WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SCR 116

WATER DISTRICTS – States findings of the Legislature and supports various water projects within Water District 1.

68th Legislature, 2nd Regular Session (2026)

The resolution endorses continued IWRB leadership and funding for District 1 water projects, including dam modifications, aquifer protection, and infrastructure modernization.

Reported delivered to the Secretary of State on 03/16/26
#irrigation #naturalresources #resolutions #concurrent #water
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SCR 116

Summary: SCR 116 (Idaho, 2026) – Water District 1 Findings and Project Support

1) Purpose and Intent

  • SCR 116 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution that formally recognizes the hydrologic and economic importance of Idaho Water Resource Board (IWRB) District 1, which covers the Panhandle region (Boundary, Bonner, Kootenai, Shoshone, Benewah, Latah, Clearwater, Nez Perce, Lewis, and Idaho counties).
  • The resolution expresses legislative support for the continuation and active management of existing and future water projects within District 1.
  • It emphasizes proactive funding for planning, modernization, and aquifer management as fiscally responsible to prevent higher costs from deferred maintenance and emergencies.

2) Key Provisions and Projects Highlighted

The resolution enumerates and endorses several specific projects and themes:

  • Priest Lake Outlet Dam Modification (Bonner County)

    • IWRB oversight is deemed indispensable for maintaining statutorily established lake levels.
    • Goals include safeguarding North Idaho’s tourism economy, protecting shoreline property values, and ensuring adequate downstream flows for the Priest River ecosystem.

  • Lower Clearwater Exchange Project (Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District, Nez Perce County)

    • Currently in the design phase.
    • The project shifts reliance from unstable groundwater sources and the Sweetwater Creek system to the Clearwater River.
    • Expected benefits: stabilize the local aquifer and support endangered species (ESA-listed steelhead).

  • Aging Infrastructure Grants – Burnett Water Users Association (Clearwater County)

    • Recognition of the rehabilitation of diversion and conveyance infrastructure.
    • Described as essential to prevent catastrophic failures and to ensure water rights remain beneficially utilized for the rural economy.

  • Hayden Lake Irrigation District Modernization (Kootenai County)

    • Replacement of failing pipelines and improvements to pumping efficiency.
    • Objectives include reducing energy costs and protecting the Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, the primary drinking water source for the Spokane-Rathdrum region.

  • Overall framing: The identified projects are portrayed as vital to District 1’s strategic interests, supporting agricultural and high-tech sectors, preserving recreational tax bases, and protecting sole-source aquifers.

3) Who or What Is Affected

  • Water District 1 and IWRB Oversight: The resolution centers on continued IWRB-led planning, funding, and oversight of these projects.
  • Local Counties and Districts: impacted by project implementations (Bonner, Nez Perce, Clearwater, Kootenai, and other included counties) and by effects on groundwater sustainability, aquifer health, and downstream ecosystems.
  • Public and Economic Sectors: benefits to agriculture, tourism, recreation, and regional economies; improved drinking water reliability for the Rathdrum area; potential positive effects on ESA-listed species (steelhead) through improved water management.

4) Procedural and Timeline Notes

  • The resolution states legislative findings and support; it does not itself authorize funding beyond endorsing continued appropriation of funds to the IWRB for these projects.
  • The Statement of Purpose and Fiscal Note indicate no new state or local expenditures are created by the bill itself; there is no net fiscal impact attributed to the measure.
  • Legislative history shows passage through committees and both chambers, with standard readings and signings culminating in the usual enactment process for a concurrent resolution.

5) Fiscal Impact

  • Fiscal Note: The bill has no additional expenditure of funds at the state or local level and no net revenue impact. It is a formal recognition and policy endorsement rather than an appropriation or mandate.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with prior District 1 projects or a glossary of the key terms (e.g., aging infrastructure grants, aquifer management, and exchange projects).

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

Sign in to ask a question.