Title: Resource Management Task Force Final Report to Governor Bob Graham
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004163/00001
 Material Information
Title: Resource Management Task Force Final Report to Governor Bob Graham
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Resource Management Task Force Final Report to Governor Bob Graham (JDV Box 43)
General Note: Box 18, Folder 2 ( Water Management - 1977-1983 ), Item 5
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004163
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

...-- -..' -~-.~C S. c~ r

I -

.- t -. *I


~~tip' v.-

i-c -.4 ;1- ~

.tJ-. "O

S4 5~;~QiLY~ I~~I *

0ju~ Lr


.. Final ReprtoernGrha

C. .

,. Section One

SAn Integrated Policy Framework for Land and Water Management


1. Comprehensive resource management policies are prerequisite to the

effective management of land and water resources at all levels of govern-

ment. Activities of the various resource management agencies need a

clear direction within an integrated policy framework that promotes con-

sistency between government agencies.

'2. The state should formally adopt state resource management policies

":-. that concisely express policy direction for the management of state

resources and the inherent problems of growth. These policies should

have the necessary legal effect of guiding state agency activities,

including planning, research, regulation and service delivery, toward

... a common set of goals. They should also guide the policies and activi-

ties of regional and local agencies insofar as these activities affect

state resources. Specific state goals should include, but not be

limited to a state water policy, coastal management policy, and agri-

cultural lands policy, as described in later recommendations in this


3. Florida's regional planning councils should formally adopt by rule

.... comprehensive regional resource management policies which are a concise

statement of policy direction for the management of regional resources.

They should be more detailed than state policies, but not as site


-* -. .'.' -3l

specific as a local comprehensive plan. Regional policies should be

consistent with state policies, and be certified as such by the state

planning agency.

.... 4. Local government comprehensive planning is currently the basic tool

for growth management in Florida. The hopes and aspirations which led

to the passage of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of

1975 have not been achieved. It is vital that local government compre-

hensive planning be improved and integrated with other state and regional

resource management. After the adoption of state and regional resource

management policies, and when the required five year review of local

government comprehensive plans occurs, local .comprehensive plans should

be certified by both the region and the state for local conformance to

.. --"'~. state and regional policies. Subsequent local government plan amendments

should also be so certified. This should not change already-approved

development decisions made by local governments.

5. In order to encourage local governments to prepare, update, and

implement their comprehensive plans promptly and acceptably, a broad

system of workable incentives should be available, and a system of dis-

incentives should be developed and invoked where there is prolonged

delay and/or non-compliance. Incentives should include both technical

assistance and financial assistance that assists effective performance

by local governments.

Explanation of Intent

The intent of these recommendations is to provide a resource

management policy framework to guide and coordinate the decisions of

'e ":(

~"' "'

----- "C-

:.^ c~~j~c- ^^-, ,: .-.-..-

the various state, regional and local resource managers. The policy

framework should be different than the present state and regional plan-
. ,.-- ...
ning efforts in three important ways. First, policies should have more
- -'
than advisory effect over the planning and activities of other agencies;

rather, these agencies should be made to conform to state policies in

their state-related activities. Second, policies should be concise and

easily understood, while being broad in scope. A detailed planning docu-

ment is not envisioned. Third, the policies, once adopted, would be the

`-, -.3 basis for state and regional certification of local government comprehen-

'"--. sive plans in their state and regional implications.

Policies developed by different management levels should fit, or

-. "nest" together in an integrated way. State policy would guide the

development of regional policies, which in turn would guide the five-year

review and certification of local comprehensive plans. At the same time,

each level of policy making should primarily attend to the management of

resources at that level. Thus, state policy should be concerned with

resources that are of state importance, and with resolving inter-regional

conflicts. Regional policies should be concerned with regional resources

and should conform to state policy in aspects of greater-than-regional

interest. They should also not infringe on issues that are of purely

local interest. Regional policies should become the standards by which

applications of Developments of Regional Impact are reviewed by regional

agencies. Local plans would be reviewed and certified by regional and

state planning agencies only in their respective regional and state



- ^ ^ ^ "'' ....-.-, --*** -.

