Senate Ag committee backs returning Kansas Water Office FY26 request to agency level, flags State Water Plan over-appropriation

The Senate Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources on Monday recommended that the committee return the Kansas Water Office’s FY2026 funding to the agency’s original request, reducing roughly $5 million in House-added increases and restoring a $2 million transfer from the Economic Development Initiatives Fund (EDIF) to the State Water Plan Fund.

Committee Chair (Mr. Chair) said the panel would “go back to the agency request,” recommending that the committee’s position match the Kansas Water Office’s proposed base rather than the larger House position. Luke Drury, senior fiscal analyst for Legislative Research, told the committee: “In FY 2026, that is over appropriated by about $12,200,000.”

Why it matters: reversing the House’s additional funding trims the proposed enhancement to water planning and project development and reduces pressure on the State Water Plan Fund, which staff flagged as over-appropriated if the House-level increases are retained.

What the committee approved and discussed - Committee recommendation to revert the Kansas Water Office FY26 funding to the agency’s proposed base (a reduction of about $5,000,000 from the House position). Chair called for objections and, after a voice vote, said the recommendation passed. The transcript records a voice vote rather than a numerical roll call. - Restoration of a $2,000,000 EDIF transfer to the State Water Plan Fund (cited in the meeting using KSA 70-9404). Drury and members agreed to include restoration of that statutory transfer in the committee recommendation. - A technical reallocation request to move $500,000 from the Projects/Grants fund into the Technical Assistance fund for water office programs. Senator Titus proposed shifting $500,000 from grant funding to technical assistance; the committee approved including that shift in its recommendation “without objection.”

Additional discussion and proposals - Senator Titus proposed a plan to address sedimentation at John Redmond Reservoir by adding $3,000,000 to the water office budget to support a hydro (suction) dredging project. Titus described a funding approach intended to keep the committee’s recommendations budget-neutral by reallocating carryover or previously removed money: $1,000,000 from HB 2302 project grants, $1,500,000 from carryover in the Department of Agriculture conservation budget, and $500,000 from KDHE’s RAPS carryover. - Committee members voiced general support for addressing major reservoir sedimentation and for ensuring the water office’s buckets of funding are reported on and targeted. Senator Ware and others noted that stakeholders and local projects are asking for additional House funding; Senator Shane and others urged caution about increasing funding before measuring program effectiveness. - Staff agreed to prepare language and materials for the committee and Ways and Means. Chair and staff clarified that the committee recommendation as drafted would not reduce statutory transfers already dedicated in law; instead the recommendation would use funds removed from proposed enhancements where feasible.

Context and constraints - Drury identified the primary revenue sources for the State Water Plan Fund as fee funds (municipal water fees, clean drinking water fees, industrial water fees), general fund transfers, and EDIF transfers; he noted that the Senate position had previously deleted a $2,000,000 EDIF transfer. - Multiple senators stressed that reverting to the agency request does not eliminate ongoing programs already under way; it removes additional, new enhancements that had been added in the House position.

Next steps - The committee’s recommendations on the Kansas Water Office were wrapped into the committee report and will be available for Ways and Means review; research staff were asked to produce additional details on debt and project-status items to include with the Ways and Means presentation.

Ending note: The committee recorded its recommendation to use the agency base for FY26 water funding and the related technical adjustments via voice votes and unanimous consent on several items; where the transcript records no roll-call tally, the record cites voice approval or “without objection.”