Title: Letter from Kari Hebrank
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00001907/00001
 Material Information
Title: Letter from Kari Hebrank
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Letter from Kari Hebrank. December 21, 1995, Florida Associations of Counties
General Note: Box 9, Folder 14 ( SF-WMD REview Commission - 1995-1996 ), Item 4
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00001907
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, 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



main
< FLORi M
ASSOCIATE
SCOUNr[ 79


P.O. Box 549 / Tallahassee, Florida 32302
Phone: 904/224-3148 FAX: 904/222-5839


December 21, 1995









Holiday Greetings! e Florida Association of Counties (FAC), under the leadership of FAC
President John Hart, B ward County Commissioner, established a Select Committee on Water
Policy. Comprised of elected county officials and county staff, the Committee was directed to
evaluate a myriad of ater-related issues to determine the Association's legislative position.

Below I have outline the top five legislative policy positions developed by the FAC Select
Committee on Water Policy and adopted by the Florida Association of Counties Board of
Directors and general membership, along with a brief explanation.

1. SUPPORT the Legislature creating standing connittees on water resources in both the
House and Se te to provide legislative oversight and guide the water management
districts in their budgetary and operational priorities.

Our committee heard lots of testimony on the need to improve accountability of the water
management districts. We believe creating legislative committees in both the House and Senate
will provide needed o ersight and increase accountability. Oversight committees would give the
Legislature a better "h ds-on" understanding of water management districts and provide citizens
with an elected-body- -the Legislature---to which they can appeal and a mechanism to ensure
needed accountability

2. SUPPORT a local sources first" policy implemented by the water management districts
that is based n the economic, environmental and technical feasibility as determined by
the affected lo al governments.

This policy basically states that local governments need to look within their own jurisdictions
for water sources first and that any "local sources first" policy implemented by the districts
MUST be based upon the economic, environmental and technical feasibility as determined by
ALL affected local governments.


VIVIAN ZARICKI JOHN P. HART
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PRESIDENT
SBROWARD


CAROL ROBERTS JOHN MANNING RUDY MALOY
PRESIDENT-ELECT IST VICE PRESIDENT 2ND VICE PRESIDENT
PALM BEACH LEE LEON


CHARLEY RICHARDS
IMMEDIATE
PAST PRESIDENT
SARASOTA


\a
ri
3




-L.


3. SUPPORT inter-basin or inter-district transfers of water among consenting affected local
governments when implemented in accordance with water management policies.

This policy simply provides guidance to the FAC staff that the Association is not against inter-
district transfers of water on a statewide basis. It goes hand-in-hand with the "local sources
first" policy and the key phrase is "among consenting local governments."

4. SUPPORT state funding for the Surface Water and Improvement Management (SWIM)
program.

As you know, the state legislature failed to fund the SWIM Program last session.
Approximately $16.5 million is needed to adequately fund this critical program. Additionally,
the FAC Growth & Environmental Planning Committee identified SWIM funding as one of its
top funding priorities.

5. SUPPORT the formation of an independent scientific peer review for the evaluation of
scientific protocols relating to water management concepts.

We support creating an "impartial" scientific peer review to evaluate the science associated with
district rules and policies. As a voluntary system, it would involve local staff and private-sector
scientists, hydrologists, etc., that understand the local conditions, as well as faculty from the
State University System and federal agencies, where appropriate. Not every district would have
to provide such a forum, but there have been instances in some areas of the state where the
"science" between district staff and local government staff have differed dramatically. This type
of forum would move the "science" to an independent evaluation when mediation is needed.
Leon County has implemented a similar voluntary system. The peer review would be appointed
jointly by the water management districts and local governments.

I have also enclosed the FAC position paper which addresses a host of water issues outlining the
Association's stance. You will note that FAC evaluated many of the same issues that have been
discussed, debated and reviewed by the Water Management District Review Commission and
in the House Select Committee on Water Policy.

I look forward to discussing FAC's water policy positions with you in the near future. Hope you
and your family have a safe, happy holiday and a joyous New Year.

