Transcript Highlights:

• It's been used over time under the direction of a Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund Advisory
• It's been used over time under the direction of a Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund Advisory
• It's been used over time under the direction of a Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund Advisory
• It's been used over time under the direction of a Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund Advisory
• It's been used over time under the direction of a Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund Advisory

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held an introductory orientation for members, many of whom were new or newly assigned to the committee. Leadership emphasized that the committee is intended to operate in a nonpartisan, collaborative way, and members introduced themselves and described their backgrounds in farming, gardening, food service, environmental work, water and waste issues, veterinary work, and related fields. Several members noted personal ties to homesteading, livestock, orcharding, food security, landfill concerns, and animal welfare, while others said they were eager to learn the committee’s work. The chair then reviewed committee procedures and expectations. Members were told the committee would generally meet on Tuesdays, with hearings starting around 10 a.m. and often running until about 4:30 p.m., and that absences, substitutes for executive sessions, and email communications would be handled through House rules and the committee’s email system. The chair also covered decorum rules for live-streamed meetings, including professional dress, limiting food and drink at the table, and giving full attention to witnesses. Members were reminded that legislative emails are subject to public records laws and that the committee may soon transition to a new email domain. The chair also explained logistics such as bill folders, committee room storage, and emergency procedures for evacuation or shelter-in-place. No bills were debated or voted on in this meeting, but the chair noted that the committee already had roughly two dozen bills pending, including animal welfare, landfill, policy, and cat-and-dog related measures. Members were told to expect a broad mix of topics beyond agriculture, including solid waste and animal-related legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that just shows you the total amount of um bonding that would occur with general fund, highway fund
• If they were to come into federal funds, they're under this language, they're to reduce the general fund
• > others</c><00:10:05.680><c> of</c> general fund, highway fund and others of general fund, highway fund
• for the water project.
• </c> about um some additional water projects. about um some additional water projects.

Committee: Senate Capital Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• water.
• water.
• water quality control plan, That the water board considered housing in developing the water quality
• nearly $5.2 billion to fund critical drinking water infrastructure.
• Nearly $5.2 billion to fund critical drinking water infrastructure, critical water quality infrastructure

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing production, affordability, and timelines. Chair Pacheco and Assemblymember Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage and the need to reduce costs while maintaining environmental, safety, and community protections. The first panel featured housing experts and industry representatives who argued that state regulations, code complexity, utility constraints, and agency review processes add substantial cost and delay to development. Bill Fulton described overlapping state and local land-use authorities and the tension among housing, coastal protection, climate, and wildfire goals. CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and California Apartment Association representative Bob Raymer said building codes, energy mandates, and agency processes have materially increased per-home costs, and they urged more centralized affordability analysis and greater scrutiny of regulatory impacts. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger timelines and accountability for state agency reviews. The second panel brought in state agencies to explain their roles. HCD said its housing element enforcement, streamlining laws, and technical assistance have helped increase production, shorten entitlement timelines, and improve compliance by local governments. CARB said SB 375 is a planning law that does not directly regulate land use, and argued that regional housing assumptions in sustainable communities strategies are not being fully implemented on the ground. The Coastal Commission said it works with local governments to balance coastal protection, sea-level-rise risk, and housing, and noted recent guidance and pilot efforts to streamline housing approvals in the coastal zone. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are designed to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design and documentation complexity. Fish and Wildlife and DTSC both emphasized early engagement and collaboration to reduce delays while protecting natural resources and public health; DTSC said it is refining vapor intrusion guidance and using brownfield grants to support redevelopment. The State Water Resources Control Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to provide predictable permitting while balancing water quality, water rights, and housing needs, and noted billions in grants and loans for water infrastructure and site remediation that can support housing affordability. In response to questions from Assemblymember Haney, several agencies described ongoing coordination across departments, including regular meetings among HCD, CARB, the Coastal Commission, and transportation agencies, as well as broader interagency efforts to reduce redundancies and identify pinch points in project delivery. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the main outcome was informational testimony and discussion of possible future reforms to improve coordination, predictability, and affordability in state regulatory processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as you know, the Arizona Water Settlement Act of 2004 was a large... For our water.
• A huge, in fact, because of the amount of water, we're the largest customer that Colorado River water
• So the Mar 5 is one of our hallmarks of water management and water conservation.
• helps fund infrastructure and helps fund the salaries of state troopers and state firefighters.
• This is one of the processes that we go through when we appropriate funds from the State General Fund

