Transcript Highlights:

• The ranchers talked about how we can live together, the ranchers and the folks who are currently concerned
• But it talked about ranchers working with their population of cattle and knowing what the habits are
• I can tell you that the ranchers have been living with this issue for a long time.
• The ranchers know all about the habits of the wolf.
• The ranchers are doing everything they can to try to survive and live in this atmosphere because we have

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The ranchers talked about how we can live together, the ranchers and the folks who are currently concerned
• But it talked about ranchers working with their population of cattle and knowing what the habits are
• I can tell you that the ranchers have been living with this issue for a long time.
• The ranchers know all about the habits of the wolf.
• The ranchers are doing everything they can to try to survive and live in this atmosphere because we have

Summary: The House convened, approved the prior journal, received gubernatorial communications, and then moved into an additional Committee of the Whole to consider Senate bills on two calendars. In that committee, members adopted floor and committee amendments and reported SB 1100, SB 1160, and SB 1178 out as amended. On the second calendar, the committee considered SB 1200, SB 1560, SB 1627, and SB 1723, adopting amendments on SB 1200, SB 1627, and SB 1723 and reporting all four measures out, while SB 1725 was retained on the calendar. The House then adopted the committee reports and sent the amended bills to engrossing or third reading as appropriate. The chamber then took up a long series of third-reading votes. Several bills passed with recorded votes and some member explanations focused on public safety, parental rights, school safety, health care, local control, property rights, and wildlife management. Among the measures that passed were SB 1013, SB 1015, SB 1046, SB 1094, SB 1095, SB 1124, SB 1186, SB 1214, SB 1275, SB 1280, SB 1315, SB 1318, SB 1205 on reconsideration, SB 1327, SB 1416, SB 1418, SB 1582, SB 1613, SB 1662, SB 1664, SB 1670, SB 1711, SB 1741, SB 1821, and several concurrent memorials. A number of bills failed, including SB 1052, SB 1170, SB 1457, SB 1074, SB 1540, SB 1649, and SB 1663. Debate on several bills drew pointed partisan and policy disagreements. Members opposing health-related bills argued they targeted LGBTQ people or medical decision-making, while supporters framed them as protecting children or bodily autonomy. On SB 1170, members said the bill contained a drafting error that would create extreme penalties and strain prison capacity. On SB 1280, supporters and opponents split over Mexican gray wolf management and federal conservation efforts. On SB 1199, the Salt River horse herd bill, members discussed herd management, heritage, property impacts, and a required emergency clause; it passed with the needed two-thirds majority. The House also adopted a group concurrence motion on numerous House bills and passed several House bills on final reading, including HB 2013, HB 2016, HB 2028, HB 2086, HB 2118, HB 2140, HB 2170, HB 2226, HB 2244, HB 2248, HB 2249, HB 2327, HB 2379, HB 2380, and others, forwarding them to the Governor.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm also a cattle rancher from Catron County.
• I'm coming to you as a union member for CWA 7076, but also as a rancher and farmer who has ranches and
• Also, you know, a number of folks stood up: farmers, ranchers, Farm Bureau, all those.
• Conversation for farmers and ranchers: how does that negatively impact their grazing rights?
• In response to the ranchers, there are many ranchers who are now going to wind energy and having that

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They originally told their farmers and ranchers it was their civic duty to take the biosolids fertilizer
• This particular rancher has had about 30 of these stillborn calves, along with some adult cattle that
• This particular rancher has had about 30 of these stillborn calves, along with some adult cattle that
• Many ranchers would do just that.
• Many ranchers would do just that.

