Senate Natural Resources committee advances multiple water, mining and geoengineering measures as rural groundwater talks continue

The Arizona Senate Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 17 moved a set of bills and a constitutional resolution affecting assured water‑supply rules, rural groundwater policy, mine‑inspector term limits, cloud‑modification restrictions and oil‑and‑gas oversight, while a large public turnout pressed the panel on a proposed ban on geoengineering. Most measures received committee "due pass" recommendations, but several drew close, partisan votes and extended debate over technical details and long‑term water availability.

Why it matters: The committee’s work touches the state’s core water‑planning framework — assurances that new subdivisions have 100‑year water supplies, how municipalities may rely on locally stored or surface water, and what tools rural Arizona has to rein in overdraft. Those choices affect housing, agriculture, local budgets and long‑term aquifer health.

Water bills, surface rights and Marana’s appeal

The committee advanced Senate Bill 13‑04 on a 4‑3 vote after testimony from the Town of Marana and the Cortaro‑Marana Irrigation District. The bill would permit ADWR to designate a portion of a city or town as having an ‘‘assured water supply’’ when local surface‑water rights or long‑term contracts with irrigation districts can be shown to supply a 100‑year need. Mayor John Post of Marana told the committee: "This water is vital to our the growth of our community. We need to have this surface right, converted into M&I use, so that our citizens will have the water that we have protected for very many years." ADWR staff said they were neutral and will keep working with proponents; Trent Blomberg, Arizona Department of Water Resources, said, "We're neutral on this bill. We believe the change in statute isn't necessarily or isn't necessary to accomplish the bill proponent's goals," and urged continued interagency talks.

Supporters from the Cortaro‑Marana Irrigation District urged statutory safeguards to allow irrigation districts to supply renewable surface water to adjacent cities. Opponents warned partial designations and loosened standards could weaken the assured water‑supply program; one senator said he could not support a change that ‘‘could let citizens grow without enough water.’’ The bill received a committee "due pass" recommendation (4 ayes, 3 nays).

Rural groundwater and basin management

Lawmakers spent much of the hearing on larger rural groundwater proposals and a strike‑everything substitute for SB 15‑20 to create Basin Management Areas (BMAs) for selected rural basins (Gila Bend, Hualapai Valley and Wilcox). Proponents said the bill is a way to give local water users a tool distinct from the Active Management Area (AMA) model; supporters described local councils, phased reductions and flexibility accounts to reduce overdraft while allowing community economies to continue.

Opponents — including conservation groups and some county officials — said the substitute is too weak, covers only three basins, caps mandatory reductions at levels they called inadequate and leaves open the risk of commodifying groundwater through unlimited banking and transfers. Sierra Club representative Anna Gorland said the substitute "allows what is effectively an exception to the 100‑year assured water‑supply rule by counting water that does not exist." The committee gave SB 16‑11 (an Ag‑to‑Urban conversion bill tied to this session’s rural package) a due‑pass recommendation (4 ayes, 3 nays, 1 not voting) and forwarded SB 15‑20 as amended with mixed votes.

Mine inspector term limits

Senate Concurrent Resolution 10‑31 would reconcile conflicting constitutional provisions and limit the State Mine Inspector to two consecutive 4‑year terms starting in 2027. Proponent testimony noted the intent was to align term limits with voter intent from 1992. State Mine Inspector Paul Marsh, who testified in favor, told the committee that longer tenures had correlated historically with improved safety outcomes and said the office benefits from continuity; he noted, "for the first time in state history, January 28 was the first time in state history that the Arizona mines have not had a fatal accident in 3 consecutive years." The committee recommended the resolution (7 ayes, 0 nays, 1 not voting).

Cloud modification / geoengineering bill and public comment

Senate Bill 14‑32, revised by committee amendment, would prohibit intentional dispersion of materials for solar radiation management and retain regulation of cloud‑seeding licensing. The hearing drew a substantial public turnout: residents described perceived changes in skies and local health concerns, and several national‑scale commentators urged a ban on stratospheric aerosol injection. Cindy Lucrecchio testified, "I used to come down here and we used to laugh because we didn't see 1 cloud in the sky, a natural cloud," and urged a statewide ban. The committee adopted the sponsor’s amendment and recommended the bill (4 ayes, 3 nays, 1 not voting).

Oil and gas commission, helium and produced water

Senate Bill 17‑33 would remove the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission from ADEQ and place its fees and fund under a separate commission fund. The bill drew industry support for streamlining permitting for helium and produced‑water handling; Frank Thorwald, chairman of the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, said separation would help the commission operate more efficiently. ADEQ raised concerns about primacy for underground injection control (UIC) and grant administration. The committee recommended the bill (4 ayes, 3 nays, 1 not voting).

Stormwater recharge, long‑term credits and recovery wells

The committee advanced several measures affecting recharge and storage. A major amendment to SB 12‑36 would create a mechanism for stormwater capture in constructed underground storage facilities (USFs) to receive replenishment credits (credit = 95% of measured recharge annually) and allow transfers and local offsetting of replenishment obligations. ADWR staff noted stormwater recharge is already reflected in models and urged caution because site‑level variability can be substantial. SB 15‑30, clarifying a 1‑mile "safe harbor" for recovery wells near constructed facilities and managed facilities, drew industry support for predictability and some regulator caution about treating groundwater‑savings facilities the same as USFs. The committee recommended both measures.

Underground storage tank funding and fee timing

Senate Bill 17‑30 (UST revolving fund and TSIP deadlines) would require applicants to apply for reimbursement within one year after project completion and sets an application deadline for earlier projects; proponents said the change protects the fund from future sweeps and helps clear an application backlog. ADEQ and the regulated industry are negotiating technical language and implementation timing; the committee recommended the measure (4 ayes, 2 nays, 2 not voting).

