Texas Senate Bill SB660

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 3/9/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 3/31/11
• Refer: 3/16/11
• Voted on by Senate: 4/20/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/16/11
• Report Pass: 3/31/11
• Voted on by House: 5/20/11
• Engrossed: 4/20/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 4/26/11
• Report Pass: 5/3/11
• Report Pass: 5/4/11
• Enrolled: 5/30/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the review and functions of the Texas Water Development Board, including the functions of the board and related entities in connection with the process for establishing and appealing desired future conditions in a groundwater management area.

Impact

The legislation introduces a structured framework for groundwater conservation districts to follow when formulating their management plans. It also requires these districts to ensure their plans are consistent with the desired future conditions adopted during the joint planning process. The bill addresses the challenges of maintaining sufficient groundwater by establishing stricter oversight and coordination among districts, ensuring that all stakeholders work together towards common water management goals.

Summary

Senate Bill 660 focuses on the review and functions of the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), particularly concerning groundwater management areas. The bill mandates the establishment of desired future conditions that will guide water management practices. It emphasizes the importance of aligning groundwater conservation activities with defined goals, which must be established collaboratively by districts in a management area. This alignment is intended to promote effective use and conservation of groundwater resources across Texas.

Contention

Some points of contention have arisen regarding the implications of having a centralized authority, like the TWDB, overseeing local groundwater management efforts. Opponents argue that this could undermine local control and flexibility in managing resources tailored to regional needs, particularly in responding to unique hydrological conditions. Additionally, the processes for resolving disputes, particularly through negotiated rulemaking and alternative dispute resolution, may shift the dynamics of how groundwater rights and responsibilities are enforced, raising concerns among local entities about their agency in planning and management.