Transcript Highlights:

• on water supply and water quality.
• And to me, that's very indicative of our water systems needing the love and the funding that they deserve
• Funding is critical to maintain water quality standards and protect against levee failure.
• And how do we all understand that it's an important and a special part of our water supply and funding
• And funding.

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:

• But one thing I would say is just the management of water to get water, but also to get rid of water
• So this water-glycol mixture is a glycol mixture of water, and...
• Another indirect water use is the sanitary water use, including restrooms, Water use is the sanitary
• We're incorporating water sampling for water quality.
• high water mark.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and opening remarks from NDSU President David Stewart, who emphasized NDSU’s land-grant mission of statewide service through teaching, research, and extension. He highlighted the university’s role in agriculture, water, soil health, and community outreach, and pointed to examples of research commercialization such as Lilac Agriculture’s work on nitrogen-fixing microbes for crops. He also said he is still early in his tenure and intends to spend time listening and learning across the state. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study estimated that North Dakota could develop about 1.3 million additional irrigated acres, with major potential in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau. Testimony stressed the economic benefits of irrigation for crop yields, value-added processing, dairy, and potato production, while members also discussed water availability, aquifers, downstream water use, and the need for more flexible permitting. The drainage portion of the study found significant economic benefits from legal drains, and staff explained that the impacts were calculated through increased productivity and related input purchases. Greg Lardy then gave NDSU’s required agriculture update, saying agriculture accounts for more than $41 billion in annual economic activity, one in five jobs, and about 25 percent of state GDP. He reviewed the role of SBAR, the statewide research-extension network, new crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI and weather-network tools, and Extension’s county partnerships and youth programs. He also outlined NDSU’s priorities for the next session: restoring proposed budget cuts, increasing operating support, and addressing deferred maintenance. Members asked about storage shed construction, NDSU’s relationship with Grand Farm, and whether NDSU could help with water-related research tied to drainage and aquifers. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor on water and data centers, who described graduate fellowships, a water workforce certificate program, and research on data center cooling, water use, and “Legendary Harvest” concepts that would reuse waste heat for greenhouse or aquaculture production. Questions focused on whether the cooling systems were closed-loop, who would own any related production facilities, and whether the project was still only a feasibility study. Finally, North Dakota AgTech described its NSF-funded “engine” project, saying it has brought millions in federal investment to the state, supported startups and on-farm trials, and is focused on commercialization, workforce development, and helping producers lower input costs and improve profitability.

Transcript Highlights:

• fund.
• fund.
• So, there's a general fund ground water.
• for</c><00:43:02.640><c> projects</c> funding uh specific funding for projects funding uh specific funding
• </c> with uh water use or the water with uh water use or the water management<00:48:37.200><c> uh</c>

Transcript Highlights:

• But that's what those funds are for.
• This project funding isn't unlimited, but as an agency we've been monitoring water in streams for 25
• We used our water quality funding to do that. We basically went out and assessed wetlands.
• Well, we created these water resources of 3 billion, almost 4 billion gallons of water.
• So the water resources in those ponds alone is enough for 2.1... ...million days of cow water.

Committee: House A&B Natural Resources Subcommittee

Summary: The meeting began with a budget presentation from the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry. Secretary Blaine Arthur and Deputy Commissioner Jan Lee described the agency’s divisions and recent efforts to improve efficiency, including expanded online licensing, electronic veterinary inspection certificates, and a new laboratory information system. They highlighted youth and workforce programs, local food initiatives for schools, market development efforts, and ongoing animal health concerns such as avian influenza, equine herpesvirus, and the threat of New World screwworm. They also discussed staffing, turnover, and uncertainty around federal cooperative agreement funding, while noting they were not requesting new or additional appropriations for the upcoming fiscal year. Members asked about meat inspection staffing, the use of one-time forestry firefighting funds, biosecurity and national security coordination, and agency staffing levels. The department said meat inspection was currently in good shape but dependent on federal funding stability, and explained that prior firefighting dollars had been used for equipment purchases. They also said they work with state and federal partners, including DHS and FBI, on threat preparedness and have reduced turnover by adjusting salaries and maintaining staffing at or below prior levels. The Oklahoma Conservation Commission then presented its budget and program overview. Staff described the agency’s long history and current work in water quality, flood control, soil health, unpaved roads, wetlands, and woody species control, especially eastern red cedar removal. They emphasized data-driven, voluntary conservation practices, citing stream cleanups, flood-control dam benefits, pond cleanouts during drought, and the Cherry-Peach watershed project as examples of programs that improve water resources and reduce wildfire risk. The agency said its workload has grown significantly and requested funding for critical dam repairs, local conservation district staffing, continued unpaved roads work, and expansion of woody species control statewide. Members asked about county matching for road and dam projects, who to contact about flooding roads, sediment removal from pond cleanouts, and the effectiveness of county training programs. Commission staff explained that county in-kind work can count as match, local conservation districts are the first point of contact, and the road training has produced measurable savings and better maintenance practices. They also clarified that “high hazard” dams are those where failure could threaten people or infrastructure downstream, not necessarily dams that are structurally failing.

