Title: Proposed Topics 11/22/1977 and Attached Letter
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00002755/00001
 Material Information
Title: Proposed Topics 11/22/1977 and Attached Letter
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Proposed Topics 11/22/1977 and Attached Letter
General Note: Box 10, Folder 26 ( SF WMD Quarterly Meetings VOL III - 1979-1991 ), Item 114
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00002755
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


I. Task Force
A. WMD funding
1. Land acquisition
2. Operations
3. Construction
a. local
b. federal
B. State holding title to lands purchased with state dollars.
C. Water Supply Authorities
D. Relationship with DER
2. Performance Audit -
3. Changes to WMD boundary s C 7 A
4. Consumptive Use Permitting
5. Role of WMD's in water quality regulation
6. Artificial recharge/deep well injection ) l/ -'A V"f
7. Uniformity of rules pAF c~d -'A
'7 8. Coastal Zone Management
/ '. ^y --
S9. Relationship with RPC's Re CUP's
10. Sunshine Law
11. Financial Disclosure
^ 12. Power Plant Siting
13. State Water Use Plan/Water Element
14. Liaison between WMD's wf ~ r' "
15. Annual Water Management Conference t V
16. Interbasin transfers

1-7. LQt^ ^^^--



li.l -I .. a I


I. WMD funding
--Requests by WMDs will be made under three separate categories; operations,
land acquisition and construction.
--The requests will be forwarded intact to the Governor's office but ER may
make recommendations as they see fit. fd i c to tte m',atB
--The Governor's recommendations relative to the WMDs will be segregated from
DER's budget.
A. Land Acquisition -- Will be continued but will be justified by relating
to water quality. -A J^)
B. Operations -- To be continued due to need by newer Districts. Older
Districts need not request.
C. 11 be continued, but all new authorizations will require
nefit or justification. -7A A )
--All local projects will continue to be funded by ad alorem taxes.
--The two federal projects (FRB & South Florida) will continue to
Receive state funding but only if they can be phased out over a
specified period (5 years was discussed). Both SWFWMD and SFWMD
indicated the projects were winding down and could be "wrapped
up" following realistic evaluation of those portions likely to be
deleted. I 4 .
2. State old ng title to lands purchased with sate dollars.
-7 It was agreed that the state (trustees) should have final approval for selling
surplus land, but that the title to property purchased with state funds by
the WMDs would remain with the WMDs.
3. Water Supply Authorities
All more or less agreed there were significant problems. Mr. McAteer and
Don Morgan.were to summarize problems by letter to Whitfield. (D. S. McAteer's
4. WMD relationship with DER discussed:
--Quarterly meetings are needed and wanted by the WMDs.
--DER's "general supervisory" authority over the WMDs needs clarification e.g.
_- coordination versus integration.
--Interest by DER in WMD budgets (legislative and reporting requirements) is
related to its reporting requirements to the Auditor General and is not based
upon other ulterior motives.
--No specific legislation was proposed.

A1 ._.- Jll .L.itL


Page 2

--DER "Report to legislature" March:1, 1977 mentions "organizational
merger by Chapter 20, FS, of DER and W~D functions related to water
resources," (pp 22 & 23); and, "consolidation of water resources
management responsibilities." Representatives of DER didn't seem
to be familiar with the report.

EDV:ml s

a I Iu ii

tSoutlhtrest Florida
SWater WManagenmeznt District
I PHONE (904) 796-7211
D uNiL MIUATURN, CahuL. bm~mp.n N. XBa00K JOIHM. Lat .ad M4L TORMSOUN, S. PWinlu
Mn*Oar UA rrN M V' (Cam.. Tam RONALD LAMbsR, Wuwcdu. LATIMr TUrv Wi. sMawm.
TOMAB VAN DU vLia .my. Yaa.u.emm NICK PHDOR.i Tam.p
I C. EIrT. Tm ,. Lamm 0abm GBORGE RUPPE. Crwamr BM PL ugu. basNiw" DBLmrw
November 17, 1977

Mr. Estus Whitfield, Senior Planner
Division of State Planning
660 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32304

RE: Water Supply Authorities

Dear Estus:

At the last meeting of the Task Force on November 15, I indicated I
would provide you with a summary of my comments relating to Water Supply
Authorities. It is important that this not be considered an official
statement adopted by the Governing Board of the Southwest Florida Water
Management District. My comments are based upon my own observations and
discussion with a number of individuals and are offered to the Task
Force for its information and whatever action it feels may be appropriate.


