Transcript Highlights:

• We'll start with the Texas Water Development Board.
• We, every five years, develop and adopt a comprehensive state water plan, which assesses the water demands
• We also have the Texas Water Development Fund, or D-Fund program.
• I'm the Executive Administrator at the Texas Water Development Board.
• As you know, the water development...

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, water conservation or recycling, treatment and reuse of water.
• We were authorized to use the Water Project Fund to fund technical assistance and capacity development
• for water systems.
• Small water, water systems, mutual domestics are unable to actually complete a water project, because
• We primarily fund economic development and community development projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• and surroundings, and the effects of development on water resources.
• 03.280> development<00:05:04.240> on<00:05:04.560> Water effects of development
• on Water effects of development on Water Resources<00:05:06.240> including<00:05:06.759> the
• Resource Management to advocate for water rights and secure water reservations and water credits for
• Resource Management to advocate for water rights and secure water reservations and water credits for

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first took up SB 534, a measure concerning development in Kakaʻako Makai involving the Hawaii Community Development Authority and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. The chairs explained that the hearing was decision-making only and no testimony would be accepted, though members could ask clarifying questions. The chair outlined amendments to clarify HCDA’s approval process, require an environmental impact statement before residential development proposals are submitted, require Department of Health documentation on hazardous substances, and specify that only OHA-owned parcels would be eligible for certain residential development with a 400-foot height limit and maximum floor area ratio of 10.0. The amendments also addressed affordability, owner-occupancy, association fees, and a special fund, while noting Attorney General concerns that the fee could be construed as a tax and suggesting further review by Judiciary and Ways and Means. Members discussed the affordability threshold, with one senator suggesting 160% AMI instead of 140% due to high housing costs and concern that essential workers could be priced out. Others raised concerns about Native Hawaiian affordability, the long-term effect of perpetuity restrictions, and whether the process would protect OHA’s interests. An HCDA representative said 140% AMI was used in existing reserve housing rules and that lower thresholds could make development economically infeasible. OHA and other supporters said the proposal was still early in planning and emphasized the need for public hearings, community input, and compliance with environmental and remediation standards. The committees voted to pass SB 534 with amendments: Water and Land approved it 4-1, and Hawaiian Affairs also adopted the chair’s recommendation, with one member excused and one voting no. The meeting then moved to SB 3, relating to water resource management. The bill would authorize the Commission on Water Resource Management to retain independent legal counsel, create an executive director position, allow challenges to emergency orders under certain conditions, establish fines for water use offenses, and revise emergency and shortage declaration procedures; Red Hill-related provisions were noted as removed from this version. Testimony was largely supportive, including from DLNR, the Board of Water Supply, OHA, and Sierra Club, with OHA stressing the measure’s importance to Native Hawaiian water rights and past litigation. A Department of Hawaiian Home Lands representative supported the bill with amendments and recommended explicit language directing the commission chair or designee to advocate for water rights and reservations for homelands. The chair indicated the committees would use the prior Senate-passed version as the basis for further action, and the discussion then moved on to SB 130, a search-and-rescue reimbursement bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Water use within a designated water management area generally requires a water use permit.
• And then for both ground and surface water, we have water use permits.
• Like, this all, in my mind, is in the same area of water, and so I'm a developer, so I'm a little bit
• Um, Big Island, don't they have a lot of water? Probably they have issues. Water?
• Housing wise future... which is developer, residential developer, which is 10.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Developed properties benefit from local infrastructure, e.g., roads, water, and sewers, and should contribute
• We found that the most egregious form of water theft is through water hydrants, where we've got some
• We estimate up to about 50 million gallons of water per year is lost because of water theft.
• The potential damage that can be caused to the water system, both the fire hydrant and even the water
• Alfredo Redondo on behalf of Irvine Ranch Water District and East Valley Water District, in support.