Transcript Highlights:

• us from funding those stream water gauges?
• Community financial assistance and technical assistance, funding for low water crossing safety, early
• We looked heavily at our clean water and drinking water state revolving funds to model this fund.
• But one thing I'd like to know, because I keep hearing you say You fund the water gauges that are there
• We are primarily funded by the revenues we receive associated with providing water supply and wastewater

Committee: House Disaster Preparedness & Flooding, Select

Transcript Highlights:

• They also have a bit of water sector money that can be used to fund this, but at the...
• They also have a bit of water sector money that can be used to fund this.
• So the sub fund will be part of the solution, the USDA loan, the water sector commission funding, and
• for the water.
• Management and collect the funds for the water, but the company Patterson actually does the work.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on the troubled water system in Tallulah and whether to appoint a limited fiscal administrator for the water utility. Senator Jackson described the system’s long-running failures, the need to expand repairs beyond the treatment plant to the distribution network, and the growing project cost, which he said had risen to roughly $26 million. Legislative Auditor’s Office staff explained that the system had received failing grades from LDH for several years, had entered joint receivership in 2024, and was placed under a public health emergency in 2025; they said the city’s adoption of limited fiscal administration in April 2026 made it eligible for additional state funding. Governor’s staff said the state, GOSEP, Magnolia, and the city had worked together to restore service and that the limited fiscal administrator would help unlock an emergency subfund and other financing sources. The mayor of Tallulah supported the appointment, saying the state’s work had improved water quality and that the limited role would focus only on the water system rather than the whole city. She said the city was preparing an RFQ to move the project toward bidding. Two residents spoke in opposition. One argued that the city had recently elected a new council and should wait for new local leadership before proceeding. Another questioned the need for the appointment, criticized past management and contract arrangements, and objected to using emergency funds to pay prior project costs. State officials responded that the F grade and public health concerns justified the action, that the administrator would control water-system finances, and that the distribution system needed repairs to address leaks and water quality issues. After discussion, a committee member moved to appoint a limited fiscal administrator for the Tallulah water system. The motion was seconded and passed without opposition. The committee then moved to public comment and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:09:46.920><c> Resources</c> fund our ecological and Water Resources fund our ecological and Water
• and the Clean Water Legacy Fund.
• Water Legacy fund um fund and the Clean Water Legacy fund um so<00:21:43.880><c> again</c><00:21:44.080
• The next bucket of funds, or the next bucket, is the Clean Water Fund proposals.
• The next bucket of funds, or the next bucket, is the Clean Water Fund proposals.

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we were able to invest some of that fund, 500,000, in the Northern New Mexico Youth Fund.
• me the parameters of the fund?
• water cycle.
• So those funds.
• A recent NIH-funded study found that U.S. counties with PFAS-contaminated drinking water had higher cancer

Committee: House Water & Natural Resources Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• are funded by program fees, are swept into the state's general revenue fund.
• Those funds are very slim, and I think it's important that we delegate these funds the correct way.
• And the same with water.
• So much water is consumed every day in St. Charles County just for residential water.
• I've had at least two boil-water orders from my water.

