Landowners in 7 more South Dakota counties file complaints against Summit Carbon Solutions

A back-and-forth exchange of court filings between Summit Carbon Solutions and South Dakota landowners seems to be in high gear.

Landowners in eight counties have now filed against the Iowa-based carbon dioxide pipeline company. They're represented by Brian Jorde, an attorney with Domina Law Group in Omaha, Neb.

A group of McPherson County landowners was the first to file a complaint against Summit. That was at the end of June. It alleges that a state law allowing Summit to enter landowners' property to conduct survey work without consent is unconstitutional. 

In response, Summit filed paperwork in McPherson County asking for declaratory judgement and injunctive relief. Declaratory judgement would result in the court resolving any legal uncertainty when it comes to the right to survey land. The declaratory judgement sought would prevent landowners from stopping the surveys. 

Now, landowners in Minnehaha, Lincoln, Lake, Edmunds, Spink, Brown and Beadle counties have also filed complaints against Summit. As of Tuesday, though, Minnehaha County commissioners also opted to not go through with a one-year moratorium "on the issuance of any permits and/or approval of land uses for transmission pipelines."

More:McPherson Co. landowners' lawsuit claims Summit surveys without consent are unconstitutional

Summit files paperwork to prevent landowners from stopping surveys

Summit Carbon Solutions has also filed a motion against several landowners in Edmunds County asking for a court order that would prevent them from denying Summit access to their land for survey work. 

Like the complaint filed in McPherson County, the subsequent landowner filings in the other seven counties ask for a declaratory judgement and preliminary injunction, as well as a notice of a constitutional challenge. 

More:Summit Carbon Solutions seeks ruling to prevent South Dakota landowners from stopping surveys

In the new cases, the declaratory judgement sought asks the court to declare that a state law is in violation of the South Dakota Constitution and the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The law reads that companies have a right to access land for survey work without consent, so long as there is a permit open with the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission, they give 30 days written notice to the landowner and they make a payment to the landowner in the event of any damages. 

The landowner filings cite an article in the state constitution that notes private land cannot be taken or damaged without just compensation and another that notes corporations that take private property must pay compensation before any damage to the property is done.

Those articles make the state law unconstitutional, according to the landowners.

Landowners want compensation determined before surveys

The filings also cite an article in the state constitution that says landowners have a constitutional right to have just compensation determined by a jury and paid prior to entry on the land.

However, the law includes wording that prevents landowners from exercising that right, noting that the authority, Summit Carbon Solutions in this case, can determine the payment for any damages.

More:PUC approves Summit Carbon Solutions' request for a permit application deadline extension

The landowners' filings go on to claim that the surveying law violates the due process clauses of both the state and federal constitutions. The clause reads that everyone has the right to life, liberty and property with due process of the law.

Summit Carbon Solutions has also filed legal paperwork in McPherson County, claiming that surveying private land is legal. Summit Director of Regulatory Affairs John Satterfield previously told the American News that surveys are necessary in order to examine the conditions along the pipeline path.

Videos will be taken both before and after survey work is done and can be used in the event of a disagreement between Summit and landowners about the amount of damage, Satterfield said.

Summit has bonds in place to pay for any land damage, he said.

The company applied for a permit from the PUC earlier this year. The carbon sequestration pipeline would go through several South Dakota counties and five states. Carbon dioxide emissions from 32 ethanol plants, including seven in South Dakota, would be piped to North Dakota for underground storage. That would allow the ethanol plants to sell their product in states with low carbon fuel standards. 

The pipeline would be more than 2,000 miles and cost an estimated $4.5 billion.