Transcript Highlights:

• Water Augmentation Fund to be used for brackish groundwater recovery projects.
• So if there's that much, and we've been talking about brackish water for years and years, that's the
• got over 600 million acre-feet of brackish water in Arizona that we should be taking a look at and seeing
• There have been two previous investigations into brackish water in the state.
• Cities in the Valley are already pumping and treating brackish water, so the technical capability and

Bills: HB2042, HB2052, HB2055, HB2056, HB2094, HB2098, HB2185, HB2328, HB2758, HB2798

Keywords: solar radiation management, environment, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, public health, complaint process, Attorney General, groundwater management, water conservation, irrigation, water supply, brackish groundwater, water supply development, desalination, water infrastructure, financial assistance, environmental reviews, brackish water, groundwater, water resources

Summary: The committee first received an update from Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzky on Colorado River negotiations and post-2026 operating rules. He described the legal framework governing Arizona’s allocation, argued that Arizona and the lower basin have already made substantial conservation cuts, and said the upper basin is pressing positions Arizona views as inconsistent with prior Supreme Court rulings. He emphasized the need to move water from upstream reservoirs to Lake Mead, warned of continued shortage risk, and said the state is seeking an equitable deal through ongoing federal and interstate negotiations. Members asked about outside water use, tourism and recreation impacts, and tribal water rights, including the Navajo-Hopi-San Juan Southern Paiute settlement. Buschatzky said the state’s delegation and bipartisan support have been helpful and urged continued public and legislative backing. The committee then heard House Bill 2758, which would expand McMullen Valley groundwater transportation authority and add related requirements and guardrails, including an amendment increasing the La Paz County transportation cap from 10% to 50% of the annual volume and adding conditions for sales or leases from historically irrigated acres. Supporters, including bill sponsor advocates, the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, and the Home Builders Association, said the bill would create a lawful, regulated transfer option similar to the Harquahala model, support housing growth, and include oversight through hydrologic studies, pumping limits, and monthly reporting to ADWR. Opponents, including La Paz County Supervisor Holly Irwin’s statement, local residents, Sierra Club, and rural advocates, argued the bill would accelerate aquifer depletion, harm private wells and subsidence conditions, and benefit a New York hedge fund at the expense of rural communities. After debate, the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and then passed HB 2758 as amended on a 6-4 due-pass vote. The committee next took up House Bill 2098, which would modify bonding authority and public hearing notice requirements for county water augmentation authorities and allow local repayment agreements with WIFA. Pinal County Supervisor Stephen Miller and other supporters said the bill would clean up statutory language so the Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority can finance future water augmentation and infrastructure projects, including potential Bartlett Dam-related work, and better prepare for future Colorado River uncertainty. The Home Builders Association also supported the bill, saying it included proportionality protections for private utility water charges. The bill was moved for a due-pass recommendation and the committee proceeded to a roll call vote, with the transcript ending before the final vote result was shown.

Bills: SB 1169, SB 1285, SB 1583, SB 1611, SB 1898, SB 1976, SB 2160, SB 2161, SB 2658, SB 2661, SB 2662, SB 2692, SB 1055, SB 1359, SB 2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, groundwater management, water conservation, district planning, environmental regulation, sustainability, groundwater, conservation, fees, agricultural uses, water regulation, wastewater treatment, environmental testing, pollutants

Transcript Highlights:

• brackish water with a TDS, or total dissolved solids, concentration of 3,000 milligrams per liter or
• So you mentioned the high salinity, basically the brackish water.
• There's no prevention of freshwater moving into those brackish water zones.
• But Montgomery County already uses brackish water, pumps out of the Catahoula. We do.
• So it removes the sort of the science and oversight of that brackish water production.

