Idaho water officials defend $30 million ongoing request, outline ARPA projects and need for five new water‑administration staff

The Idaho Department of Water Resources told lawmakers it has hundreds of millions of dollars committed to statewide water projects, that much of the recent spending reflects ARPA state fiscal recovery funds, and that the agency needs five new positions to create a Water Administration Bureau.

Janet Jessup, a budget and policy analyst with Legislative Services, opened the committee’s presentation by placing the agency’s materials in the legislative budget book and online and noting that “the Department of Water Resources is 1 of Idaho's executive departments” with responsibilities grounded in state law.

Why it matters: The department and the Idaho Water Resource Board are managing one‑time and ongoing federal and state money for aging infrastructure, water‑sustainability projects and flood management while also implementing an Eastern Snake Plain aquifer settlement that requires expanded administration and monitoring. Committee members pressed agency leaders on how quickly projects could move from engineering to construction and whether the agency has adequate staff and reporting to justify an ongoing $30 million general‑fund recommendation from the governor.

Director Matt Weaver, director of the Idaho Department of Water Resources, said the department received large federal inputs in recent years and that the funds fall into three broad categories: aging infrastructure, water sustainability and flood management. Weaver said the Legislature provided ARPA state fiscal recovery funds that produced a substantial increase in the agency’s base in fiscal 2023: "fifty million of this appropriation was one time and the other fifty million was made ongoing," he said.

Weaver and Jeff Raybould, chairman of the Idaho Water Resource Board, described projects the board has committed money to, including a pipeline and pumping work serving Mountain Home Air Force Base; work on Anderson Ranch; a pipeline tied to Dworshak Dam to supply fish hatcheries; Bear Lake storage carryover work; the Priest Lake water‑management project; groundwater‑to‑surface water conversion projects; and canal efficiency and monitoring efforts. Raybould said the board has committed money to loans and grants, and that some projects require multi‑year engineering and phased payments.

Jessup and agency leaders gave the committee numerical context: the water management account had an ending fiscal‑year 2024 cash balance of roughly $293 million, revenues through December totaled about $38 million, and expenditures of about $11.2 million left roughly $320 million in cash before accounting for board commitments. Raybould said the board’s list of committed projects totals about $290 million, leaving an uncommitted balance of about $29 million.

Weaver said the agency had used grant and loan tools, including a groundwater‑to‑surface‑water conversion program. He told the committee that $13 million of a $20 million allocation had been directed to conversion projects so far, and later estimated outstanding loans of about $23 million in the revolving development account and roughly $20 million in loans out of the water management account.

On staffing, Weaver asked for five new positions to stand up a Water Administration Bureau that would pair five new staff with roughly 11 existing positions now doing distribution and compliance work. He said the bureau would include a bureau chief and technical records support and would help with water‑district creation, training of water masters and real‑time measurement: "we are building out our water districts in those basins tributary to the Eastern Snake Plain" to meet administration needs stemming from last fall's settlement agreement, Weaver said.

Committee members asked why the agency needed the additional staff and whether the $30 million ongoing governor recommendation should instead be distributed project by project. Several members expressed concern about large balances sitting in accounts while projects proceed through engineering and permitting. Raybould and Weaver said many projects require multi‑year engineering and that the board disburses funds as work progresses, not up front; Raybould told the committee: "we only send them the money as work progresses." He added that the board encourages applicants to bring project plans forward for review so funding can move to construction sooner.

On recharge and the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA), Weaver and others said Idaho has increased state‑sponsored recharge activity in recent years. Weaver summarized a period from 2016–2024, saying the Idaho Water Resource Board averaged about 268,000 acre‑feet a year of state‑sponsored recharge, private parties averaged about 116,000 acre‑feet a year of recharge and pumping was reduced by about 212,000 acre‑feet — yielding an order of magnitude of roughly 600,000 acre‑feet of aquifer‑management activity over that period. "I'm not going to stand up here and say that we've stabilized it or balanced it because we don't have enough data," Weaver said, adding that the work is promising but that long‑term plans and additional infrastructure will be needed.

The presentation also described technology and operational requests: an ongoing one‑time laserfiche conversion (agency electronic‑records software), an ongoing ArcGIS license increase of about $58,500, and a proposed public information officer (the agency said it was able to repurpose one FTE toward that position). Jessup noted the department uses interactive GIS maps and has detailed fund PDFs in the committee's SharePoint folder.

Committee members asked for follow‑up materials. Jessup said she would provide the board’s statewide project list for projects that are identified but not yet funded. The hearing did not include committee votes on any appropriation; lawmakers questioned and requested more detail before making funding decisions.

Outlook: Agency leaders asked the Legislature to consider ongoing funding because some water‑supply and recharge projects will require operations, maintenance and monitoring over many years. Several committee members said they favored reviewing projects individually before committing large ongoing sums.