September 21, 1977
SUBJECT: CORAL GABLES WORKSHOP AND PUBLIC HEARING: September 19, 1977
State Comprehensive Plan, Department of State Planning
DSP staff members present:
Randy Whittle: Director DOA
Jim Harvey: Recreation and Leisure
Don Young: Energy
Ed Wood: Employment and Manpower
Curry Hutchinson: Water
Jan Clarke: Utilities
Howard Pardue: Human Resources
AFTERNOON WORKSHOP: 1:30'- 4:30 P.M.
About 19 persons attended this meeting. Each of the six elements was assigned a
circle of chairs, and interested individuals sat in whichever element discussion
circle they wanted.
In the Water Element circle, there were 11 of the 19 representatives from the
public. Some elements received no visitors at all. The Water discussion group
Joe Podgor, Jr. FIU (drinking water quality)
E. J. Murphy Post, Buckley and Schuh,
Constance Rogier Dade League of Women Voters
John Scrivani Dade County Planning Department
LaMont-Graw concerned citizen (partial to SFWMD)
Frank Nix Everglades National Park
Jan Horvath SFWMD
Linda Sumarlidason SFRPC
Bill Burns attorney, Dade County Water and Sewer
Walter Din Dade County Water and Sewer Authority
Lucy Ayer City Planner, Miramar
Curry Hutchison group leader, DSP
(The following dialogues are not direct quotes, nor are they the discussions
in their entirety.)
History of water management can be traced back to 1850, when
the Feds transferredland to state ownership and the state sold
it back to private entities. The monies made by land sales
paid for drainage. Florida has always looked on water manage-
ment as making land developable. (For example: the FCD dropped
the Kissimmee Chain of Lakes six feet.) The South Florida study
showed that 60 percent of the original wetlands had been drained
or developed. Therefore the remaining 40 percent must be manager
as crucial element.
-7 1r-j s '-.
The WMD has permitting authority which helps to keep growth in
check; so we've already vested responsibility in that District.
We don't want to add layers of government or usurp the WMD's
authority. They have a large and capable staff who can easily
handle, and continue to make, important decisions. This draft
leaves the door open for someone to take over that responsibility
(esp. #6, page 15).
This.element is only an attempt to codify state policy. It
makes explicit state objectives. We're trying to touch all base
and have a single document where all state policy will be set
down. The WMD's have had no real legislative direction since
1850. Chapter 373 is just a starting point for this draft.
Each WMD had to develop a Water Use Plan without state guidance.
Ideally this draft should've been done before the five radically
different WUPs were finished. The WUPs will be brought into
line with this draft and then become part of the State Water Plar
and ultimately...(see Appendix A, p 113.)
Number 6 seems to be saying water should limit growth. If you
only express the restraint side and don't mention orderly growth,
you're directing an independent agency (the WMD) in a given
From current statutes, the WMD is delegated authority from DER--
this does not imply its independence. Number 6 just restates the
District's responsibility; don't take it out of context.
Where is an area that water is a limit to growth?
Pinellas County. The state shouldn't have to pay for areas to
grow beyond their resource capability.
Do other elements discuss limiting growth as much as this one?
Some do.....Page 18, #5 poses another question, can the state
put water on preflooded lands without constituting a "taking?"
I say yes. Plus, the wetlands provide cattle forage when the
levels fluctuate. The state would have to pay for capital im-
are three issues that need to be discussed and public
is requested: ds
1) page 15, #6 was deleted .. PAC. Does the public
think that it should be deleted, reworded or left
intact? ('Water is a limiting factor on growth'
2) page 14, #5 was drastically revised by PAC. Should
water be imported to support additional development?
3) page 14, #5. Should the beneficiaries of water
transportation projects pay for the costs and benefit
. .. i] 1 I W ,i u .l i l Ii I
S- Bill Burns:
Have the various agencies' legal people looked into that?
I'("ure Grafton of "Softmud" has l 'ed at it.... Assuming
tha; energy and inflation will go up, it's important to use
natural systems wherever possible to keep expenses down.
Under the Federal Water Pollution Act (17-3), you may want to
put in something about the regulation that state waters going
into national parks have to be as good as the water already in
it. The water quality in the Park is deteriorating even with'
the present standards.
Along with that addition, we're thinking about adding another
element: Education of the general public on water management '*
policies and practices through the media.
The entire 18-element package is coming up this session. The
elements will be reviewed and updated yearly; they will be used
to reestablish goals of water management districts, to check for
consistency in local comprehensive plans, and by the budgetary
agency in making agencies comply. In order to implement the SCP.
bills will have to be enacted after it becomes legislative law.
The state should bring all plans together and implement as a
Master Plan to look at all water bodies and see what they were,
are, and should be.
Up to this point the Feds have had most of the responsibility of
deciding what's beneficial to Florida and what's not as far as
water management. The state wants to have more of a part.
The only way to get more water into the system is to
off to the sea or use less water. Conservation is a
of our plan. Figure out what water is really worth.
shows about $110 per acre foot.
But Dade's been paying for water management since the beginning,
and now the state's thinking about cutting off state funding.
