PSI Sci
New here? Follow the money and the votes · Not sure of your district? Find your U.S. House member · Find your state legislators

H.R. 5516: To allow for the renegotiation of the payment schedule of contracts between the Secretary of the Interior and the Redwood Valley County Water District, and for other purposes.

Before you vote › Federal bills

H.R. 5516: To allow for the renegotiation of the payment schedule of contracts between the Secretary of the Interior and the Redwood Valley County Water District, and for other purposes.

109th Congress · introduced 2006-05-25 · Water Resources Development · Latest: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

  1. Where it came from: introduced 2006-05-25 · official record
  2. Who proposed it: Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-1] · what a sponsor is
  3. What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
  4. Where it stands now: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
  5. If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

To allow for the renegotiation of the payment schedule of contracts between the Secretary of the Interior and the Redwood Valley County Water District, and for other purposes.

Plain summary

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.) Authorizes the Redwood Valley County Water District, California, to enter into additional non-federal obligations necessary to finance procurement of dedicated water rights and improvements needed to store and convey those rights, if the Secretary of the Interior and the District, as of January 1, 2006, have not renegotiated the schedule of payments for loans made by the United States to the District. Requires: (1) the renegotiated schedule of payments to commence when such additional obligations have been financially satisfied by the District; and (2) the date of the initial payment by the District to the United States to be regarded as the start of the repayment period and the time upon which any interest shall first be computed and assessed under the Small Reclamation Projects Act of 1956. Repeals the prohibition against charging interest on any loan payment due but not paid before the renegotiated schedule of payments takes effect.

Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House without amendment), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

To allow for the renegotiation of the payment schedule of contracts between the Secretary of the Interior and the Redwood Valley County Water District, and for other purposes.

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House without amendment)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-1] · 0 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Sponsor's campaign money: Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-1] reported raising $5.5 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (1)
Obligation
A binding promise by a government agency to pay money, for example by signing a contract or awarding a grant. Spending data such as USAspending.gov counts money when it is obligated, which can be before it is actually paid out.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Record fed-us-cong109-hr5516 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong109 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong109