Iowa House Bill HF943

Iowa 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/25
• Engrossed: 3/26/25
• Refer: 3/27/25

Caption

A bill for an act relating to the exercise of eminent domain for the construction of hazardous liquid pipelines and including effective date and applicability provisions.(Formerly HSB 287.)

Impact

The introduction of HF943 significantly alters the landscape of eminent domain law concerning agricultural land. By requiring owner consent for the condemnation of land for hazardous liquid pipelines, the bill provides additional protections for property owners, particularly farmers. This change is poised to limit utilities' powers in utilizing eminent domain, directly impacting how infrastructure projects related to hazardous materials are executed in Iowa. Legislators supporting the bill argue that it will protect the interests of landowners and uphold individual property rights.

Summary

House File 943 proposes amendments related to the exercise of eminent domain specifically concerning the construction of hazardous liquid pipelines, notably those aimed at transporting liquefied carbon dioxide. The legislation is designed to clarify the definition of what constitutes public use in the context of condemnation proceedings for agricultural land. Under HF943, the construction of such pipelines will not be deemed a public use unless the landowner consents to the condemnation, which marks a significant shift in current law where utilities could previously condemn land without owner consent for private projects.

Conclusion

As HF943 moves through the legislative process, its potential implications on utility regulations and property rights will need to be scrutinized. The bill's requirement for private consent could lead to a re-evaluation of how utilities approach land acquisition for future projects, further igniting discussions about the appropriate limits of eminent domain in the context of environmental and public health considerations.

Contention

Notably, the bill has sparked debate surrounding the balance between private development and public interest. Supporters argue that allowing utilities to bypass owner consent undermines property rights and can lead to adverse impacts on local communities, particularly in agricultural areas. Conversely, opponents may argue that the bill could hinder critical infrastructure development needed to address environmental or energy challenges, highlighting a tension between economic development interests and landowner rights.