Title: Consensus Statements: 1/9/97
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004661/00001
 Material Information
Title: Consensus Statements: 1/9/97
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Consensus Statements: 1/9/97 (JDV Box 70)
General Note: Box 24, Folder 5 ( Water Supply Work Group/Planning and Management - 1996/1997 ), Item 6
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004661
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

Consensus statements: 1/9/97

Funding Committee's Charge (Agreed to December 6):

"The Committee will develop recommendations to ensure sufficient funding to construct,
operate and maintain the water supply infrastructure and water resources needed to meet
the growing demand for water in a safe, affordable and environmentally acceptable

Tasks and Consensus statements
Task 1. Identify overall range of future funding needs (identify existing sources and
discuss both water supply and water resource needs separately)
Consensus Statement: While a target goal may be important, the lead for this issue fits more
appropriately with the duties of the water supply development committee; it is better for
the funding committee to offer up a menu of sources, with constraints, impediments, and
possible fiscal estimates of each source.

Task 2. Identify existing and future options and combinations of funding sources (both
revenue & loan sources)
Consensus statement: The Legislature should ensure that all potential federal funding be
made available to Florida through the Safe Drinking Water Water Act by providing the
necessary matching state dollars.

Task 3. Identify factors in determining equitable cost distribution
Consensus statement: Generally, beneficiaries should pay for benefits. However, in certain
circumstances, if a water supply development project meets a "greater public purpose",
costs for the project should be more broadly funded.

See public benefit white paper on next page.

Applies only to external sources (other than local) and new sources

There are several areas of the State evidencing similar problems of water shortages involving
more than one local jurisdiction. In many instances these shortages create conflicting demands
between existing users and the environment and the potential to create competing uses among
existing and future users. In these instances it may be very difficult for the competing interest
groups to form a consensus on needed water supply funding. External funding may be helpful to
assist in creating a consensus and facilitate cooperation and planning.

There will limited external funding available and that state or regional funds will never be
adequate to solve all problems. This requires adoption of state policy by the legislature so that
these limited funds will be used consistently and for the greatest statewide benefit and advance
state goals for the environment and the economy.

Though a complete policy statement has not been developed as to how available funding could
be applied, several criteria were identified that could be considered in developing a policy
regarding this. These criteria include:
1. Incentives to develop innovative technology
2*. Option a: Assistance for other sources when existing uses are cut back to achieve
significant environmental needs.
Option b: Assistance when need for alternative or new source development is
necessitated by reallocation of water for regional water resource benefit or
3*. Assistance when developing a new water source and is more appropriate than
applying the competing use test and helps to reduce conflict.
4*. Assistance for the development of multi-jurisdictional solutions.

The policy should include limiting conditions required to qualify for external assistance.
*Limiting conditions could include:

1*. The area should be optimizing feasible water conservation and efficiency.
2*. Projects to be funded are consistent with the regional water supply plan.
3*. All water utility revenue is currently allocated to the water supply needs.

This is not a complete development of a recommendation but a start towards identifying a need
for a policy development at the state level.

*For further discussion

(. Task 4. Clarify roles and responsibilities in water supply and water resource funding
Consensus statement: If a revenue source is currently controlled by an existing decision-
making body, no changes are recommended as long as the effect is confined to the
jurisdiction of that body and does not involve funding efforts with extra-jurisdictional
impacts and where extra-jurisdictional impacts, regional strategies and approaches should
be encouraged. If the loanl .-urc:e first principle is t be appd in certain r-gions (et
South Flnrida), however "lcal" nzds t, bd.ntr &

SThere needs to be a link between planning and funding.

SFunding should be built in to the planning strategy i.e provide a menu of water sources and
funding sources to local suppliers in regional water supply plan.

Task 5. Identify options for administration and distribution of new sources of funding
Consensus statement: The legislation of mandatory set-asides of revenue is not

Task 6. Identify and address constraints and impediments to water supply funding.
(This task will generally be addressed as an overlay on all funding source-related tasks, but to
ensure its consideration in all instances, it has been identified as a separate and distinct task.)

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