(C) Iowa Capital Dispatch
This story was originally published by Iowa Capital Dispatch and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Lawsuit challenges Reynolds' authority in rulemaking process • Iowa Capital Dispatch [1]
['Clark Kauffman', 'Cami Koons', 'Robin Opsahl', 'Joshua Haiar', 'More From Author', '- April', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow', 'Class', 'Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus', 'Display Inline']
Date: 2025-04-07
A group of Iowans is suing the State of Iowa, alleging Gov. Kim Reynolds has no authority to require agencies such as the Department of Natural Resources to adopt regulations that are less burdensome on industry.
The lawsuit was filed recently in Polk County District Court by Steve Veysey, a fly fisherman and clean-water advocate from Ames; Kathy Carter, a Floyd County resident who says her city’s drinking water is pulled from a source affected by a water-withdrawal permit benefitting an ethanol plant; and Mary Powell, heir to a Shelby County farm through which a hazardous- liquid pipeline is routed.
The plaintiffs claim Reynolds’ Executive Order 10, issued in January 2023, diminishes the effectiveness of regulations that are supposed to protect landowners from the environmental and economic damages caused by a pipeline.
The governor, the lawsuit claims, has “no authority to manipulate the rulemaking process prior to a final rule being adopted,” and so “any regulation adopted in compliance with Executive Order 10 is illegal and void.”
The governor’s order dictated that each state agency, board and commission repeal and replace all existing rules by Dec. 31, 2026. In doing so, the order stated, the agencies, boards and commissions must “reduce the overall regulatory burden, or remain neutral, as compared to the previous rule.”
According to the lawsuit, Reynolds’ order “ignores the benefits” of previously existing rules.
“Unchecked corporate actions often result in damage to people and the environment,” the lawsuit claims. “The order then alleges that there is a regulatory burden on Iowans. The regulatory burden is not on Iowans. If there is a regulatory burden, it is on business and industry, which seems to be the only thing the governor’s action is concerned about.”
The lawsuit alleges all proposed rule changes must first be cleared by her administrative rules coordinator they can even be considered for the rulemaking and approval process.
As an example, the lawsuit cites a DNR proposal to change requirements related to the construction of manure storage facilities and says those proposed changes “were not allowed” to be brought forward to the administrative rules coordinator. “There is no authority in the statute for the governor to veto a rule, or a portion of a draft rule, before it is even presented to the public,” the lawsuit alleges.
While the governor’s order does not prohibit public comment on proposed rule changes, the lawsuit claims, “it renders that comment meaningless, because it ties the agency’s hands from considering that comment if the result would be regulations that violate the dictates of the executive order.”
The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that the executive order is beyond the governor’s authority and that any agency rules adopted in compliance with that order be deemed illegal and invalid.
The state has yet to respond to the lawsuit. A spokesperson for the Iowa attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2025/04/07/lawsuit-challenges-reynolds-authority-in-rulemaking-process/
Published and (C) by Iowa Capital Dispatch
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-ND-NC 4.0.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/iowacapitaldispatch/
