WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2412

Summary — HB 2412 (Introduced version, 2025)

Title: REGULATION‑TECH — Amendments re: Long‑Term Water Augmentation Fund
Primary sponsor: Rep. Alexander Kolodin
Introduced: February 4, 2025
Status: Referred to Rules Committee

Purpose and intent

HB 2412 revises Arizona law governing the Long‑Term Water Augmentation Fund and related limitations on the State “authority” that administers water augmentation activities. The bill (1) broadens eligible uses of the fund to include projects that create new sources of water within Arizona (in addition to importing water from outside the state), (2) imposes new restrictions on buying existing in‑state water, and (3) directs a substantial portion of fund monies to benefit specific Active Management Areas (AMAs).

Key provisions (section‑by‑section highlights)

  • Amends A.R.S. §49‑1210 (Limitations on water activities)

    • Expands the consent requirement before the authority can convey/deliver water to include: areas “within a city or town water service area” and areas within a certificate of convenience and necessity of a private water company.
    • Clarifies and retains existing prohibitions on purchasing mainstream Colorado River water (with tribal and certain revolving‑fund exceptions) and on operating/owning certain water facilities.
    • Restricts sale/lease of imported water or long‑term storage credits owned by the authority to amounts no greater than necessary to repay bonds or meet statutory obligations.

  • Amends A.R.S. §49‑1303 (Long‑Term Water Augmentation Fund: purposes; limitation)

    • Expands eligible fund uses to include: funding projects that create new sources of water within Arizona as well as importing water from outside the state; purchasing newly created in‑state water or rights thereto.
    • Specifically forbids using fund monies to purchase existing in‑state water or rights from an in‑state user unless the purchase is tied to creation of a new in‑state water source.
    • Requires that at least 75% of monies appropriated to the fund in FY 2022‑23, FY 2023‑24 and FY 2024‑25 be reserved for project(s) that import water (these reserved monies must be accounted for separately).
    • Adds a new allocation directive: at least 75% of the monies described in the paragraph above that remain in the fund as of the effective date of the amendment must be used to fund water supply projects supplying imported water for end users in the Phoenix, Pinal, or Tucson AMAs.
    • Retains existing provisions on allowable uses (investigations, financial assistance, guarantees, fund administration) and on actions if pledged monies are insufficient for bond payments (treasurer liquidation, audits, AG investigation).

  • Amends A.R.S. §49‑1304 (Evaluation criteria)

    • Retains project prioritization criteria (benefits vs. cost, multiple benefits, costs, mitigation capacity, etc.). (Full text beyond initial criteria was truncated in the provided version.)

Who is affected

  • State “authority” that administers the Long‑Term Water Augmentation Fund and related programs.
  • Municipalities, towns, and private water companies (consent requirements for deliveries/conveyances).
  • Water project developers and local water suppliers in Arizona — especially potential shift toward funding in‑state new water‑creation projects and projects benefiting Phoenix, Pinal, and Tucson AMAs.
  • Holders of existing in‑state water rights (new restrictions limit fund use to buy existing rights unless tied to creating new water).
  • Bondholders and financial structures for augmentation projects (repayment and fund‑liquidation rules preserved).

Significant procedural/timeline notes

  • The bill was introduced Feb 4, 2025, and is currently referred to the Rules Committee.
  • The bill references reserving fund monies for FY 2022‑23 through FY 2024‑25; its provisions also apply to monies remaining in the fund as of the effective date — review of fiscal and retroactivity implications would be necessary (check fiscal note).
  • The provided document also contains unrelated text from an Illinois HB2412 concerning the Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act; that appears to be clerical duplication and is not part of the Arizona statute amendments.

Potential impacts / considerations

  • Policy shift from buying existing in‑state water rights toward developing new in‑state water sources and prioritizing imported water projects for specific AMAs could change market dynamics for water rights and influence project selection.
  • The 75% allocation requirement for monies remaining as of the effective date would substantially concentrate fund resources on projects benefiting Phoenix, Pinal, and Tucson AMAs — stakeholders outside those AMAs may see reduced access to fund support.
  • Local governments and private water companies gain explicit protection via required written consent before the authority delivers water into their service areas.
  • Fiscal and legal effects (bonding, repayment schedules, and any retroactive reserve requirements) should be examined in the bill’s fiscal note and attorney‑general/treasurer guidance.

For precise legal interpretation, check the official engrossed bill text, committee analyses, and the Legislature’s fiscal note.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.