Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Funding Conservation Districts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee on Water advances bill to boost conservation-district matching funds, trims appropriation
Summary
The Committee on Water voted to send House Bill 2113 to the floor with amendments that maintain a 2-to-1 state match for conservation-district grants but reduce the requested appropriation. The bill also directs transfers to the State Water Plan Fund and sunsets two water grant funds in 2028.
A committee of the Kansas Legislature advanced House Bill 2113 on a voice vote after adopting an amendment that reduced the bill's requested appropriation for conservation districts.
The bill would require annual July 1 transfers intended to match federal conservation funding and expand uses to include domestic water-quality sampling. It also directs enhanced transfers from the State General Fund to the State Water Plan Fund and would sunset the Water Technical Assistance Fund and the Water Project Grant Fund on July 1, 2028.
Reviser: “Section 1 of House Bill 21 13 would transfer $5,000,000 each July 1 to match federal funding for conservation districts. The matching would be 2 state dollars for every 1 non state dollar. The 5,000,000 could also be used for the provision of domestic water quality sampling. Section 2 of the bill would provide for the enhanced transfer of monies from the State General Fund to the State Water Plan Fund.”
A fiscal note presented to the committee said enactment would increase expenditures from the State Water Plan Fund by $20,000,000, with $8,000,000 directed to the Kansas Water Office grant programs and about $12,000,000 distributed to agencies for programmatic uses; that $20,000,000 would be in addition to an existing $35,000,000 from the State General Fund. The Kansas Department of Agriculture indicated enactment would raise its expenditures by about $5,000,000 beginning in fiscal year 2026, and one agency estimated it would need one full-time position at an estimated cost of about $95,000 to manage the program.
Committee members debated the appropriation level before the panel adopted an amendment lowering the conservation-district allocation. The chair said he had consulted stakeholders and reduced the requested additional aid for conservation districts from $5,000,000 to $2,500,000. Representative Blake Blacks (Representative Blacks) moved adoption of that amendment; Representative Besseck seconded the motion. The committee approved the amendment by voice vote.
Representative Blacks said the 2-to-1 match is essential because many conservation-district offices are “underfunded and, for the most part, understaffed,” and he advocated using match funding to expand technician and field capacity.
After amendment votes and further discussion of targeted projects and prior appropriations, Representative Essex moved that the committee report HB 2113 favorably as amended; Representative Vaughn seconded. The committee passed that motion by voice vote.
The bill as amended preserves the 2-to-1 matching structure while reducing the state appropriation directed to conservation districts; questions about final funding and allocation remain subject to reconciliation in the full legislative budget process.
Next steps: HB 2113 will move to the full House floor with the committee's recommendation and the adopted amendments.
