Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:34.080> season, of just during the open water season, of just during the open water
• <01:13:00.080> and with the Minnesota Board of Water and with the Minnesota Board of Water
• > permit<01:38:04.639> transfer support for water permit transfer support for water permit
• Even though the water permit was already in place, the water use never changed.
• the state where we already have water the state where we already have water concerns<01:42:11.280

Bills: HF4253, HF4257, HF3236, HF4264, HF4149, HF4019

Keywords: boat storage structures, public waters, natural resources, rule amendments, watercraft canopy, PFAS, environmental regulation, manufacturers, public health, product safety, groundwater, water appropriation, water-use permit, water permit, aquifer test, aquifer, well construction, groundwater permit, Department of Natural Resources, DNR

Transcript Highlights:

• the Water Caucus and the Texas Water Foundation.
• And we appreciate water.
• That's an nominal idea in it, that they can actually pump water when they get water. Yes, sir.
• Texas Water Code.
• water, Especially as our state water supply, infrastructure, treatment, groundwater, and surface water

Bills: SB480, SB767, SB790, SB971, SB1066

Keywords: water resources, interlocal contracts, local government, collaboration, planning activities, wildfire response, firefighting equipment, emergency services, state database, Texas Forest Service, customer complaints, Public Utility Commission, water service, complaint process, utility regulation, SB 971, Texas Water Assistance Program, Water Code, rural political subdivision, rural water

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met on Texas Water Day and limited public testimony to two minutes. The chair emphasized the need to move quickly because of scheduling conflicts with other committees and noted the importance of water policy and related stakeholders. The committee heard several bills focused on water administration, rural utilities, emergency response, and public works contracting. Senate Bill 790 by Senator Alvarado would let the Public Utility Commission create a simplified process for resolving tenant complaints over water or wastewater bill discrepancies; it was described as a way to avoid lengthy contested-case hearings for small disputes. Senate Bill 971 by Senator Sparks would clean up conflicting statutory definitions of “rural political subdivision” so Texas Water Development Board programs are applied consistently; Texas Rural Water Association testified in support. Senate Bill 767, also by Senator Sparks, would expand and improve a statewide database of fire-response equipment so departments, including volunteer and rural departments, can locate and share resources more effectively during emergencies; fire service witnesses supported the bill and suggested annual updates to keep the database current. Chair Perry laid out Senate Bill 480 to clarify that local governments and special districts may enter interlocal agreements for water-related planning and research, including aquifer management and flood/water planning. He also presented Senate Bill 1066, which raises payment and performance bond thresholds for Texas Parks and Wildlife Department public works contracts to $150,000, arguing the change would reflect inflation and help smaller vendors on lower-risk projects. Witnesses were heard on the bills, with no opposition recorded in the transcript. The committee voted out all five bills favorably. SB 1066, SB 480, SB 767, SB 790, and SB 971 each received unanimous committee approval and were recommended to the local and contested calendar, with SB 767 noted as amended by a suggested annual-update requirement for the equipment database.

Transcript Highlights:

• Trent Blomberg, chief legislative liaison with the Arizona Department of Water Resources.
• The 2007 agreement mandated a series of reductions as water levels decreased, measured by water levels
• Water is the number one issue, or one of the top issues, this year and will continue to be.
• Water is number one issue or one of the top issues this year and will continue to be.
• on what is or is not appropriable water.

Bills: HB2053, HB2116, HB2148

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation, A.R.S. 45-119, natural resources, water policy, river management

