Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 5678 establishes a river market place Municipal Management District in Elgin, Texas.
• House Bill 5686 proposes creation. in the Municipal Management District, being known as Montgomery County
• District also has territory near the ETJ.
• my house district.
• This district follows the management district template with the additional.

Bills: HB769, HB2132, HB3383, HB3792, HB5431, HB5682, HB5677, HB5678, HB5680, HB5681, HB5683, HB5684, HB5685, HB5686, HB4078

Keywords: environmental regulation, sustainability, business compliance, state oversight, local control, pollution, renewable resources, grant program, neighborhood organization, pedestrian infrastructure, Texas Department of Housing, financial assistance, neighborhood organizations, grants, urban development, safety, public safety, housing development, low income housing, tax credits

Transcript Highlights:

• The water district will cooperate, which is most of the water districts and irrigation districts, but
• Water district will cooperate, which is most of the water districts and irrigation district.
• and in the management of groundwater by those groundwater districts.
• Gary Gary Westbrook, general manager for the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District, for
• district.

Bills: HB2018, HB1633, HB1689, SB612, SB3058

Keywords: agricultural conservation, land preservation, environmental protection, wildlife habitat, Texas Farm and Ranch, groundwater conservation district, Texas Water Code, water permit, permit amendment, groundwater permit, water rights, aquifer, well registration, exempt wells, beneficial use, water conservation, groundwater quality, well plugging, Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area, surface water resources

Summary: The Senate Water, Agriculture, Rural Affairs Committee heard several bills focused on groundwater management, water infrastructure, and agricultural land conservation. SB 612 would limit certain water districts in Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy counties from charging developers pipeline construction fees above actual, documented costs; the committee substitute removed a developer challenge mechanism to preserve district discretion over construction standards. HB 1633 would require groundwater conservation districts to consider registered exempt wells when reviewing or amending permits, and testimony from landowners, district representatives, and advocacy groups largely supported the bill as a way to protect domestic and livestock wells from drawdown caused by large export projects. HB 1689 would clarify that export fee revenues may be used for well operability, alternative water supplies, and aquifer monitoring, including through interlocal cooperation, and HB 3058 would give the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District authority to use export fees for county road improvements and environmental programs tied to well inspection and groundwater management. HB 2018 would clarify that the Texas Farm and Ranchland Conservation Program is intended to purchase conservation easements only on working agricultural lands, with support from cattle raisers and Farm Bureau representatives. The committee also considered HB 29, which would require large water systems to validate water loss audits and submit mitigation plans; a committee substitute removed the water-loss threshold and adjusted the timeline for more detailed validation. Public testimony on the bills was generally supportive, with several witnesses describing declining well levels, road damage from export projects, and the need to preserve agricultural land and local water supplies. The committee adopted committee substitutes and voted favorably on HB 29, HB 1689, HB 2018, SB 612, and SB 3058, recommending several of them for the local and uncontested calendar; HB 1633 was left pending awaiting a committee substitute.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill will require that all facility managers and instructors be certified to teach children to swim
• Um, San Antonio, where I'm from, is probably like every other district is a, is a city of small businesses

Bills: SB 28

Keywords: groundwater, groundwater conservation district, Water Code, Water Development Board, modeled available groundwater, aquifer, water permit, groundwater transfer, export groundwater, out-of-district transfer, management area, desired future conditions, well permit, retail public utility, potable water, emergency interconnect, subsidiary, controlled entity, aquifer management, water resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of the water districts and irrigation districts cooperate, but some do not.
• and the management of groundwater. or by those groundwater districts.
• the district.
• Gary Westbrook, manager for the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District.
• Our district and why this is important to this district.

