Interception of electronic communication isn't necessary; all that's required is an interception of an oral communication with a device that passed in interstate commerce, just what probably happened here. Can't you Dummies come up with better responses??
Nope fraid knot.
First the communications were not intercepted. The person recording was admitted to the meeting and Iowa law allowed members to record meetings. That's why the county attourny refused to get involved.
Second, sending a recording made legally across state lines is not an crime and is not prohibited. That's why the US attourney refused to get involved.
You simply can not make a crime out of this event no matter how hard you try. The entire text of 18 USC § 2511(1)(a) is available on line for your enjoyment. There is no reason to make these things up.