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:

• , and I'm really excited that we're looking together into this brackish water issue. ...water situation
• , and I'm really excited that we're looking together into this brackish water issue. ...water situation
• If brackish water is exempt from permitting, we will not be able to curtail the brackish production to
• You mentioned the high salinity, basically the brackish water.
• brackish water zones.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• But we need water. We need water. water and the Rio Grande River ain't cutting it.
• water desalination.
• pulling up water.
• This is only for brackish water desalinization for larger projects that can. and put that cost in and
• In the city of Laredo and Webb County how much brackish water is available to y'all I think that we have

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

Transcript Highlights:

• things that we're looking at. 600 million acre-feet of brackish groundwater is a lot of water for the
• I can't drill a well below 1,000 feet, but I do have—I discovered that I have brackish water.
• I guess specifically, does ADWR know how much brackish water is in the state of Arizona and where it's
• And I do feel that we do need to address brackish water and how we look at it and we treat it and how
• I do feel that we do need to address brackish water and how we look at it and we treat it and how we

Bills: HB2013, HB2026, HB2056, HB2098, HB2113, HB2156, HB2158, HCM2011, HCR2057

Keywords: air pollution, wildfires, environmental standards, public health, Arizona Revised Statutes, assured water supply, groundwater, commingling, commingled water, water supply, Arizona Department of Water Resources, ADWR, active management area, AMA, subdivision plat, development approval, water rights, municipal provider, private water company, certificate of assured water supply

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 27 and March 3, 2026, and then heard several natural resources and water-related measures. House Bill 2013 would require ADEQ to submit an exceptional event demonstration to EPA when wildfire smoke from federally managed land affects Arizona air quality. The sponsor said this would help Arizona’s ozone/nonattainment position, while Sierra Club and ADEQ raised concerns that the bill duplicates an existing process and could waste staff time and resources. The bill passed 5-3. House Bill 2156 would appropriate $250,000 to the Livestock Compensation Fund. Supporters argued ranchers need help with livestock losses and drought impacts, while opponents criticized the board’s transparency and said the program already receives federal and prior state funding. The bill passed 5-3. House Bill 2113 would require RUCO to intervene in utility rate cases when a proposed increase reaches 100% or more; the sponsor said rural customers are being overlooked, while RUCO said it would need significant additional staff and funding and could not absorb the workload without more resources. The bill passed 6-2, with members noting they expected a future amendment to add funding. The committee also approved House Concurrent Memorial 2011, which urges Congress to delist the Mexican gray wolf and return management to states and local authorities. Supporters cited livestock losses and ranching impacts, while opponents said the species remains endangered and recovery decisions should remain science-based; the memorial passed 5-3. House Bill 2026, concerning how ADWR evaluates water availability when supplies are commingled, passed 5-3 despite concerns that it could weaken groundwater safeguards. House Bill 2056, which funds a feasibility study for brackish groundwater desalination sites, also passed 5-3 after debate over whether the study was necessary given existing groundwater accounting and treatment efforts. House Bill 2098, modernizing Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority bonding authority, passed unanimously 8-0. Finally, House Concurrent Resolution 2057, supporting a geothermal permitting roadmap and agency coordination for next-generation geothermal development, passed unanimously 8-0.

Transcript Highlights:

• water, brackish groundwater, it's just y'all kind of looking at that.
• Brackish zones explicitly have a process in place to deal with any negative impacts to water levels and
• water quality.
• Um, House Bill 4896 will allow more of our communities the opportunity to access brackish water resources
• the water caucus.

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of our members are nonprofit water supply corporations and water districts.
• The Water Development Board's initial assessment of the brackish groundwater production zones (BGBZs)
• Brackish zones explicitly have a process in place to deal with any negative impacts to water levels and
• water quality.
• House Bill 4896 will allow more of our communities the opportunity to access brackish water resources

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• it would actually threaten the water system's safe drinking water.
• water side.
• All right. reduces the regulatory burden on developing brackish groundwater as a water supply by exempting
• He did in 2027 with a permanent brackish water desalination plant, which will supply both the Tulisa
• water development. the government here, which includes the provision that the development of brackish

Bills: SB1169, SB1285, SB1583, SB1611, SB1898, SB1976, SB2160, SB2161, SB2658, SB2661, SB2662, SB2692, SB1055, SB1359, SB2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• State water is water that the state owns.
• be paid for that water.
• People need the water; you've got to send the water." And that's what you just pointed to.
• Water District was created.
• Association of Water Companies.