Bills: HB2018, HB1633, HB1689, SB612, SB3058

Keywords: agricultural conservation, land preservation, environmental protection, wildlife habitat, Texas Farm and Ranch, groundwater conservation district, Texas Water Code, water permit, permit amendment, groundwater permit, water rights, aquifer, well registration, exempt wells, beneficial use, water conservation, groundwater quality, well plugging, Hill Country Priority Groundwater Management Area, surface water resources

Bills: SB 3038, SB 3045, SB 3065, SB 3069, SB 3071, HB 2025, HB 2149, HB 3370, HB 4205, HB 4506, HB 5424, HB 5652, HB 24, HB 3687

Keywords: Montgomery County, management district, special district, bond issuance, assessments, taxation, public welfare, economic development, nonconforming uses, zoning regulations, land use, property rights, municipal authority, municipal utility district, eminent domain, bonds, taxes, public infrastructure, water supply, zoning

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair now calls a witness, Robert Tannenhahn from the Southeast Regional Management District for
• House Bill 5698 addresses the Southeast Regional Management District, which is highly active in providing
• Once as the acronym for Southeast Regional Management District and once as the actual expanded variation
• But the Southeast Regional Management District is correct.
• We show you Robert Tottenham on Southeast Regional Management District testifying for the bill, please

Bills: HB293, HB 1173, HB3753, HB4999, HB5696, SB2145, HB5689, HB5690, HB5694, HB5698, HB293

Keywords: HB 293, Texas housing tax credits, low-income housing, affordable housing, private activity bonds, PAB, qualified allocation plan, TDHCA, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, state representative objection, housing development approval, municipal notice, county commissioners court, extraterritorial jurisdiction, LIHTC, bond-financed housing, homelessness, housing services, Texas Department of Housing, municipal programs

Transcript Highlights:

• We're a statewide water policy association focused on water supply and management.
• Our members include river authorities, municipalities, all types of water districts, including flood,
• For the record, I'm Derek Bayes, General Manager of the San Antonio River Authority.
• the river and its tributaries, and our district spans Bexar, Goliad, Karnes, and Wilson counties.
• This House Bill, 2692, In the Special District Local Laws Code.

Bills: HB16, HB16, HB1618, HB2692, HB2712, HB2970, HB3609, HB3628

Keywords: judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, 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

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm bringing it back, and this will allow two aquifer storage and recovery projects in my district
• In 2021, we created the Gulf Coast Protection District.
• Houston Pilots has a better idea with the help of the Gulf Coast Protection District.
• Districts' desire for future conditions are challenged.
• administrative reviews of groundwater management plans.

Bills: HB16, HB1618, HB2692, HB2712, HB2970, HB3609, HB3628, HB16

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: SB 410, SB 795, SB 2510, SB 728, SB 2689, HB 143

Keywords: Gulf Coast Protection District, navigation safety, special districts, state governance, Texas legislation, Gulf Coast, flood protection, storm risk management, coastal restoration, natural resources, prescribed burns, self-insurance, fire management, liability protection, rural land management, recycling, environment, sustainability, economic development, Texas Recycling Fund

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:

• I'm the general manager of the Upper Trinity Groundwater Conservation District.
• Uh, our district, it occurs in the four counties immediately west of the DFW metroplex.
• Uh, we live on the, our district is on the outcrop of the Trinity aquifer, so it's.
• Uh, Plum Creek Conservation District manages 28 flood control structures built on the tributaries of
• or other soil and water type districts, uh, governmental entities of the state.

Bills: SB 612, SB 1855, SB 2568, SB 3058

Keywords: SB 612, Texas Water Code, Section 49.2127, conservation and reclamation district, water district, reclamation district, developer fees, pipeline construction, water pipeline, sewer pipeline, associated infrastructure, subdivision infrastructure, cost recovery, fee cap, actual reasonable documented costs, engineering fees, legal fees, inspection fees, infrastructure relocation, utility connections

Transcript Highlights:

• and own land within the district.
• If I can correct it, it should be Cook's Branch Management. Cook's Branch Management.
• Management. OK. You may proceed. I'm Paul Sarahan. I'm an attorney for Coats Grange Management.
• Groundwater Conservation District. you, Mr.
• Groundwater Conservation District.