Marijuana retail licenses for unserved rural communities

Senate Bill 17‑13 would create a narrowly limited rural opportunity initiative: under the proposal a community of 50,000 or fewer residents that is at least 25 miles from an existing dispensary could qualify for a local retail license (local governments may opt out). Proponents said the change would reduce illicit sales and restore jobs and tax revenue to towns that lost brick‑and‑mortar dispensaries. The Association representing existing dispensaries urged caution and flagged constitutional, cap and relocation issues under Prop 207. The committee recommended the bill (6 ayes, 1 nay, 1 not voting), but sponsors and opponents said further technical drafting will be needed before floor consideration.

Other quick items

- SCR 10‑31 (mine inspector term limits) — due pass (7‑0‑1) - SB 16‑99 (air permitting coordination and general permits) — committee adopted amendments and advanced the bill to encourage equivalent general permits and interagency coordination. - SB 15‑79 (Ganado waterline) — an appropriation to complete a community waterline project; committee gave a due‑pass recommendation (7‑0‑1).

Votes at a glance (committee outcomes)

- SB 13‑04 (assured water supply, partial municipal designations): due pass recommendation; tally 4 ayes, 3 nays. Proponent: Mayor John Post (Town of Marana). Key issue: whether partial designations weaken 100‑year supply standards. Referenced transcript: Feb. 17, 2025 testimony from John Post and ADWR. - SCR 10‑31 (state mine inspector term limits): due pass (7‑0‑1). Change: set two consecutive 4‑year terms starting 2027. Testimony: Paul Marsh, State Mine Inspector; safety and continuity cited. - SB 14‑32 (cloud modification / solar radiation management): due pass (4‑3‑1). Sponsor amendment narrows language to solar‑radiation management; drew broad public testimony. - SB 17‑33 (oil and gas conservation commission/fund): due pass (4‑3‑1). Key debate: independent commission fund vs. ADEQ oversight and UIC primacy. - SB 12‑36 (stormwater recharge credits / USF credits): due pass as amended (4‑3‑1). Creates stormwater replenishment credits (95% annual credit) with proximity and reuse limits. - SB 15‑30 (recovery well safe‑harbor): due pass. Seeks to codify a 1‑mile safe harbor for recovery wells near constructed underground storage facilities and clarify standards. - SB 17‑30 (UST revolving fund / TSIP deadlines): due pass (4‑2‑2). Adds deadlines for reimbursement applications and clarifies fund commitments; ADEQ and stakeholders negotiating technical language. - SB 16‑11 (Ag‑to‑Urban framework / phased conversions): due pass (4‑3‑1). Major, ongoing stakeholder negotiations; supporters say it offers transition tools, opponents say it risks allowing development where water is not physically available. - SB 15‑20 (Basin Management Area strike‑everything substitute): due pass (4‑3‑1). Creates local BMA councils and phased reductions for three named basins; critics say it’s too limited and weak on mandatory reductions. - SB 15‑79 (Ganado waterline appropriation): due pass (7‑0‑1). $340,000 appropriation to complete a community waterline serving about 50 previously unserved households. - SB 17‑13 (rural marijuana retail initiative): due pass (6‑1‑1). Creates a narrowly drawn pathway for a single retail license in unserved rural communities; opponents cite constitutional/cap concerns and asked for technical fixes. - SB 17‑09 (holiday decorations exception to unlawful feeding of wildlife): due pass (6‑1‑1).

What the committee directed staff or agencies to do

- ADWR and stakeholders: continue negotiations on the Marana/irrigation‑district designations and the Ag‑to‑Urban rule set; ADWR will continue informal rule stakeholder meetings on conversion rates and eligibility. - ADEQ and petitioners: refine language on general air permits and UIC primacy, and work with industry on UST fund‑commitment language. - Committee sponsors: prepare technical amendments (many supporters requested clearer definitions of boundaries, short‑term banking limits and metering/monitoring requirements).

Voices from the hearing (selected)

- "This water is vital to our the growth of our community," Mayor John Post (Town of Marana), urging municipal access to an irrigation district's surface rights. - "We're neutral on this bill," Trent Blomberg, Arizona Department of Water Resources, urging further conversations and warning that the department's modeling and safeguards would be needed before changing assured‑supply policy. - "For the first time in state history... Arizona mines have not had a fatal accident in 3 consecutive years," Paul Marsh, State Mine Inspector, arguing continuity matters for mine safety. - "I used to come down here and we used to laugh because we didn't see 1 cloud in the sky, a natural cloud," Cindy Lucrecchio, public commenter on SB 14‑32, describing personal observations and asking for a ban on geoengineering. - "This is a good way to get more groundwater through storm water," Michelle (attorney/consultant), describing how a stormwater replenishment credit could help water providers locally offset CAGRD obligations.

Bottom line and next steps

Lawmakers advanced a complex set of water and natural‑resources bills, but many measures will require technical floor amendments or further stakeholder negotiation before final votes on the Senate floor. The hearing made clear the continuing divide between local‑control advocates (especially in rural basins seeking alternatives to AMAs) and statewide regulators focused on hydrology, modeling and statutory guardrails. ADWR, ADEQ and sponsors signaled they will continue to refine language on designations, credits, and transfer rules ahead of floor consideration.

Ending note: The committee’s calendar included a long slate of other, largely procedural measures (continuing boards, small technical fixes). The most consequential decisions for planning — who can claim a 100‑year supply, how local basins can cap pumping, and how stormwater recharge is counted — will move forward for more drafting and debate on the Senate floor.