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 2116, which would appropriate $1 million in fiscal year 2027 from the State General Fund to the Colorado River Litigation Fund. The sponsor said it was a repeat of last year’s request and was intended as a backup if the seven Colorado River basin states cannot reach a new agreement. Arizona Department of Water Resources staff testified in support, explaining the state’s role in ongoing Colorado River negotiations and distinguishing the litigation fund from the executive’s separate Colorado River Protection Fund. The bill received a due pass recommendation on a 17-1 vote. The committee then took up House Bill 2053, which appropriates $100,000 to ADWR for updated stormwater recharge mapping and expands the mapping effort beyond state trust lands to private lands. The committee adopted Chairman Livingston’s amendment, which extended the coordination timeline to one year, broadened the agencies involved, and revised language on site eligibility and the definition of stormwater. The sponsor said the bill would help identify more places to capture stormwater for recharge, while ADWR testified neutral, supporting the mapping work but raising a concern about language tied to appropriable surface water because that is a legal determination for the courts. The amended bill passed 11-7. House Bill 2148 was then heard, proposing to give the legislature authority to appropriate non-custodial federal monies, with requirements for specifying purposes and allowing agencies to spend such funds if the legislature does not act. An amendment excluded university and Board of Regents research grants from the bill’s scope, which the chair said was intended to avoid implementation problems. The sponsor framed the bill as a transparency measure, and members discussed the large amount of federal pass-through funding Arizona receives. The amended bill passed 11-7. After the bills, the committee received a lengthy JLBC presentation comparing the executive budget with the JLBC baseline. Discussion focused on revenue forecasts, the impact of federal tax conformity, state employee health insurance costs, SNAP administrative and error-rate costs under H.R. 1, developmental disabilities and AHCCCS growth, and K-12/ESA funding trends. Members repeatedly criticized the executive budget for funding some ongoing costs on a one-year basis and expressed concern about rising caseloads and supplemental needs. No formal action was taken on the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of our members are nonprofit water supply corporations and districts, water districts.
• Lastly, the bill requires permit holders to annually report water data, um, water quality data instead
• water quality.
• the water caucus.
• There's so much need for water. That's all we've heard about how important water is.

Bills: HB 937, HB 2078, HB 2080, HB 3322, HB 3350, HB 4212, HB 4630, HB 4896, HB 4951, HB 5348, HB 5675, SB 565, SB 971, SB 1662, SB 2124

Keywords: special districts, notice requirements, Water Code, government transparency, public meetings, meeting notice, transparency, public engagement, notice, elections, groundwater management, water conservation, joint planning, environmental impact, desired future conditions, groundwater, conservation district, environmental quality, regulatory review, water utility

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of our members are nonprofit water supply corporations and water districts.
• Water utilities, both large...
• water quality.
• There's so much need for water. That's all we've heard about how important water is.
• There's not enough water in Texas.

Bills: HB937, HB2078, HB2080, HB3322, HB3350, HB4212, HB4630, HB4896, HB4951, HB5348, HB5675, SB565, SB971, SB1662, SB2124

Keywords: special districts, notice requirements, Water Code, government transparency, public meetings, meeting notice, transparency, public engagement, notice, elections, groundwater management, water conservation, joint planning, environmental impact, desired future conditions, groundwater, conservation district, environmental quality, regulatory review, water utility

Transcript Highlights:

• water supply portfolio.
• I'm with the Texas Water Association, which is a statewide water policy association focused on water
• We need water at the tap, water in the fields, and water to run our economic engine. is not going to
• over the Water Development Board's use of dedicated revenues to the Texas Water Fund.
• Any water that's made available to meet water needs that wasn't... ...previously available is new water

Bills: SB7

Keywords: water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Governing water supply contracts for in-state water do not apply to contracts for water import.
• water facilities.
• This time, we focused on water loss and water management.
• water allocation.
• That's a lot of water.

Bills: SB7

Keywords: water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is Texas Water Day at the Capitol.
• All the offices have received invitations to participate in the Water Day activity from the Water Caucus
• and the Texas Water Foundation.
• It's a great way to learn more about Texas water.
• Our water district management and aquifer systems...

Bills: SB480, SB767, SB790, SB971, SB1066

Keywords: water resources, interlocal contracts, local government, collaboration, planning activities, wildfire response, firefighting equipment, emergency services, state database, Texas Forest Service, customer complaints, Public Utility Commission, water service, complaint process, utility regulation, SB 971, Texas Water Assistance Program, Water Code, rural political subdivision, rural water

Transcript Highlights:

• They also informed me that it is a water district's bond council, not the water district itself that
• So we're the Texas Rural Water Association.
• With over 750 water district members.
• Water districts are small entities by design.
• Water control improvement districts, underwater, uh, water conservation districts, freshwater supply

Bills: HB 279, HB 310, HB 365, HB 391, HB 420, HB 422, HB 638

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• But we could put the water trough in the corral.
• Where's my water? We don't we don't do water. We're we're We're a county, we're unincorporated.
• Members, Texas faces ongoing challenges in water infrastructure and the Texas Water Fund fund, which
• Although 70% of American customers are are customers of large drinking water supplies, 77% of all water
• water supplies.

