H.B. 349 Statewide Water Storage

What this bill does

H.B. 349 would set a checklist that a reservoir project must meet before it can qualify for state funding. The checklist covers having a water right, a local sponsor such as a water conservancy district, a readiness timeline, a demonstrated need, affordability, and review by the legislative water committee.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 11 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 2, 2026Who voted how
• 63 yes, 1 no, 11 absentFinal House vote · Feb 12, 2026Who voted how
• 4 yes, 0 no, 3 absentSenate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee: vote to approve it · Mar 3, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 2, 2026 House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (22 turns)

  1. Committee chair58:57

     statewide. Water storage. Go ahead whenever you're ready.

  2. Rep. Walt Brooks59:02

     Thank You, Mr. Chair and Committee. It's a pleasure to be to the best committee. I wish I could attend more often. Um, this is actually a, a simple bill, but it, it kind of addresses a really large issue. Um, one thing that we try to do in the house is look forward 50 75, a hundred years of what we need to do to competitor the state. Um, we've been talking about building more reservoirs the 10 years that I've been here. Um, but we've haven't really done a lot because the reservoir takes more than one session to build. So we Uintah work on this over the last two years to kind of really make a simple and clear process of how we could get more storage in the state of Utah. And it became a kind of a political mess. People were trying to just push their way through. But working with, um, all the stakeholders, particularly our state water engineer and um, water resource director, we kind of come up with a, a way that can help organize people's effort to be able to put all the pieces in place that could qualify and move through the process. And the meat of this, um, bill really starts on line 1 59. Um, before you can build a reservoir, you need to have the water rights. And it's funny enough, we have a lot of reservoirs that want to get built, but they don't own any water. And it goes through, you can see from 1 61, there's a regional or state benefit. There needs to be a, a local sponsor that's usually a, a water district. Um, it needs to be ready to be built within five years. And if they do all these things that are listed there, then they could qualify to receive state funding. It doesn't change anything in the state funding or the water legislative dis, um, commission that makes those decisions. Doesn't put any burden on them. It just organizes everything so they can see that they're basically shovel ready. And with that, I'm open to any questions.

  3. Committee chair1:00:48

     Okay. Thank you. We'll bring it back to the committee for discussion or clarifying questions.

  4. Unknown speaker1:00:57speaker not certain

     Representative. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've got a question representative. So, if there's a small irrigation company that has an irrigation pond, is this limited in size or can they say maybe all they need to do is dredge, dredge the reservoir or the pond, or, uh, increase the dam size? Is that included in here?

  5. Rep. Walt Brooks1:01:21

     It does, it takes into account all those different issues. In fact, um, I'll give you an example of St. George Gunlock Reservoir. If you notice that it's, it's overflowing, which is really pretty, has all the waterfalls, and we don't have any water. So how did it fill up so quick? It's over half full of dirt. It's full of sand. And so if you look at the annual water that flows through, there is an 88% reduction in capacity because of that. So we did address those things as well. Mr. Chair.

  6. Committee chair1:01:47

     Thank you. Uh, Representative Chew?

  7. Rep. Scott H. Chew1:01:52

     Yes. Thank you, Mr. No, just, just to comment, you know, I, I've heard, uh, you know, since we've been in, in the drought, we've had, uh, we get a lot of criticism whether we've done enough or we haven't done enough. Uh, as far as, and as far as storage, I've heard some criticism about, uh, uh, we're out of water. It doesn't, it's, and it, uh, likened it to, like, why do we go around, uh, open a new bank accounts when we don't have any money to put in it? And I, uh, kinda like to, uh, what, uh, answer back well, uh, as I wasn't there, but I understand that it wasn't raining when Noah built the ark. So, uh, I think that it doesn't hurt for us to plan ahead.

  8. Committee chair1:02:34

     Okay. Thank you, Representative. Chew. Okay. Seeing, no more clarifying questions, we'll go to the public. Anybody want to comment on this? Come on up. State your name, who you represent,

  9. Terry Camp, Utah Farm Bureau Federation1:02:54

     sign in. Sure. Um, Terry Camp, vice President of Public Policy for the Utah Farm Bureau Federation. Um, we support HB 3 3 49 and appreciate what it's promoting. Um, we would, however, urge the committee to also consider adding groundwater storage and recharge projects, uh, to the bill. We believe these projects can reduce evaporative loss. Um, we understand there's some challenges sometimes with measurement, but we also believe that underground storage has a lot of potential and we would want those projects to be included and eligible for funding as well. But overall, urge the committee to support the bill.