Committee: House Conservation and Natural Resources

Summary: The Conservation and Natural Resources Committee heard Senate Bill 953, sponsored by Sen. Jason Bean, which would address a projected shortfall in the Department of Natural Resources’ air pollution control program. Bean and supporters from Associated Industries of Missouri, quarry and sand producers, engineering firms, the Missouri Chamber, forest products, and municipal utilities said the bill would stop sweeping unused program funds into general revenue and dedicate a portion of existing sales and use tax revenue from utilities to keep the program solvent without raising permit fees on businesses that have reduced emissions. One informational witness from Armour Vine warned that moving funds out of general revenue could affect broader state revenue and tax triggers. DNR also testified that the fee fund is projected to become insolvent in fiscal year 2028 if current trends continue. No opposition testimony was presented, and the bill hearing was closed. The committee then heard House Bills 3362 and 3364, sponsored by Reps. Colin Wellenkamp and Mike Koslow, which would create guardrails for AI/data center buildout around electricity and water use. The sponsors said the bills are intended to protect ratepayers and local water systems by requiring large-load customers to bear their own infrastructure costs, extending consumer protections to co-ops and municipal utilities, and requiring permits and review for major water withdrawals, with emergency shutoff provisions in water shortages. Support came from environmental groups, conservation organizations, rural advocates, Renew Missouri, the Sierra Club, Missouri Municipal League, Missouri Electric Cooperatives, Ameren Missouri, and Missouri American Water, though some witnesses urged tighter thresholds, more frequent reporting, stronger water-quality protections, and clearer definitions to avoid legal ambiguity. Several witnesses also raised concerns about transparency, local impacts, and whether current thresholds are high enough to protect aquifers, springs, and utility customers. The chair closed testimony after noting time limits and adjourned the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, existing funds.
• general fund to the Medicaid trust fund.
• If that source is the general fund, it reverts into the general fund.
• That you can use the funds in the strategic water reserve.
• So the fund already exists and there is money in the fund already. exists and there is money in the fund

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• with Measure O funds.
• It would also determine the sources of funding, whether they come from general state funds, special funds
• any excess funds to contractors, including Metropolitan Water District, which I believe last year approved
• unspent funds DWR has retained and their planned use for those remaining funds.
• Every water district that's listed on here is a water district that will benefit from water being moved

Committee: Senate Joint Legislative Audit

Summary: The committee began with a status report from the State Auditor on staffing and audit capacity, noting 14 audit supervisors, 14 audits in progress, several audits scheduled for release, and a planned high-risk review of state financial reporting. The committee then approved a consent calendar covering six audit requests, including topics such as kindergarten oral health assessments, prison infrastructure management, Los Angeles fires prevention and response, community college financial aid and enrollment, wildfire management at Chino Hills State Park, and the Chiquita Canyon landfill. The first major item was Assembly Member Gonzalez’s request for an audit of Coachella Valley Unified School District’s contract and fiscal management. Supporters described long-running fiscal mismanagement, a projected $60 million deficit, layoffs, concerns about contracting practices, foundation donations, and weak governance. District representatives said they were already working with Riverside County Office of Education and FICMAT, had adopted a fiscal stabilization plan, and were making cuts to restore solvency. The State Auditor said the proposed audit would examine the district’s financial condition over 10 years, ELOP spending, partnership agreements, foundation funds, and contracting practices. After extensive discussion and public comment, the motion to approve the audit failed because it did not receive the required votes. The committee next approved Senator Wahab’s request for an audit of East Bay transit agency administrative oversight. The senator argued that the Bay Area’s fragmented transit system creates duplication and wastes resources, while agency representatives and transit advocates said the agencies already face extensive oversight and are actively coordinating through existing regional efforts. The State Auditor outlined objectives focused on agency autonomy, coordination, ridership, finances, and the potential effects of consolidation. After debate and public comment, the audit was approved. Finally, Senator Archuleta introduced a request to audit excessive unrestricted reserves at selected California Community College districts and Calbright College, arguing that reserve balances have grown substantially and may be diverting funds from student services and instruction. He said the audit would examine why districts are holding large reserves and whether those funds are being used effectively for students.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:26:08.159><c> fund</c><00:26:08.480><c> Appropriations</c> due to clean water fund Appropriations
• from the Clean Water Fund.
• from the Clean Water Fund.
• </c><00:39:29.119><c> fund</c> will the funds from the Clean Water fund will the funds from the Clean
• </c><00:58:04.119><c> of</c><00:58:04.240><c> Legacy</c> Water fund which as co-chair of Legacy Water

Bills: HF363 , HF2155 , HF1524 , HF821 , HF1677 , HF1292

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• water state revolving fund.
• storm water. specifically to their funding sources. specifically to their funding sources.
• ><c> would</c> water development office funding would water development office funding would be<00:58
• Now, we have storm water federal funds.
• </c> funding through the drinking water SRF. funding through the drinking water SRF.

Bills: SF0101

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• put toward municipal water and water in general.
• This approach, the AWWA water audit method, is a widely recognized and This approach, the AWWA water
• Being proactive and making funds available to allow that proactivity to happen could make water use efficiency
• , and water use efficiency measures.
• Providing funding...