Bills: HB279, HB310, HB365, HB391, HB420, HB422, HB638, HB279, HB310

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• They also informed me that it is a water.
• So we're the Texas Rural Water Association.
• providers, Water Supply Corporation.
• There were a number of different water districts, including... Water control improvement districts.
• Water conservation districts, freshwater supply districts, municipal utility districts, water. improvement

Bills: HB279, HB310, HB365, HB391, HB420, HB422, HB638, HB279, HB310

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, House Bill 1209 by Representative Fuhrman provides for the withdrawal of surface water.
• House Bill 1209 places a pause on the issuance of new cooperative endeavor agreements for surface water
• Issuance of new cooperative endeavor agreements for surface water withdrawals while allowing existing
• The purpose is to give the state time to take a hard look at how we're managing our surface water resources
• and people have invested life savings to buy waterfront property, and you can't even tell there's water

Bills: HCR54, HCR79, HCR87, HCR94, HCR104, HB1209

Keywords: migratory waterfowl, hunting regulations, flooded crops, wildlife management, environmental impact, hunting, Kisatchie National Forest, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, deer hunting, dogs, conservation, hunting heritage, federal regulations, Senator Kennedy, wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, legislative support, environment, protective measures, boating safety

Summary: The Senate Natural Resources Committee met on March 27 with a quorum present, approved prior minutes, and then took up several resolutions and one bill related to wildlife, water resources, and conservation. H.C.R. 79, as amended, urged the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries to work together to allow the use of dogs for hunting in Kisatchie National Forest; supporters described it as a traditional hunting practice that has been restricted for years and could benefit local hunters and businesses. H.C.R. 104, as amended, asked the Department of Conservation and Energy and the Louisiana Geological Survey to study and modernize the collection, retention, and access to subsurface data, with members emphasizing the need to avoid sharing company-specific information. H.C.R. 87 was reported favorably to support correspondence from U.S. Sen. Kennedy regarding duck flyway management, H.C.R. 54 was reported favorably to study the impact of flooded corn on migratory waterfowl and restore an enforcement mechanism related to hunting over intentionally flooded crops, and H.C.R. 94 was reported favorably to require annual boating safety reports to legislative committees. The committee then heard HB 1209, which would have paused new cooperative endeavor agreements for surface water withdrawals while allowing existing agreements to continue and be renewed through December 31, 2036. The author said the bill was intended to give the state time to develop a more comprehensive, data-driven surface water strategy and to address invasive species such as giant salvinia, which he said has severely affected waterways in his district. Members and witnesses acknowledged the seriousness of the issue, but there was concern that the bill was too complex to move quickly in the session. The committee discussed converting it into a study resolution instead, and the bill was deferred without objection. The meeting then adjourned.

Bills: SB 1194, SB 1215, SB 1253, SB 1268, SB 1302, SB 1484, SB 1532

Keywords: water management, bond issuance, eminent domain, regional authority, fee structures, local governance, environmental quality, oyster cultivation, coastal management, natural resources, marine ecosystems, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas Water Development Board, guidance principles, flood plan, state water plan, rule review, infrastructure, water discharge, general permit

Transcript Highlights:

• irrigation, water supply, and drainage, as well as water users and those who support the water industry
• clean water.
• The Texas Water Development Board has billions of dollars in water supply, clean water, and drinking
• water shortages.
• We need the water.

Bills: HB16, HB16, HB1618, HB2692, HB2712, HB2970, HB3609, HB3628

Keywords: judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control

Transcript Highlights:

• Williamson County Water Plant supplies treated water to the city of Taylor and Jonah Water Special Utility
• Red Bluff Water District.
• We're injecting treated drinking water, standard water, through the aquifer, and that danger is not present
• The Water Development Board is responsible for developing both the state water plan and the state flood
• This bill provides a straightforward solution: amend the water code to exempt TWDB's water and flooding

Bills: HB16, HB1618, HB2692, HB2712, HB2970, HB3609, HB3628, HB16

Keywords: water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control, flood management, water quality, conservation district, bonds, utility rates, ratemaking, water services

Transcript Highlights:

• OK, Senate Water Committee on Agricultural, Water, Rural Affairs, come to order.
• Water district will cooperate, which is most of the water districts and irrigation district.
• If you got no water. I like to say in this committee, you can't live without water or bees.
• If you got no water. I like to say in this committee, you can't live without water or bees.
• validate the results of the water loss audits and submit water loss mitigation plans.

