Title: Lower East Coast Water Supply Plan Costs and Funding
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004664/00001
 Material Information
Title: Lower East Coast Water Supply Plan Costs and Funding
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Lower East Coast Water Supply Plan Costs and Funding (JDV Box 70)
General Note: Box 24, Folder 5 ( Water Supply Work Group/Planning and Management - 1996/1997 ), Item 9
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004664
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





Lower East Coast (LEC) Water Supply Plan Costs and Funding

Costs Preliminary costs for the options contained in Phase 1 and Phase 2 of Alternative 5 of the
LEC Water Supply Plan are presented below. Phase 1 items are those that can, for the most part,


be completed in 5 to 7
years. The Phase 2 options LowV
can be completed by 2010. Prelin
The costs presented are
those for land and Opions
structures. Structure costs
IVnimruf
include a 15% factor for
design of the facilities. E gia
Operation and maintenance c-4Sru
costs are being considered East Coi
in the plan, but were not Broward
available at this time. In Ulity w
total, the O&M costs will be UtAtyG
much smaller than the land Soue
and structure costs. All Ce
Cenirai
costs are in 1996 dollars.
Options that show no land Phase 1
or structure costs involve LOme
only changes in the Preli
operations of the water
management system.
Existing Funding Sources Opfons
- These are sources that EAASto
exist presently and are being C sa
used to fund programs
similar to the LEC Plan. Regona
While it is reasonable to IVbde L
expect that some of the ERvrgla
funds available in the future Phase 2
from these sources would


r East Coast Water Supply Plan
linary Phase 1 Costs (millions of 1996 $)


n Flows and Levels
des Restoraon Phase 1
ctres
astBuffer Sie 1 Reservoir
Secondary Canals Recharge
elleld Expansion
ound WaVer ASR
nL-8 Project
'alm Beach County Storage
- Total


Land CostsStucire CostsTotal Costs
$0.0 $0.0 $0.0
$0.0 $40 $4.0
$0.0 $1.9 $1.9
$83 $82 $16.5
$0.0 $20 $20
$0.0 $29.3 $29.3
$00 $169.0 $169.0
$29.5 $324 $61.9
$20.2 $37 $23.9
$580 $250.4 $30.4


SEast Coast Vter Supply RPan
rinary Phase 2 Costs (millions of 1996 $)


Land'CostsSiucre CostsToal Cost


rage
hahee Stage
G ound VUir ASR
ends Hydropatnm Resltalon
les Restwalon Phase 2
- ToW


$0.0
$1125
$0.0
$51.0
$00
$213.5


$9.2
$77.4
$3094
$3.3

O$4
$4843


$144.2
$18a9
$309.4
$5.3
$00
$67.8


be used to support the LEC Plan, no precise estimates can be provided at this time. The
availability and use of these funds to support the LEC Plan will have to be decided in conjunction
with decisions regarding other competing uses for the funds. These existing sources include; from
the District, ad valorem revenues under present millage rates; from the state, Water Management
Lands Trust Fund (Save Our Rivers, SOR) funds, Preservation 2000 Funds and Conservation and
Recreation Lands (CARL) funds; from the federal government, funding and cost shares that
support projects authorized by Congress as a result of the C&SF Restudy; from local
governments, funds provided by utilities for wellfields and other utility works and by general
revenue for purchase of lands for environmental preservation. In addition funds from mitigation of
wetland impacts or actions undertaken as mitigation measures can contribute to meeting LEC
Plan goals. A small portion of the lands needed for the LEC Plan have already been purchased.








Additional District Funding Mechanisms In addition to the existing funding measures
described above, special additional funding mechanisms are being considered for the LEC Plan.
The major alternative mechanisms are:

1. Lower East Coast Basin millage assessments

The District's enabling legislation limits the combined District at-large and basin tax
millage to .8 mils. Because the current millage is .672 mils, additional millage of up to .128 can
be considered.
Three millage scenarios provide examples of the potential revenue generated if the millage
rate in a proposed LEC basin were raised to (1) the .8 mil cap; (2) .736 mil (50% of the difference
between current millage and the cap); and (3) .704 mil (25% of the difference between current
millage and the cap.)
Using 1996 taxable values for the three LEC counties, generated revenue was calculated.
Scenario 1 provides $25 million a year; scenario 2 provides $12.5 million a year; and scenario 3
provides $6.2 million a year.

2. User fees on utility raw-water withdrawals

The District would charge a fee to utilities for raw water withdrawals. This funding
option assumes three tax levels on raw water withdrawals. One is five cents per thousand, and
the other is ten cents per thousand and the third is twenty-five cents per thousand.
The total amount of public supply water pumped in the Lower East Coast counties in
1995, according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), was 796 MGD or 291 billion
gallons/year. For a five-cent charge on a thousand gallons, revenue would be $14.6 million per
year; for ten cents per thousand gallons, the total revenue would be $29.2 million per year; .25 per
1000 gallons would produce $73 million a year in revenue.

3. A charge on water allocated to non-metered permitted users

The amount ofnonmetered water withdrawal based on annual allocation amounts for the
LEC counties would result in revenues of$11.7 million/year (m/y) for $.02/1000; $29 m/y for
$.05/1000 and $57.9 m/y for .10/1000 of allocation.

4. A tax on fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals

The District or representatives of the State could seek a legislative change imposing a
sales or excise tax on the sale of fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals whose use is
associated with water pollution and/or environmental degradation.
Using either sliding scale or constant rate taxes, revenues of $2.4 million; $6.0 million;
and $9.7 million could be realized.




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