  10. Joel Williams, Deputy Director, Utah Division of Water Resources1:03:34

      Hey, thank you. I'm Joel Williams, acting director at the Utah Division of Water Resources here to express support for this bill. We all understand how important reservoir storage is to the, our way of life here in Utah, and being able to store the water as it as it comes and typically in the spring. Hopefully that happens this year. And the importance of maintaining that storage. And this bill does include, as, as was mentioned, the ability to address sedimentation or the ability to adjust the, the storage capacity of a reservoir. And really any project described in this bill could already apply to the Board of Water Resources for funding through our existing funds. What this does is opens up additional funding through the water infrastructure restricted account. So it would just expand that ability a little bit. And the, the new funding source would still be through a loan process where the money would be loaned to the, the sponsor and been paid back over time to be used on other projects. Thank you.

  11. Committee chair1:04:35

      Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? Do we have any online? Okay, come on. Yeah, come on up.

  12. Zachary Frankel, Utah Rivers Council1:04:48

      Thank you very much for the chance to speak. My name is Zachary Frankel. I'm the Executive Director of the Utah Rivers Council and Representative Chew. Um, might have been referencing a conversation we had with this analogy about storage and whether we need more storage when we have no water. Um, and it, it's similar to saying that, you know, we lost our income and so the solution is to go open up a bunch of empty savings accounts. I know that hurts. You know, right now, in this drought that we're experiencing, which is certainly no laughing matter, um, as mentioned earlier, we would much rather see the board, which has already got the ability to make loans be doing so, and not be doing so with permanent sales tax collections. Um, the bill does reference the current repayment guidelines that the Board of Water Resources may establish, but it's not clear that interest needs to be collected. One of the concerns, of course, with any kind of water development is what, whether or not the projects actually needed for the recipients. So most of the water projects of all kinds that are constructed in the United States are done so with local entities that are allowed to, um, of course, issue bonds and establish a repayment plan with interest. And that's economic's way of ensuring that the project's necessary. The problem that we're concerned about by using sales taxes instead of our water rates and bonds to pay for it, is we could easily see projects, um, approved that have no purpose really, even though at the time they might sound good. But this is a big carte blanche for any kind of project. It's not to say that there aren't needed water projects, especially sedimentation problems, pipeline replacements, and the like. It just says, if we can shift those things to a rate revenues and local governments, then it ensures, uh, more fiscally conservative approach to this. Um, and so with that consideration, I thank you for your time and allowing me to speak.

  13. Committee chair1:06:58

      Okay. Thank you for your comments. Anybody else wanna speak in Coate comment? Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Bring it back to the Committee for action or further discussion.

  14. Committee chair1:07:11

      Representative Albright?

  15. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht1:07:13

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, Representative Brooks, I, I think there's been a couple of pretty good suggestions. I would, as there's no amendments online, I would just encourage you to, uh, discuss with Mr. Frankel and the Farm Bureau, their suggestions and see if you can come up with either a sub or some amendment language there. But I, uh, I would make the motion that we pass out favorably as is, uh, HB 3 49 statewide water storage by Representative Brooks.

  16. Committee chair1:07:45

      Uh, discussion to the motion to back to Representative Brooks.

  17. Rep. Walt Brooks1:07:51

      Thank you. I appreciate the comments being made. Um, this s bill doesn't address the, um, repayment and taxes and all those pieces 'cause it's already in code. This just references to that. Whatever those terms are, they would have to follow the same suit if they're looking for a loan for this. So it doesn't address, um, those particulars, um, about the benefit to the state that is part of this, this bill process. They can't go build a reservoir if it doesn't benefit anybody. And there's a lot of things that a reservoir could help with. And that's, um, something that our state engineer is working on is called diversion management. So if we have a reservoir that's high enough in elevation that they can move water on both sides of a ridge. There's, there's a lot of different things that goes into place, but it, it's mostly about setting what is important and what can be done for the people. This is not just building a reservoir. 'cause they're pretty, it's really for the benefit and the use. Um, we did look at a little bit of the groundwater recharge part, and I'm still open to that, but, um, the state water engineer basically said we don't really understand the groundwater completely yet. So we're just kind of waiting to get some more information how we can move forward there. That's 'cause we can't see it. We can see everything on the surface.

  18. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht1:08:59

      That's right. Mm-hmm. So my motion stands, Mr. Chair

  19. Committee chair1:09:03

      Yeah. The discussion of the motion representative vo

  20. Unknown committee member1:09:07speaker not certain

      Thank you chair. Honestly, I, I was gonna say something very similar to Representative Albrecht. So I'll just say, um, I encourage you to have those conversations around the groundwater storage and then, uh, I also support the motion.