Bills: HB2018, HB1633, HB1689, SB612, SB3058

Keywords: agricultural conservation, land preservation, environmental protection, wildlife habitat, Texas Farm and Ranch, groundwater conservation district, Texas Water Code, water permit, permit amendment, groundwater permit, water rights, aquifer, well registration, exempt wells, beneficial use, water conservation, groundwater quality, well plugging, Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area, surface water resources

Summary: The Senate Water, Agriculture, Rural Affairs Committee heard several bills focused on groundwater management, water infrastructure, and agricultural land conservation. SB 612 would limit certain water districts in Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy counties from charging developers pipeline construction fees above actual, documented costs; the committee substitute removed a developer challenge mechanism to preserve district discretion over construction standards. HB 1633 would require groundwater conservation districts to consider registered exempt wells when reviewing or amending permits, and testimony from landowners, district representatives, and advocacy groups largely supported the bill as a way to protect domestic and livestock wells from drawdown caused by large export projects. HB 1689 would clarify that export fee revenues may be used for well operability, alternative water supplies, and aquifer monitoring, including through interlocal cooperation, and HB 3058 would give the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District authority to use export fees for county road improvements and environmental programs tied to well inspection and groundwater management. HB 2018 would clarify that the Texas Farm and Ranchland Conservation Program is intended to purchase conservation easements only on working agricultural lands, with support from cattle raisers and Farm Bureau representatives. The committee also considered HB 29, which would require large water systems to validate water loss audits and submit mitigation plans; a committee substitute removed the water-loss threshold and adjusted the timeline for more detailed validation. Public testimony on the bills was generally supportive, with several witnesses describing declining well levels, road damage from export projects, and the need to preserve agricultural land and local water supplies. The committee adopted committee substitutes and voted favorably on HB 29, HB 1689, HB 2018, SB 612, and SB 3058, recommending several of them for the local and uncontested calendar; HB 1633 was left pending awaiting a committee substitute.

Transcript Highlights:

• treatment systems, clean water and drinking water treatment facilities.
• treatment systems, clean water and drinking water treatment facilities.
• That can mean things like conveyance of water, storage of water, reuse of water, groundwater replenishment
• more water?'
• acre-feet of water.

Bills: HB2024, HB2053, HB2097, HB2116, HB2117

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, irrigation, non-expansion areas, water management, agriculture, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation

Summary: The committee began with member and staff introductions, then heard House Bill 2024, which would expand the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority’s water supply development definition to include snowpack augmentation and related planning and facility work. Supporters argued cloud seeding and drone-based silver iodide deployment could increase snowpack and water supply at relatively low cost, while opponents raised concerns about weather modification, uncertainty in the science, and possible environmental or health effects. After debate, the committee approved HB 2024 on a 6-4 vote, with some members expressing reservations and requesting more information before floor consideration. The committee next considered House Bill 2053, which would direct the Arizona Department of Water Resources to update stormwater recharge mapping statewide and provide $100,000 for the work. The sponsor and ADWR said the bill would expand on prior state-land mapping and help identify recharge opportunities on private land; ADWR was neutral and said it could do the technical mapping but could not make legal determinations about appropriable surface water rights. Salt River Project opposed the bill’s language on surface-water rights, arguing that determinations about unappropriated water belong to the courts and that site-specific recharge projects could affect downstream rights. The committee adopted the Griffin amendment and then passed HB 2053 as amended on a 6-4 vote. Chelsea McGuire of WIFA then gave a broad presentation on the agency’s revolving funds, conservation grants, and long-term augmentation efforts, describing past investments, current grant awards, and seven potential augmentation projects under development. She said WIFA’s current budget ask was essentially for no additional cuts, while members asked about costs, project qualifications, and public-private structure. The committee then took up House Bill 2097, which would impose a six acre-feet-per-acre groundwater pumping cap in irrigation non-expansion areas, add reporting and well-measurement requirements, and set a $150 penalty for violations. ADWR said the bill could require additional staffing and that the cap and substitution provisions had technical concerns; environmental groups argued the cap was too high and could still encourage overpumping, while supporters said it would finally place a limit on INA pumping. HB 2097 passed 6-4. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2116, which would appropriate $1 million to the Colorado River Litigation Fund; the sponsor described it as a contingency for ongoing Colorado River negotiations, and the committee moved the bill forward after brief discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, water is a top priority and Members, um, water is a top priority, and I think this would help everybody
• be told what we can do with our water. be told what we can do with our water.
• water right holders and senior water water right holders and senior water right<00:09:02.880>
• that they can uh share adjudicated water that they can uh share adjudicated water rights<00:09:15.120
• It is about allowing junior water users to exchange water with senior water users. That is true.

