NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.
Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
| SPONSOR: | Wilson | DATE TYPED: | 01/24/01 | HB | |||
| SHORT TITLE: | Complete Regional Water Planning Process | SB | 80 | ||||
| ANALYST: | Dotson | ||||||
| Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||||
| FY01 | FY02 | FY01 | FY02 | ||
| $ 1,500.0 | See Narrative | Recurring | General Fund | ||
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Duplicates/Relates to Appropriation in The General Appropriation Act SB 81, HB 114 and 113.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
State Engineer
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
SB 80 appropriates $1.5 million from the general fund to the Interstate Stream Commission to complete the regional water planning process.
Significant Issues
According to the State Engineer, funds appropriated in 1998 for statewide water planning activities have assisted seven of the sixteen water planning regions in significantly advancing their water plans. Ten of New Mexico's water planning regions still need funds to complete their regional water plans. Four regions still need additional funds to complete their water plans. Six regions had no funding under the 1998 appropriation. Three regions have completed plans with funds appropriated by the Legislature in previous years.
These matching funds would help to advance the timeliness and enhance the quality of water planning efforts.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
According to the State Engineer, planning for high quality and active water resources management is of critical importance to quality of life and economic development in New Mexico's water planning regions.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The appropriation of $1.5 million contained in this bill is a recurring expense to the general fund in the FY02 and FY03. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of FY03 shall revert to the general fund.
According to the State Engineer, implementing recommended alternatives in water plans relating to data gathering, water resources measuring and monitoring, and construction of water works could become a recurring cost to the state. Long term cost of not conducting and implementing water planning is huge, including reduced government revenues.
CONFLICT/DUPLICATION/COMPANIONSHIP/RELATIONSHIP
HB 113 is a companion bill. HB 114 and SB 81 appropriate $500,000 in general funds for implementing regional water plans.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
According to the State Engineer, completion of regional water plans under the state's regional planning program will be suspended if the bill is not enacted.
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
Were the funds appropriated in 1998 intended to complete any planning activities? If so, which ones?
What indication does the Interstate Stream Commission have that this appropriation is sufficient to complete the planning process?
PD/ar:prr