Transcript Highlights:

• taking significant steps to develop new water supplies and to preserve the water that we already have
• over the Water Development Board's use of dedicated revenues to the Texas Water Fund.
• the development of water supplies throughout Texas, including implementation of the state water plan
• Sure, any effort we can to both conserve, uh, potentially reuse water and develop new water supplies.
• The, I've heard it said that conserving the water we have is one of the best ways to develop water, uh

Bills: SB 7

Keywords: water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability

Transcript Highlights:

• , representing the Texas Water Development Board, testifying on the bill.
• Of the Water Development Board. All right, none. Thank you very much. Yes sir.
• It takes significant steps to develop new water supplies and to preserve the water that we already have
• over the Water Development Board's use of dedicated revenues to the Texas Water Fund.
• We have water loss audits by the Water Development Board that cover part of that, and hopefully having

Bills: SB7

Keywords: water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund, primarily for new water supply development.
• supply development to supplement the state's water plan.
• Senate Bill 7 also authorizes the Water Development Board to finance new water supply and conveyance
• authority inside the Water Development Board.
• Stepney, Chairwoman for the Texas Water Development Board.

Bills: SB7

Keywords: water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Texas Water Development Board.
• She was appointed to the Texas Water Development Board. in September of last year.
• As for the record, I am Tanya Miller, Director with the Texas Water Development Board.
• for the responsible development of water.
• How do you see the Water Development Board, is it going to change?

Keywords: Texas Water Fund, water management, infrastructure funding, local governments, workforce development, community colleges, educational programs, sustainability

Summary: The meeting focused on several crucial issues, including the Texas Water Fund and its implications for development in the state. Various members highlighted the critical need for effective management of water resources, discussing the role of the Water Development Board and their strategies for outreach to local governments. The committee engaged in a thorough examination of funding projects and the sustainable financing necessary for communities facing challenges in meeting their infrastructure needs. Additionally, there was notable discussion regarding promoting workforce development and the alignment of educational programs with the demands of the job market as indicated by recent trends in community colleges.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill will also require that all staff be trained in basic water rescue and first aid.
• And all we're asking is that the staff be trained in basic water rescue and first aid.
• He panicked, breathed in water.
• That services young children who don't know how to swim in water.
• A body of water is deadly, unintentional, preventable death. That's what we're trying to stop here.

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:

• We want to make sure that as we put billions of dollars into water infrastructure and the Water Development
• You don't develop water systems in two years. It takes time.
• the Water Development Board for financing.
• Cure will develop 100,000 acre-feet, utilizing existing surface water rights, groundwater development
• , and the Rural Water Assistance Fund to promote uniformity across all of the agencies' water development

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

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:

• You don’t develop water systems in two years.
• The handout that you're receiving details the latest water loss audits certified by the Water Development
• It'll develop 100,000 acre-feet, utilize existing surface water rights, brackish groundwater development
• The Texas Water Development Board has developed grant standards that exceed the requirements outlined
• , and the Rural Water Assistance Fund, to promote uniformity across all of the agency's water development

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.

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:

• <00:04:31.759> policies development policies development policies right<00:04:34.960> together
• <00:30:18.120> is program that that ABC is developing is program that that ABC is developing
• <01:24:33.639> developing started working on developing developing started working on developing
• working with our curriculum developer working with our curriculum developer now<01:24:52.960>
• Greater Minnesota Business Development Greater Minnesota Business Development public<01:30:33.239

Bills: HF47, HF335

Keywords: telecommunications, installation, certification, safety, underground utilities, HF335, Greater Minnesota, economic development, public infrastructure, grant program, DEED, Department of Employment and Economic Development, business development, infrastructure grants, local government aid, general fund appropriation, rural development, site development, utilities, roads

Transcript Highlights:

• , and storm water drainage.
• treatment or water attainment.
• To develop and wanted to develop affordable housing. Is that not correct? No, ma'am.
• housing development.
• How long does the church have to hold the land after it develops it? Can developers...