Because the policies are to have legal effect, they should be

developed with maximum participation of those who will be affected by

the policies, including citizens, all government agencies, and particu-

4, larly affected groups. The particular vehicle for adoption of state

,- policy could be the legislature, the Administration Commission, the

Governor, the state land planning agency, or whatever vehicle achieves

the intent of the recommendation in the most timely and effective way.

The regional policies should be adopted by the regional planning councils.

It is vitally important that the quality of local government com-

-; prehensive planning be improved. Local governments are vested with

primary responsibility for development decisions and other decisions

that affect community resources. The state should increase its effort

...- .to provide technical and financial assistance to local governments in

their planning and implementation efforts. This assistance should be

Based on the performance of local governments, while recognizing the

responsibility of local governments to plan effectively regardless of

state assistance.

The state should also initiate a serious new effort to review

and approve local plans for their conformance to state and regional

policies. This will require the immediate development of state and

regional policies. After those policies are adopted, by a target date

of 1984, local plans should begin to be certified. A certified plan

should carry great weight in state and regional decisions, including

priority in the use of state and regional funds. However, it is not

the intent of this recommendation to alter local government approvals

made under existing local plans in effect prior to the proposed

-^ ---

r -

. ... 4.. ..-.-- o-. ... .-- .,-* ..--..


An integrated policy framework is key to tt

existing management tools in Florida, and underlie

'Force recommendations that follow. For this areas(

of all the recommendations.

ie successful use of

es all of the Task

)n, it is placed first




...,.. *~

II-- -

-_7 *1" j
" -..'* -:..". ... .- -

Section Two

S-- Regional Resource Managemenl
*" y ^




,* -.~


1. The regional diversity of the state of Florida makes effective re-

source management a necessity, and not a luxury to the state. Regional

resources do not respect local or political boundaries, and thus cannot

be effectively managed solely at a local level. At the same time, cen-

tralized management at the state level cannot always provide for the

significant natural and social diversity found in different regions of

the state. Regional management can accommodate the diversity throughout

the state and bring management closer to the people who use and enjoy

the resources. There now exists a fragmented regional level of resource

management, but this management effort needs to be coordinated and the

ability of regional agencies to manage regional resources needs to be


2. Regional planning councils should be strengthened in two important

ways. Regional policies, as described in Section One, should be developed

to have more than advisory effect on issues of regional resource manage-

ment. Second, regional planning councils should be restructured by:

1) reviewing the existing boundaries of regional planning

councils and fixing them in a logical pattern;

2) mandating county membership in the regional planning

council encompassing the county, and encouraging other

local government participation;




,~- .-.i

C. -.
* '.":. .^-*.'*. '," -:', : "*-* "A "-'* < :-. =..-.'.i. .. :. "-. .

3) basing voter participation by the members of regional

.-:-..:-- planning councils on a proportional formula;

4) including a less-than-majority of the regional planning

council to be appointed by the Governor;

5) increasing state funding.

If the constitutional restriction on dual office holding is held to

apply, local government membership on the council should be appointed

by elected officials of the member governments.

-q'i: 3. Developments of Regional Impact review responsibilities should be

retained in the strengthened regional planning council. However, in

the event that, within a reasonable period of time, the legislative

session fails to act to strengthen the regional planning council as

recommended, then the Governor should consider designating another

-. regional agency as the reviewing agency.

4. The Task Force recommends to the Governor that, to the greatest

i-* l* i f rJ ulJaJtion of ofth water quait7 and7

extent poss leU, plan" ng or bot wat anr quait an

water quantity be consolidated at the regional or district level. This

process should continue on a selective basis, with delegation occurring

under standards and guidelines established by the state, to those

regional or district agencies which have or can develop the financial

and technical capabilities to carry out both functions. Selected water

quality functions that can most expeditiously be consolidated with

water quantity functions should be delegated consistent with federal

and state law. A five year target date should be established for

regions or districts to assume these appropriate functions.

yl (
-~ C"-


I* -
. .
, ~ "' ,-
$ : .7 ..j- k :_





r. '~-

However, where water management districts construct, operate or

maintain works affecting the quality and quantity of state waters, such

activities should be regulated by the Florida Department of Environ-

mental Regulation under rules adopted by the Environmental Regulation

Commission. Likewise, the DER and ERC should retain power to establish

statewide quality standards, and should exercise oversight of the water

management district activities to assure needed consistency with state

planning and standards in the operation of the water management districts.

