Transcript Highlights:

• I intend to offer a committee substitute that would allow water districts that are located only in counties
• If a water district is located in at least one county with at least 125,000 people or more, the district
• They also informed me that it is a water district's bond council, not the water district itself that
• With over 750 water district members.
• Water control improvement districts, underwater, uh, water conservation districts, freshwater supply

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• The common county is one of the fastest-growing counties in the United States.
• Meanwhile, I look over at, I pulled up Hayes County Mud No. 5, and Hayes County is... county of almost
• growing county, this county, and that county.
• Where's my water? We don't we don't do water. We're we're We're a county, we're unincorporated.
• water supplies.

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• If a water district is located in at least one county with at. least 125,000 people or more the district
• They also informed me that it is a water.
• providers, Water Supply Corporation.
• There were a number of different water districts, including... Water control improvement districts.
• Water conservation districts, freshwater supply districts, municipal utility districts, water. improvement

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Conservation Grant Fund that receives water from a multi-county water conservation district.
• from a multi-county water conservation district.
• from a multi-county water conservation district.
• ensure each project has received financial assistance, and exempts a county that receives...
• each project has received financial assistance and exempts a county that receives Thank you.

Bills: HB2029, HB2096, HB2116

Keywords: water conservation, grants, infrastructure, environmental protection, sustainability, cesspool remediation, cesspool replacement, forgivable principal, forgivable loan, wifa, water infrastructure finance authority, clean water revolving fund, drinking water revolving fund, wastewater infrastructure, on-site wastewater system, septic system, groundwater protection, public health, nonpoint source pollution, county water projects

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee heard three bills, all of which received do pass recommendations. House Bill 2029 would require additional disclosure from applicants to the Water Conservation Grant Fund, including plans for how saved water will be used; an amendment broadened the disclosure requirement from only certain applicants to all eligible entities. WIFA testified neutral on the bill and amendment, noting it already collects much of the information. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 8-0, with the sponsor indicating he may reoffer the amendment on the floor. House Bill 2096 would authorize counties to seek WIFA financial assistance, including forgivable principal, to remediate, close, or replace cesspools that threaten water quality or public health, and would clarify county authority to accept such loans without voter approval. WIFA was neutral and said the bill resolves ambiguity in the statutes. Supporters from the County Supervisors Association and Gila County described widespread cesspool problems in rural counties, especially Gila County, where thousands of cesspools remain and flooding caused sewage contamination and major cleanup costs. The committee approved the bill 8-0. House Bill 2116 would appropriate $1 million from the General Fund in FY 2027 to the Colorado River Litigation Fund. Supporters said the money is needed to prepare for possible legal challenges over Colorado River cuts, while several members emphasized they hope litigation will not be necessary and described the amount as a placeholder for future budget discussions. The bill passed 8-0 and was sent to Appropriations before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Without new water strategies, the state water plan projects a shortage of about one point Without new
• water strategies, the state water plan projects a shortage of about 1.3 acre-feet of water per year
• It led to a joint Tarrant Regional Water District and City of Dallas water project that has received
• Before construction of any project, a new project in the water plan must go through various existing
• It's not an easy thing to get a lot of water down into an ASR project quickly.

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:

• This water project has received $800 million from the Water Development Board, and that partnership has
• Before the construction of any new project, the project in the water plan must go through various existing
• Of state water planning projects under the existing law, just keeping that separation between planning
• I mean, Montgomery County already uses brackish water pumps out of the Catahoula.
• We think any kind of alternative water resource project or initiative is a good idea.