Summary: The committee hearing focused on biosolids, sewage sludge, and PFAS contamination, with the opening remarks and first three presenters arguing that land application of municipal sludge poses serious risks to soil, water, livestock, and human health. Representative Shaw cited EPA and state data on detected pollutants and PFAS in biosolids, while Denise Travick Poyer described her background in chemical engineering and PFAS work and said the EPA’s draft sewage sludge risk assessment shows unacceptable risk at very low PFOS/PFOA levels. She urged source reduction, more testing, and consideration of total organic fluorine, and noted examples from Michigan where industrial pretreatment and source reduction reduced PFAS in biosolids. Johnson County, Texas Commissioner Larry Woolley and Investigator Dana Ames presented a case study of alleged runoff from land-applied biosolids affecting a ranch, with high PFAS readings in soil, water, fish, cattle tissue, and a stillborn calf, and said the county and state had pursued investigations, lawsuits, and legislative responses. Sandra Trawick of Save Oklahoma Farms and Ranches argued that Oklahoma’s biosolids program relies heavily on Class B sludge, that current rules are outdated, and that land application exposes farms and rural communities to pathogens, chemicals, odors, flies, and runoff; she cited examples from Maine, Texas, Georgia, Michigan, and Oklahoma to support calls for stronger regulation or a ban. After the testimony, members asked about sampling methods, lab testing, EPA limits, and whether the cited PFAS blood levels were comparable to the soil and sludge measurements. Witnesses said the Johnson County samples were collected by a Texas A&M PhD contractor and tested at a single lab, and they explained that the EPA’s 4 parts per trillion figure applied to municipal drinking water standards. Questions also addressed whether sludge is incorporated into soil; Trawick said it had often been left on the surface, though she had seen better disking after public scrutiny. Members asked how biosolids compare with manure and feedlot waste, and witnesses responded that municipal sludge is more contaminated because it includes industrial, hospital, and household waste streams, unlike animal manure. The committee then moved to alternative solutions, hearing from Doug McKinney of Advanced Microbial Solutions, who promoted biological sludge removal using bacteria to reduce sludge volumes and avoid land application, citing cost savings for wastewater plants and correctional facilities. Jason Jepsen of Eden Energy followed with a pitch for an eight-stage waste-to-energy system that converts mixed waste into clean energy, biochar, and reusable products, framing waste as an asset and presenting his company’s technology as a no-land-application alternative.

Transcript Highlights:

• know, I realize it's a delicate ecosystem, but when individuals, mostly on the opposition side of ranchers
• farms and ranches throughout California, sitting at kitchen tables, talking about how farmers and ranchers
• And we have long relied on ranchers and farmers to help take care of those resources.
• So this includes things like data sharing, allowing counties to see the same data we do so that ranchers
• So this includes things like data sharing, allowing counties to see the same data we do so that ranchers

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Farmers and ranchers face crop losses, stored hay and feed losses, and fence destruction.
• Farmers and ranchers face challenges.
• Farmers and ranchers face crop<00:55:35.760> losses,<00:55:36.440> stored<00:55:36.880>
• My name is Miles Kuschel, and I'm a third-generation beef rancher from Cass County.
• These programs exist because the state recognizes that when farmers and ranchers are expected to bear

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• who you, please have a seat, have a seat. put here, it shows that you represent yourself as a dumb rancher
• Okay, you're not a dumb rancher. I appreciate, I certainly appreciate the sarcasm, but may I just.
• Matt with your permission may I change the record to say rancher is that as if I don't have your permission
• know that your citizen of Texas in the United States, that makes you a valued member, valued rancher
• So that makes you pretty valuable, not a dumb rancher, so.

Bills: SB1150, SB763, SB1061, SB1146, SB1198, HB279, HB310

Keywords: concrete plants, environmental regulation, permit process, air quality, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, SB 1061, uranium mining, production area authorization, TCEQ, Water Code, groundwater, groundwater conservation district, restoration table value, restoration values, contested case hearing, Chapter 2001, mineral rights, surface owners, notice requirements, environmental permitting

Transcript Highlights:

• Then, there are four new position seats: a rancher or a farmer, a hunter-angler, a conservationist, and
• Agricultural land is often a safe haven for birds, and farmers and ranchers regularly support habitat
• I'm a cattle rancher from [County], which is in the heart of elk and Mexican wolf country in this state
• For it to be a rancher or farmer, are you trying to...
• To qualify as a farmer or rancher, you earn at least $1,000 from the farm or ranch.

Transcript Highlights:

• Farmers and ranchers of color, as well as small-scale producers, have faced longstanding discrimination
• That's why I authored the Farmer Equity Act in 2017 to ensure that socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers
• implementing the Farmer Equity Act by bringing the lived experience of socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers
• committees are just one example of what it can look like when socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The California Senate Committee on Agriculture heard several bills focused on agricultural equity, seed regulation, conservation, and pest prevention. AB 52 by Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry would codify two existing CDFA advisory committees created under the Farmer Equity Act: the California BIPOC Producer Advisory Committee and the Small-Scale Producer Advisory Committee. Supporters said the committees give socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers a permanent voice in policy and program development, while no opposition was presented. Members spoke favorably about the bill and its equity goals. AB 1848 by Assembly Member Ransom would raise seed law fees to fund CDFA seed enforcement, which supporters described as a consumer protection measure ensuring seeds are accurately labeled and free of contamination and noxious weeds. AB 1551 by Assembly Member Krell would add implementation of the “rice footprint” to the California Rice Commission’s priorities, tying rice acreage management to habitat conservation for waterfowl, shorebirds, salmon, and other species; the bill drew support from conservation groups and the rice industry. AB 2143 by Assembly Member Irwin would prohibit online marketplaces from facilitating the sale and shipment of noxious weeds into California, with supporters citing the spread of invasive species through e-commerce and the need to modernize enforcement. After discussion, the committee took formal action once a quorum was established. AB 2143 was moved first and passed 3-0, then the committee approved the consent calendar items and AB 52, AB 1848, and AB 1551. All bills were reported out of committee, with several initially held on call for absent members before final votes were recorded. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is money from outside the state that goes to help our state's farmers and ranchers and our community
• reimbursement program within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to reimburse eligible ranchers
• reimbursement program within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to reimburse eligible ranchers
• <00:32:59.440> but discussed for farmers and ranchers but discussed for farmers and ranchers
• cares for, but cattle that the rancher cares for, but it's<00:56:30.720> also<00:56:30.880>

Bills: HB1602, HB2246, HB1707, HB2216, HB2594, HB2595, HB2155, HB2113, HB2207, HB1832, HB2015, HB2152, HB2548

Keywords: agriculture, grant specialist, financial support, farmers, Hawaii, federal grants, grant administration, revolving fund, department of agriculture and biosecurity, grant compliance, transportation, reimbursement, food security, local production, sustainability, agricultural loans, financing, Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, Hawaii agriculture, loan portfolio

Transcript Highlights:

• farmers and ranchers first. farmers and ranchers first.
• ,<02:44:08.640> and in support of farmers, ranchers, and in support of farmers, ranchers,
• ranchers vulnerable. ranchers vulnerable. and<02:55:17.439> the<02:55:17.680> Doge
• <02:56:14.000> you,<02:56:14.399> we're and ranchers can tell you, we're and ranchers
• green for our cows and our ranchers green for our cows and our ranchers pocketbooks.<03:22:30.080

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, June 4, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's an exemption from some of the standards for ranchers. harvesting and you're doing a custom
• from some of the standards for ranchers. from some of the standards for ranchers.
• <00:30:53.679> and<00:30:53.919> you<00:30:54.080> own So if you are a rancher
• ,<00:32:04.320> their<00:32:04.640> families,<00:32:05.679> their rancher, their
• families, their rancher, their families, their non-paying<00:32:06.559> guests,<00:32:07.360>

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• different research units and facilities on campus, trying to generate knowledge that farmers and ranchers
• we're committed to advancing science, providing science-based solutions to Oklahoma's farmers and ranchers
• topics that relate to soil health, human health, and ultimately economic viability for farmers and ranchers
• It's also the concern for households, farmers, ranchers that are neighbors to application of biosolids
• It's also the concerns for, uh, of households, farmers, ranchers that are neighbors to application of

Summary: The meeting focused on the use of biosolids on farm and ranch land, with testimony from Oklahoma State University experts, a conservation official, and an engineering representative about the benefits, risks, and regulatory implications. Dr. Lusk described OSU’s long history of soil fertility research and said biosolids can provide nutrients and organic matter, but also may carry contaminants such as PFAS, heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, and pathogens. He emphasized that many questions remain unanswered, especially about contaminant uptake into soil, crops, livestock, and humans, and said existing EPA and Oklahoma DEQ regulations address some treatment and application standards but may not fully cover PFAS. Dr. Arnell expanded on nutrient management, explaining that biosolids can function similarly to manure as a fertilizer source, especially for nitrogen and phosphorus, but should be tested, incorporated into soil, and applied under permit conditions to reduce runoff and other losses. He said PFAS testing methods are not yet standardized and that more research is needed to determine sampling protocols, movement in soil, and long-term effects. Committee members asked whether farmers and ranchers should be notified of risks, whether PFAS is currently tested, how many counties use biosolids, and what research would be needed for a dissertation-level study. The witnesses generally agreed that landowners should be informed of known risks and uncertainties, but said the science is still developing. Dr. Arnell said a unified testing method is needed before reliable PFAS monitoring can be done, and suggested that a multi-year study would be required to understand soil movement, crop uptake, and livestock impacts. Greg Scott of the Oklahoma Conservation Commission framed the issue as a waste-management problem, noting that human waste streams contain contaminants and that soil type affects how pollutants move; he said sandy soils pose greater movement risks than clay soils and that current best practice is incorporation, careful timing, and avoiding steep or sensitive sites. He also said PFAS are widespread and not naturally occurring in the way some other compounds are, and that liability and cleanup costs are major concerns. Mary Elizabeth Mock of Garver Engineering focused on the practical and financial consequences of a possible moratorium on land application, saying most of Oklahoma’s biosolids are currently land applied and would otherwise have to go to landfills. She warned that many landfills are nearing capacity, tipping fees could rise sharply, and cities such as Tulsa and Norman could face large increases in disposal costs, which would ultimately be borne by ratepayers and taxpayers. She also said septic system maintenance costs could rise if land application options shrink, potentially leading to deferred maintenance and system failures. Mock urged a tiered, data-driven approach to PFAS regulation and said advanced treatment technologies may help in the future, but they are still emerging and expensive. No votes were taken; the session consisted of presentations and member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And also another thing too, on that, on that 50% reimbursement for a rancher, that's a pretty tough sell
• I want y'all to consider maybe bumping that reimbursement level up because if I'm a rancher, I'll just
• If I'm a rancher and I've got a Orphan well on the ranch, and you know I know it's going to take the