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee opened its 2026 session with committee housekeeping, member introductions, and a reminder that schedules are set a week in advance and amendments must be submitted by the prior day’s deadlines. Chair Reeves emphasized solution-oriented, collaborative, and respectful participation, then outlined that the committee would focus on three interim reports relevant to its work this session: municipal water efficiency, ecosystem services, and food policy. The first presentation, from the William D. Ruckelshaus Center and WSU, reviewed Washington’s municipal water efficiency statute and regulation. Presenters said interviewees largely agreed on the need for better data collection, more technical assistance for smaller systems, and more state funding for both agency staffing and water system infrastructure. Most opposed shifting oversight of the conservation program from the Department of Health to Ecology, and the report recommended keeping oversight at DOH while improving collaboration across agencies and tribes. The presenters also urged broader statewide water planning, more consistent reporting using the AWWA water audit method instead of leakage percentage, re-evaluating the 500-connection threshold, and addressing outdoor water use, rebates, reuse, and public education. Members asked about creating a new office for water oversight, but the presenters said that idea was generally viewed as too costly and impractical under current budget conditions. DNR then presented its 2025 ecosystem services work group report. The department described ecosystem services markets it studied, including regulatory and voluntary forest carbon, avoided wildfire emissions, and water leasing, with lower potential identified for blue carbon, biodiversity, and water quality markets. DNR said about 15,000 acres of state forest land may have carbon-market potential, but emphasized that the analysis was broad and not project-specific, so the report recommends pilots, continued market monitoring, use of third-party developers, and clarification of authority through House Bill 2170. Committee members asked about economic feasibility, timber tradeoffs, and how success would be defined, and DNR said those questions would be better addressed in future, more detailed project-level work. The final presentation covered the Food Policy Forum’s 2025 report to the legislature. Speakers described broad consensus recommendations on food security, local foods in schools, farm-to-food-bank programs, a state farm bill, commercial access, and food system infrastructure. They highlighted pressures on agriculture from development, flooding, drought, water shortages, and the need to preserve farmland and support farmers, food banks, and local procurement systems. The committee chair thanked the presenters and noted that several related bills and policy proposals would be heard later in session. No votes were taken; the meeting concluded after the presentations and brief member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Water Defense Fund, working with landowners, businesses, and government to protect the Carrizo-Wilcox
• Grant Management Standards, including the Research and Planning Fund, the State Water Implementation
• Revenue Fund, the Flood Infrastructure Fund, the Texas Water Bank, and the Colonial Self-Help Program
• SB 2204 would expand this exemption to include the Water Assistance Fund, the Water Loan Assistance Fund
• , and the Rural Water Assistance Fund to promote uniformity across all of the agencies' water development

Bills: SB863 , SB1190 , SB1261 , SB1413 , SB1624 , SB1662 , SB1663 , SB1855 , SB1967 , SB2124 , SB2204 , SB1623

Committee: Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Prop. 4 ensures more reliable water funding for rural communities, providing confidence to farmers to
• Good afternoon, Beth Olasso, on behalf of the Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley Advocacy Fund
• Water District, Yuba Water Agency, and TreePeople, in support.
• So the fund is a big fund, and consumers—you buy—where is this fund? Is it? It's at CalRecycle.
• into the fund.