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:

• The Woodlawn Water Supply Corporation located in my home county of.
• ASR project would store treated drinking water in a natural aquifer, minimizing evaporation water loss
• This project is an ancillary project to Austin's water plan.
• It is not an ancillary project to Bastrop County. This is our. Primary water source.
• County and Bastrop County Town Hall were never conveyed to Austin water. leadership or to the Austin

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:

• It would encourage projects that turn flood water or storm water into a valuable water supply, improving
• Water supply is at the top of the list when we target a project.
• To build their project, the Water Supply Corporation said, "We have water, but we want to save it for
• Myself and the other rural water systems serve half the county, the eastern half of the county, with
• The project is called 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

Transcript Highlights:

• water supply component of the project with access to the necessary funding in total three water treatment
• To build their project, the water supply corporation said, 'We have water, but we're not going to give
• Myself and the other rural water system serve half the county, the eastern half of the county, with our
• I'm a landowner as well as a private water well owner in Lee County.
• The project is called Water Secure.

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:

• So what I'm hearing is that we would like to have more on-the-ground projects to save water, so that's
• All projects have to have some level of water savings involved.
• If we're looking for water-on-the-ground projects, this research can... ...help us find those projects
• looking for water on the ground projects these research this research can help us find those projects
• Madam Chair and members, House Bill 2096 expands projects funded by the Water Infrastructure Finance

Bills: HB2029, HB2030, HB2096

Keywords: water conservation, grants, infrastructure, environmental protection, sustainability, grant fund, Arizona water law, A.R.S. 49-1332, water efficiency, water reuse, education programs, public outreach, rainwater harvesting, gray water, graywater, drought-resistant landscaping, xeriscaping, turf removal, groundwater recharge, aquifer health

Summary: The House Committee on Natural Resources, Energy and Water heard three bills related to the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (WIFA) and county wastewater issues. HB 2029 would require applicants for water conservation grant funds to provide additional information about the long-term water savings, efficiency, reliability, and intended use of grant money. WIFA testified neutral, saying most of the information is already collected under agency policy and the bill would mainly codify existing practice. The committee passed HB 2029 on a 9-1 vote. HB 2030 would remove education and research programs from the list of allowable uses for the water conservation grant fund. Supporters of the bill argued the fund should prioritize projects that put more water savings “on the ground,” while opponents said education and research can support conservation and help identify effective projects. WIFA said about 15 of 211 funded projects had some education or research component, totaling about $10.5 million and an estimated 180,000 acre-feet in savings. The committee passed HB 2030 on a 6-4 vote, with several members opposing the bill because they saw value in those projects. HB 2096 would expand WIFA funding to allow counties to receive assistance for remediating, closing, or replacing cesspools that threaten groundwater, surface water, or public health, and would let counties offer income-based assistance and report annually on the program. County and association witnesses described cesspools as an ongoing rural public health problem, especially in Gila County, and said the bill would help homeowners afford required upgrades. WIFA and ADEQ were neutral, noting the bill would clarify county authority and use existing federal revolving fund dollars; testimony also explained that current law already requires cesspools to be upgraded when discovered or when a property is remodeled. The committee passed HB 2096 unanimously, 10-0, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's not only drinking water, but... waste water, flood control, agriculture and conservation projects
• So, innovative water projects that that fund is specifically targeted to address.
• have any. water, wastewater services, the water in unincorporated Harris County, either by mud. or by
• correct Swift is for new water supply project in the state water plan.
• But large projects, whether they're technologically... oriented or other high water need projects, they

Keywords: infrastructure, water supply, flood mitigation, Texas Water Fund, community projects, funding allocations

Summary: During this committee meeting, the focus was on discussing critical infrastructure funding, especially related to water supply and flood mitigation projects. Chairwoman Stepney and the Water Development Board presented extensive details regarding the Texas Water Fund, which included $1 billion appropriated to assist various financial programs and tackle pressing water and wastewater issues. Additionally, funding allocations aimed at compromising the state's flood risk and improving water conservation were hotly debated, emphasizing collaboration among committee members and the necessity of addressing community needs in such projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under Chapter 54 of the Water Code, it is required to notify the Commissioner's Court of a county where
• The cost to the county and these are county...
• ... that conform to city, county, and TCEQ regulations to be reimbursed for the project.
• The roads are conveyed to the county. The water and sewer system stays with the MUD.
• Notification is very important to us as County Commissioners and County Judge.