Thatwould have a big impact on Dade.
There hasn't been enough consideration of local management plans
in this draft. Did you actually look at Dade's Comprehensive
Plan? Your plan doesn't reference it. Mr. Sloan had to comment
on your plan without having the chance for any initial imput.
To my knowledge there are no conflicts with local plans. If
there are, it's up to you to point them out.
(See Dade County Water and Sewer Authority's written comments attached)
EVENING PUBLIC HEARING: 7:00 10:00 P.M.
Forty-five (45) in attendance. A few faces were familiar: Nancy Brown, Tropical
Audubon; Rep. Bob McKnight; Joan Browder, PAC water element and Wetlands Center;
Paula Church, DERM; Linda Sumarlidason, SFRPC; E. J. Murphy, Post, Buckley and Schuh;
Scott Hoffman, DER; Allen Cirkin, PAC water element; Reginald Walters, Dade County
Director of Planning.
--wtr r' .'* *--;~ ****- ---'^^^A^^ '^:;"~r^/'.T""'''^'.--^*^^ '^^'-'^'^:^^^^ '* ''r '^*^*'*"""^
Curry gave an overview of his workshop statements ending with:
"All of the ujectives of 373 may be met if water management is
optimized. The nain principle is that water resources function as a
system under natural laws. Water must be managed under those laws.
"Conservation is very important. All operating criteria of water
management districts should be revised drastically and additional water
storage should be provided. Local codes and ordinances should require
the use of water saving devices."
We need guidelines for the state; this is an impressive step
forward. Hopefully the problems here in South Florida Can
be headed off in North Florida. No one agency protects our
water quantity and quality outside Cade County.
Dade's Water and Sewer Authority mentions two plans it has been
evaluating, the SCP and the Water Management Districts' WUP. I
hope the philosophical SCP can be an umbrella over the other :
plans which are more of a practical nature. We want no
squabbling over whose plan is best.
The WUP and the SCP are headed toward the same direction--water
management. The District offers too many options. We have
problems now. We'urge the acceptance of the State Plan as the
plan for water management. We need action.
Groundwater tables need to be increased, yet there's no element
of this in the WUP.
We urge restoration wherever possible. .
The public shouldn't have to pay for projects to increase
development. Water is a limiting factor. Implement the State's
The physical system of the WMD was designed for drainage. The
State Plan should make implicit that structural changes aren't
necessary--just raise the elevations in canals. Make sure the
WMD understands. The WMD philosophy is provide water at any cost.
The water element offers a potentially significant framework for
for the WMD's plans. Where theirs was vague, the SCP is more
specific. We support the maintenance of pre-development wetlands
Interbasin transfers should be based on an economic analysis.
Dade will take the lead if it is adopted.
Although the water element lacks some specifics, it hits more
key issues than the other elements. We have a concern for the
deletion of #6. Why was it deleted? What was the dialogue? No
replacement of it leaves a key issue void.
You have a good beginning and we should all communicate that to
Number 6 should be put back in. We should set limits on lengths
to which the District can go to support growth. Jack Maloy has
said "the District can provide as muchwaterasfuture populations
would need if people are willing to pay the price and accept the
.... .~~~~ .. : r: .-T"r- Ti-r- J: o ....,-, .'"l -
- i:T- (- -~ --
S Browder (cont'd,) environmental impacts." In other words, they will provide
S no matter what the cost or inm t.
The water management districts have no policy to guide them in
this respect. "
The PAC is made up of many interests. At the last PAC meeting
Jack Maloy helped to shoot down this issue himself. (She wasn't
there.) Please put this back in so I can get a change to fight
How does the PAC go about putting #6 back in?
We'll put together a summary format of these meetings and the
PAC's will get together. They are there to give advice;' it's
not necessary to take a vote. Even if the PAC doesn't want it,
we can leave it in. The Governor can do anything he wants with
I went to the last PAC meeting and have philosophical problems
with it. They shouldn't be able to vote to add or delete
elements after the public's had an opportunity to react. A
group of people in some room in Tallahassee shouldn't have that
As far as interbasin transfers, look at California. If we go
to that system we should look at what's happened there. They
spent all this money to bring the water down and the system
doesn't work. Hope that doesn't happen here.
We submit a revised draft to Jim Williams. There is no closed
room situation with the PAC. Randy'll take care of that.
October 1 is the deadline for receipt of comments on the State
Comprehensive Plan Element
DSP (Curry Hutchison)is pushing for reinstatement of #6.
The WUP is being touted as a subordinate part to SCP in setting
water management policy.
The District is being assigned a low position on the "identity"
totem pole. Through DSP's innuendoes, the WMD's are becoming just
a part of DER at whose whim our responsibilities may be deleted,
The SCP has a "motherhood" and "apple pie" ring to it, and many
people do not seem to realize it lacks substance. To these work-
shop attendants, the plan was seen as a much needed uniting
.. .. ... *- .* ,- .
I ~~~8h4'. ~ .~ ~ ~ 'C~A4. aivJ'~-:. ,~.' '
.' r r'