Bills: SB1169, SB1285, SB1583, SB1611, SB1898, SB1976, SB2160, SB2161, SB2658, SB2661, SB2662, SB2692, SB1055, SB1359, SB2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• They're pumping that water.
• That's water the state owns. We're talking about water that the landowner owns, not the district.
• The district has no economic interest or entitlement to the water, cannot own the water, cannot condemn
• paid for that water.
• People need the water, you got to in the water. And that's what you just pointed to.

Bills: SB 1169, SB 1285, SB 1583, SB 1611, SB 1898, SB 1976, SB 2160, SB 2161, SB 2658, SB 2661, SB 2662, SB 2692, SB 1055, SB 1359, SB 2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• The updated brackish water groundwater study has been completed and is at the Department of Water Resources
• Water is one of the top issues for the state of Arizona, especially with Colorado River water being negotiated
• So if we have that much water in brackish groundwater, we ought to be considering cleaning it up and
• All the brackish water that we have has already been accounted for in our groundwater, and so it's not
• think that treating and using brackish water is the best way for us to protect our aquifer.

Bills: HB2056, HB2202, HB2207, HB2224, HB2303, HB2344, HB2532, HB2759, HB2798

Keywords: brackish water, groundwater, desalination, water resources, feasibility study, environmental impact, dementia care, telementoring, healthcare education, rural communities, grant funding, braille, disability access, education funding, state corrections, inclusion, produce incentive, agriculture, economic support, funding

Summary: The Appropriations Committee met on January 28 and heard several bills, beginning with member and staff introductions and a reminder about amendment deadlines. HB 2056 would appropriate $100,000 to the Arizona Department of Water Resources for a feasibility study of brackish groundwater desalination sites; the sponsor said Arizona should explore potential water supplies amid Colorado River concerns. A witness opposed the bill, and members debated whether brackish groundwater should be treated as a resource or a threat to aquifers. The committee approved HB 2056 on an 11-6 vote, with one member not voting. The committee then considered HB 2798, as amended, which would provide $100,000 to the University of Arizona/Arizona Geological Survey to compile data on materials related to nuclear energy, including thorium and other non-uranium fuels. The sponsor framed the bill as an economic development and national security effort, while opponents questioned whether Arizona has enough of the material to justify public spending. The University of Arizona supported the work as within the Geological Survey’s mission. The committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill 11-5, with one member present and one not voting. HB 2303 would codify investment rules for the State Treasurer, requiring safety and principal preservation ahead of return and prohibiting speculative investments and insider-benefit conduct. The Treasurer’s Office said the bill reflects current policy and ethics rules already in place, and members asked about how “speculative” would be defined and whether the bill would affect other investment-related statutes. The committee passed the bill 15-0, with two members present and one not voting. HB 2344 would require the Treasurer to manage the local government investment pool and allow a third-party backup only in emergencies; the Treasurer’s Office argued this preserves a low-cost, high-liquidity service for local governments, while some members questioned whether it limited future Treasurers’ discretion. The committee passed HB 2344 12-2, with three present and one not voting. Later, the committee heard HB 2759, which would appropriate $500,000 to the Department of Veterans’ Services to partner with an educational institution in Yavapai County for veteran programs. A retired Navy SEAL and campus veterans coordinator described emergency housing, equipment, and professional-development needs for student veterans at Embry-Riddle, while several members supported the effort and others objected to using state funds for a private institution or a county-specific program. The bill passed 11-6, with one not voting. The committee also passed HB 2207, appropriating $300,000 for the prison Braille transcription program, after testimony that the program trains inmates in a skilled trade and has had no recidivism among released participants; it passed 17-0, with one not voting. Finally, HB 2224, as amended to reduce the appropriation from $2 million to $1 million, would fund the Double Up Food Bucks produce incentive program through SNAP. Supporters said it helps families, farmers, and local economies and can improve health outcomes, while members discussed budget constraints; the committee approved the amended bill after testimony from program advocates and farmers.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill also requires the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority to administer the Brackish Groundwater
• Chairman, I stated, and I believe I've heard it several times, is that brackish water is groundwater.
• I stated, and I believe I've heard it several times, is that brackish water is groundwater.
• We talk about brackish water. We're drilling below a thousand... ...pump or groundwater.
• We talk about brackish water. We're drilling below a thousand feet, etc., etc.