Bills: HB24, HB2015, HB2149, HB2559, HB2701, HB2797, HB3172, HB24

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, water conservation, municipal utility districts, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, environmental regulation, groundwater management, nonconforming uses, zoning regulations, land use, property rights, municipal authority, municipal moratorium, development moratorium, property development, subdivision, site plan

Transcript Highlights:

• And Representative, I meant to mention that TCEQ and the Water Development Board have a lot of rulemaking
• They're filed with the Water Development Board and with the regional water planning groups, and we'd
• The regional water planning group that is set up under the state water plan and the Texas Water Development
• The builder-developer is going to use groundwater as a supply of water, and so we have taken steps to
• We have developments that are completely halted because of a water moratorium that's currently in place

Bills: HB24, HB2015, HB2149, HB2559, HB2701, HB2797, HB3172, HB24

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, water conservation, municipal utility districts, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, environmental regulation, groundwater management, nonconforming uses, zoning regulations, land use, property rights, municipal authority, municipal moratorium, development moratorium, property development, subdivision, site plan

Transcript Highlights:

• water.
• It would also give them money to develop that water.
• And the reason they're blocking is because that water is... ...money to develop that water.
• The Griffin amendment dated 1/26/26 at 9:44 a.m. wrong with developing this type of thing my my water
• water.

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 1194, SB 1215, SB 1253, SB 1268, SB 1302, SB 1484, SB 1532

Keywords: water management, bond issuance, eminent domain, regional authority, fee structures, local governance, environmental quality, oyster cultivation, coastal management, natural resources, marine ecosystems, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas Water Development Board, guidance principles, flood plan, state water plan, rule review, infrastructure, water discharge, general permit

Transcript Highlights:

• Anchia said, when did we develop, when did we do voter ID? Was that in 2009? 6 when was it 6 or 7.

Bills: HB311

Keywords: flood hazards, recreational vehicles, temporary dwelling structures, Texas Water Development Board, flood safety standards, emergency management

Transcript Highlights:

• It directed the legislature in Senate Bill 7. directed the Texas Water Development Board to develop a
• Since 2015, the Texas Water Development Board has invested over $10 million to develop a flood gauge
• FEMA grant, absent any Water Development loan.
• It's used for water supply development.
• What does it look like in terms of developing more water supplies? Is that the refinement of water?

Keywords: flooding, emergency response, communication systems, first responders, disaster management, Texas Water Development Board, regional planning, public safety

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on discussions around the recent floods in Texas, specifically addressing emergency preparedness, response coordination, and recovery efforts. Officials from various agencies provided testimonies on the challenges faced during the emergency, including issues with communication systems among first responders. Notably, the need for improved inter-agency communication and technology integration was emphasized, with recommendations for establishing regional communications units for better coordination during disasters. The audience included local government representatives and emergency management partners, who shared insights and experiences from the recent flooding events.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, water is a top priority and Members, um, water is a top priority, and I think this would help everybody
• be told what we can do with our water. be told what we can do with our water.
• water right holders and senior water water right holders and senior water right<00:09:02.880>
• that they can uh share adjudicated water that they can uh share adjudicated water rights<00:09:15.120
• It is about allowing junior water users to exchange water with senior water users. That is true.

Bills: SF0050, SF0068, SF0084, HB0087, HB0029, HB0061, HB0090

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, irrigation, water management, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, water development

Transcript Highlights:

• Um and uh water um development office.
• We have a advisory team as well as the water development commission and the select water committee consider
• We have a advisory team as well as the water development commission and the select water committee consider
• We have a advisory team as well as the water development commission and the select water committee consider
• We have a advisory team as well as the water development commission and the select water committee consider

Bills: SF0050, SF0068, SF0084, HB0087, HB0029, HB0061, HB0090

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, irrigation, water management, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, water development

Transcript Highlights:

• Arizona created the assured water supply program to ensure that when we approve new development, there
• It is in place and allows continued building where a builder or developer can bring in outside water
• It is in place and allows continued building where a builder or developer can bring in outside water
• It is in place and allows continued building where a builder or developer can bring in outside water
• , how treating water, if it be the AWP, you know, recycling water, et cetera.

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:

• , or improvements for the efficiency of use of water, or improvements in water reliability.
• We are here neutral on House Bill 2029, the water conservation grant fund.
• and the water supply being conserved.
• All projects have to have some level of water savings involved.
• and the Drinking Water Revolving Fund.

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.