Sincerely Yours,



Hebrank




i




FLOR ggao
ASSOCIA TI9 P.O. Box 549/ Tallahassee, Florida 32302
COUNT it .$ Phone: 904/224-3148 FAX 904/222-s839






FAC SELECT COMMITTEE ON WATER POLICY

Position Paper

I. Water Management Districts Governance & Oversieht

1. Counties do not believe that creating an ombudsman position within each of the five
water management districts is necessary. We believe that there are forums currently
available, such as the district advisory boards, that could be modified to enhance and
improve relationships, communication and partnerships with the districts.

2. Counties do not believe the Legislature should be required to prove the districts' annual
operating budgets. Rather, the creation of standing committees on water resources in
both the House and Senate can provide the necessary oversight of the districts' budgets.
(See recommendation #5).

3. Counties believe the composition of the governing boards should be balanced to include
district-wide (geographic) representation but do not believe the governing boards should
be restructured solely to reflect various interest groups or rural or urban interests. A
prescriptive structure would be limiting and may detract from the overall mission of the
governing boards.

4. In order to provide continuity and retain institutional knowledge, counties support
staggering the terms of board appointments so that the terms of no more than three
members of a governing board expire in one year.

,5. Counties support retaining the limitation on the length of service for board members to
'17/< two terms.

6. In order to increase accountability, counties support creating standing committees
on water resources in both the House and Senate to provide legislative oversight and
guide the districts in their budgetary and operational priorities. Oversight committees
would give the Legislature a better "hands-on" understanding of water management
districts and provide citizens with an elected-body (the Legislature) to which they can
appeal and a mechanism to ensure accountability.

1

VIVIAN ZARICKI JOHN P. HART \ CAROL ROBERTS JOHN MANNING RUDY MALOY CHARLEY RICHARDS
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PRESIDENT PRESIDENT-ELECT I 1ST VICE PRESIDENT 2ND VICE PRESIDENT IMMEDIATE
BROWARD PALM BEACH LE LEON PAST PRESIDENT
I I 1 1SARASOTA




'I I I I


7. The standing committees should provide legislative oversight on water policy, but should
not review proposed board appointees and executive directors prior to Senate
confirmation.

8. The Joint Administrative Procedures Committee (JAPC) is a more appropriate body to
review administrative rules of the districts, rather than the standing committees.

y9. Counties support retaining the current coordinating role of the Water Resources
Coordinating Council.


n1 Rulemaking by Water Management Districts


1. Counties support the formation of an "impartial" independent scientific peer review for
the evaluation of scientific protocols relating to water management concepts. Such a
system should involve county staff that understand local conditions as well as faculty
from the State University System and federal agencies where appropriate.

2. The governing boards' power to adopt administrative rules should be limited to rules
substantially related to water supply, water quality protection, flood control and natural
resource protection.

3. Counties oppose the creation of a state water commission to review and approve district
rules.

4. Counties believe mechanisms for mediation and alternative dispute resolution processes
to solve disputes between water management districts and permit applicants already exist:
informal hearings in Chapter 120.57(2), F.S.; regional planning councils dispute
resolution processes; and the Florida Environmental and Land Use Dispute Resolution
Act of 1995 (private property rights legislation). Applicants can avail themselves of
mediation processes if they so desire. If the Legislature does statutorily create another
mechanism for mediation or alternative dispute resolution, such a process should be
voluntary.


I. Functions. Responsibilities & Mission of Water Management Districts


1. The water management districts should focus on water management and water supply.
The Department of Environmental Protection should retain authority for ecosystem
management on a regional basis. However, the Department of Environmental Protection
needs to reallocate resources to effectively implement ecosystem management.









2. With respect to flood control and Water resource management, there should be increased
coordination with the water control districts under Chapter 298, Florida Statutes.

3. The water management districts should be encouraged to focus more on enhancing long-
term water supply through such means as aquifer recovery and storage both regionally
and locally.

4. The primary mission of the water management districts should be water supply and
resource planning, development and allocation and this primary mission should be
emphasized statutorily.

