| Material Information
||Memorandum regarding a letter written by J. T. Griffiths
||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
||North America -- United States of America -- Florida
||Box 5, Folder 25 ( SF STATE WATER POLICY - VOL. III ), Item 23
||Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
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
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
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