Title: Letter: Proposed Revisions to Chapter 40 D-2 and 40 D-8, FAC
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00002290/00001
 Material Information
Title: Letter: Proposed Revisions to Chapter 40 D-2 and 40 D-8, FAC
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Letter: Proposed Revisions to Chapter 40 D-2 and 40 D-8, FAC, Dec 21, 1994, To: Karen Lloyd From: Mary Helen Blakeslee
General Note: Box 10, Folder 14 ( SF-Water Use Caution Areas-SWFWMD - 1993-1994 ), Item 5
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00002290
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






' STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Division of Economic Development


December 21, 1994


Ms. Karen Uoyd, Esquire 27 4
Southwest Florida O FFCE OF
Water Management District GENFERAL COUNSEL
2379 Broad Street (U.S. 41 South)
Brooksvile Florida 34609-6899


RE: Proposed revisions to Chapter 40D-2 and 40D-8, F.A.C.


Dear Ms. Uoyd,

The Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Economic Development,

issues this response to the Southwest Florida Water Management Districts (District)

rule pertaining o water use referenced above and its accompanying economic impact

statement.

The Department of Commerce (Department) agrees with the District that small

business within the District's jurisdiction will be affected by implementation of the

proposed Chapter 400 amendments. The Florida Statutes require each rulwnemaking

agency to consider the impact of such a proposed action on small businesses as

defined in Section 288.703 and, whenever possible, to tier the rule to reduce

disproportionate impacts on small business and to avoid regulating businsses which

do not contribute significantly to the problem the rule is designed to regulate.



SDms u Ecoomic d M Picue Trn TieCoiKl
Offia Ams Analysi Developme adTelevision Tie and
90S44w3300 90U44-9M57 90V4187-2568 9W0Q48.9360 94W87-1100 DelomtS
90S484-124


COLLINS BUIDNG TALLAHASSEE. FLORIDA 32389-2000


FAX 904/487-1407





0 0

Ms. Karen Uoyd
December 21, 1994
Page 2


Section 120.54(2)(a), Florida Statutes.

For several reasons, the Department does not believe the District has

completed the above requirement. First, the definition of small business used by the

District in its economic impact statement is no longer accurate. The Florida Small and

Minority Business Assistance Act (288.703 F.S.), was amended by the 1994

Legislature to define a small business as:

"an independently owned and operated business which employs 100 or
fewer permanent full-time employees, and that together with its affiliates,
has a net worth of not more than $3 million, and an average net income
after federal income tax, excluding any carryover losses, for the
preceding two(2) years of not more than $2 million "

This definition differs substantially from the definition of small business used in

the District's economic impact statement. Therefore, the Department believes that the

District did not consider the actual number of small businesses affected by the

proposed rule change.

In addition, the Department does not believe the impact of the rule amendment

on small businesses was fully considered. The first sentence of section five of the

environmental impact statement reads: "This section identifies specific rule revisions
which may cause disproportional financial impacts to small businesses relative to

larger businesses." Environmental Impact Statement at 5-1. The problem here is the
interpretation of the word "impact" The District has determined that the "impact" of the

rule means regulations disproportionately leveled on small businesses relative to larger




,j I


C Ms. Karen Uoyd
December 21, 1994
Page 3



businesses. For example, the District would interpret the requirement of a hydrolic

analysis as having no "impact" on small businesses, because the requirement is

uniformly applied to all businesses. The Department can find no basis for the District's

definition. We interpret "impact" to mean the overall effect the amended rule will have

on a small business' ability to continue profitable operations. For example, we believe

the hydrolic analysis requirement will have a significant impact on small business

because such businesses are rarely in a position to absorb substantial new or

additional operating expenses. The economic impact statement reads: "As with any

regulation or market factor which decreases reveues or increases costs large farms

enjoying economies of scale are often in a better position to reorganize operations to

minimize financial impacts." E.I.S. at 5-4. Clearly, the proposed amended rule will not

affect small and large businesses equally. The effect of the proposed rule change

would be far greater on small business concerns.

The purpose of Florida Statute Section 120.54(2)(a) is to prevent regulation

which forces small businesses to operate at a significant disadvantage. The economic

impact statement provided by the District is vague in reference to how many small

businesses wil be just so affected. The Deparment, therefore, has significant

concerns about a rule amendment that leaves large numbers of small businesses

unable to either "reorganize to minimize financial impact," or endure the rule

F amendment impact at all.





0 0


Ms. Karen Uoyd
December 21, 1994
Page 4


A question also remains as to whether the small businesses within the District
contribute significantly to the problem the amended rule is designed to regulate. This
issue is not addressed in section five of the economic impact statement. Additional
information concerning this question would be helpful.
Therefore, in light of the facts and questions, the Department proposes that the
District exempt small businesses from the requirements of the proposed amended rule
as those requirements differ from the current rule. This is determined necessary
because of the disproportional impact the new amendment will have on small
businesses within the Dstrs jurisdiction Flling that, the Dstrict should devise a tier
system within the amended rule to serve as a shelter for businesses not enjoying
"economies of scale."

We hope you will seriously consider our above mentioned concerns and
recommendations regarding the impact this rule amendment will have on the small
businesses of your jurisdiction.

Sincerely,


Mary Helen Blakeslee, Chief
Bureau of Business Assistance




0


I




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