Bills: HB3115, HB5671, HB5693, SB790, SB1055, SB1302, SB1504, SB1625, SB1663, SB2692

Keywords: Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater, water wells, domestic well, livestock well, exempt well, metering device, well meter, groundwater conservation district, Special District Local Laws Code, Water Code, Section 36.117, groundwater regulation, water rights, aquifer management, municipal utility, retail public utility, groundwater export, water supply contract, election

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources heard testimony on a series of water, utility, and groundwater-related bills. Early items included HB 5693, which would let Drainage District 7 hold board elections in November of odd-numbered years when a countywide election is occurring, and HB 5671, which would update the Johnson County Special Utility District by clarifying board eligibility, allowing bond issuance, and removing redundant TCEQ approval language to reduce costs and delays. Both bills were left pending after brief testimony from bill sponsors and local witnesses. The committee also heard SB 1504, which would update the Gulf Coast Authority to allow video-conference participation in meetings, and SB 1302, aimed at closing a TCEQ permitting loophole that allowed dischargers with prior denials or suspensions to reapply through an automated process without meaningful review. SB 2692 drew substantial discussion: it would change the signature threshold for outside-city-limits customers appealing municipal utility rates to the PUC by customer class. Valero supported the bill as a way to avoid requiring large-volume users to gather signatures from unrelated residential customers, while the City of Corpus Christi opposed it, arguing that lowering the threshold to one customer could trigger expensive appeals costing $500,000 to $1 million. A PUC witness said such cases are increasing and that the agency would need additional staff under the fiscal note. SB 790, creating a simplified PUC complaint process for small water and wastewater billing disputes, and SB 1663, expanding TCEQ notice requirements for nearby residents when groundwater contamination is discovered, were also heard and left pending. Additional bills included HB 3115, clarifying that the Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District cannot require meters on exempt domestic or livestock wells; SB 1055, raising the Southeast Texas Groundwater Conservation District’s production fee cap from 1 cent to 7 cents per 1,000 gallons; and SB 1625, requiring private water and wastewater utilities to report cybersecurity incidents to TCEQ and DIR. The committee then took up pending business and adopted a substitute for SB 7, which made several changes to water fund use, eminent domain coordination, and EDAP-related provisions, and voted 10-0 to report it favorably. The committee also adopted a substitute for HB 2347, a county water conservation program bill, and reported it favorably 9-1. HB 5675 and SB 2476 were each reported favorably 10-0. The meeting concluded with adjournment.

Bills: HB3115, HB5671, HB5693, SB790, SB1055, SB1302, SB1504, SB1625, SB1663, SB2692

Keywords: Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, groundwater, water wells, domestic well, livestock well, exempt well, metering device, well meter, groundwater conservation district, Special District Local Laws Code, Water Code, Section 36.117, groundwater regulation, water rights, aquifer management, municipal utility, retail public utility, groundwater export, water supply contract, election

Transcript Highlights:

• The biggest expense of any school district is personnel.
• The biggest expense of any school district is personnel.
• And my district gets some water from a neighboring district.
• I'm the general manager of Tarrant Regional Water District.
• I'm the general manager for Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District.

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:

• that's water needy, and my district gets some water from a neighboring district. ...And it's incredibly
• I'm the general manager of Tarrant Regional Water District.
• Groundwater Conservation District rules.
• districts in general.
• I'm the General Manager for Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District.

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:

• and Groundwater Conservation District.
• Improvement District Number 12 to provide road facilities within the district.
• . 104 acres to the district.
• This water district includes seven small towns that are in my district.
• Chairman Vandeva's district and Chairman Heffner's district.

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:

• Each district paying its own brokers, managing its own contracts, absorbing its own shocks when an employee
• Each district paying its own brokers,<00:26:25.840> managing<00:26:26.240> its<00:26:26.559
• Also, I want to be clear that the care management and control of our school districts is really vested
• and control of our school management and control of our school districts<00:48:57.599> is<00:
• grants management here? grants management here?