(See also Section Four.)

5. A long range goal of the state should be the consolidation of the

many regional agencies into one regional land and water resource manage-

ment agency. This regional agency should be responsible for planning,

regulation, and the delivery of services in those limited issues and

service problems that require regional solutions. The Task Force recom-

mends that any immediate steps in strengthening regional agencies be

considered in light of this long range goal.

Explanation of Intent

The Task Force recognizes that regional agencies have an important

role in resource management and should be strengthened in their ability

to carry out that role. Where regional agencies are capable of assuming

related duties and where that assumption would eliminate administrative

duplication and provide better management, the agencies should assume

those duties.

The recognition of the vital necessity for a more effective



I ,

-._ ,... -.- .. .*. .- .

regional planning and service entity is not a call for the creation of

another level of government bureaucracy. A fragmented and largely in-

effective layer of region management already exists in Florida. Rather,

recommendations seek to coordinate and give policy direction to the

existing regional management agencies.

The recommendations include the strengthening of regional plan-

S. ning councils to enable the councils to assume a greater responsibility

in developing regional policies, providing regional services, and re-

viewing developments of regional impact. Regional planning councils

are presently the only agencies that plan for and review a wide range

"" of resource management activities, and therefore refre e appropriate lead

agencies for regional policy development. However, the present struc-

ture of the councils does not adequately encourage a regional perspec-

-- tive by members. If councils are to be more than advisory agencies

Son regional matters, the regional perspective must be built into the

structure of the councils. Thus, membership by counties should be

mandatory, not voluntary, and regional boundaries should be fixed in

a logical pattern. Gubernatorial appointment of a minority of council

officers can encourage service by persons with regional, rather than

local, constituencies. To assume a greater role, the councils must

receive greater financial support.

It is felt by the Task Force that the review of developments of

regional impact could significantly be improved in a strengthened

regional planning council. However, if councils are not so strengthened,

the Task Force is not totally satisfied with the ability of presently



\~ '' ~r

411 -~ ~Y









constituted regional planning councils to retain review responsibility.

Therefore, consideration should be given to an alternate agency if

councils cannot be strengthened in the near future.

Careful consolidation of water quality and quantity functions

in a single regional agency in each region is a specific recommendation

for using the regional agency to its best advantage in integrating

resource management. The recommendation does not single out either

water management districts or regional offices of the Department of

Environmental Regulation as the most appropriate agencies for this

consolidation. This is because these agencies show different strengths

in each region of the state. The Task Force recommends that the Governor

carefully evaluate these strengths before consolidating water quality and

quantity functions in either agency. Transfer of specific water quality

and quantity responsibilities to regional agencies should also be eval-

uated in light of legal, fiscal or administrative constraints.

In consideration of the value of regional resource management,

the Task Force recommends that a long range goal should be the establish-

ment of a single regional resource management agency. Consolidation of

functions in a single agency could facilitate the sharing of expertise,

could better integrate the related concerns of land and water management,

and could help to consolidate permitting procedures. This would also

make more efficient use of state funds. The agency could provide

regional services for the specific needs that are most efficiently

addressed at the regional level.


- r' -- -- .. --

" '


,i--, - ----~ 1-: -::-- -

Section Three

Improvements in the Developments of Regioi

nal Impact Process





-' "



--* -i

-- --1



1. The Developments of Regional Impact Process contained in Chapter 380

of the Florida Statutes is relatively effective but at times has been

unnecessarily burdensome and complicated. However, it is basically a

valuable process and should not be abandoned or replaced by other exist-

ing review or permitting processes. Rather, the process should be im-

proved to fulfill its statutory purpose and should be better integrated

with other planning and permitting to eliminate processing delays and

provide more knowledgeable review. The Task Force recommendations

build primarily upon the existing process.

2. In the immediate future, Chapter 380 should be amended to permit

more responsive revision of the guidelines and standards that determine

which developments may be considered to be of regional impact. Specifi-

cally, the legislature should statutorily define the categories of

development which may be considered developments of regional impact.

