Transcript Highlights:

• Conservation Grant Fund that receives water from a multi-county water conservation district.
• revolving fund or the drinking water revolving fund for the remediation, closure, or replacement of
• revolving fund or the drinking water revolving fund for the remediation closure or replacement of cesspools
• The funding mechanism that would be specifically used here is the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
• Funding to address these cesspools exists and is available via the Clean Water State Revolving Fund,

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:

• The 2007 agreement mandated a series of reductions as water levels decreased, measured by water levels
• a separate fund, but this litigation fund was created last year, and so we support the measure from
• which would create a separate fund but this litigation fund was created last year and so we support
• budget off the general fund.
• Maybe we funded it one time with general fund. We backed it out.

Bills: HB2053, HB2116, HB2148

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation, A.R.S. 45-119, natural resources, water policy, river management

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 2116, which would appropriate $1 million in fiscal year 2027 from the State General Fund to the Colorado River Litigation Fund. The sponsor said it was a repeat of last year’s request and was intended as a backup if the seven Colorado River basin states cannot reach a new agreement. Arizona Department of Water Resources staff testified in support, explaining the state’s role in ongoing Colorado River negotiations and distinguishing the litigation fund from the executive’s separate Colorado River Protection Fund. The bill received a due pass recommendation on a 17-1 vote. The committee then took up House Bill 2053, which appropriates $100,000 to ADWR for updated stormwater recharge mapping and expands the mapping effort beyond state trust lands to private lands. The committee adopted Chairman Livingston’s amendment, which extended the coordination timeline to one year, broadened the agencies involved, and revised language on site eligibility and the definition of stormwater. The sponsor said the bill would help identify more places to capture stormwater for recharge, while ADWR testified neutral, supporting the mapping work but raising a concern about language tied to appropriable surface water because that is a legal determination for the courts. The amended bill passed 11-7. House Bill 2148 was then heard, proposing to give the legislature authority to appropriate non-custodial federal monies, with requirements for specifying purposes and allowing agencies to spend such funds if the legislature does not act. An amendment excluded university and Board of Regents research grants from the bill’s scope, which the chair said was intended to avoid implementation problems. The sponsor framed the bill as a transparency measure, and members discussed the large amount of federal pass-through funding Arizona receives. The amended bill passed 11-7. After the bills, the committee received a lengthy JLBC presentation comparing the executive budget with the JLBC baseline. Discussion focused on revenue forecasts, the impact of federal tax conformity, state employee health insurance costs, SNAP administrative and error-rate costs under H.R. 1, developmental disabilities and AHCCCS growth, and K-12/ESA funding trends. Members repeatedly criticized the executive budget for funding some ongoing costs on a one-year basis and expressed concern about rising caseloads and supplemental needs. No formal action was taken on the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Works Construction Fund to the ASECIA and Community Ditch Infrastructure Fund, ACDIF, for short.
• The recurring funding stream to this fund currently is $2.5 million.
• So this infrastructure funding will help us keep our acequias and keep them water-efficient so that we
• but are we just transferring money from another fund that would be used in that fund?
• The Irrigation Trust Fund, it's recurring allocations from the permanent fund.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• The Water Supply Development Revolving Fund specializes in access...
• Then there was the Water Conservation Grant Fund, which is exactly like it sounds: it's a grant fund
• And then the kind of headline grabber, the Long-Term Water Augmentation Fund.
• Then there was the Water Conservation Grant Fund, which is exactly like it sounds: it's a grant fund
• So we'll start with the Water Supply Development Revolving Fund, which I'm going to call the rural fund

Bills: HB2024, HB2053, HB2097, HB2116, HB2117

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, irrigation, non-expansion areas, water management, agriculture, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation

Summary: The committee began with member and staff introductions, then heard House Bill 2024, which would expand the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority’s water supply development definition to include snowpack augmentation and related planning and facility work. Supporters argued cloud seeding and drone-based silver iodide deployment could increase snowpack and water supply at relatively low cost, while opponents raised concerns about weather modification, uncertainty in the science, and possible environmental or health effects. After debate, the committee approved HB 2024 on a 6-4 vote, with some members expressing reservations and requesting more information before floor consideration. The committee next considered House Bill 2053, which would direct the Arizona Department of Water Resources to update stormwater recharge mapping statewide and provide $100,000 for the work. The sponsor and ADWR said the bill would expand on prior state-land mapping and help identify recharge opportunities on private land; ADWR was neutral and said it could do the technical mapping but could not make legal determinations about appropriable surface water rights. Salt River Project opposed the bill’s language on surface-water rights, arguing that determinations about unappropriated water belong to the courts and that site-specific recharge projects could affect downstream rights. The committee adopted the Griffin amendment and then passed HB 2053 as amended on a 6-4 vote. Chelsea McGuire of WIFA then gave a broad presentation on the agency’s revolving funds, conservation grants, and long-term augmentation efforts, describing past investments, current grant awards, and seven potential augmentation projects under development. She said WIFA’s current budget ask was essentially for no additional cuts, while members asked about costs, project qualifications, and public-private structure. The committee then took up House Bill 2097, which would impose a six acre-feet-per-acre groundwater pumping cap in irrigation non-expansion areas, add reporting and well-measurement requirements, and set a $150 penalty for violations. ADWR said the bill could require additional staffing and that the cap and substitution provisions had technical concerns; environmental groups argued the cap was too high and could still encourage overpumping, while supporters said it would finally place a limit on INA pumping. HB 2097 passed 6-4. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2116, which would appropriate $1 million to the Colorado River Litigation Fund; the sponsor described it as a contingency for ongoing Colorado River negotiations, and the committee moved the bill forward after brief discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Corrections Oversight Fund.
• River litigation fund.
• fund since we're so short on general fund dollars at this moment.
• Chairman and Senator, I believe that... ...fund dollars at this moment. Mr.
• But they're charged with the responsibility of bringing in more water.

Bills: HB2003, HB2063, HB2111, HB2116, HB2210, HCM2007

Keywords: driver education, instruction permit, underage drivers, motorcycle licenses, traffic regulations, corrections oversight, appropriation, independent office, public safety, funding, driver license, examinations, motorcycle awareness, traffic laws, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2003, which would lower the instruction-permit age for Class D, G, and M licenses from 15 and a half to 15, while increasing supervised practice requirements for minors: 50 hours for Class G with 20 at night, 50 hours for Class M, and a nine-month permit holding period before licensure. The sponsor argued the bill builds on Arizona’s graduated driver licensing system and is intended to improve teen safety, citing other states with longer permit periods and lower teen fatality rates. Questions focused on who certifies the supervised hours, with staff explaining that a parent, legal guardian, or custodial parent signs off, though driver education remains an alternative. The bill received a do-pass recommendation by a 9-1 vote. House Bill 2063, which appropriates $1.5 million from the General Fund in FY 2027 to the Corrections Oversight Fund, drew emotional testimony in support from a mother whose son died after a prison suicide, and from advocates who said the oversight office is needed given prison health care problems and federal receivership. The sponsor said the funding would support prison oversight and transparency. The committee then approved the bill unanimously, 10-0. The committee also passed House Bill 2116, appropriating $1 million to the Colorado River litigation fund, after the sponsor said the money would help Arizona prepare for possible litigation over Colorado River cuts and that the issue affects nearly every district in the state. Members discussed whether the funding should come from the WIFA fund instead of the General Fund, but the bill received an 8-0 do-pass recommendation with two not voting. The committee also considered House Bill 2210, which would prohibit the state, local governments, and private entities from using ADS-B aircraft surveillance data to calculate, generate, or collect aircraft fees. Supporters, including pilots and the Arizona Pilots Association, argued the technology was intended for safety and should not be used for billing, warning that fee collection could discourage pilots from keeping the system on. Opponents, including the Arizona Airports Association and the City of Phoenix, said airports should retain local control over fee collection methods and that the bill was a solution in search of a problem. After extensive debate about federal requirements, safety, and billing practices, the bill received a tied 4-4 do-pass recommendation. Finally, HCM 2007, a memorial urging renaming sections of State Route 69 to honor veterans of several wars, passed 5-4. The committee also briefly noted that some bills were being held at members’ request.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are here neutral on House Bill 2029, the water conservation grant fund.
• Of the previously mentioned 211 projects funded throughout the water conservation grant fund, 15 of them
• and the Drinking Water Revolving Fund.
• The funding mechanism to handle these loans would specifically be the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
• Funding to address these exists; we talked about that available via the Clean Water State 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.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's drinking water state revolving fund, and then there's a clean water state revolving fund.
• This provides a snapshot of the Texas Water Fund.
• The flood infrastructure fund is not currently allowed for Texas Water Fund allocations.
• Fund. appropriated into the Water Fund.
• We used two programs One the water loan assistance fund and the rural water assistance fund to target

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:

• funding.
• Like the severance tax permanent fund, the tobacco settlement permanent fund, the water trust fund, the
• part small funds.
• If we're going to fund it, let's fund it to that fund and not create another fund that requires two state
• Finance Authority to award funds to qualifying water projects without having to have it authorized by

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: 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:

• I wanted to ask, so would you Speak to where you are on the Texas Water Fund.
• And then talk about the Texas Water Fund.
• Yes, so the Texas Water Fund, as you know, was approved last session.
• Including SWIFT, Rural Water Agriculture Fund, the Flood Infrastructure Fund. and it created the new
• water supply for Texas Fund, of which $250 million is required to go there.