  21. Committee chair1:09:20

      Okay. Thank you. Uh, so just prerogative of the chair, I just say we hope we have some water runoff to fill the reservoirs we have for sure. But this is really an important, important bill. So I'll place the motion. The motion is to pass out HB 3 49 with a favorable recommendation, statewide storage, statewide water storage. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say nay. I rule that passes unanimously.

  22. Committee chair1:09:53

      Thank you, Representative Brooks. Thank You Committee.

• Feb 12, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (12 turns)

  1. Floor clerk40:45

     for its consideration. Madam Marine Clerk House Bill 3 49 statewide water storage by Representative Brooks. This bill will serve in natural resources, agriculture, and Environment with the vote of 11 0 3.

  2. Speaker (presiding)40:56

     Representative Brooks.

  3. Rep. Walt Brooks40:58

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I've been up here for 10 years now and every year that we've talked about how we can look forward 20, 50, a hundred years. And one of the issues that we need to, um, address was something that takes 20 and 50 years to develop, and that is water storage or reservoirs. So we worked all last year, worked with the state engineer, the director of water resources, took this to the water task force about what do we need to do to help expedite the process so that we can identify where reservoirs are, what would be the best use for the state, all the different factors that go into making the decision. And what we've realized there was, was really no process. It was more of a political driven piece that just caused more confusion, more chaos, and no reservoirs. So working through this, we identified over 800 reservoir sites in the state and then narrowed it down of how we can really make these come, come to be. And so this bill just articulates a process that in order to build a reservoir, one, you have to have water rights. Two, you have to identify the benefit of the state and so forth. And they're listed towards the end of the bill. But, um, as reason it's got unanimous support is, it's really putting some forward thinking on how we can get the stuff done today so we can build a reservoir in the future in the best time possible. And with that, I'm open up to any questions.

  4. Speaker (presiding)42:13

     Thank you Representative Brooks discussion to the bill Representative Hansen.

  5. Rep. Leah Hansen42:18

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a question?

  6. Speaker (presiding)42:20

     Representative Brooks, will you yield?

  7. Rep. Walt Brooks42:22

     Yes, sir. Yes. Representative

  8. Rep. Leah Hansen42:24

     Hansen. Thank you. On line 91, the rulemaking authority to make a loan from available federal funds to repair the water infrastructure project. Um, when the bill talks about making a loan from federal funds, who are they making that loan available to?

  9. Rep. Walt Brooks42:39

     So in, in what you're referring to is, if you look at that word is already there, it says in preparation to make, and it already has loans in the piece that we crossed out and rewrote it and is changing it from basically funds to money. Basically it goes to the water conservative districts who would be the partner managing the water resource.

  10. Speaker (presiding)42:58

      Thank you. Thank you Representative Hansen. Further discussion to the bill, back to you, Representative Brooks for summation.

  11. Rep. Walt Brooks43:07

      Thank you. I appreciate your support on this bill. It's, it's a simple bill, but it really does give the state some, um, forward-looking ability to really prepare now so we can create more water storage in the future. Thank you.

  12. Speaker (presiding)43:19

      Thank you, Representative Brooks Voting will now be open on HB 3 49. Representative Acton, would you to vote on this? Representative Acton? Representative Okerlund, would you like to vote? Representative Okerlund. Thank you. Seeing all president and voted voting is now closed. HB 3 49 passes this body with 63 yes votes one no vote will be sent to the Senate for its consideration. Madam Reading Clerk

• Mar 3, 2026 Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (26 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)39:21

     Um, Representative Brooks is not Yes, he's right there. Representative Brooks, welcome house Bill 3 49. First substitute.

  2. Rep. Walt Brooks39:32

     Do you have any substitutes or amendments to No, I do not, Sir, to Speak to. Okay. Oh, Wait, yes, I do. I need to adopt the first sub. Do you,

  3. Committee chair (presiding)39:39

     The first Sub was adopted in Center fields, your first sub was adopted. So we do have first sub 3 49. Okay, Great. Yeah, time is yours.