Summary: The committee devoted much of the meeting to presentations highlighting tribal communities in rural Arizona. Representative Peshlakai opened with a video and remarks about Legislative District 6, describing it as the state’s largest district and emphasizing its many tribal nations, scenic landmarks, and her personal Navajo background. Governor Stephen Roe Lewis then presented on the Gila River Indian Community, discussing its Akimel O’odham and Piipaash heritage, water rights history, the MAR-5 aquifer recharge project, cultural traditions, and the community’s role in regional water and infrastructure issues. A presentation on the Pasqua Yaqui tribe followed, focusing on cultural resilience, ceremonial traditions, and the history of displacement and freeway construction in Tucson. Representative Sosei later outlined barriers to tribal economic development, including trust land financing limits, federal and tribal review delays, infrastructure gaps, dual taxation, and the need for broadband, water, and road investment, while proposing reforms such as tax changes, state match funds, and annual tribal field hearings. The committee then considered SB 1016, a strike-everything amendment that would move the property-owner petition requirement earlier in the municipal improvement district process and allow waivers of certain notice and protest procedures. Supporters, including mayors from Camp Verde and Clarkdale, said the change would improve transparency, reduce financial risk for small towns, and help rural communities build wastewater and other infrastructure. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and passed SB 1016 on a 5-0 vote, with one member present and one absent. Next, the committee heard SB 1401, the Workforce Housing Accelerator Act, which would let municipalities create expedited plan review and permitting processes for qualified workforce housing projects and exempt project proceeds from the state portion of the prime contracting sales tax. Supporters from Habitat for Humanity said the measure would reduce carrying costs, speed approvals, and help build more affordable homes for working families. One member noted the bill would reduce general fund revenue but supported it as a targeted tradeoff to address housing affordability. The committee adopted the amendment and passed SB 1401 on a 5-1 vote, with one member absent.

Transcript Highlights:

• Heritage Fund.
• See, there's a lot of water in the Willcox water basin.
• The water is plenty deep, and the only ones that could reach that water for the people there was the
• The Department of Water Resources had a report on all the basins, two water basins in the state, and
• water.

Bills: HB2167 , HB2168 , HB2169 , HB2171 , HB2790 , HB2905 , HCM2005

Committees: House Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs , House House Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs Committee of Reference

Keywords: attorney general, nuisance action, consumer fraud, damages, civil penalty, public nuisance, nuisance abatement, abatement action, injunction, superior court, county attorney, city attorney, board of supervisors, obscenity, obscene materials, adult materials, pornography, schools, parks, residential district

Transcript Highlights:

• water table.
• treatment, water disposal, water transportation, just dealing with waste water in the oil field.
• There's a potential new source of water. And this is brackish water.
• Water disposal wells close to underground sources of drinking water.
• You mean baseline water data, I guess, so. Water quality data.