Bills: SB 1150, SB 763, SB 1061, SB 1146, SB 1198

Keywords: concrete plants, environmental regulation, permit process, air quality, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, SB 1061, uranium mining, production area authorization, TCEQ, Water Code, groundwater, groundwater conservation district, restoration table value, restoration values, contested case hearing, Chapter 2001, mineral rights, surface owners, notice requirements, environmental permitting

Transcript Highlights:

• They're a critical partner and essential for the success of farmers and ranchers.
• They're a critical partner and essential for the success of farmers and ranchers.
• <00:54:41.839> but going to become Farmers or Ranchers but going to become Farmers or Ranchers
• Again, these are critical research stations important to farmers and ranchers, and, Chair, we would be
• Again, these are critical research stations important to farmers and ranchers, and, Chair, we would be

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Committee on Higher Education and Agriculture heard Senate Bill 1158, which would authorize general obligation bonds and appropriations for a controlled environment agriculture research and demonstration facility at the Magoon Research and Teaching Site in Manoa. Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive from the University of Hawaiʻi, Department of Agriculture, Farm Bureau, Maui County, MetroGrow Hawaiʻi, and other agricultural groups, who said the project would strengthen food resilience, support year-round production, create clean jobs, and provide a demonstration site for urban vertical farming. University representatives said the project would include demolition of an existing condemned building, a research and lab component, and a multistory vertical farm, with an estimated cost of $6 million and a projected two-year build time. Members questioned whether Manoa was the best location, whether the project fit the university’s broader strategy, and whether the request would displace other priorities. The University said the site is tied to SEAR activities, close to students and faculty, and intended to support hands-on training and commercial-scale production. In response to concerns about soil testing and stakeholder needs, the University said it would restart the soil testing lab using internal funds, though not as part of this bill, and would request additional staff for efficiency. The committee then recessed and later reconvened in decision-making, where the chairs recommended and the committee adopted amendments to SB 1158, including a name correction and deferral to July 31, 2050, and the bill passed with amendments. The committee then took up Senate Bill 663, relating to the University of Hawaiʻi College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources and SEAR research and experiment stations. The University testified that the stations are important for locally relevant agricultural research but are short staffed, with 34 positions down since 2005, and that the bill requests eight new positions, including agricultural technicians and four county community coordinator positions, to improve station operations, community engagement, and workforce development. The Farm Bureau supported the measure, saying the positions are needed to revamp extension services and that Manoa is an appropriate urban location for the vertical farming component. Members questioned why vacant or existing positions could not be used instead of new ones, and the University explained that some listed vacancies reflected old federally funded positions or inaccurate counts, promised a written update, and said it was working to fill current openings. No final vote on SB 663 was reached in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So let me give you a scenario of a rancher that is doing regenerative grazing and multi-paddock grazing
• How would that work with the assessor if they visited a rancher property where there was basically fallow
• So let me give you a scenario of a rancher that is doing regenerative grazing and multi-paddock grazing
• We're going to go on to House Bill 2105 next. rancher that is doing regenerative grazing and multi-patic
• I was just concerned that if a rancher was fallowing land to follow regenerative farming techniques,

Bills: HB2016, HB2104, HB2105, HB2174, HB2256, HB2289, HB2477, HB2903, HB2939, HB2979, HB2996, HB4103

Keywords: tax penalties, filing, tax returns, administration, Arizona Revised Statutes, agricultural property, classification, county assessor, property inspection, appeal process, property tax, agricultural classification, Department of Revenue, property valuation, inspection notice, inspection report, on-site inspection, full cash value, rural land, farm land

