ag, anti-ethanol, and anti-energy agenda.“We are deeply thankful for the thousands of Iowans who spoke up, making their voices heard and letting Governor Reynolds know their economic future depended on this veto."The Iowa Corn Growers Association said, "Governor Reynolds’ decision to veto HF 639 is a win for Iowa’s corn farmers, ethanol industry, and economy. Iowa is the world’s leader in corn and ethanol production, and now there is an opportunity to increase demand for ultra-low carbon fuels, a market that Iowa deserves the ability to pursue."Carbon capture pipeline opponents react to bill's veto"The Governor’s decision to veto the bill is also a slap in the face to the 78% of Iowans who told the Des Moines Register in 2023 that they oppose the use of eminent domain to seize landowners’ property for CO2 pipelines," the Sierra Club said in a statement announcing a press conference for Thursday.Psilocybin bill also vetoedReynolds also vetoed House File 383, which would allow Iowa doctors to prescribe a synthetic version of psilocybin if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the use of the drug at some time in the future. The Associated Press contributed to this story.This is a developing story. Check back with ��vlog for updates.Reynolds signs other bills into law» Subscribe to ��vlog's YouTube page» Download the free ��vlog app to get updates on the go: Apple | Google Play

DES MOINES, Iowa —

House File 639 was a key piece of legislation passed this spring by the Iowa House and Senate. Proponents said it would strengthen private property rights. To qualify as a "common carrier," pipeline companies would have to agree to serve the public fairly and transport resources like gas or carbon dioxide for other people or companies, not just themselves.

Iowa landowners have been fighting for this legislation for years, as Summit Carbon Solutions continued work on its proposed $8.9 billion, 2,500-mile carbon capture pipeline, which would run through Iowa and other states.

In a , Reynolds said HF 639 was about more than eminent domain and would set a "troubling precedent that threatens Iowa's energy reliability, economy and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence."

Reynolds said she shares the bill's goal of protecting landowners, but that the policy didn't "draw clear, careful lines."

"Iowa leads the nation in biofuels. We are at the forefront of turning corn into low-carbon energy -- a leadership position we risk losing if we block the infrastructure that makes it possible. Other Midwestern states, like Nebraska, Illinois and North Dakota, are already moving forward with carbon-capture projects that would put Iowa at a competitive disadvantage if this bill became law," she said.

In her statement, Reynolds said the eminent domain bill would block the Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy CO2 pipeline project, which is in its final stages of construction “with not a single acre condemned.” She said HF 639’s “arbitrary 25-year limit” on CO2 pipelines “would effectively kill the project.”

Reynolds said the bill “combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets,” but that she agrees that more can be done to limit the use of eminent domain, while promoting transparency and ensuring responsible land restoration.

Though she vetoed HF 639 in its entirety, Reynolds is asking the Iowa Utilities Commission to implement two provisions that were in the bill – requiring all commissioners to be present for live testimony and ensuring at least one commissioner attends every informational meeting.

Even with the relief from Reynolds' veto, Summit will likely have to readjust plans after South Dakota's governor signed a ban on the use of eminent domain — the government seizure of private property with compensation — to acquire land for carbon dioxide pipelines. Summit's permit application was also rejected in South Dakota.

The project has permit approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota but faces various court challenges.

House GOP leader calls for special session to override veto

Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, shared a statement shortly after the announcement, calling for the legislature to reconvene in a special session to override the veto.

"Iowa House Republicans believe landowner rights are a fundamental right in Iowa. With the Governor's veto of House File 639, I have sent a request to all members to sign a petition to reconvene the legislature in a special session to override the Governor's veto," Grassley said.

"This veto is a major setback for Iowa. It is a setback not only for landowners who have been fighting across Iowa, but for the work the House of Representatives has put in for four years to get legislation like HF 639 passed. We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain."

The Iowa Constitution states that a request for special session from two-thirds of both chambers, or the governor, can bring lawmakers back to Des Moines. Two-thirds of both chambers would need to vote for an override for the bill to become law without the governor's approval.

Iowa Democratic leader reacts to Reynolds' veto

“I’m disappointed by the governor’s veto of HF639, but, unfortunately, I cannot say I’m surprised,” said Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, the Senate Democratic Leader. “There is simply no amount of political posturing or legislative stonewalling that can deny the fact that Iowans’ right to private property should never be infringed upon for private gain."

Previous eminent domain bill veto overridden

in July 2006, the Iowa Legislature voted "overwhelmingly" to override then-Gov. Tom Vilsack's veto of an eminent domain bill restricting cities and counties from condemning land for economic development projects.

At that time, it had been more than 40 years since the Iowa Legislature voted to override a governor's veto. That was the last time the Legislature voted to override a governor's veto.

Summit released the following statement after the governor announced her veto:

"We thank the Governor and her staff for their thoughtful and thorough review of the bill. Summit remains committed to working with landowners through voluntary agreements—just as we have with more than 1,300 Iowa landowners to date, resulting in $175 million in payments. We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project. At a time when farmers are facing increasing pressures, this project opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America’s energy dominance for the long term."

The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association shared this statement:

“IRFA is deeply grateful for Governor Reynolds’ veto of HF639,” said Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) Executive Director Monte Shaw. “This is a classic example of why our system of government has checks and balances. Any thoughtful review of this bill would determine that it would lead to higher energy prices for Iowans, hamper future economic development, hold back job creation, and stifle new markets for Iowa farmers. IRFA thanks Gov. Reynolds for listening to Iowans, studying the actual legislation, and ignoring the rhetoric that was as inaccurate as it was loud.”

Iowa Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver, R-Knoxville, said, "I support the decision Governor Reynolds made to veto HF 639. Based on the votes on that bill in the Iowa Senate, a significant majority of our caucus supports a better policy to protect landowner rights. I expect that majority of our caucus would not be interested in any attempt to override her veto."

Tom Buis, CEO of the American Carbon Alliance, said, "Governor Kim Reynolds has once again proven she’s an unwavering champion for Iowa’s farmers and ethanol producers, standing tall as a national leader in defending rural America and advancing its full economic potential.

“Her bold veto of HF 639 is a clear victory for Iowa’s agricultural heartland, farmers, and the ethanol industry. It sends a strong message rejecting the misguided efforts of environmental extremists who pushed this legislation. These groups have done everything in their power to undermine agriculture, ethanol, and America’s energy dominance with their anti-ag, anti-ethanol, and anti-energy agenda.

“We are deeply thankful for the thousands of Iowans who spoke up, making their voices heard and letting Governor Reynolds know their economic future depended on this veto."

The Iowa Corn Growers Association said, "Governor Reynolds’ decision to veto HF 639 is a win for Iowa’s corn farmers, ethanol industry, and economy. Iowa is the world’s leader in corn and ethanol production, and now there is an opportunity to increase demand for ultra-low carbon fuels, a market that Iowa deserves the ability to pursue."

Carbon capture pipeline opponents react to bill's veto

"The Governor’s decision to veto the bill is also a slap in the face to the 78% of Iowans who told the Des Moines Register in 2023 that they oppose the use of eminent domain to seize landowners’ property for CO2 pipelines," the Sierra Club said in a statement announcing a press conference for Thursday.

Psilocybin bill also vetoed

Reynolds also vetoed House File 383, which would allow Iowa doctors to prescribe a synthetic version of psilocybin if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the use of the drug at some time in the future.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

This is a developing story. Check back with ��vlog for updates.