Changes in the present guidelines and standards should be made through

rule-making by the Administration Commission, with such changes to

become effective upon the conclusion of the following session of the

legislature, if not rejected by the legislature.

3. Chapter 380 should also be amended to state that guidelines and

standards adopted by rule are presumed to be determinative as to

whether a development is a DRI, and that the presumption shall be over-


come only by clear and convincing evidence.

4. New guidelines and standards should be dev

sional study for adoption by the Administratio

lines and standards should incorporate quality

into consideration the character, location, an

as well as quantitative criteria. New criteria

developments are reviewed for only regional, a

regional planning council should be permitted

.. local nature for information, but such issues

~" *- for appeal of a development order. Electrical

not be required to be reviewed as a DRI, but a

the Power Plant Siting Certification Program s

electrical transmission lines, and administer

S*'-- Environmental Regulation.

5. Both the development of state and regional

ening of regional planning councils will provi

to the Developments of Regional Impact process

an integrated policy framework as described in

1 FForce would endorse and encourage the promotion.

DRI review option. Such an option should be e.

experimental basis to test its effectiveness.

local governments to assume the responsibility

-- review of a DRI application. The regional plal

state land planning agency, would retain a rig

government development order to the Governor a.



eloped by thorough profes-

n Commission. The guide-

tive criteria, taking

d magnitude of development,

a should ensure that

nd not local, issues. The

to comment on issues of a

should not be the basis

transmission lines should

review program similar to

should be established for

d by the Department of

policies and the strength-

de significant improvement

Upon the completion of

Section One, the Task

n of a local government

established first on an

The option would permit

for administering the

nning agency, and the

ht to appeal a local

nd Cabinet.

. -..- -.-

Such an option would be available to a local government only

after it: a) incorporates state and regional resource management

policies within its adopted local government comprehensive plan; b)

adopts site-specific impact review and assessment procedures which

adequately address regional as well as local issues; c) demonstrates

that adequate staff and funds are available to administer the process;

d) develops adequate multi-jurisdictional review and appeal mechanisms;

and e) agrees to a state or regionally supervised monitoring and annual

.... certification system.

6. Other specific means for improving the DRI process which should be

adopted include (by stage of process):

.. Binding Letter Stage

a. Amend Section 380.06, F.S., to grant regional planning
agencies (RPA's) standing to intervene in binding letter
determinations made by the State Land Planning Agency.

b. Amend Section 380.06, F.S., to reduce the time during
-Y which the State Land Planning Agency must make a binding
letter determination from "60 days" to "30 days from
receipt of a sufficient application."

c. Provide information and assistance to developers
-. through prebinding letter submission conferences, infor-
mation workshops and responses to specific information

Preapplication Stage

d. Improve the DRI Application (ADA) by eliminating
requests for non-regional information, standardizing
.-. information requirements statewide, and producing a
consolidated regulatory and planning review packet for
use by developers in coordinating with other planning
and regulatory processes and initiating concurrent
project approval processing.

e. Establish procedures allowing RPAs to identify
issues as (1) local, (2) possibly regional, or (3)


.. I

clearly regional, and giving RPAs authority to waive
unnecessary information requirements for specific DRI

f. Require RPAs to develop and maintain an information
base, including application data and pertinent plans,
.-' for use by developers at their option; and to develop
procedures for assisting developers in obtaining infor-
----------' nation from other sources.

Sg. Establish mandatory preapplication conferences in
order to save time and reduce costs.

h. Establish procedures allowing developers to select
the most appropriate type of DRI review option: for
example, "regional impact only;" "regional impact and
local approvals;" "regional impact and state permits;"
or "all of the above."