Bills: HB2014, HB2055, HB2145, HB2150, HB2696, HB2755, HB2763, HB2781, HB2782, HB2787, HB2795, HB2889, HB2975, HB2985, HB2986, HCM2009, HCR2020, HCR2038

Keywords: air emissions, fuel blends, environmental quality, feasibility study, Arizona Department of Agriculture, brackish groundwater, water supply development, desalination, Arizona Revised Statutes, water infrastructure, financial assistance, environmental reviews, fuel reformulation, gasoline standards, environmental regulations, ethanol supply, Air Quality, state land department, mineral lease, renewals

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee approved the March 17 minutes and then took up a long calendar of bills, holding HCR 2038. HB 2787, which would bar the state and its political subdivisions from using personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer, or cooperate with the Mexican wolf reintroduction program, drew opposition from Sierra Club and Humane World for Animals/Animal Defense League of Arizona, who argued it would hinder wolf recovery and undercut science-based wildlife management. The committee nevertheless gave HB 2787 a do-pass recommendation by a 4-3 vote. The committee then considered HB 2055 on a Brackish Groundwater Recovery Program Fund and HB 2782 on disclosure requirements for regulatory assets in utility rates. Testimony on HB 2055 raised concerns that brackish groundwater is still groundwater and that pumping it could cause localized impacts, but the bill initially received a do-pass recommendation before a later vote failed on reconsideration. HB 2782 prompted discussion about Corporation Commission authority and utility regulation, but it ultimately received a do-pass recommendation. The committee also heard HB 2781, a solar energy decommissioning and financial assurance bill, with testimony from environmental groups, industry representatives, and a local official; an amendment by Senator Sundareshan to strengthen financial assurance and remove the remediation fund failed, and the underlying bill also failed on a tied 4-4 vote. Later, the committee approved HB 2975, which would suspend use of solar scoring maps on state trust lands and require new mining and housing scoring maps, despite opposition from environmental groups and neutral comments from the State Land Department that the solar map is only a guidance tool. HB 2696, as amended, passed after the committee adopted amendments shifting the Arizona Commerce Authority’s fuel-price mandate and creating a fuel resiliency task force; testimony focused on fuel supply, pipeline capacity, refinery access, and whether the ACA was the right agency to lead the effort. The committee also passed HCM 2009 urging Congress to require legislative approval for new national monuments and to streamline mining and land-swap processes, and HB 2889, which funds ADEQ monitoring of uranium contamination and creates a statewide registry and tribal partnership program. Finally, the committee approved HB 2763, which would require legislative approval before the Arizona Game and Fish Commission could close a shooting range. Supporters said it was meant to protect facilities like Ben Avery and preserve safe shooting locations, while opponents argued the bill was unnecessary because existing review steps already exist and there was no imminent closure threat. The committee also heard testimony on the bill from Game and Fish, which said the measure would add another layer to an already extensive closure process and that the department was neutral on the proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bill 2056 appropriates $100,000 from the state general fund in FY 2027 to the Arizona Department of Water
• Resources for a required feasibility study in potential brackish groundwater desalination projects.
• So whether or not it's brackish, pumping more groundwater in places such as the Rinconas Plain that are
• We should be deeply investing in water conservation and not allowing for more groundwater pumping.
• We should be deeply investing in water conservation and not allowing for more groundwater pumping.

