Title: Memorandum regarding a letter written by J. T. Griffiths
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00052907/00001
 Material Information
Title: Memorandum regarding a letter written by J. T. Griffiths
Alternate Title: Memorandum to L. M. Blain from J. Edward Curren, Attorney, Legal Department, regarding a letter written by J. T. Griffiths, Florida Citrus Mutual, proposing language for the State Water Policy which would conflict between a permitted use and a new use see
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
General Note: Box 5, Folder 25 ( SF STATE WATER POLICY - VOL. III ), Item 23
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00052907
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

June 3, 1981


TO: L. M. BLAIN, Esquire, General Counsel

FROM: J. EDWARD CURREN, Attorney, Legal Department

RE: J. T. Griffiths, Florida Citrus Mutual

I have just seen J. T. Griffiths' letter of May 28, 1981 and his
proposed language for the State water policy.

The final portion of the language, after the last comma, would
create problems if construed as Dr. Griffiths does. He refers
not only to this "qualified" right to use water already exer-
cised and converted to permitted use, but he goes on to contend
that the "property owner" has a prior right for water either as
a result of his use, or as a result of his potential use.

This proposed language would serve to create conflict between a
permitted use and a new use seeking to exercise a "prior right
potential use".

This is not only inconsistent with the Tequesta case, but it is
contra to Section 373.233, F.S., that preference be given to a
renewal over an initial use where competing applicants are equal-
ly qualified and there is inadequate water available for both.

I would like to be supportive of Dr. Griffiths but find that in
this case it would not serve the best interest of water manage-
ment districts or affected water users. Therefore, I have no
problem with the first part of the language:

"In implementing a consumptive use permitting program, the
Department and Districts shall recognize the qualified rights
of property owners to use the ground water under their land for
reasonable-beneficial purposes".

However, the following proposed phrase should be stricken as
being inconsistent with Florida Law.

"and shall continually seek maintenance of a proper balance
between competing users."

By this memo, your memo of May 11, 1981 is addressed.

cc: J. T. Ahern

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