Regional Review and Public Hearing Stage

i. At the option of the developer, require state,
regional and local agenices to use the DRI process as
a vehicle for coordinating planning and permitting
requirements. This includes requiring agency partici-
pation in preapplication conferences and subsequent
meetings, and establishing procedures to allow concurrent
processing of DRI, environmental permitting and other
planning/regulatory requirements.

j. At the option of the developer, require state
agencies, including water management districts to parti-
cipate in regional reviews for topics clearly within
their jurisdiction. State agency DRI review comments
should be binding on the RPA staff making the review,
and incorporated verbatim in the regional DRI report.
RPA staffs should be authorized to attach dissenting

k. At the option of the developer, require state agen-
cies to use the DRI process for permitting reviews,
where information and timing requirements are compatible;
and (2) for conceptual planning reviews, where DRI
reviews are not sufficient for permitting purposes.
At the conceptual review level, state agencies should
specify those problems that could later constitute
grounds for permit denial or a major modification of a
proposed development. A failure to identify such grounds
at the conceptual review stage should preclude the state


----------- -



- -i-.. -J~ ~r



- 4~C~

agency from raising such issues/concerns during later
permitting. This constraint should not apply when the
agency could demonstrate that adequate and accurate
information was not available at the time of review or
that conditions have changed. (See q below.)

1. Prohibit RPAs from requiring additional information
from developers after it has once been determined that
a DRI application is "sufficient for further review."

m. Develop and adopt by rule, a system for determining
and granting development credits which can be used to
counterbalance a project's negative regional impacts.

n. Local governments should continue to use zoning-type
development order hearings, but should be required to
(1) tape record hearing proceedings, making such record-
ings available for transcription at the expense of any
interested party; and (2) specify in the notice of local
development order hearing where and how DRI reports and
information can be obtained.

Development Order Stage

o. Amend Section 380.06(7), F.S., to require local
governments to complete public hearings and issue
development orders not more than 120 days from the date
the local government meets to set the public hearing,
unless the time period is extended at the developer's
request. Failure to complete this process within the
120-day time limit, or to obtain an extension, should
result in automatic approval of the project.

p. Development orders (D.O.) should specify the proce-
dures and the local government officials) responsible
for monitoring the DRI for compliance with the D.O..
D.O.s should specify the types of information to be
included in any reports required of developers. D.O.
expiration dates should be established to allow
developers a time certain to commence physical devel-
opment or otherwise comply with D.O. conditions and
phasing requirements.

q. Require all parties to review proposed D.O.s on
master Application Approvals; to ensure that anticipated
impacts have been adequately addressed and that future
review requirements for subsequent incremental applica-
tions are clearly defined. In the D.O. for master appli-
cations, specify those concepts agreed upon and those
potential problems that can result in the denial of




-- ----c~-~
~-----~ ~-

Incremental applications. Local and regional reviews of
incremental applications should be restricted to those
problems that were identified in the master application
and any development plans inconsistent with the previous
conceptual approval. Issues reviewed and approved in
both master and incremental application proceedings and
D.O.s should be considered settled and not subject to
further review in later incremental application hearings
unless either substantial changes occur in conditions
underlying the D.O., or the D.O. is shown to have been
based on inaccurate information of a substantial nature.

- "





r. Upon the developer's request, require local govern-
ments to issue the D.O. concurrently with appropriate
related local approvals (e.g., zoning) and local plan

Appeals Stage

s. After an appeal is filed, parties involved in a
D.O. dispute should be required to meet within thirty
(30) days in an effort to resolve the dispute.

t. The composition of the Florida Land and Water Adjudi-
catory Commission (Governor and Cabinet) should not be

u. The list of parties
ment development orders
present statutory four:
the state land planning

eligible to appeal local govern-
should not be expanded from the
the property owner, the developer,
agency, or the appropriate RPA.

Development Order Revision and Enforcement Stage

v. Amend Chapter 380, F.S., to clarify that the Develop-
ment Order runs with the land and is assignable in the
event of foreclosure, bankruptcy, or sale of all or part
of the property.

w. Change the "substantial deviation" determination to:

Specify by rule and in local development orders that
developers must present all proposed DRI changes to
the local government for a substantial deviation

Require that local governments make a substantial
deviation determination on any changes to an approved

... .?
; -"


.... 1

... i- .....-

,,~ ,..,


*1 '

.- L



Clarify that the local government must notify the
RPA and state land planning agency of their proposed
changes and findings when local review is completed;

Clarify that any finding regarding proposed changes
made by the local government is a D.O. subject to
appeal provisions of Section 380.07, F.S.