Summary: The committee first approved the March 9, 2026 minutes and held House Bills 29 and 2939 at the sponsor’s request. It then took up House Bill 2016, which would eliminate the late-filing penalty for taxpayers with zero income tax liability; after discussion about whether taxpayers still need to file to establish that they owe nothing, the committee adopted an amendment narrowing the bill to income tax filers and passed the bill 4-3. The Department of Revenue said it was neutral on the bill but supported the amendment. The committee next heard House Bill 2289, which updates the property-value examples used in bond/override election pamphlets and truth-in-taxation notices from older low values to $300,000. Supporters said the figures are outdated and should better reflect current home values; opponents questioned whether $300,000 was the best benchmark and whether adding another example would confuse voters. The bill passed 4-3. The committee also approved House Bill 4103, which bars school districts from calling bond elections if enrollment is below 50% of capacity. Supporters argued districts should use or monetize excess space before asking taxpayers for more debt, while school administrators and others said the measure would block needed maintenance, safety upgrades, and local decision-making. It passed 4-3. Two related agricultural property bills, House Bills 2104 and 2105, were both amended and passed 4-3. HB 2104 creates a four-year period after a successful agricultural property tax appeal during which assessors generally may not reclassify or reinspect the property absent changes in use, ownership, splits, or improvements. HB 2105 requires advance notice of inspections and inspection reports and provides a three-year inspection exemption after the most recent inspection, with similar exceptions. Farm and ranch groups said the bills provide fairness and certainty after successful appeals; county assessors opposed them as limiting oversight and creating unequal treatment. The committee also passed House Bill 2256 unanimously, which sets notice and title procedures for salvage auction dealers when insurance claims are denied or unpaid, and House Bill 2979 unanimously, which updates credit union regulatory timelines and procedures. Later, the committee passed House Bill 2996 unanimously, clarifying that certificates of insurance are informational only and cannot expand coverage or rights, with penalties for misrepresentations. It also heard House Bill 2174, which renames and updates regulation of insurance modeling and data organizations, requires model filings, and revises related reinsurance provisions; the discussion focused on how DIFI would regulate models versus the companies that create them, but no vote was taken in the portion provided. Finally, House Bill 2477 was introduced to conform Arizona’s 529 plan to federal law by increasing the K-12 withdrawal limit to $20,000, adding post-secondary credentialing expenses, and allowing rollovers to ABLE accounts and Roth IRAs if requirements are met; the sponsor and Treasurer’s Office supported it as a cleanup/conformity measure, and discussion began on how the new rollover options would work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Farmers, ranchers? I mean, what is the point of this?”
• “Farmers, ranchers, I mean, what is the point of this?” “Well, it benefits, I guess, everybody.
• “And that is not for, Madam Chair, is that not for ranchers, farmers, those type of individuals?”
• “Not for ranchers, farmers, those type of individuals? Remember the farmers.
• farmers those type of individuals very rich. not for ranchers farmers those type of individuals remember

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:

• It's not fair to our students, but it's also not fair to the farmers and the ranchers and the business
• I'm a local rancher and husband of Susan. So I'm going to go a little bit different route.
• When all us farmers and ranchers are gone, what option do we have other than foreign countries?
• We can't lose any more farmers and ranchers, especially to something like this, when there are other
• You know, as a rancher in East Texas, I find it offensive that 50 years later they're still not able

Bills: HB1523, HB2109, HB2694, HB3525, HB3898, HB4646, HB5188, HB5219, HB5320, HB5651, HB5655, HB5659, HB5662, HB5672

Keywords: aquifer conservation, Class V injection well, environmental regulation, groundwater protection, municipal water supply, temporary prohibition, water management, reservoir construction, state water plan, Texas Water Code, environmental impact, Brazoria Drainage District, commissioners, elections, vacancies, resignation, HB 3525, North Texas Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater permit, permit amendment

