Linn Supervisors vote ‘yes’ on first carbon pipeline setback reading

CEDAR RAPIDS — The Linn County Board of Supervisors voted 2-1 Monday to approve the first reading of an ordinance that would stipulate how close a carbon pipeline could be built to certain locations. The vote came after multiple residents voiced their concerns about the ordinance — specifically its allowance for setback waivers.

Supervisors Ben Rogers and Louie Zumbach were the yes votes on the proposed ordinance while Supervisor Stacey Walker voted no. An ordinance needs three readings approved before it becomes county code.

The ordinance considerations come as Wolf Carbon Solutions is working to develop a proposed 280-mile carbon sequestration pipeline through Iowa, including Linn County.

The ordinance proposes two setback standards: one for areas of public assembly and one for dwellings.

The setback for public areas such as schools, hospitals and parks mandates the pipeline be a distance of 155.8 feet times the pipeline’s diameter. That would equal about 2,500 feet — a little less than half a mile — for the 16-inch pipeline.

The setback for dwellings would be 107.65 feet times the diameter of the pipeline, plus another 328 feet, equal to about 2,050 feet for a 16-inch pipeline.

Linn County Planning and Development Director Charlie Nichols said the proposed ordinance was written with Linn County residents’ safety in mind.

“We are trying to find our space in this regulatory framework that we conditionally have not existed in but are trying to add safety measures for,” Nichols said.

The county can’t dictate where hazardous materials pipelines are built, but Nichols and the supervisors have said they believe setbacks from homes and public facilities are legal and would help protect residents.

'Please stand up and protect us’

About a dozen people participated in a public comment period during the board’s work session on Monday morning. Many said the current proposed ordinance doesn’t go far enough. They criticized the ordinance’s inclusion of a setback waiver.

“Setbacks from dwellings may be waived by the owner of the dwelling. If setbacks are waived, the pipeline operator shall provide proof of this waiver in writing,” the ordinance reads. “Projects that have received approval from the Iowa Utilities Board shall have their required setback reduced to 300 feet provided the pipeline operator addresses why this setback reduction is necessary in their petition to the Iowa Utilities Board.”

The future growth area setbacks may also be waived by the applicable city, according to the proposed ordinance.

Cedar Rapids resident Patricia Booth said the setbacks, as written, are not enough.

“You need to listen to us. You were elected to protect us,” Booth said. “A 300 setback waiver is not acceptable. This is our community. Please stand up and protect us.”

“Don’t worry about getting sued,” Lisbon resident David Wiskus said. “You’re leaders. Lead. Give these other counties the strength to stand up and pass these ordinances. Don’t be intimidated or worry about money or people throwing things out. Let them throw it out and come back at them.”

Amanda James, an attorney representing Wolf Carbon Solutions, said the company “doesn’t feel setbacks are the best tool in this situation.”

“It’s not the only tool and it’s certainly not the most effective,” James said. “But we would like to continue the process and explore all the tools you do have that are within your jurisdiction.”

Supervisors will meet with legal counsel

Summit Carbon Solutions, another company that’s proposing construction of a carbon sequestration pipeline through Iowa, filed lawsuits against Story and Shelby counties last month after the counties adopted setback ordinances. The company is arguing that county supervisors adopted ordinances attempting to preempt oversight from the Iowa Utilities Board and the federal government.

Pipelines carrying natural gas are regulated by the Iowa Utilities Board, but hazardous materials pipelines are regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

Zumbach said last week that he intended to vote for the Linn County ordinance because he wants setback rules that he feels will “withstand any kind of court battle.” He said he voted for the ordinance on Monday to also keep the process moving forward.

“We don’t have to decide everything with this first vote today,” Zumbach said. “But I don’t want to leave here with nothing. I’m willing to do this today knowing that if we have changes, which we probably will, I just don’t want to have nothing.”

Now that Wolf has concluded its public meetings, the company can begin to contact landowners. Zumbach said he would like to have an ordinance on the table and potentially address other issues outside of setbacks in “stacking ordinances” so if IUB or a court would throw it out, it wouldn’t be everything all at once.

IUB must at least look at and consider local ordinances when approving projects such as a carbon pipeline, but it doesn’t necessarily have to abide by them, Nichols said.

Walker was the lone no vote on Monday. He said public comment from residents helped change his vote.

“I had previously indicated that I was inclined to support the ordinance as is but I’ve heard some thorough and compelling testimony here today and I have several questions that are probably best answered with counsel in closed session,” Walker said. “So I will not be supporting the ordinance as written going forward.”

The supervisors are planning to meet in closed session on Tuesday afternoon before their second reading of the proposed ordinance on Wednesday at 11 a.m. The third and final reading is currently planned for Dec. 21.

Comments: (319) 398-8255; gage.miskimen@thegazette.com