Kansas Water Authority urges two‑year ramp‑up to 10‑year program, seeks expanded funding for reservoirs, contamination and technical assistance

Don Buehler, chair of the Kansas Water Authority, told the House Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources on the authority's annual report and implementation framework that demand for state water funding far outstrips available dollars: “we saw 309 applications totaling $380,000,000 in requests, of which we had $18,000,000 available to award. $18,000,000 is a lot of money.”

The report and Julie Lorenz’s implementation presentation lay out an approach the authority says is both “bold and practical”: a two‑year ramp‑up to a 10‑year program that would shift state spending from many small line items to outcome‑driven investment buckets. The framework models a baseline program of $60 million a year with a $30 million enhancement (a $90 million program), and describes a target scenario that Kansans in stakeholder outreach supported of roughly $140 million annually for a fully scaled ten‑year program.

Why it matters: the authority described three core statewide problems — aquifer depletion in western Kansas, reservoir sedimentation and aging infrastructure in the east, and widespread water‑quality impairments — and argued the new framework would prioritize projects that provide measurable, regional outcomes. The report says two‑thirds of Kansans rely on reservoirs for drinking water and that counties overlying key aquifers generate about $57 billion in annual GDP.

Key numbers and program design - Applications and need: Fiscal‑year 2024 saw 309 applications requesting about $380 million with $18 million available; fiscal‑year 2025 saw 286 applications requesting about $227 million with $27 million available. Those figures, the authority said, indicate statewide demand far exceeds current state funding. (Don Buehler) - Funding scenarios: the implementation booklet models a $60 million base budget, a $30 million ramp‑up enhancement (total $90 million), and a fully scaled scenario the authority discussed at about $140 million per year. The governor’s budget includes an enhancement line of $30 million and the authority’s recommendations underpinned that request. (Julie Lorenz; Vijay Ramasamy) - Outcomes and accountability: the authority identified 43 measurable outcomes and eight top recommendations. It proposes independent evaluation funding (a $900,000 base allocation, a governor‑proposed $500,000 increase, and a long‑run target of about $2 million annually for evaluation and independent accountability). (Julie Lorenz)

Priority problem areas and examples - Contamination remediation: the authority said the state has more than 140 hazardous contamination sites; with the base budget the authority expects to address about four sites by 2027, six under a ramp‑up, and more than 50 over a full 10‑year program. (Julie Lorenz) - Reservoirs and sedimentation: reservoirs provide flood protection and drinking supply, but many are aging and silting. The report highlights pilot technologies, such as hydro‑suction, and cites projects like a $1 million investment in the Equus Beds chloride‑plume cleanup near Wichita. Vijay Ramasamy described a $3 million hydro‑suction pilot for John Redmond in the governor’s budget and a separate $2 million sedimentation‑planning request that is not in the governor’s enhancements. (Vijay Ramasamy) - Aquifer depletion and regionalization: the authority showed maps of recharge variability and areas with an estimated 25 years or less of supply. The plan emphasizes regional planning and “project pipelines” so communities can pursue regional solutions where feasible; the presentation used Caney buying 250,000 gallons per day from Coffeyville as a regionalization example. The vision tied to the framework is that, within ten years, every community will know whether it has a 50‑year water supply or a plan to achieve one. (Julie Lorenz)

Technical assistance, workforce and federal partnerships The authority repeatedly stressed that small communities need technical assistance and project readiness so state or federal money can be used quickly. Julie Lorenz said some projects are “ready to go” but feasibility and preliminary engineering work are necessary to keep a pipeline of deployable projects. Committee members and agency officials also discussed workforce constraints, noting a need for more engineers and implementation staff. The authority reported outreach that included roughly 1,500 Kansans and more than 50 stakeholder meetings.

Questions from committee members Representative Mosley pressed whether the estimate of “25 years” remaining for some aquifer areas assumed current conditions; Earl Lewis, chief and director at the Kansas Department of Agriculture’s Division of Water Resources, said the projection is based on current pumping and average conditions. Legislators also asked about comparisons with other states, reuse of treated wastewater for aquifer recharge (Earl Lewis cited pilot work in Garden City and Dodge City), and the scale of past state spending; members said they would follow up for more detailed numbers.

Votes at a glance - RS 0708 (bill request concerning a water task force): introduced by request of committee; no objections recorded and the request was entered. No formal roll‑call votes were recorded on HB 2302 or program funding during this hearing.

What the authority asked the legislature to do - Provide ramp‑up funding and project management support for a two‑year start to a 10‑year program focused on five guiding principles (conserve the High Plains aquifer, secure and restore reservoirs, improve water quality, increase resiliency to extreme events, and increase public awareness and education). - Move from many small line items in the state water plan to outcome‑oriented budget categories, with performance metrics, independent evaluation and local consult meetings to adjust and reallocate funds based on results. (Julie Lorenz)

Limitations and next steps Committee members asked for more detailed fiscal comparisons with neighboring states and for a breakdown of how much consultant and agency time has already been spent developing the framework; staff committed to provide those figures. Several committee members invited the authority back for deeper discussion on technical details, regional impacts and northeast Kansas implications. The authority said it will continue local consults, evaluate pilot programs during the two‑year ramp up, and report back to the legislature.

Sources: testimony and slides presented to the Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources by Don Buehler (chair, Kansas Water Authority), Julie Lorenz (principal consultant, implementation framework and former Kansas transportation secretary), Earl Lewis (chief and director, Division of Water Resources, Kansas Department of Agriculture), and Vijay Ramasamy (governor’s special adviser for water).