Committee: House Radioactive & Hazardous Materials Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• And so water groundwater trust fund.
• The Drinking Water and Groundwater Trust Fund does have some funding left over in it, but I will state
• Senator Waters happens to sit on that commission. the source of funds. the drinking water the source
• and Groundwater Trust Fund for lead testing and water?
• and designate it. drinking water and groundwater trust drinking water and groundwater trust fund<00:

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:09:40.399><c> on</c> fund to the um environmental fund. on fund to the um environmental fund.
• </c> funding for that uh direct uh funding funding for that uh direct uh funding for<00:09:54.320><c>
• funded by the environmental fund.
• You have $262,000 per year ongoing, and that comes from the water wreck account, which is funded through
• that comes from the water wreck account which<00:21:05.120><c> is</c><00:21:05.280><c> funded</c><00:

Summary: The conference committee on the Environment budget for Senate File 2077 met to introduce members and staff, then walked through the Senate and House budget spreadsheets side by side. Nonpartisan staff explained that the Senate budget was built around a smaller general fund increase and more use of environmental and dedicated funds, while the House met its target through several reductions, including cuts to DNR, PCA, and Board of Water and Soil Resources appropriations. The committee reviewed major agency items for the Pollution Control Agency, DNR, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Zoo, and other accounts, including operating adjustments, permit-related funding, and transfers between funds. Several major differences were highlighted. For the PCA, the Senate included operating adjustments, permitting efficiency funding, composting grants, outreach funding, and a closed landfill investment fund approach that repeals an expiring statutory appropriation, while the House instead extends that appropriation for four more years. For the DNR, the Senate included operating adjustments, groundwater and AIS fee increases, aquatic invasive species funding, trail grants, outdoor schools for all, abandoned watercraft enforcement, and a sustainable foraging task force; the House had fewer of these fee and policy items and used reductions to meet its target. The committee also noted Senate-only policy provisions on outreach to diverse communities, field citations and mercury certification for skin-lightening products, disabled veteran license fee changes, and a moratorium on foraging rulemaking until July 1, 2027. Agency testimony followed. The MPCA commissioner praised both chambers for recognizing core agency work and urged adoption of operating adjustments, the closed landfill fund access, and the air appropriation increase. The DNR assistant commissioner supported operating adjustments, groundwater and AIS fee increases, and the veteran license proposal, but raised concerns about the Senate’s foraging task force language, saying it overweights consumptive users and could limit the agency’s ability to manage foraging without clear data. He also noted support for the land transfer funding and said the agency would continue working with the committee on unresolved issues. No votes were taken in this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• . water. water.
• The fund is available for use by all New Hampshire municipalities, community water systems, and nonprofit
• . water. water.
• </c> grant fund. grant fund.
• </c> a high water mark of a surface water. a high water mark of a surface water.

Committee: Senate Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• And you know, you talk about water, water, now I, the term escapes me, but precisely the need to reduce
• Communities are facing challenges regarding water issues as well as water supply.
• and brackish water, as well as recycling and reuse of water, generates a lot of data.
• That funding was immediately cut.
• We need to continue to support the funding, although So, the state funding, general funds, support this

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that public water or is it private water?
• </c> the water and the bill says overwater. the water and the bill says overwater.
• </c><00:15:18.320><c> And</c><00:15:18.480><c> with</c> water or is it private water?
• And with water or is it private water?
• > to</c><00:54:29.119><c> be</c> Park Pier Fund, a dedicated fund to be Park Pier Fund, a dedicated fund

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 27FN, which would change how improvements to dwellings over water are handled and align those projects more closely with the state building code. The bill was presented by Trisha Milo on behalf of Senator Lang, and attorney John Cronin explained that it arose from a specific New Hampshire Supreme Court case involving the Newcombs’ lakeside property, but that it could affect a small number of older waterfront homes statewide. He said the intent was to give the Department of Environmental Services (DES) limited waiver authority for improvements that do not harm water quality, plant life, or fish, while still requiring DES review and local permits. Committee members asked several questions about the scope of the bill, including whether it was tied to one case, how many properties might be affected, what counts as “living space,” and whether the language could allow larger decks or other expansions. Cronin said the bill was meant to be narrow, focused on access and egress and not on creating new living space, and that DES would still be able to deny unreasonable requests. He also described the Newcombs’ project as a rehabilitation of an older structure that had been approved locally and later challenged by DES, leading to the current dispute. Darlene Forst, the Wetlands Bureau administrator at DES, testified in opposition. She said the department was surprised the bill was being heard because it believed the Senate had sent it to interim study, and she argued the language was unclear and could have broader statewide effects than intended. Forst also said the underlying case was still active and should not be effectively re-litigated through this bill. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Implementation Fund for Texas or the SWIFT financial assistance to be posted on Texas Water Development
• into clean water. into a usable water supply source.
• water rights.
• Water rights owners aren't assessed by utility districts for water and waste water. service.
• to water water those landscapes.