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:

• And then on the third page, you'll see the clean water heritage fund.
• If you turn to the fourth page, you'll see the clean water fund, and the clean water fund is largely
• You'll see the total appropriation for the clean water fund at $144,625,000 the first year and $159,301,000
• Fund.
• Clean water, same thing. One-third of our funds. We talk about it, but please look into it.

Bills: HF2563

Keywords: HF2563, legacy finance bill, Legacy Amendment, outdoor heritage fund, clean water fund, parks and trails fund, arts and cultural heritage fund, Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Clean Water Council, Minnesota legacy funds, habitat conservation, prairie restoration, wetland restoration, forest conservation, riparian buffers, water quality, groundwater protection, drinking water, septic systems, watershed planning

Transcript Highlights:

• If you turn to the fourth page, you'll see the Clean Water Fund.
• The Clean Water Fund is largely the Clean Water Council revised recs.
• The Clean Water Fund is largely the Clean Water Council revised recs.
• <00:14:36.000> That and that's in the clean water fund.
• That and that's in the clean water fund.

Bills: HF2563

Keywords: HF2563, legacy finance bill, Legacy Amendment, outdoor heritage fund, clean water fund, parks and trails fund, arts and cultural heritage fund, Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Clean Water Council, Minnesota legacy funds, habitat conservation, prairie restoration, wetland restoration, forest conservation, riparian buffers, water quality, groundwater protection, drinking water, septic systems, watershed planning

Transcript Highlights:

• This is House Bill 63, emergency clause, NMFA Water Project Fund projects.
• It authorizes the New Mexico Finance Authority to make loans or grants from the Water Project Fund for
• Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund, $2 million to the Local Government Planning Fund, and $5 million
• Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund, $2 million to the Local Government Planning Fund, and $5 million
• fund.

Bills: HB63, HB64, HB184, HB200, HB47, HB48, HB2, HB9

Keywords: water project fund, New Mexico Finance Authority, NMFA, Water Trust Board, water infrastructure, wastewater, drinking water, flood prevention, watershed restoration, water storage, conveyance, delivery, water treatment, recycling, reuse, municipal infrastructure, local government finance, capital outlay, grants, loans

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, Senator Campos, Senate Bill 193, acequia and ditch infrastructure fund transfer.
• is it proposes to amend language relating to the transfers from the irrigation works construction fund
• to the SECA and Community Ditch Infrastructure Fund, and so to increase the amount of the transfer from
• Yet today, our planning and funding processes treat them as one.
• It also renames the equipment replacement revolving fund to the equipment software and replacement fund

Bills: SB193, SB132, SB35, SB145

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, SB132, DOIT, Department of Information Technology, software replacement, equipment replacement

Transcript Highlights:

• They're not guaranteeing funding.
• settlement fund.
• Yes, and that's, there's not funding for that because there's funding elsewhere for disasters.
• So if we go back to 134, irrigation works and construction fund—how much is in that fund? Mr.
• Yes, and that's, there's not funding for that because there's funding else.

Bills: SB193, SB132, SB35, SB145

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, SB132, DOIT, Department of Information Technology, software replacement, equipment replacement

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund, once that fund is exhausted, it can now reach the appropriation contingency fund.
• And hopefully, if needed, the soil and water districts can help access some of this funding.
• I like the idea of a fund.
• I mean, we need to fund this.
• fund.

Bills: HB2, SB193, SB132, SB35, SB145

Keywords: general appropriation, budget, Medicaid, education funding, public safety, 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

Transcript Highlights:

• They also informed me that it is a water district's bond council, not the water district itself that
• So we're the Texas Rural Water Association.
• With over 750 water district members.
• Water districts are small entities by design.
• 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:

• Where's my water? We don't we don't do water. We're we're We're a county, we're unincorporated.
• Members, Texas faces ongoing challenges in water infrastructure and the Texas Water Fund fund, which
• Water Fund. law directs a portion of this funding to rural political subdivisions and municipalities
• It's going to let small municipalities access properly needed funding for water infrastructure and new
• 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:

• They also informed me that it is a water.
• So we're the Texas Rural Water Association.
• 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:

• SB 187, the Water Project Fund.
• Mexico Finance Authority's Water Project Fund.
• to the 16-member Water Trust Board, and we also administer the Water Project Fund.
• Water State Revolving Loan Fund.
• can the Water Project Fund.

Bills: SB154, SB187, SB193, SM3

Keywords: insurance, wildfire, flood damage, natural disasters, property coverage, water projects, appropriation, New Mexico, finance authority, infrastructure, New Mexico Finance Authority, funding, SB193, acequia, community ditch, irrigation works construction fund, water infrastructure, ditch infrastructure, irrigation, New Mexico water law