House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB548 - Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources
Short Title
Excepting matters relating to the administration or processing of individual water rights and applications from the advice and assistance that groundwater management districts may provide.
Minutes Content for Mon, Mar 14, 2022
Chairperson Kerschen announced to the committee that both SB548 and SB549 were on the agenda for today. Since most of the conferees were testifying on both bills, Chairperson Kerschen said he was allowing them to speak on both bills when they were called to testify.
Chairperson Kerschen then opened the hearing on SB548 and SB549.
Tamera Lawrence with the Revisor of Statutes Office explained the bills. SB548 would exclude matters relating to water rights from the advice and assistance that groundwater management districts may provide and limiting rules and regulations recommendations to matters that relate to irrigation use with the district. SB549 would enact a new law that would allow a holder of a water right dedicated to a beneficial use, other than irrigation, to elect to withdraw from a groundwater management district.
Kimberly Svaty testified in favor of the bills. She explained to the committee that the Water Appropriation Act established that the water of Kansas belongs to the people of Kansas. Currently there is a difference in governance between member communities whose rights are handled directly by the Division of Water Resources and those whose rights are reviewed sometimes indefinitely by the Groundwater Management District in which the community exists. She supports the original mission of the Groundwater Management Districts, but when the leadership structure of the boards offers little opportunity for municipal input and the District board exerts undue influence on municipal water interests, she supports efforts in these two bills to provide clarification or remedy.(Attachment 1)
Don Henry spoke in support of the bills. He believes that efficient governance and administration of water rights laws and regulations is fundamental to successful municipal water supply planning. Passage of these bills would provide a clear path to successful planning and allow the state engineer to efficiently serve and protect the public interest.(Attachment 2)
Toby Dougherty testified as a proponent of the bills. He told the committee that the bills limit a groundwater managements district's input and oversight on matters pertaining to water rights. it allows all water right holders and applicants to be subject the the same level of regulatory scrutiny regardless of where they live.(Attachment 3)
Tom Brown offered testimony in favor of the bills. He told the committee that he supports the intent of the bills to address the issues of the lack of fair and equitable representation of municipalities in the groundwater management districts, particularly in Groundwater Management District 2 has caused.This current imbalance discrepancy and the inability of municipalities to be fairly heard continues to be a serious concern for the city of McPherson.(Attachment 4)
Josh Svaty spoke in support of the bills. He believes that the there is an inequitable composition of the members on the board of Groundwater Management Districts. This has resulted in numerous delays in municipal permit applications for multiple municipalities and has cost taxpayers millions of dollars.(Attachment 5)
Written only proponent testimony was submitted by:
Erik Sartorius- Kansas League of Municipalities (Attachment 6)
John Quinday- City Manager, Russell(Attachment 7)
Ty Lasher- City Manager, Bel Aire (Attachment 8)
Jade Piros de Carvalho- Mayor, Hutchinson(Attachment 9)
Kiel Magnus- city of Derby(Attachment 10
Tim Boese testified in opposition to the bills. He believes that the bills create poor public policy and severely restricts the District's ability to properly manage the Equus Bed Aquifer.(Attachment 11)
Craig Zwick spoke against the bill. He told the committee that the water resources in Kansas are complex and there is not a 'one size fits all" answer to address the various issues. This is the core purpose for groundwater management district formation. If issues arise with water management, they should be addressed individually with the underground management system directly rather than changing how all districts are operated and managed.(Attachment12)
Shannon Kenyon testified in opposition the bills. She believes that the water supply is for everyone and stakeholders depend on the Groundwater Management Districts to manage the resource for future use for all types of water users.(Attachment 13 )
John Donley spoke against the bills on behalf of Kent Askren . He explained to the committee that water right applications for new appropriations and to exchange existing water rights are currently reviewed by groundwater management districts for conformity with their management program. Each groundwater management district has unique issues that require unique solutions. SB548 would eliminate this critical role of water right review.(Attachment 14)
Mark Rude testified in opposition to the bill. He believes the the passage of SB548 would effectively render the purposes of all groundwater management districts unachievable. (Attachment 15)
Written only opponent testimony was submitted by:
Bill Carp-private citizen(Attachment 16)
Ruth Jacob- private citizen(Attachment 17)