Summary: The committee heard several natural resources bills focused on wildfire resilience, recycling, forest management, and organic waste diversion. AB 442 would remove a requirement that a harvest area be limited to a single watershed for working forest management plans; the author and supporters from the California Forestry Association and Pacific Forest Trust said it would reduce barriers to forest resiliency work, and there was no opposition. AB 623 would require state agencies to report on the use of CEQA and Coastal Act suspensions for wildfire and fuel-management projects after the governor’s emergency proclamation; the author said the bill would provide data on how well the suspensions are working, and it drew support with no opposition. AB 35 would exempt Proposition 4-funded programs from the Administrative Procedures Act to speed implementation of climate, water, wildfire, and environmental projects; the author and a large coalition of local governments, water agencies, conservation groups, and fire organizations argued the exemption would help get funds out faster, while no opposition was present. The committee also discussed AB 3333, which would create a market-development payment to support end users of non-container glass, such as ground glass pozzolan used in cement, in order to divert glass from landfills and reduce carbon emissions. Supporters said the bill would create a productive use for hard-to-recover glass, while opponents from the Glass Packaging Institute, Californians Against Waste, and waste management interests argued it would divert beverage container recycling funds away from the bottle-to-bottle system and could undermine existing recycling investments and recycled-content goals. Members raised questions about the fund’s revenue sources, the purpose of the beverage container recycling program, and whether the bill would amount to “downcycling”; despite those concerns, the bill advanced on a due-pass-as-amended recommendation, with members noting fiscal and policy issues for further work. AB 643 would allow certain diverted organic material used as a beneficial agricultural amendment, including CDFA-licensed fertilizer products made from biosolids, to count toward SB 1383 recovered organic waste procurement targets. Supporters from wastewater agencies and Clean Water SoCal said the change would expand options for meeting procurement requirements and help move biosolids out of landfills, while Californians Against Waste and other opponents argued the bill could expand procurement credit beyond SB 1383’s original intent and weaken investments in composting infrastructure. Committee members questioned what kinds of biosolids would qualify, how the procurement credit would work, and whether the bill could be narrowed to historically landfilled materials; the author said she would continue working with opponents and wait for CalRecycle technical assistance. The committee adopted the bills’ amendments and passed AB 35 with urgency, AB 3333, AB 442, AB 623, and AB 643 to Appropriations, and also approved consent-calendar AB 946. After roll calls, all of the measures were reported out of committee, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please keep our water, our sacred water, and our land protected.
• The only adjectives that should be acceptable are sacred water, clean water, pure water, healthy water
• You cannot divide pure water from contaminated water. It's either water or it's no longer water.
• water.
• When you clean water to an extremely high extent, either for produced water or brackish water, and you

Bills: HM45 , HB276 , HB300

Committee: House House Agriculture, Acequias And Water Resources

Summary: The committee first heard House Memorial 45, which asked the Water Quality Control Commission to promptly hear a petition seeking consideration of the beneficial reuse of treated produced water. The sponsor and supporters argued that produced water could help conserve freshwater, support agriculture and rural communities, and potentially aid compact obligations with Texas and industrial users. The committee also heard extensive opposition from acequia leaders, environmental groups, and residents who said the science is not yet sufficient, the water contains unknown or proprietary contaminants, and the memorial could pressure regulators or shift pollution burdens to other communities. After questions focused on the meaning of a memorial, the status of the petition, and the role of the Produced Water Research Consortium, a motion to table HM 45 passed, with members explaining they wanted the petition in hand before acting. The committee then took up House Bill 276, which appropriates $3.3 million to NMSU for the New Mexico Department of Agriculture to support celebration of the 400-year anniversary of winemaking in New Mexico. Supporters described the bill as a statewide agritourism and economic development effort tied to New Mexico’s long wine history, with marketing, signage, and tourism promotion intended to benefit wineries across the state. Members asked about the funding source, the anniversary date, and whether the effort would include wineries outside the south; the sponsor said the campaign would highlight wineries statewide. The committee voted do pass on HB 276. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 300, which would appropriate funds for the care and management of free-roaming horses and related domestic horse management, with an emphasis on tribal and local herd-control efforts using fertility control and trained community members. Supporters said the program would help address overpopulation, grazing impacts, and roadway safety, while opponents questioned relocation plans and whether the money should be spread across more counties. The sponsor and expert witness said trained personnel were already in place and the funds would support implementation. After discussion, the committee voted do pass on HB 300. The meeting ended with notice that the committee would meet again Saturday to hear House Bill 207.

Transcript Highlights:

• and emergency funding. ...for providing loans and emergency funding for our rural community water associations
• We've been loaning out funds since 1997, and a lot of good has been done out in our community, uh, water
• This all comes out of EPA grant funding for safe drinking water for the states.
• So, you know, all the water associations that had opportunity for ARPA funding pivoted from SRF loans
• </c><00:10:52.320><c> are</c> the m the funds are here the funds are the m the funds are here the funds

Committee: Joint Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Group A public water systems must submit water system plans, small water system management plans, or
• Group A public water systems must submit water system plans, small water system management plans, or
• a water district or a PUD.
• or funding the program through a utility surcharge or collection of utility funds.
• or funding the program through a utility surcharge or collection of utility funds.

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Technology

Transcript Highlights:

• Across the state, the water board and water users are working to address water challenges in every basin
• Another project that we've recently received funding through the Idaho Water Resource Board for is a
• Another project that we've recently received funding through the Idaho Water Resource Board for is a
• for funding.
• That's about a $400,000 project that the Idaho Water Resource Board funded at 50%.

Committee: House Resources and Conservation