Bills: HB2056, HB2057, HB2224, HB2257, HB2265, HB2311, HB2352, HB2367, HB2369, HB2446, HB2532, HB2592, HB2752, HB2809, HB2957

Keywords: brackish water, groundwater, desalination, water resources, feasibility study, environmental impact, special plates, centennial, Arizona Department of Transportation, vehicle registration, commercial discounts, Arizona Centennial, produce incentive, agriculture, economic support, funding, Arizona, boating, watercraft licensing, law enforcement

Summary: The committee approved the March 10, 2026 minutes and then considered several bills. HB 2056, appropriating $100,000 for an Arizona Department of Water Resources feasibility study on brackish groundwater desalination, passed 6-3 despite concerns that it could encourage more groundwater pumping and worsen subsidence or impacts to tribal lands. HB 2057, which lowers the Arizona Centennial Special Plate renewal fee from $25 to $20, also received a do-pass recommendation, 7-2, with some members objecting to the special plate’s focus and the reduced fee. HB 2224, appropriating $1 million annually to DES for the produce incentive program, drew strong support from nonprofit and food-access advocates who said the Double Up Food Bucks program helps families, farmers, and local markets; it passed 9-0. HB 2257, changing the allocation of watercraft registration revenues among the Watercraft Licensing Fund, Lake Improvement Fund, and boating safety/law enforcement funds, passed 6-3 after criticism that the bill was heard without a sponsor present and concern about shifting money away from Game and Fish. HB 2265, barring courts from charging defendants for public defender or court-appointed counsel costs and related criminal-case fees, passed 7-1 amid debate over constitutionality, cost shifting to counties, and whether the bill should be amended to offset lost revenue. The committee then took up HB 2311, which imposes disclosure, content, parental-control, and self-harm response requirements on publicly available conversational AI services for minors. The sponsor and supporters framed it as child protection, while opponents warned about privacy, surveillance, and overbroad definitions; an Epstein amendment expanding the bill to broader conversational technology was rejected, and the bill passed 7-2. HB 2752, moving authority over international trade offices from the Arizona Commerce Authority to legislative appropriations and reporting, passed 6-3 after a proposed data-and-research amendment was also rejected. Finally, HB 2957, requiring ADOT to continue offering non-REAL ID licenses and limiting biometric collection and data sharing, prompted extensive testimony for and against; supporters emphasized privacy and choice, while opponents warned it could conflict with federal CDL and REAL ID requirements. The transcript cuts off during the discussion of HB 2957, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would encourage projects that turn flood water or storm water into a valuable water supply, improving
• The flood and drainage waters captured by the Delta Project to be treated are not only brackish but also
• water rights.
• , water supply, drainage, as well as water users and those who support the water industry.
• water troughs and our water wells.

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

Keywords: Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, water loss, municipally owned utilities, Texas Water Development Board, administrative penalties, water audit, water infrastructure, water supply, state water plan, water management strategies, water financing, municipal bonds, revenue bonds, public debt, obligations, TWDB

Transcript Highlights:

• The flood and drainage waters captured by the Delta project to be treated are not only brackish, but
• It's not a bad investment to get that kind of water. project to be treated are not only brackish, but
• We established a Texas Water Bank in 1993 to facilitate the transfer, sale, and lease of water and water
• It'll develop 100,000 acre-feet, utilize existing surface water rights, brackish groundwater development
• get water.

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

Keywords: Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, water loss, municipally owned utilities, Texas Water Development Board, administrative penalties, water audit, water infrastructure, water supply, state water plan, water management strategies, water financing, municipal bonds, revenue bonds, public debt, obligations, TWDB