Bills: HB1520 , HB1525 , HB1530 , HB1535 , HB2068 , HB2091 , HB2347 , HB2372 , HB2805 , HB2815 , HB2867 , HB3154 , HB3482 , HB3483 , HB3663 , HB3781 , HB3901 , HB3915 , HB4135 , HB4153 , HB4158 , HB4329 , HB4331

Committee: House Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• They came to the Industrial Water Board and asked that we fund the rebuilding and putting that system
• , Dothan Water and Sewer System, and Tuscaloosa Water and Sewer.
• and water management.
• That's a water crisis. I was... ...went. That's a water crisis. I was talking about a water crisis.
• us to use the funds that are not used for bond debt to fund the energy bank that was... ...debt to fund

Bills: HB 1520 , HB 1545 , HJR 110 , HJR 203 , HB 245 , HB 1465 , HB 1482 , HB 294 , HB 793 , HB 809 , HB 3928 , HB 334 , HB 2037 , HB 1973 , HB 285 , HB 4341 , HB 4264 , HB 1043 , HB 837 , HB 1234 , HB 1193 , HB 1194 , HB 1646 , HB 1729 , HB 2498 , HB 1314 , HB 2295 , HB 1353 , HB 1531 , HB 1988 , HB 5398 , HB 3960 , HB 3923 , HB 1407 , HB 1764 , HB 2221 , HB 2214 , HB 2517 , HB 2518 , HB 2213 , HB 5008 , HB 5092 , HB 3421 , HB 3663 , HB 3748 , HB 3800 , HB 3756 , HB 2613 , HB 3782 , HB 5246 , HB 4344 , HB 4044 , HB 4066 , HB 2702 , HB 2807 , HB 2869 , HB 2898 , HB 3181 , HB 3250 , HB 4153 , HB 2091 , HB 2115 , HB 2542 , HB 2768 , HB 3349 , HB 3352 , HB 4406 , HB 1593 , HB 1899 , HB 3133 , HB 4432 , HB 4960 , HB 3214 , HB 3915 , HB 3508 , HB 2145 , SB 304 , SB 608 , SB 2312 , SB 494 , SB 530 , HB 45 , HB 2520 , HB 35 , HB 47 , HB 318 , HB 349 , HB 554 , HB 1359 , HB 1373 , HB 2254 , HB 2259 , HB 2853 , HB 3073 , HB 3088 , HB 353 , HB 355 , HB 786 , HB 762 , HB 705 , HB 932 , HB 849 , HB 1119 , HB 3041 , HB 713 , HB 3104 , HB 3970 , HB 4042 , HB 4490 , HB 1731 , HB 2607 , HB 3689 , HB 1788 , HB 1612 , HB 138 , HB 15 , HB 1971 , HB 1338 , HB 2989 , HB 267 , HB 1201 , HB 2954 , HB 5265 , HB 1804 , HB 5061 , HB 1520 , HB 1545 , HJR 110 , HJR 203 , HB 1887 , HB 1914 , HB 2402 , HB 2306 , HB 1809 , HB 2350 , HB 3000 , HB 3237 , HB 3326 , HB 3211 , HB 1056 , HB 2081 , HB 2187 , HB 3092 , HB 3308 , HB 3526 , HB 3750 , HB 3527 , HB 4219 , HB 4230 , HB 4290 , HB 5238 , HB 4804 , HB 4749 , HB 245 , HB 1465 , HB 1482 , HB 294 , HB 793 , HB 809 , HB 3928 , HB 334 , HB 2037 , HB 1973 , HB 285 , HB 4341 , HB 4264 , HB 1043 , HB 837 , HB 1234 , HB 1193 , HB 1194 , HB 1646 , HB 1729 , HB 2498 , HB 1314 , HB 2295 , HB 1353 , HB 1531 , HB 1988 , HB 5398 , HB 3960 , HB 3923 , HB 1407 , HB 1764 , HB 2221 , HB 2214 , HB 2517 , HB 2518 , HB 2213 , HB 5008 , HB 5092 , HB 3421 , HB 3663 , HB 3748 , HB 3800 , HB 3756 , HB 2613 , HB 3782 , HB 5246 , HB 4344 , HB 4044 , HB 4066 , HB 2702 , HB 2807 , HB 2869 , HB 2898 , HB 3181 , HB 3250 , HB 4153 , HB 2091 , HB 2115 , HB 2542 , HB 2768 , HB 3349 , HB 3352 , HB 4406 , HB 1593 , HB 1899 , HB 3133 , HB 4432 , HB 4960 , HB 3214 , HB 3915 , HB 3508 , HB 2145 , HCR 6 , HCR 12 , HCR 34 , HCR 50 , HCR 55 , HCR 58 , HCR 70 , HCR 71 , HCR 72 , HCR 74 , HCR 75 , HCR 78 , HCR 80 , HCR 93 , HCR 100 , HCR 107 , HCR 116 , HCR 117 , HCR 90

