| Material Information
||Memorandum from SWFWMD Executive Director
||Memorandum from SWFWMD Executive Director to Governing Board that a final order be discussed and adopted in its Feb. 9, 1972 meeting,
||January 28, 1972
||North America -- United States of America -- Florida
||Box 2, Folder 4 ( ST. PETERSBURG, CITY OF V. SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ), Item 2
||Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
January 28, 1972
TO: District Governing Board & Myron Gibbons
FROM: Dale Twachtmann, Executive Director
RE: St. Pete Order
As we observe the court proceedings surrounding the disagreement between
the City of St. Petersburg and Hillsborough County concerning the crossing
of the Lutz-Lake Fern Road for the City of St. Petersburg's pipeline, it
becomes very apparent that both sides in this lawsuit would save a lot of
time, trouble, and expense if our final order to the City of St. Petersburg
were passed as soon as possible. Yesterday, we received from the Court
Reporter the second transcript -- the one from the January 12th continuance
of the hearing -- and so the final staff version of the order can now be
prepared. That would allow you to have final discussions and adopt the
final order at the Regulatory Board meeting of February 9, 1972.
As we study the transcripts here it appears that the only matters of serious
concern yet to be resolved are:
1. Choosing the wording that establishes the effective date of the
2. Deciding whether we go with the "Dundee" observation well or
change to the "Jackson 26A" observation well (as suggested in
the amended staff recommendation).
Because the transcripts are so very bulky to xerox and mail -- and because
the really sticky parts of the decision still remaining can be condensed
to the several significant pages we have enclosed -- we think you will find
these pages adequate. However, if there is something else you'd like to
see please call us and we'll get these pages out to you too. The transcript
pages are Attachment #1.
Since testimony continued to conflict somewhat on the matter of the effective
date of the order, we have put together a description of the complications
of the several alternatives. This will give you an opportunity to think
through the consequences of each alternative. That's Attachment #2.
Attachment #3 is our final staff recommendation as to the resolution.