  4. Rep. Walt Brooks39:49

     So, um, I, I've been here for a while and I know every year we talk about things that we want to do and set up for the future, 50 years, a hundred years in the future. And one of those issues has been water. We always talk about water and making sure that we have enough of it and, and we can store it in a proper way, or how we can't just build a dam if there's no water and whatever. So what is the thoughts that go into that? So over the last, um, interim, I've been working with the state water engineer and the director of water resources of, of what policies we need to put in place to get us on the right track so we can be doing whatever's best for the state for water storage. Um, I remember a few years ago there was a lot of political pressure to get a dam built in central Utah, um, the Hatch Dam. And, uh, there was a lot of effort, but it resulted in nothing. And one of the reason is they don't have any water rights. So it doesn't matter how many, you know, big wigs we get over here to pull the levers. If they don't have water rights, then it's not gonna happen. So that's kind of where this bill originated from and where it's structured around. We wanted to make good policy that can be in place for the next decades century, whatever it takes to, to make sure that we can get on the right path. So the meat of this bill starts on line 51 and it's basically identifying what needs to be in place in order to build a reservoir. And it's, you need to have a water, right? It needs to have the best use for the region or the state benefit. You need to have a local sponsor, like a water conservancy district that can manage that. Um, you need to be ready to be able to, um, be builded a reservoir before you go get funding. And there needs to be a need for it, and it has to be affordable. 'cause there are some projects that are great, but the cost of the water to build that reservoir is just so crazy that it's not wise to do that. We would be better off doing it somewhere else. It also does give, um, some effort towards, let's say, Gunlock Reservoir, for example, down on my neck of the woods, it's a great reservoir, but it's the size of your bathtub. Every time it rains, it, it fills up, which is great, but one reason it does is 'cause it's full of sand. It's less than 50% of its capacity because it's full of dirt. And so if they got to the point where the, the local district wanted to be the partner to go in and, and let's say excavate that all out to make sure that they have increased capacity, they could follow the same process to make sure that they meet all the criteria before they go to the next step, which would be the legislative water committee. So with that, that's what the bill does. I'm open to any questions.

  5. Committee chair (presiding)42:20

     Okay. Thank you for your work on this representative. And I'll bring it to the committee if, if there's any questions, clarifying questions for the sponsor, Maybe just one I'll add here.

  6. Committee chair (presiding)42:32

     Um, and I see one from Senator Hinkins. I'll go there for, okay. Um, I, I think when you say you're showing, is there a, one of the questions is there, or looking at the criteria, is there, what is the benefit? Is there a state benefit, a local benefit? What, and you can actually, so I've heard some that were resistant to pulling those together, but you can actually get more benefit if you put projects together and Correct. Put resources together. So I, I really appreciate what you're doing on this forward thinking. So let me go to Senator Hankins,

  7. Sen. David P. Hinkins43:06

     If you don't mind, Mr. Chair.

  8. Committee chair (presiding)43:07

     Yeah, please, please Respond to that point.

  9. Rep. Walt Brooks43:09

     So, uh, one, one benefit. Let's say if there was a reservoir in central Utah near your neck of the woods, then it can be use what's called demand management. So we could actually pull water from the Colorado side, that's ours to store there and necessary it could flow to the other side. So demand management is something the state engineer's been working on, and I think a really valuable component of what this could provide as well.

  10. Committee chair (presiding)43:30

      Okay. Thank you. Senator Hankin? Yeah.

  11. Sen. David P. Hinkins43:32

      Uh, one of the things that I was, uh, that makes it for the public use is to be able to put, uh, fish in there so people can fish. And so I'm wondering, you know, like if you know to help pay for the price of the reservoir, the state would have, uh, 'cause normally it's an irrigation company or something like that, that usually has, uh, is there something in this, uh, build that would actually make it so that the state could share in it to make it, uh, for well water skiing, recreational, as well as, uh, you know, to be able to fish and all that sort of stuff?

  12. Rep. Walt Brooks44:05

      Um, yes and no. It doesn't specifically detail what you're suggesting, but part of this process is, um, recreation is an economic development tool, right? And state parks love to be managers of these water bodies because it takes the load off of the, the entity that's in charge of it, but able to create resources. And if you try to go camping, there's not enough campsites really in the state. So they're always looking for activity. So there is a partnership between how we can best utilize the resources around the state as well to help fund those pieces. But the whole funding aspect we removed, 'cause we already have one already established, and that's the legislative water commission and, and the water task force and others that are working well. So we're just making sure where's the hiccups? 'cause people have gone to those and couldn't get a, a reservoir built because they were missing some of these pieces. So the bill is really quite simple. It's going down to the very bottom principles of the state and how do we wanna manage and move forward with water projects?

  13. Sen. David P. Hinkins45:04

      Yeah. Yeah. The only, uh, Mr. Chairman, the only disadvantage would be you have to build it twice as big. 'cause you gotta leave enough water in there for the fish to live, you know, is what I mean. So sometimes it's, I don't know if it makes it more feasible or not to have to build it twice as big as it.

