CKMUV I. "lSm
-- -- -- -- -- --
.i L\MUiT SILOuA :NAI conIt "
.'0 144o 4 o r. Ita* I EIOUCr
I- .S OCALA.4oaS"-oA lt IILALII AMU RUIAIWUATIVI SEVCEI
V.pz y. IUDICIARVCRIMINAL
SENATOR KENNETH N. MaAY
TO: Interested Parties. :
FRO : K. H. MacKay, Jr.-.
RB: Referendum on ad valorem funding for water;
Pursuant to various requests, I am attempting to
set forth in detail my position on the pending referendum
concerning ad valorem tax funding for water management
districts. My concerns, and a brief rationale, for each
of them, is set forth below.
.7 I see Florida's future pretty much as outlined in
the studies which have been made over the last two or three
years. My recollection is that some 75% of Florida's popu-
lation is now located in the densely populated fringe along
Florida's coast, and that within another ten years, these
areas will also contain the vast majority of the new people
who can be expected to move to Florida. This continued
crowding into a small area is already putting a severe strain
on the natural systems in our coastal areas, and it is fore-
seeable that.the situation will be greatly aggravated if
present trends continue. The focal point of the stress will
be the lack of sufficient water, and thus the efforts (and
costs) of watar management will become increasingly critical.
My first concern has to do with the relationshiL between
(-/the aer manaement districtsC a the oeP anies with
reHspaons niilty por. onot eSlnve that the
management of water can properly be considered as a separate
issue from the management of our other natural and man built.
resources. I do not believe the implementation of any long-
term comprehensive plan should be considered separately
from the funding of water management districts, as I
perceive all of this as part of the total problem.
My approach would be to require each lanning cor-
munity to live i its a a or to l1enI y
Sa ble and wvling to support the cost of exceeding
these limitations. Indeed, any comprehensive plan that
does not address these elements will ultimately be
S counter-productive to the long-terp economic survival
S of the county, or area, an4 its collective urban and
The various pieces of planning legislation passed by
S the Florida Legislature during recent years have been
excellent. Indeed, we are as far along as any jurisdiction
of which I am aware. A major shortcoming exists, how-
ever, in the lack of any meaningful provision for coordination
between planning entities. Nowhere is this more apparent
Than in water management.
Our existing statutes make little or no provision for
coordination between the water management districts and
regional planning councils. One example is the D.R.I.
process, where the water management districts are not
.even involved. Thus they legitimately argue that they
are not consulted when development decisions are made, and
S should not be held accountable for the results. In fact,
Given the ill-defined roles of regional and state planning.
agencies, it is difficult to see how anyone can fairly be
held accountable for the results.
' Another aspect of the coordination issue is the co-
ordination of policy between the water management districts.
An example is the creation of separate river basin boards
within'the boundaries of water management district, with
differing levels of taxation in the different river basins.
This policy is authorized by statute, and is in effect in
SMPHD. In the P.C.D., however, river basin boards have not
`'" -I ii .ur--~- --.i~