Title: SWFWMD. Board of Governors. Minutes of the Meeting
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00051979/00001
 Material Information
Title: SWFWMD. Board of Governors. Minutes of the Meeting
Physical Description: pp. 14-15.
Language: English
Publication Date: June 6, 1984
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
General Note: Box 4, Folder 1 ( SF BASIN BOARD CONCEPT ), Item 63
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00051979
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text

Minutes of the Meeting June 6, 1984
Board of Governors Page 14

complete and has resulted in an operational recharge and recovery system which is
considered innovative enough to have been awarded one of six national awards by the
American Consulting Engineers Council. The existing contract was started on
September 1, 1982, at a cost of $130,000, and copies of the final report are available.
Contingent upon Manasota Basin Board approval during its June meeting, staff
recommended acceptance of the final report and approval of the final payment of $6,500
which is the five percent retainage fee.

Amendment to Agreement with Florida Institute of Phosphate Research -
Time Extension
On May 1, 1983, the District executed a one-year agreement with the Florida Institute of
Phosphate Research (FIPR) for funding of a research project entitled, "Source of Gross
Alpha Radioactivity Anomalies in Recharge Wells." The research would be conducted by
the University of South Florida (USF) using FIPR funds. Due to delays in the start-up of
the project, a no-cost time extension until September 1, 1984, has been requested by USF
and approved by FIPR. Staff recommended approval of the amendment to the agreement
which changes no scope in dollars.

Motion Approving Consent Items
Following consideration, Mr. Crane moved, seconded by Mr. Harkala, to approve the staff
recommendations outlined above for consent items 4B, Bid No. 8451 Service Agreement
for Auction of Vehicles and Equipment; 4D, Lake Manatee Recharge/Recovery Final
Acceptance; and 4E, Amendment to Agreement with Florida Institute of Phosphate
Research Time Extension. Motion carried unanimously.

Legislation Committee Meeting
At this time, during the lunch break, the Governing Board sitting as the Legislation
Committee met in the Board Room.

Senate Bill 1040 The Chairman of the Legislation Committee, Mr. Samson
y introduced Mr. Doug Stowell and asked that he and Mrs. Zysko update the Board
relative to the Legislative Session Summary. Mrs. Zykso briefly reviewed those bills
o having direct impact on the District. She said House Bill 900 directly amended
SChapter 373, Florida Statutes. It contained a conforming amendment to Chapter
373 for an amendment to Chapter 200, F.S., pertaining to format for TRIM notices
in certain cases. Mrs. Zysko said another bill that amended Chapter 373, F.S., was
"- Senate Bill 575. She said this included a routine sunset of regulations that pertain to
water well contractor licensing and drillers registration in 1988. Additionally, she
said, is Committee Substitute for Committee Substitute (CS/CS) for Senate Bill 1040
? I and 788 containing a number of "clean-up" amendments which the districts proposed
- for inclusion in the bill, amending Chapter 373. At this time, Mr. Stowell briefed
< ^) the Board on CS/CS Senate Bill 1040 explaining that this bill addresses concerns
"s -\ raised by this Board in clarifying issues as they relate to Basin Boards. He said this
,. is the same issue as raised by the Auditor General regarding the St. Johns River
Water Management District (SJRWMD) in an effort to clarify what the
responsibilities and jurisdiction of the Basin Boards are in comparison to the
Governing Board. Additionally, he said, other Auditor General issues as they relate
"to SJRWMD and problems of other water management districts, were submitted for
"clean-up" and subsequently incorporated into Senate Bill 1040. Mr. Stowell
reviewed those items amended in Chapter 373, F.S., as follows: (1) it was clarified
S- that district governing board and basin board members were authorized to receive
^ travel and per diem from their place of residence; (2) utilization of private or
charter aircraft is authorized only when reimbursed at a commercial carrier rate for
the same distance; (3) clarification of Basin Board responsibility and authority is

Minutes of the Meeting June 6, 1984
Board of Governors Page 15

addressed stating all basins in the state operate under the same ground rules, the
provisions of Chapter 373; (4) citations as they relate to notification of well drillers
for violations is now permitted by the districts rather than the Department of
Environmental Regulation (DER); (5) use of district lands will be by way of district
authorization; (6) authorization for the districts to levy civil penalties up to $10,000
per day; and (7) modifications to the water shortage plan to allow the plan to address
all users. In response to Mr. Crane's question, Mr. Stowell said in the case of
traveling via private or charter aircraft from one point to another where no
commercial flights travel, an acceptable reimbursement amount can be figured in
miles using a formula available from the state. In response to Mr. Stubbs' question,
Mr. Stowell said if an internal auditor is hired, the auditor must report to the
Governing Board. The Governing Board has the authority to hire an internal auditor
but it is not mandatory to do so. Mr. Stowell noted that Senator Neal and the
Speaker of the House were helpful in the passage of this bill. / e' oFF .
of /e //cxe

Wetlands Legislation Mr. Stowell than reviewed the wetland( legislation with a
comment that the water management districts initially were involved only to ensure
no authority was taken away. Mr. Stowell said the second or third week of the
legislative session, a press conference was held with agricultural representatives and
key legislators at which time the press was informed that water management
districts would be wetlands protectors relative to agricultural activities. DER
concurred with this direction. There was concern by the Governor that perhaps the
water management districts did not have sufficient authority to adequately regulate
wetlands. He said the bill reflects a total exemption of agricultural activities in
wetlands as long as the district in which the activity will occur has implemented
Part IV, Management and Storage of Surface Waters. The criteria for
implementation as set forth by the Governor is that Part IV rules must be in order
and in final form by October 1, 1984. He said four of the five water management
districts have in some way or another implemented Part IV. In response to
Mr. Crane's question, Mrs. Zysko said this District has partially implemented Part
IV. Mr. Stowell said South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and
SJRWMD have fully implemented Part IV Regulation, Management and Storage of
Surface Waters. This District has in a limited way implemented Part IV. Northwest
Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD) has implemented Part IV throughout
their district with only very large projects being subject to regulation and Suwannee
River Water Management District (SRWMD) has done nothing toward
implementation within their district. He said this means if nothing is done within
the SRWMD toward implementation of Part IV by October 1, all agricultural
activities will be regulated by the DER. He said because all other districts have
adopted partial rules, DER has no jurisdiction over agricultural activities in
wetlands. Therefore, he said, this District must review, revise and finalize Part IV
rules by October 1, the effective date of this act, to ensure nothing unexpected
happens. Mr. Stowell suggested that in NWFWMD thresholds be reduced to include
and require smaller projects be regulated so that a saftey net will be in place by
October 1. Mr. Stowell proceeded to read the intent of language in the House and
Senate journals as follows: "The language contained in 403.9(1)(3) relating to
agricultural activities shall be construed in conjunction with Section 373.406(2) to
exempt from permitting only those activities defined as agricultural activities
pursuant to this act in accordance with the commentary to Section 4.02(2) of the
Model Water Code." He said in essence the Model Water Code states the purpose of
the agricultural exemption in Part IV of the Model Water Code is to ensure that a
farmer who is plowing, contour plowing and diverting water and those activities are
incidental to agricultural activities, then he does not need to be permitted. If the
activities being undertaken to ditch, dike or divert water in order to accomplish an

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs