MEMORANDUM State ..ater Policy Meeting
March 20, 1981
The rest of the meeting focused on discussion of comments received
by DER. Comments had been received from:
St. Johns River Water Management District some
specific wording suggestions and general concerns
that the implementation section goes beyond the
scope of policy guidance and that the policy does
not adequately cover the breadth of water manage-
ment. Most of the wording changes were accepted;
the group felt that the more general concerns were
adequately addressed in the draft policy.
Estus Whitfield, Office of the Governor a call
for more emphasis on water conservation, floodplain
management, wetlands protection and non-structural
water management. The group suggested wording for
water conservation and non-structural water manage-
ment, and suggested that DER reply to Mr. Whitfield's
letter, listing the proposed policy statements that
address his other concerns.
Unspecified "Agricultural Interests" a request
for wording tying the rights to consumptive uses of
water to ownership of land. This amendment was not
accepted by the group.
Florida Chamber of Commerce suggested wording
changes that the group felt were either already
addressed or were not particularly pertinent as
Nathaniel Reed expression of his opinion that
the proposed policy is "toothless, without merit
and an insult to the process." No amendment was
Florida Audubon Society; Florida Department of
Natural Resources; City of Melbourne; Container
Corporation of America; Florida Chapter of the
Sierra Club; Florida Defenders of the Environment;
and John T. Allen requests for specific wording
After a great deal of discussion, the group decided that most of
these suggestions either would be beyond the statutory authority
of the districts and the DER or could probably not be supported
by the districts' Governing Board.
cc: L. M. Blain
TO: Donald R. Feaster
FROM: Marcia K. Penman
DATE: March 20, 1981
RE: State Water Policy Meeting: March 19, 1981
At your request, I attended the March 19 meeting of representatives
of the water management districts and the DER. In attendance were:
Chuck Littlejohn and Terry Cole of DER; Rich McWilliams and Doug
Stowell of NWFWMD; Sonny Vergara, Dale Hardin and Lee Worsham of
SJRWMD; Steve Walker of SFWMD; Estus Whitfield of the Governor's
Office; and L. M. Blain and myself of SWFWMD.
The meeting had been called to provide an opportunity to discuss
comments that had been made concerning the draft state water policy.
A set of the comments received by the DER was provided (Attachment
A), and a long discussion followed as to which comments could be
endorsed by the group as modifications to the proposed policy. (See
below). The hearing draft (as it appears typed in Attachment B)
at the meeting will be presented as staff recommendations at that
time (margin notes on Attachment B).
x The consensus of the group was that the proposed rule as amended
at the meeting is a good policy that will serve to unite the efforts
of the DER and the water management districts. Chuck said he thought
that most discussion/dissatisfaction would come from environmental
groups; he thinks they will want stronger language regarding pre-
ference for non-structure approaches to water management, flood-
plain and wetlands protection and public participation. He also
thought there may be some requests for strengthened wording regarding
the riparian rights of land owners.
Chuck has requested that a representative from each district sit on
the dias with Secretary Tschinkel and assist her in explaining the
wording of the policy.
DISCUSSION OF COMMENTS
There was some concern on the part of District representatives that
the hearing draft contained modifications from the workshop draft
that had been accepted at the quarterly meeting. In response,
Chuck said that it was his understanding that district representa-
tives with whom he had met on February 19 had the authority to agree
to the changes.