Bill

SB 2210

AN ACT to provide for a legislative management study relating to the management of water based on watershed boundaries.

69th Legislative Assembly (2025-26) Introduced by Mike Brandenburg and 5 co-sponsors

Directs a 2025-26 study on shifting North Dakota water management from political boundaries to natural watershed boundaries, with findings and possible draft legislation.

Filed with Secretary Of State 04/17

WeVote Research Nonpartisan

Bill Summary · SB 2210

Summary — SB 2210 (Sixty‑ninth Legislative Assembly, North Dakota)

Title / Purpose

SB 2210 directs the Legislative Management to conduct a study during the 2025–26 interim on the feasibility and desirability of assigning management authority for the state’s waters according to naturally occurring watershed boundaries rather than political‑subdivision (county/municipal) boundaries.

Key provisions

Requires the Legislative Management to study, during the 2025–26 interim, whether water management authority should be assigned to areas defined by natural watershed boundaries instead of political boundaries.
The study must evaluate all of the following:
- Approaches used in surrounding states for managing water by watershed.
- Powers, duties, and organizational structure of watershed boards.
- Dispute‑resolution procedures available to residents within a watershed district.
- Mechanisms to initiate, implement, and improve works projects within a watershed district.
- The role of the Department of Water Resources in mapping and establishing watershed boundaries.
The Legislative Management must report findings and recommendations — including any draft legislation needed to implement recommendations — to the Seventieth Legislative Assembly.

Who is affected

State legislative policymakers and staff (who will conduct the study).
State agencies involved in water management (notably the Department of Water Resources).
Local governments, watershed districts/boards, landowners, agricultural interests, and other water users who could be affected if statutory authority were later shifted to watershed‑based management.
Stakeholders involved in project implementation, dispute resolution, and cross‑jurisdictional water governance.

Timeline / Procedural status

Study period: 2025–26 interim.
Report due to: Seventieth Legislative Assembly (per bill).
Legislative history (select): Introduced in the Senate; passed both chambers (Senate vote: yeas 45, nays 2; House vote: yeas 85, nays 3); enrolled and signed by legislative officers; signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State (filed 04/17/2025).

Potential impact / considerations

The bill itself is investigatory — it does not change law immediately. Its outcomes may recommend structural statutory changes that could reassign authority, alter governance of watershed districts, adjust dispute‑resolution processes, and require expanded mapping and administrative work by the Department of Water Resources.
Implementation of any recommended changes could affect funding, local control, permitting, infrastructure project processes, and interjurisdictional coordination.
The study’s comparative review of other states is intended to identify models and lessons for North Dakota policy choices.