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard House Bill 2109, which would remove certain long-proposed reservoir projects from the state water plan after 50 years without progress. Chairman Van Deaver and many landowners, local officials, timber interests, and conservation advocates testified in support, arguing that the Marvin Nichols Reservoir has burdened Northeast Texas landowners for decades with the threat of eminent domain, depressed property values, and uncertainty over homes, farms, ranches, schools, churches, and cemeteries. Supporters also said the project would flood tens of thousands of acres, require extensive mitigation, harm timber and agriculture, and that Texas now has better alternatives such as conservation, reuse, aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination. Several members expressed sympathy for the affected families and questioned whether a project could remain in the plan indefinitely without progress. Opposition came from North Texas water interests, including the North Texas Commission, Tarrant Regional Water District, and the Texas Water Association, who argued that the bill would interfere with the state’s long-term water planning process and remove needed future supply options for a fast-growing region. They said Region C faces major projected shortages by 2070, that conservation and reuse have already delayed the need for new supplies, and that reservoirs remain one tool in the state’s water-planning toolbox. TWDB staff explained the existing inter-regional conflict process and noted that the substitute would affect several unique reservoir sites, not just Marvin Nichols. After testimony, Chairman Van Deaver closed by urging passage of the bill, but the committee withdrew the substitute and left HB 2109 pending. The committee then took up House Bill 5188, a brackish groundwater bill. The author said the bill would reduce permitting burdens for wells in designated brackish groundwater production zones, and the committee substitute added requirements on monitoring, groundwater-rights ownership, and allocation of pumpage limits while removing some exclusions and export-fee provisions. Texas Wildlife Association testified against the bill, warning that the exemptions could weaken groundwater conservation districts’ ability to protect freshwater resources and surface-owner rights. San Antonio Water System testified in favor, saying brackish groundwater is a key future supply and that the substitute would help speed development of desalination and brackish projects. The Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts testified neutrally but raised concerns about reduced district oversight, especially around injection-well exclusions and the loss of export fees, and said discussions on the bill were ongoing.

Transcript Highlights:

• She and I will be actually up in one of these rural counties meeting with ranchers next week.
• difficult subject for us to wrap our heads around because our understanding is that in some cases ranchers
• There's a real physical and mental health impact of cohabitating with wolves on ranchers and other rural
• There's a real physical and mental health impact of cohabitating with wolves on ranchers and other rural
• residents in that area. of cohabitating with wolves on ranchers and other rural residents in that area

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the May Revision from the Department of Finance and comments from the Legislative Analyst’s Office on the state’s overall budget condition and natural resources proposals. Finance said the May Revision keeps the budget balanced in 2026-27 and 2027-28, reduces the structural deficit, and includes major natural resources items such as Proposition 4 climate bond spending, including up to $125 million for the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, $23.2 million for wildlife refuge and wetland projects, $25 million for Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, $25 million for Bay-Delta environmental flows, $1 million for coexisting-with-wildlife work, and $2.5 million for cancer-risk research. The LAO said revenues remain strong but argued the budget still relies too heavily on reserves, recommended more savings and fewer new discretionary expenditures, and urged the Legislature to prioritize only urgent health and safety needs while planning for uncertainty in greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues. Members focused heavily on the Golden Gate Fields purchase, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, the wildlife coexistence initiative, and cap-and-invest funding for transit. On Golden Gate Fields, agency officials said the property is a time-limited, once-in-a-generation opportunity, that the state’s contribution would help secure the acquisition, and that the land would ultimately transfer to East Bay Regional Park District, which would assume operations and maintenance. Officials said the site would be remediated by the current owner, the state would use deed restrictions to prevent commercial development, and the remaining purchase price would be covered by nonstate partners. On Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, Finance and the Natural Resources Agency said the $25 million would support scientific monitoring and early implementation of the Bay-Delta plan update, while the LAO questioned the timing and said the request was premature until the Water Board formally adopts the plan. The committee also discussed the coexisting-with-wildlife proposal and wolf-livestock conflict. Finance said the May Revision’s $1 million proposal would backfill existing funds to support limited-term staffing, deterrence tools, and conflict response, while members and the California Cattlemen’s Association said the need is larger and includes direct loss compensation, indirect loss compensation, and nonlethal deterrence. The Cattlemen’s Association said private insurance is limited and often inadequate for these losses. Members also raised concerns about the greenhouse gas reduction fund and transit, warning that lower auction revenues and possible CARB rule changes could leave major transit and other tier-three priorities underfunded. The LAO recommended planning for multiple revenue scenarios and reconsidering the current cap-and-invest spending framework. No votes or formal actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to get those and get those in the farms, in the hands of, of the farmers and ranchers.
• next session or, or when the opportunity arises, is maybe a grant program for these farmers and ranchers
• I'm being told by most of the people that I talked to and ranchers and feed producers that the cartel
• So we got full full 100% cooperation from the ranchers.
• That's the direction we, we feel, at least myself, and I think I speak for a lot of ranchers, that we