Summary: The committee opened the June 18, 2025 Local Government hearing with housekeeping rules, noting that testimony would be in person and that disruptive conduct would not be tolerated. Because a quorum was initially lacking, the committee proceeded as a subcommittee and heard several bills before later taking formal votes once quorum was established. The agenda included 15 bills, with eight placed on the consent calendar and one bill pulled by the author. The bills discussed included SB 333, which would let San Luis Obispo County voters consider raising the local sales tax cap for transportation funding; SB 390, a district-specific measure for South San Francisco to address a Mello-Roos/CFD issue affecting properties with conservation easements; SB 394, which would increase penalties for water theft and allow local agencies to recover damages; SB 611, which would restore protections for housing projects tied to adopted community plans while CEQA litigation is pending; SB 757, which would allow nuisance abatement liens or special assessments to collect cleanup costs for chronic nuisance properties; and SB 489, which would require public agencies involved in housing approvals to post application requirements online. Supporters generally framed the bills as tools for infrastructure financing, housing production, transparency, public safety, or deterrence of theft and blight. Opposition was heard on SB 757, with critics warning about due process, foreclosure risk, and displacement of low-income homeowners. After quorum was called, the committee voted 7-0 to pass SB 757, and later approved SB 489 on a 10-0 vote. The consent calendar bills—SB 74, SB 225, SB 272, SB 409, SB 558, SB 735, SB 736, and SB 737—were approved together. SB 333 advanced on a 7-2 vote, SB 390 passed 9-0, SB 394 passed 9-0, and SB 611 passed 10-0. The hearing concluded with the committee adjourned after all listed actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• as far as. there's a difference between a residential development and a forest as far as drinking water
• But also, to get development, you need water, and you need to recognize that the kind of people that
• But when we're protecting water, not just my drinking water—and this is my drinking water now—but also
• water quality.
• water quality.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Water Development Division director with the Department of Water Resources.
• Our water development plan is statutorily required.
• First off, we are required with the State Water Commission to develop a comprehensive water development
• water development plan.
• Water development plan participation as a requirement.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But also, to get development, you need water, and you need to recognize that the kind of people that
• But when we're protecting water, not just my drinking water—and this is my drinking water now—but also
• water quality.
• No property development leads to the highest water quality.
• We just would like to have some smart development and have them in areas with the least impact to water

Summary: The committee met to consider a series of temporary appropriation requests, reserve fund transfers, federal grant appropriations, and review items. Early items included a $32 million appropriation and matching reserve transfer for the Department of Education’s educational freedom account program, a $476,000 request for the State Crime Lab, and a $90,000 assessment coordination request from DFA. Members asked questions about the assessment contract costs, and the item was approved. The committee also approved a $1 ARPA return to the CDC and a Department of Human Services reallocation package that moved general revenue and positions among divisions to meet client needs. The most extensive discussion centered on a $32 million restricted reserve transfer for the educational freedom account program. Members questioned the growing number of participating students, the program’s long-term funding needs, and safeguards against improper purchases. Agency representatives said about 44,000 students were being funded, that reimbursements and marketplace purchases are reviewed, and that reporting and audit controls are in place, though not every instance of fraud can be prevented. The committee approved the transfer after discussion. Members also approved smaller cash and federal grant items, including funding for a teacher shortage data dashboard, All Kids Bike grants, crime lab outsourcing, veterans cemetery operations, and a podiatric medicine licensing investigation fund. The most contentious item was a $7 million federal Forest Legacy grant request for Central Arkansas Water and the Department of Agriculture to acquire land in the Maumelle watershed, including acreage in Perry County and Pulaski County. Members debated water quality, development pressure, property tax impacts, local support, and whether Perry County had been adequately consulted. Agency and company representatives argued the acquisition would protect drinking water, preserve forested watershed land, and support recreation, while some legislators emphasized the county’s tax and development concerns. Senator Davis moved to defer the item to the full Legislative Council and to request removal of the Perry County portion; that motion passed. The committee then reviewed the remaining items, including a Veterans Affairs pay plan request, and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• “And how much is the water having to put with it, Central Water?”
• But also, to get development, you need water, and you need to recognize that the kind of people that
• But when we're protecting water, not just my drinking water—and this is my drinking water now—but also
• appear to me, you can tell me if I'm wrong, that no property development leads to the highest water
• We just would like to have some smart development and have it in areas with the least impact to water

