|
WATER LEGISLATION DISMEMBERMENT
The mega-water bill – HB 2686 – was gutted by a substitute bill offered in the House Water committee on Tuesday March 1. The new bill – Sub HB 2686 – retreats from the fundamental water program reorganization proposed in the original bill. The question of water policy and future water vision is pushed down the road one more time. While the original bill was not perfect, it did elevate water to a cabinet level position similar to agriculture, labor, transportation, or health and environment, etc. The fate of the substitute bill is uncertain as is how or whether a substantive ‘future of water’ debate proceeds?
The original bill – HB 2686 – drew significant opposition from major farm organizations and commodity groups as well as the Groundwater Management Districts (GMDs). The Chairman of the House Water committee – Rep. Ron Highland – offered a substantive amendment to narrow the proposed new Department of Water and /environment to just the Department of Water and leave the Division of Environment in the existing Kansas Department of Health and Environment. (See testimony for original bill here:
http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/HB2686/testimony )
In terms of the GMDs, the proposed changes to governance and eligibility of non-water right holders to serve on GMD boards was withdrawn. The GMD requirement to file annual usage and conservation reports was retained. The increase from 3 cents to 5 cents per 1,000 gallons for municipal, commercial and agriculture water users was scrapped. (The 3 cents per gallon water protection fee has not changed in years.) Highland’s amendment did include a portion of the existing state sales tax ($43 million) that would be controlled by the new ‘Water Management Board’ created under the original bill. This amendment still included moving the Division of Water Resources (that controls water rights in Kansas) from the Kansas Department of Agriculture (KDA) to this new Department of Water.
But the major farm organizations supported the substitute bill to gut the original bill to make no organizational change. This after the House Water Committee spent two years studying water issues and agency responsibilities across the state. They determined that 16 state agencies muddied the water and left no one actually advocating for water in a cabinet level position.
Sub HB 2686 (that gutted the original bill) still requires some new reporting by the GMDs so the legislature can better understand their programs and progress with conservation. The substitute also rejected the proposed fee structure increase and instead takes the recommendation from the 2017 Governor’s Blue Ribbon Water Task Force to direct one-tenth of one percent of the existing 6.5% state sales tax which would add $49 million to the State Water Plan Fund. This would raise the State Water Plan Fund from about $20 million to $70 million annually if this substitute bill becomes law. The Kansas Water Authority in conjunction with KDA, the Kansas Water Office, and KDH&E would still make water program funding recommendations to the Governor and the Kansas Legislature annually for approval as is done now. Kansas Water Office planning has shown that to address the water issues that need addressing the amount should be at least $55 to $60 million annually.
Water policy in Kansas is clearly controlled by agricultural interest groups, who do not want the boat rocked even though the primary source of irrigation water is the declining Ogallala Aquifer. Some regions estimate only 10 to 20 years of water use left.
85% of water use in Kansas is crop irrigation. These water users pay very few fees for this water. If they are within a GMD boundary, they pay a user fee or tax to provide for GMD functions, but if an irrigator is outside GMD boundaries, they pay no fee. Farmers do pay into the SWP fund through fertilizer and pesticide fees. The rest of us, unless we have a private well, pay for water through a water protection fee ($.03/1000 gallons) in our municipal or rural water bills. Under the substitute bill, we will also pay an extra share for irrigation water use via a statewide sales tax which will fall largely upon the urban populated areas of the state. The original bill attempted to make funding more equitable across uses.
In 2017 (according to the USDA Agricultural Census) Kansas had 58,569 farms and 2,881 (5% of all farms) accounted for 75% of all farm sales. In 2017 Kansas had 2.5 million acres under irrigation on 5,141 farms out of 21.8 million harvested acres. In terms of Farm Bill commodity payments (for wheat, corn, soybeans and sorghum) in Kansas, 74% of these payments have gone to 10% of the recipients since 1995. Until the federal government fundamentally alters farm programs that subsidize (via commodity payments and crop insurance) certain select crops such as corn, water overuse and the continual decline of the Ogallala is inevitable.
Hard to tell if the Kansas Legislature and the Governor have the vision and political courage to challenge the existing paradigm of consolidated agriculture? While existing water law states clearly that the waters of Kansas are the property of the residents and to be used for the most beneficial use, over appropriated water rights - particularly in Western Kansas – assure a shortening span of time for ‘beneficial use’.
Elections can and should provide the opportunity for serious priority discussions on the future of Kansas and its natural resources. 2022 has a Gubernatorial, U.S. Senate and Congressional races in Kansas to provide that policy opportunity.
See the Legislative Research Department’s supplemental note explaining the substitute bill:
http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2021_22/measures/documents/supp_note_hb2686_01_0000.pdf
For KWA 2022 Report to Governor & Legislature click Here.
For more read:
https://kansasreflector.com/2022/03/01/shooting-themselves-in-the-foot-committee-guts-kansas-bill-to-protect-water/
| 