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Kiwalo Basin ocean water wise. Kiwalo Basin ocean water wise.
• I do understand some tools to enforce water, but please take their comments. water users.
• </c> Uh with comments, Board of Water Supply. Uh with comments, Board of Water Supply.
• our vital resource, water.
• In other words, fund.

Bills: SB2982 , SB2367 , SB2818 , SB2944 , SB2022 , SB2240 , SB2986 , SB2547 , SB2401 , SB3031 , SB3035 , SB3032

Committee: Senate Water, Land, Culture and the Arts

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 2982 on campaign finance, which would prohibit foreign entities and foreign-influence businesses from making contributions and expenditures. The Attorney General’s office testified first, followed by the Campaign Spending Commission, which supported the bill but asked for clarification on constitutional review authority and additional implementation time for certifications, forms, and procedures. Common Cause also supported the measure, arguing it would help protect elections from dark money and foreign influence. No vote was taken. The committee then took up SB 2367 on a state boating facilities lease program for the Ala Wai small boat harbor. DLNR supported the bill, while UPW opposed it, warning about privatization of a public asset and possible job displacement. Several members of the public supported the concept but urged amendments to protect public access, affordability, youth ocean programs, and state employee jobs. Committee members questioned DLNR about the scope of the lease, the role of the Board of Land and Natural Resources, and whether public access and existing concessions would remain protected. DLNR said current leases would remain, the board would retain approval authority, and employees would not necessarily be displaced, but members indicated more discussion and possible amendments were needed. For SB 2818 on boating penalties, DLNR testified in support and there was no opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 2944 on conservation, which would require wildlife viewing guidelines that substantially conform to NOAA guidance and reporting requirements; DLNR said it stood on its written testimony. SB 2022 on water code penalties drew support from DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management, which said the bill’s two-tiered penalty structure would preserve deterrence while keeping the current $5,000 penalty for first-time or non-harmful violations. The Board of Water Supply submitted comments, and Ulupono Initiative supported the measure as a needed enforcement tool. Committee members discussed whether the higher penalty ceiling should be phased in and asked for stakeholder input on the amount of the penalties. Finally, the committee began SB 2240 on land use, which would require water availability certification from the Commission on Water Resource Management before a district boundary amendment proceeds to the Land Use Commission. DLNR supported the bill and said it often reviews project documents that lack sufficient information on water needs and availability, so the measure would allow earlier review and comment. The committee also indicated it would seek amendments and further feedback on the water penalty bill before it moved to the next committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a lot of partnership grants where the FAA might be funding 55% of it, the state's funding 40%
• And then, last but not least is the FY25 infrastructure funding, those one-time funds.
• funds, in the case of Haw E, we have some FEMA funding that we're working out.
• The statistics that I'm probably most proud of are these: between the prep funds and the pro-growth funds
• fund and then the authority fund.