Summary: The committee met to consider a series of appropriation, reserve transfer, and grant requests. Early items included temporary appropriations for the Department of Education’s Educational Freedom Account program ($32 million), the State Crime Lab ($476,000), and DFA Assessment Coordination ($90,000), along with a $1 ARPA return from the Department of Health. The committee approved these items after brief questions, including a discussion about contract cost increases at Assessment Coordination and a clarification that the $1 ARPA item was simply an unused-funds return. The most extensive discussion centered on the Department of Education’s EFA funding. Members questioned the growth in participation, the use of one-time funds and restricted reserves, and safeguards against fraud or improper purchases. Agency officials said about 44,000 students were being funded, that purchases are reviewed and flagged for unusual activity, and that homeschool students are not required to buy a curriculum so long as purchases are eligible and approved. The committee approved the EFA appropriation and related reserve transfer, and officials said the governor’s proposed budget would include the program in the RSA going forward. The committee also approved a DHS reallocation request and reviewed a building authority loan for a data center power supply replacement. In the federal grant section, members discussed a Department of Agriculture request for Central Arkansas Water to acquire land in the Maumelle watershed. Debate focused on the environmental benefits versus local property-tax and development concerns in Perry County, with testimony from the agency, Central Arkansas Water, and Potlatch about watershed protection, public access, and potential development impacts. After extended discussion, the committee adopted a motion to defer the item to the full Legislative Council and asked the department to remove the Perry County portion from the request, limiting the grant-funded purchase to Pulaski County property. The committee then reviewed remaining items, including a Veterans Affairs pay-plan appropriation, and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So things are going to look a lot different regarding water management and water supply development in
• I would think the Water Development Board would be our best resource.
• I'll ask the Water Development Board about depths and things like that. Mr.
• John Dubnyk, Texas Water Development Board. He’s here as a resource only.
• I'm not going to criticize the Water Development Board.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's more water systems than there are water treatment plants.
• system or a surface water or source water, what the water quality is based on work that we do.
• c> here<00:16:06.560> at quality water high quality water here at quality water high quality
• of water.
• our economic development development our economic development committee<01:42:57.520> and<01:42

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting began with roll call, adoption of the minutes, and brief remarks, including birthday recognition for Representative Maseroni and a moment of reflection for a soldier who died during training at Fort Knox. The committee then heard a presentation from Tony Hatton, commissioner of the Department for Environmental Protection and acting director of the Kentucky Division of Water, with Amanda Lefer, deputy commissioner, on the state’s water and wastewater programs and planning. Hatton described Kentucky’s water resources and the Division of Water’s responsibilities, including watershed and nonpoint source work, KPDES discharge permitting, PFAS response, engineering review of water infrastructure, inspections, public outreach, and sampling. He said Kentucky has 428 public water systems, 263 water treatment plants, about 1.9 million service connections, and nearly 97% of the population has access to municipally treated water. He also noted that the state has 43 systems receiving awards for EPA areawide optimization and emphasized operator training, regionalization, and use of GIS mapping and Kentucky Infrastructure Authority data to support planning and funding decisions. Members raised concerns about aging infrastructure, water loss, staffing shortages, and wastewater problems in local systems. Representative Blandon described severe failures in a city system, including major water loss and sewer backups, and asked whether the state could intervene; Hatton said the division inspects treatment facilities and provides compliance assistance but is not authorized to manage delivery systems, though third-party help and emergency funding can be used in some cases. Senator Smith and others shared similar experiences with line loss and system failures, while Hatton pointed to regionalization and funding support as the main tools available. The discussion also highlighted PFAS as an emerging issue, with Hatton saying the department is working with systems to meet anticipated federal requirements by 2029.

