December 7, 1972
for all the parties mentioned in the proposed agreement. I believe that one of the
solutions to meeting the demands for future water supply sources is having the capa-
bility to spread your pumping from well fields consisting of several hundred acres,
If we are going to take reasonable steps towards regionalism there are several things
the District as well as the governmental units involved can do. The following are
what seem to be reasonable:
1. The District needs to implement planning and policy through which it
could coordinate the development of new water supply sources. The proposal by
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council appears to be a good thing for such planning
2. The District needs to urge local governments, primarily Counties, to
enact ordinances to eliminate small water supply units. We need some type of
area-wide water supply units preferably county-wide units, perhaps smaller.
But certainly let's do away with the hundreds of small suppliers in Pasco and Hills-
borough Counties. Pinellas County doesn't have these problems because there are
two suppliers Pinellas County and City of St. Petersburg. The advantages of
these area-wide suppliers are numerous, but to mention a few: (a) if problems do
arise, you only have the area-w.ide users to deal with; (b) you could eliminate
much of the competition for water -- once you make a decision on withdrawals
from an area you don't have to worry about a new development in the area
requesting water; and (c) this would allow the supplier to spread out their wells
to the greatest extent possible to eliminate the problems that usually accompany
3. We need to move the Counties and Cities towards (1) taking over the
small suppliers and (2) interconnecting the systems.
4. We need complete hydrologic analysis of the Cypress Creek area and
the Starkey well field.
Incidentally, at this point we are preparing a resolution that will set forth these
concepts on regionalization. It is our intent to have the resolution executed by
the Counties and Cities mentioned in the Cypress Creek Agreement.
I ..' '.
December 7, 1972 / /
TO: Donald .:Feaster *
Actingxecotive Director C
FROM: Jake VV Varn
RE: Regional Water Supply
With each day we hear of new support for a regional water supply unit. To date we
have actively supported the creation of such a unit and the proposed agreement of
Cypress Creek represented a major thrust in this direction.
The recent meeting of the staffs mentioned in the Cypress Creek Agreement proved
to be very beneficial even though some of the representatives said that they couldn't
enter the agreement because of technical and/or legal problems. The most promising
factor that evolved from the meeting was that those attending generally agreed on
some basic concepts on regional water supply. Before discussing some of these con-
cepts I would like to make several comments on the present status of the agreement.
From the beginning some felt that our proposal would never come about. At this
point this appears true, but on the positive side the agreement did serve as the
moving force to bring together six governmental units who say (at least on the staff
level) they agree that regionalization is the answer to the area's water supply
To a certain extent we may have been fortunate that the proposed agreement never
materialized. At this point no one knows how much water is available from Cypress
Creek. Imagine for a second the criticism we would receive had the agreement been
entered and we had five water supply systems needing 20 m.g.d. each, only to find
out that there is only 60 m.g.d. available. This may well be the case.
Along the same lines this agreement represents an action on the part of the District
that is very similar to the past actions of the City of St. Petersburg and Pinellas
County. We have severely criticized these two for making larger withdrawals than
the area could withstand -- yet this agreement could lead to the same thing. In
sum, there isn't adequate quantities of water available in the Cypress Creek area
,- .. '. , .