TO: \LD R. FEASTER, Executive Direda(t
FROM: E. D. VERGARA, Director,Dept. Interagency Coordination
RE: Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting held 8/22/77
regarding the Water Element of the State Comprehensive Plan
1. The 27-page summary (attached-exhibit A) is to be reduced even
further and may become the element itself. The PAC is concerned no
one is going to read it and suggested a 2-page Executive Summary. I
am concerned that the 1-inch thick packet of explanation to accompany
the policies has not been reviewed or signed off by the PAC. The DSP
staff is supposed to modify this additional material to assure it doesn't
conflict with the policies adopted by the PAC but they've demonstrated
an inability to fully understand all the concerns of the PAC and I doubt
they would have the time or good faith to do it properly.
I recommend we draft a letter to Whitfield stating that the explanatory
material should be dropped. Our planning staff is reviewing it now.
2. The public hearings on the Water Element and several other elements
are to begin on September 15. There will not be another PAC meeting until
after the Hearings and a summary of comments has been sent to members of
Several "Policies" were deleted at the meeting. yesterday and some were
rejected until better wording can be devised. Included as one to be
revised is the one pertaining to importation of water. We suggested
the following which was modified slightly and generally accepted:
"All regions should utilize local water resources to the greatest
degree that is economically and environmentally feasible before
considering the importation of more distant water resources.
The importation of water to provide for new development should be
discouraged. As a last resort it should not be allowed until:
1) A comprehensive water conservation, reuse and management
program has been initiated in the area of need and a need still exists.
2) A complete analysis of environmental and other impacts has been
3) A comprehensive investigation to determine all cost and benefits
has been conducted.
4) An equitable sys 1g ,4fcost and benefit allocation has been
developed among the/parlees.'
It should be pointed out that none of the actions taken by the PAC at
yesterday's meeting will be included in the hearings because the policies,
wording, explanations, etc., have been printed and distributed (2,000)
based upon changes made at the July 11 meeting. There will be a
statement at the hearing, however, pointing out which ones have been
i I ii 1 ~I ~I
Donald R. Feaster
deleted and/or are being revised (don't ask me how this affects the legality
of the hearings!)
Wodraska (SFWMD) pointed out that it should be clear that the PAC has
not signed off on the water element and that PAC acceptance of a policy
does not mean individual members of the Committee or the organizations
they represent necessarily approve any specific policy.
I think this is another item that should be mentioned in the same letter
recommended above because certainly we should have the same concerns.
3. Once again the PAC didn't get to discuss the last section~entitled
"Legal and Administrative Policy" and "Water Resource Project Evaluation Policy."
I suggest Buddy should be requested to review and comment upon them.
Casey Gluckman provided a substitute for the "Legal" Policy (attached-
Exhibit B) which should be reviewed carefully; and, Chuck Littlejohn
said that he wanted to provide some changes to the policy pertaining to
water resource projects. His proposal is supposed to be mailed to the
PAC members by DSP upon receipt.
I suggest we comment in our letter that we're looking forward to
receiving copies for review.
4. Asa point of interest Dean Maloney in response to a question,
commented that since the legislature has mandated that the Comprehensive
Plan be put before it, he's not sure what status this will give the plan
if it is approved as far as the legal requirement for agencies to
implement its policies! If it conflicts with existing statutes, he's
not sure which will have precedence over the other.
DSP is to provide a tabulation of sorts showing which policies are
complemented, which ones conflict and which ones are not addressed by
If you have any questions regarding the status of the Water Element,
please advise. Suggest the Chairman be advised because in actuality,
it's you and he who are the PAC members from SWFWMD.
cc: J. B. Butler
C. E. Palmer
August 23, 1977
't)i:II LrML. -. -------.--_-.
LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE 0
1. Retain water quality and water quantity regulatory authority in
-one oversight agency of statewide jurisdictions.
-Good means to accomplish many of the policies of the element.
2. Adopt statutes and rules insuring non-degradation of waters of
the state and encouraging enhancement of water quality of
.A basic regulatory tool to accomplish many of the policies in
3. Enact statutes providing special protection for state and na-
tional resource waters.
-Examples of waters needing such protection are aquatic preserves,
-wild and scenic rivers, waters related to natural resource Areas
of Critical State Concern and Environmentally Endangered Lands,
-potable water supplies and other specially designated water
4. Prohibit self-permitting.
Agencies or authorities which build structures, withdraw large
quantities of water, perform dredge and fill activities, or
-other similar activities should not have water quantity or water
--quality permitting authority because of the inherent and un-
avoidable conflict of interest.
5. Agencies regulating water quantity should adopt rules to regu-
late withdrawals of surfact and ground waters.
Agency rules should be adopted to implement the policies of this
element, ensuring that orderly social and economic uses are
permitted while insuring the greatest possible protection to
-water supply sources.
6. Each water management district should adopt rules on consumptive
-use of water which are as compatible as possible with those of
-other water management districts.
Recognize interregional connection of water supplies.
Recognizing the special problems and hydrological conditions of
certain discrete areas, the broad rules should still be
Avoid conflicting rules which cause confusion to applicants and
conflict for interregional projects.
7. Encourage co-ordination of the various planning efforts so that
..water quality and quantity regulatory plans are compatible,
State and regional agencies and local governments should mae .
every effort to integrate all planning activities so that the
various plans will be compatible with each other. Current
planning activities should be co-ordinated through informal
arrangements, interagency agreements and special coordinators.
Future legislation should include means for assuring such integ-
ration of planning processes.
8. Develop a clearer test of "reasonable and beneficial use."
9. Local governments should adopt floodplain zoning or other regu-
latory mechanisms to give special protection to floodplains and
10. Local sponsors of proposed federal public works projects should
hold public meetings on proposals before requests are submitted.
Rapidly changing scientific knowledge and public policy suggest
that public participation in decisions to spend large sums on
public works projects is essential. Traditional energy intensive,
structural solutions to water problems are generally incompatible
with the policies set forth in this element. Such "works" pro-
jects should be approved only after intensive public and expert