x. During the progress of development, improve monitoring
and enforcement of the terms of D.O.s by requiring devel-
opers to prepare brief annual reports on each DRI, indi-
cating the status of the development and any modifications
that may have occurred. The report should be submitted to
the RPA. Failure to submit the report could result in the
RPA or State Land Planning Agency calling a hearing to
require the developer to show cause as to why the report
had not been filed. Failure to show cause could result in
a temporary suspension of the D.O.

y. Amend Chapter 380, F.S., to clarify that the local
government issuing the D.O. is responsible for enforcing
its provisions, with oversight responsibility remaining
with the RPA and the State Land Planning Agency.

z. Prohibit local governments from issuing permits or
approvals or providing services if the developer fails to
act in substantial compliance with the conditions of the

Explanation of Intent

Recommendations regarding improvement of the Developments of

Regional Impact process result from a comprehensive study of the process,

assisted by developers, regional planning councils, state agencies and

local governments. The Task Force recommendations include a number of

significant administrative improvements in the DRI process. The Task

Force finds that proposed alternatives to the DRI process, such as exist-

ing state permitting or federal environmental impact statements, are

not sufficient or appropriate in themselves to accomplish the purposes

of the DRI review. Instead, internal improvements in the process are

recommended that will (1) increase education and information assistance




i t

]* I


'I I
'' I

I~ ___~___

S- --'.

for all DRI participants, (2) improve coordination and

among DRI participants and permitting agencies, clarify

and increase uniformity in the DRI process, (3) decrease

required to review and approve DRI applications and to

development orders, (4) increase the accountability of

and local governments for DRI review and approval, and

centives for developers to better use the DRI process.

improvements that can be made in the short run to build

and unique management tool.

The Task Force looks forward to a time when deve

magnitude will receive appropriate and sufficient review

approval at the local level. It is believed that local

comprehensive plans that adequately address regional an

might be the basis for such a system. The local DRI re

described in this recommendation should be considered i

after the adoption of an integrated policy framework an




e the time

appeal DRI

state, regional

(5) provide in-

These are

upon a valuable

.lopment of any

.w for its


id state issues

view option

n the future,

id an experimental



Section Four

Management of Water Resources



i-- ----


1. The Task Force recommends that the state develop and adopt by rule

a state water policy. The policy should be developed through the com-

bined efforts of the water management districts and the Department of

Environmental Regulation, with the aid of regulated industries and the

public. The policy should be a "mid-range" policy, that is of more

specificity than the water policies expressed in the Florida statutes,

but broad enough to guide the development of more specific plans by the

water management districts. The policy should be a part of the inte-

grated policy framework described in Section One, and should be formally

adopted as a state rule under the Administrative Procedure Act. Both

the State Water Use plan and the State Water Quality plan should be made

consistent with the adopted state water policy.

2. The Task Force recommends to the Governor that, to the greatest

extent possible, planning for and regulation of both water quality and

water quantity be consolidated at the regional or district level. This

process should continue on a selective basis, with delegation occurring

under standards and guidelines established by the state, to those

regional or district agencies which have or can develop the financial

and technical capabilities to carry out both functions. Selected water

quality functions that can most expeditiously be consolidated with

water quantity functions should be delegated consistent with federal

and state law. A five year target date should be established for


:: ''

[ I



i r

!I ;
I :ti

i I
'' t
1 "i
ij it t

I ;

i:zi i

: ji j ij /
; : i
ii i

i ~--. )


-. ,

;--- "







I: i\ .--
i ..
---:: ~; '-- -~ i _.;~~-_-:~~ r;-
~cz.ii;~. -r:::~ ~ -.;~ '. '. -..;.CI--. '~...
;'r.-----' .-
1~---i -: ~~.
., i
,.~;; --' ~~: ~ '' ....., I.'. ~
.... ---;
.; .--,
Ti~r- ii - -~
-.1- I '5 ~=r_
.... ~.~~,::,;..,


regions or districts to assume these appropriate functions.

However, where water management districts construct, operate or

maintain works affecting the quality and quantity of state waters, such

activities should be regulated by the Florida Department of Environmental

Regulation under rules to be adopted by the Environmental Regulatory

Commission. Likewise, the DER and ERC should retain power to establish

statewide quality standards, and should exercise oversight of the water

management district activities to assure needed consistency with state

planning and standards in the operation of the water management districts.

