BALANCING AND PRIORITIZATION ISSUES
FOR THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
REVIEW COMMISSION DISCUSSIONS IN
TAMPA, FLORIDA, OCTOBER 20, 1995



A. What should be the districts' primary functions? Water supply, flood control,
environmental permitting, aquatic weed control, land acquisition-planning-
management? How should those responsibilities be prioritized?








B. Should ambitious environmental restoration projects be subject to the same criteria
and compete with the other water users, after the science behind the projects has
been peer-reviewed and the benefits clearly identified?








C. How should the water be allocated among competing uses, i.e. between
existing/renewing holders of consumptive user permits versus new applicants?
Does the existing/renewing user have any priority whatsoever? If so, of what
degree? What mustthe new, competing applicant show to be a-more "reasonable,
beneficial use" than the existing/renewing user?


I









Recommendation E.2.:


District Responsibilities: Statutory Clarification


Background:

Section 373.023 sets forth the "Scope and Application" of the
Chapter 373, the Water Resource Act. The Section currently
provides that, with certain exceptions: (i) all waters of the
state are subject to Chapter 373; (ii) state and local water-
related regulations must be filed with the department before
becoming effective; and (c) any entity with the power of
eminent domain must notify the department or Governing Board
before exercising that power. It contains no statement as to
the scope or application of the various purposes for which
Chapter 373-is to be applied.

Recommendation:

Amend S 373.023 to add a new subsection to read:

All waters managed or regulated pursuant to this Chapter
shall be managed for balanced resource use and include
considerations of water supply. the environment, water
quality protection, and flood protection. Activities
conducted pursuant to the authority of this: hatear ast
be directly and substantially related to water supply,
water quality protection or flood protection.


Action Required for (choose all appropriate):

Districts
DEP
Governor's Office
Legislature


Recommended by:

Terry Lewis/Steve Walker
Fritz Stein
Commissioner Crawford
Water Management Institute


I









Action Required for (choose all appropriate):

Districts
DEP
Governor's Office
Legislature


Recommended by:

Terry Lewis/Steve Walker


I








Action Required for (choose all appropriate):

Districts
DEP
Governor's Office
Legislature


Recommended by:

Terry Lewis/Steve Walker
Commissioner Crawford submitted a similar recommendation









Proposed Recommendation H.l.d.(1):

Require Consideration of Business and Local Economy

Background:

Florida Citrus Mutual states that the establishment of minimum
flows and levels should not be initiated without concern for
the impact to existing businesses and the local economy. One
adverse impact they predict is the dramatic decrease in the
value of certain agriculturally-zoned lands, resulting from
increased cost of permit compliance and reductions in
available water supply. They believe that minimum lake levels
must be established conservatively with the realization that
in certain areas total restoration to redevelopment levels is
unachievable.


Recommendation:

Require that minimum flows and levels be adopted according to
a prescribed order of priority, with consideration of the
impact to existing businesses and the local economy.


Action Required for (choose all appropriate)o

Districts
DEP
Governor's Office
Legislature


Recommended by:

Florida Citrus Mutual


a