Transcript Highlights:

• water than there is a need for frack water.
• And that's one avenue we've been exploring, talking to the data center developers about their water needs
• As the produced water industry continues to develop, the Viability Waiver Section does not impose standards
• I'd like to just speak a little bit about the water quality standards that we're developing.
• Universities with the consortiums, that a robust standard is being developed to ensure that water is

Bills: HB48, HB49, HB 1169, HB1971, HB2584, HB2663, HB2890, HB48, HB49

Keywords: HB 48, oilfield theft, organized theft, petroleum products, oil and gas equipment, DPS, Department of Public Safety, Texas, Railroad Commission, criminal justice, energy resources, theft prevention, organized crime, border region, El Paso, law enforcement task force, asset recovery, pipeline theft, drilling equipment, equipment theft

Transcript Highlights:

• Water is liquid gold in reality.
• With water quality in the state, the first step is setting water quality standards.
• not meeting the water quality standards, then we deem those water bodies as impaired.
• quality in a water body that is not meeting water quality standards.
• And so this is the water quality improvement grant dashboard that we're currently in development.

Summary: The Committee on Environment and Natural Resources convened with a quorum present, heard opening remarks from Chair Rodriguez and member introductions, and discussed broad priorities including water quality, climate change, budget oversight, and accountability for environmental investments. Members emphasized concerns about nutrient pollution, springs, Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, and the need for better data and measurable results. The committee then received a presentation from DEP Deputy Secretary Adam Blaylock on the state’s water quality restoration framework. He explained how water quality standards, total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), Basin Management Action Plans (BMAPs), and reasonable assurance plans work together to address impaired waters, and noted that BMAPs are updated every five years with annual reviews in between. He also described recent statutory changes requiring five-year milestones, restrictions on new septic systems in certain areas, and public-facing data tools to track projects and water quality trends. Members questioned whether BMAPs are producing enough improvement and whether the five-year update cycle is too slow. Blaylock said results can take years because of project lag and environmental variability, but that the department can adjust plans if data show they are not working. He also highlighted $2.9 billion in statewide water quality funding since 2019, nearly 1,100 funded projects, and a $1.1 billion water quality improvement grant program that now covers impaired waters beyond BMAP areas. The committee discussed agricultural projects, DEP and FDACS funding roles, and a new dashboard and centralized monitoring platform under development. No formal votes or other actions were taken, and the meeting ended with adjournment moved by the vice chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Water Board conducts an annual drinking water needs assessment.
• So the Water Commission went through their process to develop those regulations, which took multiple
• I developed that.
• And now, actually, we are developing new advanced cycles to squeeze many more drops of water out of that
• Hi, Kasha Hunt here with Valley Water, Santa Clara Valley Water.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on water and coastal resilience heard an overview of the governor’s Proposition 4 spending plan, with presentations from the Department of Finance, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Department of Water Resources, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and later coastal agencies. Members discussed the water chapter’s major allocations for drinking water and wastewater, recycled water, tribal water infrastructure, groundwater recharge and SGMA implementation, dam safety, flood protection, integrated regional water management, Salton Sea projects, and water data/stream gauges. The LAO noted that many programs are established and have clear funding processes, but some newer or less-defined programs may warrant more detailed future budget requests and reporting. No votes were taken on the agenda items. Members raised concerns about groundwater subsidence, water deliveries from the Delta, the pace of water storage investments, instream flows, and whether bond dollars were being used to backfill General Fund reductions. Administration witnesses said groundwater recharge spending is being paced because prior years already funded substantial SGMA work, that Delta operations are governed by water quality, salinity, and species requirements, and that Proposition 1 storage projects have moved slowly because they are locally led and require permitting and financing. The Water Board and DWR said they use public needs assessments, annual plans, and existing grant processes to prioritize projects, and Finance said some General Fund programs were shifted to Proposition 4 to help balance the budget. Members also asked for clearer public tracking of bond spending and more concise future reporting. In the coastal resilience portion, the Ocean Protection Council and Coastal Conservancy described Proposition 4 funding for sea level rise adaptation, coastal flood management, habitat restoration, public access, and San Francisco Bay projects, with a multi-year rollout based on project readiness and recent large state investments. The Conservancy said it would use its existing rolling grant process, while OPC said its sea level rise grants would build on existing programs and new technical assistance. The Department of Fish and Wildlife explained its proposed use of bond funds for climate-ready fisheries, hatchery modernization, salmon monitoring, whale- and turtle-safe fishing gear, and a specific hatchery operations request tied to the Friant settlement. The LAO said the coastal chapter’s proposed first-year spending is relatively modest but generally reasonable given staffing and project readiness, while members emphasized oversight, transparency, and coordination across agencies and jurisdictions.