(See also Section One, Recommendations.)

3. Water management districts should be given statutory authority to

develop regional water supply systems within their districts, and to

implement regional water supply systems where local governments and

private utility companies have failed to do so on a reasonable basis.

Regional Water Supply Authorities now authorized by statute should be

absorbed by their respective water management districts, and new regional

water supply authorities should not be permitted to form separate from

water management district control. Local governments and private util-

ities should continue to establish local and regional water supply systems

under the regional planning umbrella of the water management districts.

Water management district ad valorem funds should be authorized to assist

local governments in the development of regionally responsible water

supply systems.

4. The delegation of specific water quality tasks from DER to local

governments should be continued on a limited basis. In particular,

ministerial tasks by local governments that are supportive of regional

.. .

.-... -*.. 1-. I

programs should be delegated, with ultimate permit

S;retained at the state or regional level. Local p

staff capability should be delegated limited permi

-- ject to state or regional program supervision.


ting responsibility

'ograms with exceptional

tting authority, sub-


.4c- ,

Explanation of Intent

Florida's present water management system is predicated on a

sound legislative and administrative base. The Task Force recommenda-

tions recognize this base, and build upon it.

The Task Force recommendation fora" "mid range" state water

policy is a response to the management need to bridge the gap between

broad legislative policy and the "defacto" policies that arise from

regulatory activities. The state has taken the first steps to develop

such a policy, and is encouraged to continue development, in coordina-

tion with all interested parties, particularly the water management

districts. Water policy development should be consistent with the

parallel development of broader state resource management policies,

described in Section One. The policy should be flexible enough to

provide for regional variations, but should resolve interregional con-

flicts and provide guidance to regional and local water planning and

actions. Both water quality and quantity issues should be addressed.

Adoption under Chapter 120 is necessary so that the policy will have

legal force. In addition, adequate public input is assured, and com-

pliance with and implementation of the policy can be governed by Chapter

120 appeals processes.

Consolidating management of water quality and quantity is dis-

if, b1





...' .~




--- -4 ~ -

Z~ -~ .C- -.---~i
r- -I
5- i-.i--'
7~1 1
; --I "i ..
cSt .1
----1 ...-I~-.--LP;Y*Y.1~S-I n-~;;

cussed in Section Two in regard to the advantages of managing water

resources at the regional level. Consolidating the management of

these aspects in one agency, regardless of the level of government,

is recommended because the management of one is so closely related

to the management of the other. One agency with the full responsi-

bility for water resources will be better equipped to deal with this

relationship in its water quality and quantity decisions. Administra-

tive duplication of data and manpower should be reduced by the con-

solidation. The recommendation carries forward the trend toward

consolidation of these functions begun in the Environmental Reorganiza-

tion of 1975, with emphasis on the regional agency management under DER

supervision. The specific regional agency most capable of assuming

both quality and quantity responsibilities may vary by region. That

determination is deliberately left to the Governor, in order to give

him the greatest flexibility possible. However, if water management

districts assume the responsibility, it is recommended that their con-

struction activities be regulated directly at the state level to avoid

a conflict of interest by the water management districts.

Water management would be improved by giving water management

districts authority to plan for and implement regional water supply

systems where local governments are incapable of doing do. This

practice would make use of the water management district expertise in

water matters and would be consistent with their regional water respon-

sibilities. The present authority which permits the formation of

regional water supply authorities encourages administrative duplication


;, ~L. u
...;, r


__ --- --

C- I

and the "defensive" establishment of region

Regional supply duties in the water manageme

can help resolve often bitter interlocal dis

-- available regional assistance to local gove

tion encourages local and private supply sys

under the supervisory regional umbrella.

Local responsibilities for water qual

courage by the recommendation for careful d

tasks to local governments. Local government

..bility can provide more timely permitting an

ability in permitting decisions, while relie

management burdens.



- .--.i-,- --

1 supply authorities.

nt districts, however,

putes, and can also make

rnments. The recommenda-

tems where feasible,

ity regulation are en-

elegation of specific

ts with sufficient capa-

d better public account-

ving regional or state

L i
I '
i i:
t' '
i i
i 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