Bills: HF3422, HF3461, HF2904

Keywords: state grants, grant oversight, grants management, executive agencies, Minnesota Department of Administration, commissioner of administration, fraud prevention, waste prevention, grant monitoring, financial reconciliation, grant compliance, state government, public funds, grant recipients, competitive grants, grant administration, administrative oversight, monitoring visits, grant policy, legislative leave

Transcript Highlights:

• Community co-management residents.
• three commissioners approving a district three commissioners approving a district boundary<00:38
• <00:39:07.200> Um, importance of district. Number one. Um, importance of district.
• the traditional land use management the traditional land use management expert,<01:01:18.559>
• So that all the all the district.

Bills: HB1881, HB2218, HB1956, HB2151, HB1845, HB1844, HB2103, HB2424, HB1650, HB376, HB2599, HB1861

Keywords: land use, ropeway, transportation, state regulation, government exemption, DLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Board of Land and Natural Resources, BLNR, public lands, public trust resources, community co-management, co-management agreement, community-based organization, Native Hawaiian, malama aina, ahupuaa, subsistence, cultural resources, religious practices

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 10, 2026, with Chair Mark Hashem outlining strict testimony rules and noting a time constraint because of later hearings and floor session obligations. The committee then took up several bills, hearing mostly supportive testimony on HB 1881 relating to land use, HB 2218 relating to DLNR/community management, and HB 1956 relating to freshwater waves, while HB 1845 relating to the Land Use Commission drew legal concerns and opposition. HB 2151 relating to building materials had no substantive testimony presented in the excerpt, and the committee moved through it quickly. On HB 1881, testimony focused on protecting North Shore lands from overdevelopment. A supporter described the area as valuable precisely because it remains largely undeveloped, and a member asked whether the bill’s restrictions on “finculars” would affect existing or future private residential installations; the response suggested the bill was aimed at future commercial uses and that grandfathering or personal-use exceptions might be possible, but the exact wording would need legal refinement. HB 2218 received broad support from OHA, DLNR, Kua, Sierra Club, Hui Maka Aana, the Honlay Initiative, and others, who said the measure would expand community-based co-management across DLNR divisions, build on existing park partnerships, and produce real benefits such as better stewardship, safer access, local jobs, and stronger community trust. Members asked about the bill’s five-year review structure, how multiple community groups would be handled, and whether the model could apply to ocean or nearshore areas; DLNR said the board would retain authority, agreements would be non-exclusive and subject to review, and the department was still working through how the approach would function across different divisions and marine settings. For HB 1956, the Attorney General offered technical comments, urging clearer definitions of “residing” and “freshwater way,” clearer timing for citations and arrests, and more explicit procedural safeguards and agency roles. On HB 1845, the Attorney General and Land Use Commission raised concerns that the bill could conflict with constitutional protections for important agricultural lands and could not be reconciled with existing voting requirements; the LUC also said commissioners cannot vote by proxy under sunshine law and warned that the bill could allow too few commissioners to approve major boundary changes. Members questioned how the bill would work in counties without designated important agricultural lands, and the LUC explained that Kauai is the only county to have completed the IAL process, while the broader statutory process remains county-driven and has been the subject of litigation. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• > program<00:10:36.800> shall facility management lease program shall facility management
• the conditions contained in the district the conditions contained in the district boundary<00:42
• Mary community or each each district.
• projects in the special management area. projects in the special management area.
• . management. management.

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

Keywords: foreign influence, campaign finance, contributions, state elections, transparency, election integrity, Ala Wai Small Boat Harbor, Ala Wai Harbor, DLNR, BLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Board of Land and Natural Resources, state boating facility, small boat harbor, public-private partnership, PPP, marina management, harbor lease, fast lands, submerged lands

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