Bills: HB23, HB363, HB447, HB954, HB23

Keywords: third-party review, property development, local government, permits, construction inspection, regulatory authority, land development, liability, occupancy certificate, municipal utility district, petition, county clerk, water code, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, traffic impact studies, bonds, road projects, eminent domain, extraterritorial jurisdiction, county authority

Bills: HB23, HB23, HB363, HB447, HB954

Keywords: property tax exemption, ad valorem tax, Texas Tax Code, nonprofit corporation, charitable organization, educational nonprofit, scientific nonprofit, agriculture support, youth programs, community education, county population threshold, large county, local government revenue, leasehold interest, possessory interest, county property tax, nonprofit-owned property, third-party review, property development, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• Bethany Allen and the Pike and the Pike County Commissioner the Pike County Commissioner the Pike County
• County. County.
• Barber County, Bullet County, road. Barber County, Bullet County, road.
• Barber County, Bullet County, Russell County. Yes, sir. And ain't no Russell County. Yes, sir.
• I'm either in Russell County out on the either in Russell County out on the either in Russell County

Bills: SB 1, HB 500, SB 1, HB 1400, HB 1094, HB 365, HB 1109, HB 647, HB 500

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, state budget, mental health funding, education funding, infrastructure improvements, public safety, groundwater, water conservation, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, innovation fund, local conservation districts, transportation protection agreement, funeral services, insurance exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• To 18.6 million and other funds at the water development board for the agricultural water conservation
• and rural water assistance funds under the Texas Water Development Board, that's an important agency
• It serves Kerr County, Bandera County, Real County, Edwards County.
• Wilson County, Carnes County, Medina County, Atascosa County.
• Frio County, McMullen County, Lavo County, Bee County, San Patricio.

Bills: SB1, HB500, SB1, HB1400, HB 1094, HB365, HB 1109, HB647, HB500

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, state budget, mental health funding, education funding, infrastructure improvements, public safety, groundwater, water conservation, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, innovation fund, local conservation districts, transportation protection agreement, funeral services, insurance exemption

Bills: HB26, HB73, SB14, HB46

Keywords: impact fees, water conservation, reuse projects, builders, developers, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• I represent the Upper Hondo Water Users Association in Lincoln County.
• can get the water to our fields.
• I come from Taos County, southern part of Taos County.
• So we have to find ways to continue to get our water to our people, because without water, there's no
• And I know we did a project in Anton Chico, and you're probably aware of that project that we did with

Bills: SB193

Keywords: SB193, acequia, community ditch, irrigation works construction fund, water infrastructure, ditch infrastructure, irrigation, New Mexico water law, agricultural water, farmers, Rio Grande, acequia association, forest land protection revolving fund, state fund transfer, irrigation projects, 996, all

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• We're having informational hearings again today on our local water, sewer infrastructure bonding projects
• I am introducing the bonding projects for Chisago County. It's on Rush Lake.
• We are looking for assistance with the water treatment plant delivery project.
• working through a pipeline project to bring them clean water.
• He said they are figuring out the project as a pipeline project to bring clean water and that the serious

Bills: HF343, HF446, HF448, HF674, HF811, HF832, HF1661, HF1528, HF1536, HF1541, HF1670, HF1438, HF1714, HF1748, HF1835, HF1904, HF1929, HF1942

Keywords: HF343, Chisago County, Shorewood Park Sanitary Sewer District, Rush Lake, sewer extension, wastewater infrastructure, sanitary sewer, treatment pond, sewage treatment, capital investment, bonding bill, state bonds, Public Facilities Authority, local infrastructure, municipal utilities, water quality, sanitation, bond proceeds fund, Minnesota bonding, HF446