Kossuth County board repeals pipeline setback ordinance after 8th Circuit ruling
June 09, 2026 | Kossuth County, Iowa
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Kossuth County Board of Supervisors moved on June 9 to repeal its pipeline setback ordinance after legal counsel advised the board that federal and state law preempted provisions in the county measure.
Legal counsel told the board that the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld decisions finding ordinances like Cass County’s 300A to be preempted in the consolidated appeal Koozer v. Shelby County (8th Cir. 2025). The county’s planning and zoning commission recommended repeal, and staff said the county had stayed its own litigation pending the outcome of those cases.
“Every county is recognizing the decision is likely dispositive as to the validity of ordinance number 300A,” counsel said at the public hearing, noting Shelby and Story counties lost their appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court declined further review. A member of the public asked clarifying questions about next steps and ongoing administrative review at the Iowa Utilities Board; staff said administrative challenges and arguments about common‑carrier status and eminent domain remain pending before state regulators and in administrative review.
After closing the public hearing, the board voted on the first reading of Ordinance 300B, which repeals Ordinance 300A in its entirety and restores the previous zoning provisions not amended by 300A. The board then voted to suspend the statutory requirement that ordinances be considered at two separate meetings before final passage under Iowa Code 331.302(6A). On both roll calls (Wctor, Garmin, Stacker, H, Nath) the votes were recorded as yes.
County staff and supervisors said the repeal is largely a housekeeping measure to avoid leaving an unenforceable ordinance on the books while county efforts continue through other venues. “It’s cleaning up paperwork because we don’t have the ability to do anything anyway,” one supervisor said during the hearing.
Officials emphasized that other local controls remain in place — zoning permits, drainage and road crossing permits, and other regulations — and encouraged continued advocacy through legislative and administrative channels. The ordinance takes effect upon final passage and publication as provided by law.
The board closed the hearing after receiving no written objections and moved on to other business.
Legal counsel told the board that the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld decisions finding ordinances like Cass County’s 300A to be preempted in the consolidated appeal Koozer v. Shelby County (8th Cir. 2025). The county’s planning and zoning commission recommended repeal, and staff said the county had stayed its own litigation pending the outcome of those cases.
“Every county is recognizing the decision is likely dispositive as to the validity of ordinance number 300A,” counsel said at the public hearing, noting Shelby and Story counties lost their appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court declined further review. A member of the public asked clarifying questions about next steps and ongoing administrative review at the Iowa Utilities Board; staff said administrative challenges and arguments about common‑carrier status and eminent domain remain pending before state regulators and in administrative review.
After closing the public hearing, the board voted on the first reading of Ordinance 300B, which repeals Ordinance 300A in its entirety and restores the previous zoning provisions not amended by 300A. The board then voted to suspend the statutory requirement that ordinances be considered at two separate meetings before final passage under Iowa Code 331.302(6A). On both roll calls (Wctor, Garmin, Stacker, H, Nath) the votes were recorded as yes.
County staff and supervisors said the repeal is largely a housekeeping measure to avoid leaving an unenforceable ordinance on the books while county efforts continue through other venues. “It’s cleaning up paperwork because we don’t have the ability to do anything anyway,” one supervisor said during the hearing.
Officials emphasized that other local controls remain in place — zoning permits, drainage and road crossing permits, and other regulations — and encouraged continued advocacy through legislative and administrative channels. The ordinance takes effect upon final passage and publication as provided by law.
The board closed the hearing after receiving no written objections and moved on to other business.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