5. In relationship to county government, the districts role should be one of providing
technical assistance, sharing information and expertise and cost-sharing.

6. Counties believe water management districts have a viable role to play in land acquisition
and land management. However, any new statewide acquisition program must maintain
the local desires of the community and include local decision-making processes as to
which lands to acquire. For example, many communities initiated local bond
referendums in order to purchase specific tracts of land. The water management districts
must recognize these proposed acquisitions as the community's land acquisition priority.



IV. Water Plannine

1. In light of the fact that counties are in the midst of preparing their Evaluation and
Appraisal Reports and awaiting further revisions to the Intergovernmental Coordination
Element rule, counties believe that the Legislature should not impose any additional
requirements for inclusion in the local comprehensive plan at this time. This is
consistent with Recommendation #20 of the Governor's Task Force on Land Use &
Water Planning.

2. Counties support requiring the water management districts to provide a Water Resources
and Facilities Report to local governments for use in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report
process as an informational resource.

3. Counties support requiring submission of the State Water Policy rule and the Florida
Water Plan to the legislative standing committees on water resources.

4. Counties recommend that those portions of the District Water Management Plans that
have a binding effect on other entities be adopted by rule.

5. District Water Management Plans should not be allowed to require local expenditures in
order to assure availability of water.




i ] I i L




6. Counties do not accept the premise that the water management districts' data is "the best
available data" on comprehensive planning water-related issues.


7. Counties believe that implementation of a statewide water use fee is premature at this
time. The state must have a plan prior to implementing such a fee system in order to
clearly identify what is being financed and to achieve a dollar-to-dollar benefit for such
a fee. Instead, counties believe that the state needs to better manage and maximize
existing resources.

8. Counties believe that the water management districts should issue the longest duration
consumptive use permits possible, considering economic factors as well as water resource
and natural resource protection. Longer permit duration will provide higher bond ratings
and more certainty for those local governments that utilize the bond process to finance
water supply projects/infrastructure and will better coincide with the planning horizons
included in the local comprehensive plans.

9. Inter-basin or inter-district transfers of water should occur between consenting affected
local governments when implemented in accordance with water management policies.
10. Any "local sources first" policy implemented by the water management districts should
be based on the economic, environmental and technical feasibility as determined by the
affected local government.

11. Counties recognize water reuse as one water conservation tool, not the panacea for all
the water woes.

12. The Environmental Regulation Commission should retain responsibility and authority for
establishing the state's water quality standards.

13. Counties support requiring the water management districts to annually prepare a priority
list and a scheduled five-year plan for establishing minimum flows and levels.

14. Counties support state funding for the Surface Water and Improvement Management
(SWIM) program.









FLORip, A m
ASSOCIATISjN EV
E COUNTIESi n,
E~m d


P.O. Box 549/ Tallahassee, Florida 32302
Phone: 904/224-3148 FAX. 904/222-5839


FAC SELECT COMMITTEE ON WATER POLICY

Commissioner Gary Bartell, Co-Chair
Commissioner Steve Seibert, Co-Chair



SUPPORT the Legislature creating standing committees on water resources in both the
House and Senate to provide legislative oversight and guide the water management
districts in their budgetary and operational priorities.

SUPPORT a "local sources first" policy implemented by the water management districts
that is based on the economic, environmental and technical feasibility as determined by
the affected local governments.

SUPPORT inter-basin or inter-district transfers of water among consenting affected local
governments when implemented in accordance with water management policies.

SUPPORT state funding for the Surface Water and Improvement Management (SWIM)
program.

SUPPORT the formation of an independent scientific peer review for the evaluation of
scientific protocols relating to water management concepts.


VIVIAN ZARICKI JOHN P. HART
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PRESIDENT
I BROWARD


CAROL ROBERTS JOHN MANNING RUDYMALOY CHARLEY RICHARDS
PRESIDENT-ELECT IST VICE PRESIDENT 2ND VICE PRESIDENT IMMEDIATE
PALM BEACH LEE LEON PAST PRESIDENT
I I I SARASOTA


. ?




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