Committee: House A&B Transportation Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• Our law, which says that soil and water districts can provide funds, tools, equipment, all this stuff
• So if this is funded, I'm sure the soil and water districts would be glad to work with the Environment
• Water tests done on the water cost as much as $2,000 a piece.
• Water is being lost. Somebody come fix this gate. Whose water is it?
• use all their water. ...to store the water in the ponds so that when they run out of water they can

Committee: House House Agriculture, Acequias And Water Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Data centers and water consumption.
• So the water usage is minimal.
• , and that should be to convert that brackish water into fresh water.
• ; like the water is an input.
• So that's what's on the water.

Transcript Highlights:

• The funds in specific appropriation 13, 16, 2 from Incidental Trust Fund and General Revenue Fund are
• funds for heavy equipment.
• Land acquisition state came in federal grants make up the majority of our funding federal funds come
• can trust fund and obviously documentary stamps for the Land Acquisition Trust Fund.
• Some of those at risk conditions include taking on water without an effective means to the water.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it looks like we'll have water there eventually too, more water.
• It was also identified that when the Water Commission is considering whether to fund a water conveyance
• for water storage.
• Note again, water is on both sides of these. Stop logs are below the water.
• form into the water?

Summary: The committee opened its third interim meeting with roll call, approved the November 13, 2025 minutes, and the chair reviewed prior committee work, including a denied request for a fertilizer-capacity study and a planned later discussion of the Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger issue. Commissioner Doug Goring then presented Department of Agriculture updates on uncrewed aerial systems grants to detect noxious weeds, the state’s irrigation potential, the low-carbon fuels program for ethanol plants, the Environmental Impact Mitigation Fund, model zoning ordinances for animal feeding operations, and fertilizer production and supply in North Dakota. Members asked about funding sources, fertilizer storage and availability, natural gas and water needs for future fertilizer plants, and how the model zoning website would help counties and townships apply setback and odor tools. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Water Resources’ economic analysis tool for water conveyance and flood-related projects. Dr. Dwayne Poole explained that the department is proposing changes to better account for end-of-useful-life conditions and updated hydrologic data, while still limiting the model to direct, demonstrable costs and benefits. He said the goal is to make the analysis more realistic and consistent without changing statute, and he provided examples of how project benefits could change as drains age or as rainfall and flood data evolve. Committee members and water-user representatives generally supported continued work on the proposal, while raising concerns about downstream impacts, closed-basin projects, and whether the changes would meaningfully affect project approvals. The committee then heard from John Paskowski, state engineer, on Devil’s Lake, the West End and East End outlets, and the Tolna Coulee control structure. He reviewed lake history, outlet capacities, sulfate and downstream flow limits, and explained that the control structure is intended to prevent a catastrophic uncontrolled release by slowing erosion and head cutting. Members asked about water quality trends, the length of the downstream flow constraint, and whether the Tolna Coulee area had been studied for possible natural overflow or silt buildup. The discussion emphasized ongoing flooding concerns, mitigation for affected landowners, and the need to balance outlet operations with downstream water quality and infrastructure protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• The water is so high and so fast that it's hard to imagine.
• There's a new DFA match fund, and that's potentially a place, but the need for that fund exceeds what's
• We really rely on local soil and water districts.
• That funding comes from a percentage.
• Funding is not allowed on federally owned land.

Committee: House House Rural Development, Land Grants And Cultural Affairs