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs heard several water-related bills, with testimony focused on drinking water quality, groundwater contamination notice, flood infrastructure funding, water rights conservation, and utility service areas. SB 1662 would limit TCEQ’s advance notice to public water systems to no more than 24 hours before testing after a consumer complaint, to reduce the chance of temporary treatment affecting results. SB 1663 would allow TCEQ to notify private well owners, groundwater conservation districts, and nearby residents by direct means about known groundwater contamination, rather than relying mainly on first-class mail and annual reporting. SB 2124 would move the deadline for publishing the Texas Groundwater Protection Committee’s annual report from April 1 to June 1. Witnesses on the first two bills described long-running water quality problems and delayed notice in their communities and supported the measures. No opposition was recorded, and each bill was left pending for a later vote. The committee also heard SB 1967, which would expand eligibility for Flood Infrastructure Fund financing to multipurpose projects that both reduce flooding and create water supply. Senator Hinojosa and Hidalgo County representatives described the Delta Reclamation Project as a shovel-ready example that would capture flood and drainage water, treat it, and produce new potable supply while also providing detention and flood mitigation. A Sierra Club witness also supported the bill, saying such projects could help manage floodwaters and reduce polluted discharges to bays and estuaries. The bill was left pending. A lengthy and divided discussion followed on SB 1413, which would expand the streamlined expedited release process for landowners seeking removal from a water or sewer CCN in additional counties. Senator Nichols said the bill was a property-rights measure aimed at legacy monopolies and bad actors who use CCNs to hold landowners hostage, while supporters described cases where developers could not get timely service, including fire flow, or were asked to fund infrastructure without reasonable recoupment. Opponents from rural water corporations and utility associations argued the bill would undermine investment in water infrastructure, strand debt, and weaken the return on planned expansion. PUC and TCEQ resource witnesses explained that compensation is handled case by case through appraisal and can include stranded costs, planning, design, construction, and some legal fees, but members noted the statute is unclear and discussed possible committee substitute language. Public testimony was closed with the bill left pending. Later, SB 1624 would allow the Texas Water Trust within the Texas Water Bank to hold donated water rights for conservation purposes and protect them from use-it-or-lose-it cancellation, and SB 863 would address Edwards Aquifer utilities that straddle the aquifer boundary by allowing them to continue using Edwards water within their certificated areas under specified conditions. Both bills were laid out, received no public opposition in the hearing, and were left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, what this really does is expands the use of the water trust and the water bank.
• or temporarily put it in the water bank or water trust to help other folks.
• Um, making the water bank and water trust more flexible will only help the state meet its water needs
• Uh, my background is in San Antonio Water System, Water Quality division.
• drinking water standards.

Bills: HB 5208, SB 863, SB 1243, SB 1624, SB 1965, SB 2660, SB 2702, SB 2885

Keywords: water filtration, public drinking water, health and safety, well maintenance, water quality, Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, public utility agency, dissolution, local government, regulatory framework, municipal authority, Texas Water Bank, Texas Water Trust, water rights, water banking, instream flow

Transcript Highlights:

• put it in the water bank or water trust to help other folks.
• Making the water bank and water trust more flexible will not only help the state meet its water needs
• My background is with the San Antonio water system's water quality division.
• On testing and licensing, or on water standards? Water standards.
• drinking water standards.

Bills: HB5208, SB863, SB1243, SB1624, SB1965, SB2660, SB2702, SB2885

Keywords: water filtration, public drinking water, health and safety, well maintenance, water quality, Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, public utility agency, dissolution, local government, regulatory framework, municipal authority, Texas Water Bank, Texas Water Trust, water rights, water banking, instream flow

Transcript Highlights:

• But today, I sit here as Vice Chair of Water Trust Board.
• So The story of water in 2017, our distribution of the Water Trust Board was zero.
• So, what that does for projects is that the Water Trust Board opens the notice of intents.
• The Water Trust Board, NMFA, NMFA Oversight, we all get our job completed by December.
• But what I might add to this is that all the water and wastewater projects that go through the Water

Bills: HM26, HB243, HB109

Keywords: insects, ecosystem, education, public awareness, wildlife conservation, state agency involvement, New Mexico, equine welfare, animal rescue, shelter funding, trust fund, veterinary care, water project fund, water project finance act, New Mexico Finance Authority, water infrastructure, water grants, water loans, regional water planning, water rights adjudication

Bills: HB 16, HB 1618, HB 2692, HB 2712, HB 2970, HB 3609, HB 3628

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