The original rationale for the water supply authority concept includes:

a. Economy of scale.

b. Preventing overdevelopment (dispersed withdrawals).

c. Improving capability to balance water demand with availability.

d. Reducing friction between local/county systems.

e. Preventing large investments for duplicate facilities.

It was also felt that each member government should have a representative
on the authority board and that the authority should be self-supporting
through revenues received from the sale of water.

Currently, there are two authorities--the West Coast Regional Water
Supply Authority (WCRWSA) covering the area of Pinellas, Hillsborough
and Pasco Counties; and, the Withlacoochee Regional Water Supply Authority
(WRWSA) covering Marion, Levy, Citrus, Hernando and Sumter Counties.

J ii 1 i L ..-- L -J L

Mr. Estus Whitfield Page 2
RE: Water Supply Authorities November 17, 1977
It's now my understanding a third is being proposed that will include
counties primarily within the Suwannee River drainage basin.
When new concepts are cemented into law, problematic situations almost
always occur that are not and perhaps could not be foreseen at the
time of adoption. Below are several observations resulting from the
legislation that allows the formation of water supply authorities:
A. Boundaries
1. Existing authority boundaries follow county lines.
With the state's current interest in watershed basins
and the philosophical issue related to interbasin transfers
of water, it may be more appropriate to have authority
boundaries conform more closely to major drainage basins,
or at least along lines that are more hydrologically homo-
geneous. The WRWSA, for example, crosses the three major
drainage basins of the Suwannee, Withlacoochee and St.
Johns Rivers.

2. An authority should, from its inception, include enough
area to insure there is adequate sources to meet its projected
demands well into the future. It's obvious from recent events
that if an authority moves to.develop a supply outside its own
jurisdiction, there will likely be many philosophical, political
and legal ramifications. The WCRWSA is already investigating
sources outside its boundary.

3. The authorized area of the WRWSA includes portions of three
water management districts. This could cause major conflicts
between the Districts and the authority as each attempt to
carry out their respective responsibilities.

B. Funding
When approval for the formation of a water supply authority is
given it should be clearly understood that the authority will need
a certain amount of funds before it can become operational. Ad
valorem taxing, sales contributions from member governments and
legislative grants or loans are all possibilities for funding a
water supply authority. The requirement for a water management
district to levy a tax for the authority if requested is an
inappropriate use of that. district's taxing authority.
C. Purpose
The first water supply authority was formed to end a so-called
water war by creating an agency with the responsibility to meet
demands. The second authority was formed, according to statements
from member governments made on numerous occasions to the press

I I.

. r "

Mr. Estus Whitfield Page 3
RE: Water Supply Authorities November 17, 1977

in order to "protect" that area's water resources. One was formed within an
urbanized area to facilitate the availability of supplies while the other
was formed by a generally rural area to prevent and/or control distribution
to other areas. These apparently conflicting purposes indicate confusion
over the supply function of authorities and the regulatory function of water
management districts.
D. Approval and appellate processes
Currently, the authority to approve the formation of authorities
has been transferred from the Governor and Cabinet to the Secretary
of the Department of Environmental Regulation. This came about
incidently rather than intentionally by the 1975 Reorganization
Act and clarification by the legislature as to its intent would be
E. Board Make-Up
Attached is a progress report by the West Coast Regional Water
Supply Authority which indicates some of the situations that can
occur when authority board is comprised of officials elected to
positions other than the authority board and which also may merit
legislative attention.
Very truly yours,

Chairman, Governing Board
cc: Governing Board
General Henry Lane, Chairman, NWFIWM
Ken Woodburn, Governor's office
James Ward, Department of Administration
Bill McCartney, NWFWD
Don Morgan, SRWMD
Jack Maloy, SFWMD
John Wodraska, SFMMD
Fred Rouse, SJRWMD
Jim Lewis, DER
Jack Merriam, DER

c Dr L

B^ 1
jLa^S-^, 3<^Y<~rr^Lm\^

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