Transcript Highlights:

• every year on water, of course it's on water supply and...
• every year on water.
• on water supply and water quality.
• can slow down the water.
• We also have a program called Our Water, Our Water, Our... beyond water quality or anything else, you're

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on flood risk and flood management in California, with opening remarks emphasizing that flooding is a statewide and growing threat due to climate change, including the possibility of extreme losses in a worst-case event. Members noted recent flooding in places such as San Diego, the Tulare Basin, and Pajaro, and framed the hearing as a way to better understand prevention, response, and how to capture excess water for later use. Jeffrey Mount of PPIC gave the main overview, describing California’s high flood exposure, the different flood types the state faces, and the mix of structural and non-structural tools used to manage them. He stressed that levees, dams, bypasses, land-use planning, flood insurance, and emergency response all matter, but that risk is rising because current standards are based on past hydrology rather than future climate conditions. He also warned that flood management is underfunded, that the National Flood Insurance Program is weak, and that federal support is increasingly uncertain. Members asked about groundwater recharge, permitting, NOAA and federal cuts, and which communities are most at risk; Mount said recharge can help but does not eliminate flood risk, and that small Central Valley communities and heavily developed floodplains are especially concerning. State officials Laura Hollander of the Department of Water Resources and Jane Dolan of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board described the state’s role in forecasting, emergency response, grants, planning, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan. They highlighted aging infrastructure, the need for better coordination, and the state’s special liability in the Central Valley after the Paterno decision. Dolan reviewed the history of major floods and said the plan calls for about $1 billion per year over 30 years to meet current needs, while Hollander said the state works with local and federal partners on preparedness, response, and subventions projects. Both emphasized that floodplain planning, regional coordination, and faster permitting are important, but that more consistent funding is needed. A later panel from local flood agencies and districts reinforced those points, arguing that the state’s annual flood funding is below identified needs and that a proposed statewide flood and dam safety bond was reduced substantially in the broader climate bond package. Witnesses urged more routine maintenance funding, support for regional flood planning, and continued federal-state-local partnerships to reduce risk and maintain eligibility for federal assistance. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the informational hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Department of Water Resources.
• . waters to benefit all Americans.
• reuse, waste water.
• But can we develop, can we work towards developing a better strategic approach?
• . tribal water users.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair now calls Chair L'Oreal Stepney of the Texas Water Development Board and Executive Director
• the state water plan next the legislature. us with developing first our first ever state flood plan.
• We have the Texas Water Development Fund, D-Fund program was unique. about this program is that one loan
• This is what makes our SWIFT program so incredibly attractive to our customers. for developing new water
• So back home in my area we've got a lot of little rural water development. corporations or water supply

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• EVERY WATER BODY.
• WATER BODY.
• USE AS THE MAIN EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT IS THE MAIN ISSUE BUT IF THE WATER BODY IS NOT MEETING THE WATER
• QUALITY IN A WATER BODY THAT IS NOT MEETING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
• THIS IS THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT DASHBOARD THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IN DEVELOPMENT WITH.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Look at ways to develop new water through desalinization.
• That's called push water.
• But so when you say push water, that push water is for Delivery or push water on row crops?
• you've got Basically water is the vehicle to move more water.
• Augustine. uses a ton of water. A lot of developers use that.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Water Development Division director with the Department of Water Resources.
• Our water development plan is statutorily required.
• First off, we are required with the State Water Commission to develop a comprehensive water development
• water development plan.
• Water development plan participation as a requirement: so we go through this very robust water development

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.