Bills: SF0050, SF0068, SF0084, HB0087, HB0029, HB0061, HB0090

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, irrigation, water management, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, water development

Transcript Highlights:

• water. We better do roll. water. We better do roll.
• water around.
• water around.
• impact Wyoming's water and water supply. impact Wyoming's water and water supply.
• . water. water.

Bills: SF0050, SF0068, SF0084, HB0087, HB0029, HB0061, HB0090

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, irrigation, water management, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, water development

Transcript Highlights:

• providers, that they can recover their stored water within one mile of the location where the water
• They can recover their stored water within one mile of the location where the water was stored, or, in
• Pumping as stored water recovery.
• Chair, and then, so wet water is ideal. We have 20,000 in wet water; the rest in long-term storage.
• At a time when Arizona is facing real water scarcity, we should be reducing real water scarcity—excuse

Bills: SB1082, SB1200, SB1335, SB1336, SB1559, SB1761, SB1762, SB1785, SCM1007

Keywords: petting zoos, animal encounters, public health, handwashing, supervision, sanitization, safety regulations, civil penalties, water supply, groundwater, Phoenix, certificates, long-term storage credits, water conservation, municipal provider, replenishment obligation, water banking, annual report, Arizona Water Banking Authority, water supply management

Summary: The Senate Natural Resources Committee first considered two nominations. Jessica Manuel was introduced as a nominee to the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, where testimony emphasized her science background and experience working with agencies and stakeholders. Members asked about wolf management and her qualifications, and the committee voted 8-0 to recommend her confirmation. Stephen Williams was then introduced for the Arizona Livestock Loss Board, with discussion focused on his livestock and State Land Department experience and how the board handles wolf-related livestock losses. The committee also voted 8-0 to recommend his confirmation. The committee then took up several bills. SB 1785, which would codify ADWR’s one-mile safe-harbor policy for recovery wells near groundwater storage facilities, passed 5-3 after ADWR said it largely reflected current practice but requested clarifying language. SB 1082, requiring sanitation measures and signage for petting zoos and similar animal encounter exhibits, drew strong testimony from a parent advocate describing severe E. coli/HUS cases and opposition from fair/agriculture representatives who argued the bill was too broad and unnecessary; after amendment, it failed 4-4. SB 1336, extending the State Land Department and creating a temporary oversight committee with a broad amendment on lease holdovers, notice periods, and committee membership, passed 6-2 after significant debate over the committee’s composition and scope. Later, SB 1200, which would require ADWR to revisit certain Phoenix AMA assured water supply applications using older groundwater models, passed 5-3 despite opposition from CAP and ADWR over added replenishment obligations and concerns about relying on outdated models. SB 1335, requiring the Arizona Water Banking Authority to post its annual report online, passed 7-1. SB 1559, creating rural groundwater management work groups in each basin to report to ADWR, passed 5-3 after supporters said it would improve basin-level coordination and opponents argued it created new bureaucracy without enforcement tools. SB 1761, appropriating $47.7 million to the University of Arizona for the Yuma Center of Excellence for Desert Agriculture, Cooperative Extension, and the Experiment Station, passed 7-1 amid broad support but some concern about funding levels. Finally, SCM 1007, urging Congress to divest and improve the San Carlos Irrigation Project electric system, passed unanimously.