  14. Rep. Walt Brooks45:18

      Well, it depends because a small reservoir that may be very cost effective, um, wouldn't be big enough for, like, I'll use Pine Valley Reservoir if you know where that's at. It's the little neck of heaven in our woods. Right, right. Where you wanna get away from the heat. It's so small you can't put boats on it, but it's always surrounded by fishermen. So there are, there may be aspects like that. Okay.

  15. Committee chair (presiding)45:39

      Thank, Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Okay. I am not seeing any other questions, so I'll open it to the public. Anyone come to speak to House Bill 3 49?

  16. Committee chair (presiding)45:49

      Please come up, sir. Welcome to our committee. If you would introduce yourself and tell us if you represent yourself or a group.

  17. Peter Gessel, Attorney46:03

      Uh, Peter Gsel. I'm an attorney at Smith Harson. I'm here on my own behalf, uh, today as a water professional. I have been here before on, on behalf of clients, and I wanna start by, uh, apologizing to Representative Brooks, uh, for I, I really appreciate the thoughtfulness that you all put into these bills. And, um, I'm absolutely, uh, in favor of, of the work that, uh, the sponsor, uh, would like to see in this, uh, is going for in this bill, my only, and so that's where I'm coming from. I've worked in the water industry in Utah for 25 years. Okay. And this was, surprise me, it's not your fault. I should have had the, my email notifications turned on for this bill. Uh, but my concern, uh, is that we got a lot of moving parts right now when it comes to water infrastructure funding. Okay. We've been, uh, uh, I just left a, a group we're discussing HB 5 0 1, which is gonna be another committee this afternoon. Uh, trying to figure out how this affects, uh, the bills, how that is implemented, uh, by the agencies. And so I I'm trying to understand, uh, how now this process where these funding is recommended to the legislature. And I like that there's an evaluation there rather than the RFA head to head and, and jockeying. I do like that. Um, my, uh, concern is understanding how these pieces go together and as we're all still working in the water industry to comply, comply with the unified water infrastructure plan and implement that and get things through that. How does this piece work with it? Is it its own thing? Is this how all dams and reservoirs are going to go? Um, sure would like some time. Uh, uh, those I spoke to very briefly, I just discovered this in the last hour. Uh, uh, were unaware of it. Um, I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I, uh, again, I'm absolutely supportive of the objectives and what you're going for. I personally would hope we could get a little time to, to figure out how, how that, how these pieces, uh, go together. And so I'll leave it at that. Thank you. Thank

  18. Committee chair (presiding)48:00

      You. Yes, thank you. Make sure you can sign the clipboard there. I appreciate you coming and testifying. Fine.

  19. Committee chair (presiding)48:06

      Anyone else from the public who would like to speak to the bill? Okay. Not online. I'll bring it back to the committee then. I see. Senator Hankins, your light's on. Uh,

  20. Sen. David P. Hinkins48:17

      Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, I make a motion that we pass out house bill 3 49. First substitute favor recommendation.

  21. Committee chair (presiding)48:24

      Okay, thank you, Senator. The motions in order that we favorably recommend House Bill 3 49. First substitute 3 49. 3 49, thank you. 3 49. First substitute discussion to this motion from the committee. Okay. I'll come back to you, representative for summation.

  22. Rep. Walt Brooks48:42

      Thank you. And when we design this, we try to remove all politics out of it and get right to the meat of what is really good policy and what needs to be done. And you can see it's fairly simple and is identifying things that are very clear. And I think, um, it, it'll be something good that hangs on for quite a while. Great.

  23. Committee chair (presiding)48:58

      Thank you Senator. Yeah, anything we can do

  24. Unknown speaker49:01speaker not certain

      to get more reservoirs? You know, Utah gets enough water to get us through the year, but we don't have the storage for most of it. And so it just goes to for wherever, you know. And so I think that this is a good step forward that we really need to start building more reservoirs. If our ancestors was as lazy or as had as many obstacles as we have in this day and age, we would be completely dry. We wouldn't be, uh, Utah probably wouldn't be in, uh, able to inhabit most of it. So thanks for the effort.

  25. Committee chair (presiding)49:29

      Yeah, thank you Senator. And to that point, a prerogative of the chair, I'll just comment that, uh, to the gentleman point, I think what you're establishing is the base, the groundwork of this is where it has to start even before you start looking at the funding, is, is it practical? Does it make sense? Um, is there, are there rates associated? So, uh, appreciate your work.

  26. Committee chair (presiding)49:54

      Well, I'm gonna place the motion. All in favor of passing out house bill 3 4 49 First substitute statewide, statewide water storage to the full body of the Senate indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? If anyy say nay. Okay. Overruled. Passage unanimously.