Ken Brass — Called as present during the roll call.
Ken Brass — Referenced in connection with a district and industrial uses.
Ken Brass — Representative Ken Brass is called during the roll call vote.
Dewith Carrier — Called as present during the roll call.
Kimberly Coates — Representative Coates was called as present during the roll call.
Kimberly Coates — Representative Kimberly Coates is recognized to question the bill, opening with a biblical reference about property boundaries and asking whether a private company can cross that constitutional boundary for its own benefit. She then states her support for the bill, saying she does not want to move the boundary stone for the people of Louisiana, and the chair thanks her after her remarks.
Kimberly Coates — The chair says he will go to Representative Coates next.
Kimberly Coates — Representative Coates is briefly addressed and thanked during the same questioning exchange, with the discussion centered on acknowledging her participation rather than introducing a new topic.
Kimberly Coates — Called during the roll call vote and recorded as a yes vote.
Timothy Kerner — Called during roll call.
Timothy Kerner — Called during the roll call vote and recorded as a no vote.
Shane Mack — Called as here during roll call.
Dewith Carrier — Called during the roll call vote and recorded as a yes vote.
Shane Mack — Said he would share a brief story about HB 7 and private property in Louisiana.
Shane Mack — Shared a personal story about his Hungarian father-in-law and family land in Albany.
Shane Mack — Continued the story about the Hungarian settlement and the importance of landownership.
Shane Mack — Described the generational transfer of the family land.
Shane Mack — Described family traditions and memories tied to the land.
Shane Mack — Argued that HB 7 protects private property and generational continuity.
Shane Mack — Continued arguing that HB 7 preserves family land legacies and asked Paul Hurd about his role in the 2006 constitutional amendment.
Shane Mack — Addressed directly in the discussion of Kelo and constitutional protections.
Shane Mack — Addressed directly before the response to his question.
Shane Mack — Representative Mack is called on to ask a question and then raises a question about whether a private property owner can be compelled to allow a pipeline and carbon sequestration storage, referencing prior testimony about his father-in-law’s inherited property.
Shane Mack — Julie Sauer said she was listening to Representative Mack and agreed with what he was saying.
Shane Mack — Called during the roll call vote and recorded as a yes vote.
Danny McCormick — Called as present during roll call.
Danny McCormick — Representative McCormick is introduced as the next questioner, thanks the witnesses and chair, and later is thanked by the chair after presenting his constitutional argument against carbon capture expropriation. The mentions together capture his participation in the same hearing exchange.
Danny McCormick — Also referenced in the procedural discussion about whether to hear the remaining witnesses first.
Danny McCormick — Representative McCormick is mentioned in the context of questions being directed to the earlier panel; the speaker clarifies that both Representative Domangue and McCormick’s questions were for that earlier panel.
Danny McCormick — Representative McCormick participates in a sustained question-and-answer exchange about the bill, asking whether removing succession issues would make the bill supportable and pressing concerns about eminent domain, property rights, fairness, and compensation. The discussion includes clarifications about who the question is directed to, disagreement over claims about company power, and ends with the chair thanking Representative McCormick and noting the questioning is finished.
Danny McCormick — Is called on for a question and referenced in the discussion of subsurface eminent domain.
Danny McCormick — Representative McCormick participated in a discussion about concerns with CO2 plume-related stranded reserves, subsurface eminent domain, and the impact on traditional oil and gas. He pressed the witness on whether their organization had been polled before taking a position, referenced his own bill and asked that the issue be folded into House Bill 7, and emphasized that subsurface domain and traditional oil and gas were under attack. The exchange concluded with thanks to Representative McCormick after his questions.
Danny McCormick — Referenced as having brought up the unitization process.
Danny McCormick — Called on for a question; transcript renders the name as 'McHack,' which appears to be a transcription error.
Danny McCormick — Praised alongside Representative Mike Johnson for taking responsibility.
Danny McCormick — During the roll call vote, Representative Danny McCormick was called and recorded as voting yes/no in the sequence of vote calls.
Neil Riser — Called as here during roll call.
Neil Riser — Addressed as 'Representative Reiser' and noted as having a quick question/comment.
Neil Riser — During the roll call vote, Representative Neil Riser was recorded as voting no on the motion. After the vote, the chair thanked him, and a motion to adjourn was made by Representative Riser without objection.
Caleb Kleinpeter — Opened discussion and asked for the bill to be heard; later identified as the sponsor of House Bill 7.
Caleb Kleinpeter — Caleb Kleinpeter argued that the bill does not prohibit land takings for natural gas or oil pipelines and that carbon capture and carbon dioxide sequestration should not be treated as separate from hydrocarbons. He referenced Louisiana’s hydrocarbon production history, enhanced oil recovery, and the Clean Hydrogen Task Force to argue that carbon dioxide storage has long been part of the oil and gas industry. He also questioned why the bill was originally introduced in 2020, suggesting it reflected changing global market demands for lower-carbon products, and raised the issue of whether restrictions on one landowner for carbon dioxide should also apply to oil and gas pipelines. The exchange concluded with the response that the bill preserves carbon dioxide transportation and storage as it relates to oil and gas recovery and does not affect oil and gas production.
HB7 — House Bill 7 is introduced as the Louisiana Landowners Protection Act and then discussed through committee amendment and floor debate. The speaker explains that the bill, as filed and with technical amendments adopted, would remove the state’s and its agents’ authority to use eminent domain for private carbon capture and geological sequestration projects, require such projects to proceed only through voluntary agreements, and resolve what is described as a conflict between statute and the Constitution. The bill is framed as a pro-landowner, pro-constitution measure intended to correct a prior mistake in the law.
HB7 — House Bill 7 is discussed as a measure that would restore rights to landowners and improve their negotiating position by limiting expropriation, but it is also explicitly opposed by speakers who argue it should be rejected. The bill is described as removing eminent domain authority for carbon dioxide pipelines and storage, and the discussion culminates in a request that the committee reject House Bill 7.
HB7 — Referenced as the vehicle to address subsurface eminent domain and stranded reserves.
HB7 — Referenced as the bill being objected to on the grounds that it would harm economic progress.
HB7 — Chair reminds members to keep discussion focused on House Bill 7.
HB7 — House Bill 7 is presented as the Louisiana Landowners Protection Act, aimed at protecting landowners by prohibiting private entities from using expropriation for carbon capture transportation and geological storage. Supporters argue that the bill preserves eminent domain for true public purposes only, brings Louisiana law into line with the court ruling, and repeals unnecessary prior authority for carbon capture and sequestration expropriation. The discussion remains focused on the bill’s role in limiting private eminent-domain use and defending landowner rights.
HB7 — House Bill 7 is presented as the Louisiana Landowners Protection Act and described as restoring constitutional limits and aligning the law with the state constitution and court rulings. The speaker and supporters express clear support for the bill and repeatedly urge the committee to pass it as written, without any amendments.
HB7 — House Bill 7 is discussed in a continuous sequence: opposition cards are read, the sponsor thanks members and offers closing remarks, a motion is made to move the bill favorably, and then a motion is made to involuntarily defer the bill. The bill is ultimately involuntarily deferred.
Paul Heard — The speaker says Paul Heard was involved in the earlier constitutional effort and will be brought up to speak.