Title: Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting of December 6, 1996
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004621/00001
 Material Information
Title: Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting of December 6, 1996
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting of December 6, 1996 (JDV Box 70)
General Note: Box 24, Folder 3 ( Water Supply Development and Funding - 1996-1997 ), Item 23
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004621
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

Water Supply Development
and Funding Work Group Meeting

December 6, 1996

Proposed Objectives
To clarify the charge to the Work Group
To make progress on committee work plans
To consider over-arching questions and committee

Proposed Agenda

9:00 Work Group plan for the process and the day
9:15 Committees work independently
12:00 Lunch (ordered in)
12:45 Committee Meetings Continued
3:00 Meeting Adjourns

Committee Instructions
1. Review and seek agreement on the draft committee agenda
2. Work through the agenda items and record group products:
Points of agreement
Issues that need more attention
Action assignments for members, staff and others
Requests for the other committee
3. Review and refine the work group products to be presented for
full group consideration.
4. Discuss the agenda for the next meeting, the meeting
schedule and decide if there is a need for additional meetings
* The next full group meeting is scheduled for December 18 at
the Public Service Commission, Betty Easley Conference Center.

Water Supply Development
and Funding Work Group Meeting

Development Committee Agenda

Proposed Agenda
9:00 Work Group plan for the process and the day
9:15 Review and Agree on Committee Agenda
9:25 Complete Discussion of Planning:
Issues and potential solutions at the local and private levels
Review Summary of Perceived Problems Planning
Check for consensus on conclusions and solutions
Identify info. and action needed where there is no consensus
11:00 Discuss Regulation at Each Level
Issues and potential solutions at the local and private levels
Review Summary of Perceived Problems Regulation
Check for consensus on conclusions and solutions
Identify info. and action needed where there is no consensus .
12:00 Lunch
12:45 Discussion of Regulation Continued
1:15 Discuss Development/Implementation at Each Level
Issues and potential solutions at the local and private levels
Review Summary of Perceived Problems Development/Implem.
Check for consensus on conclusions and solutions
Identify info. and action needed where there is no consensus
3:00 Meeting Adjourns

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Water Supply Development
and Funding Work Group Meeting

Funding Committee Agenda

Proposed Agenda
9:00 Full Group Plenary
9:15 Funding Committee Introduction and Agenda Review
9:20 Overview of Committee Meeting Plan- December-January
9:30 Review of Problems/Solutions Framework
10:00 Review of Committee Charge/Overall Problem Statement
10:30 Stretch Break
10:40 Public Service Commission Presentation Questions and Answers
Problems and Solutions
11:10 Investor Owned Utilities Questions and Answers Problems and
11:40 Early Lunch
12:40 Funding Goals to meet future water Supply Needs Water
Management District discussion
1:30 Identifying Funding Options and Combinations of Funding Options
2:30 Review and Adoption of Committee Charge/Overall Problem
2:40 Next Steps and Review of Assignments
3:00 Adjourn

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Water Supply Development
and Funding Work Group
Process Plan

Date Activities
Oct. 17 Seek consensus on a basic problem statement and
Shape a structure for effective work group action
Develop a practical, feasible work plan
Interim Constituency outreach and work on tasks
Nov. 8 Review of interim products and committee direction
Committee work
Consensus testing and work plan revision
Interim Constituency outreach and work on tasks
Dec. 6 Same as above
Interim Constituency outreach and work on tasks
Dec. 18 Same as above
Interim Constituency outreach and work on tasks
Preparation of a draft legislative proposal
Jan. 8 Seek consensus on proposed amendments
Assign responsibilities for unresolved issues
Interim Constituency outreach and resolution of issues
Jan. 31 Final amendment process
Acceptance of the recommendation report
Develop work plan for the legislative session and beyond
Feb. Joint Workshop with Legislators

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Work Group Guidelines

Work Group Core Committee Representation
Interest Group Development Funding
Business, Industry, developers 2 2
Agriculture 2 2
Environmentalists/citizens 2 2
Water suppliers 2 2
Local governments 2 2
Water Management Districts 1 1
Dept. of Environmental Protection 1 1
Dept. of Community Affairs 1
Dept. of Ag. & Consumer Services 1
Public Service Commission 1 1
Other participants can choose a committee or circulate

Roles of Core Group Members
* Be selected by their interest groups
* Be expected to attend all committee meetings
* Select a committee chair and co- or vice-chair
* Share information with constituents
* Solicit input from constituents
* Rank acceptability of recommendations of the committee
* Core group members may designate and give direction to substitutes
* Replacements must be selected by the respective interest groups

Role s_of _t her Partic ip_ants
* Participate as appropriate with deference to the chair
* Circulate between committees and help coordinate efforts
* Form ad hoc groups on special issues and make reports
* Provide input to core group members and on comment forms

Roles of Committee Chairs
* Recognize speakers and balance participation, as needed
* Invite other participants can contribute to discussions
* Guide agenda formulation and compliance
* Manage committee progress through the process
Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Roles of Facilitators

* Share in structuring agendas and guiding discussions
* Capture key points on flip charts and overheads
* Help prepare reports of the group's work

Roles of Staff
* Provide information as requested by chairs
* Prepare meeting reports and materials for participants
* Lead staff for the funding committee -- Paula Allen
* Lead staff for the water supply committee -- Terry Pride

Everyone will:

* Share in keeping to the agenda
* Be focused and concise, balance participation
* Ask questions and verify assumptions
* Acknowledge differing views -- no personal attacks
* Seek mutually satisfactory solutions
* Make sure recording is accurate
* Use comment forms and the "bin" if time is limited

Brainstorming Guidelines

* Generate as many ideas as possible
* Do not discuss or criticize any ideas
* Suggesting ideas does not imply a commitment to them
* Innovative ideas are encouraged

Decision Making Guidelines Participants will
* Develop a common understanding of the issues
* Evaluate all options
* Consider the best information available
* Seek consensus on recommendations
"consensus," at best, is when everyone is satisfied they have the best
balanced product possible, at worst, everyone feels their concerns have
been considered and they agree to not oppose the package even
though there are concerns about some parts of it.
Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group

Committee Report Process

Consideration of Committee Conclusions
1. Committee overview and presentation of conclusions
2. Full group questions of clarification and answers
3. Identification of concerns (if time permits)
4. Suggest and seek consensus on amendments (if time permits)
5. Test consensus on the conclusions using computer scorable forms
6. Committee Plan for Needed Next Steps
7. Committee report on proposed next steps
8. Full group comments and suggestions to the committee
Discussion of Over-Arching Questions (see entities/roles matrix)
1. Individually identify:
Needed connections between committee efforts
Under-lying issues that must be resolved
Differing interests and dilemmas that must be balanced
Issues related to effectiveness of this group

2. List over-arching questions/issues
3. Suggestions for How These Questions/Issues Can Be Addressed
1. Participant concluding comments
2. Comments from the Governor's Office
3. Complete evaluation and comment forms
Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Water Supply Development
and Funding Work Group Meeting

Consensus Testing Instructions

1. Do not fill in the Name boxes or bubbles

2. Indicate the group you represent in Special Coding Section "A"
using the following code:

0 = Business, Industry, developers
1 = Agriculture
2 = Environmentalists/citizens
3 = Water suppliers
4 = Local governments
5 = Water Management Districts
6 = Dept. of Environmental Protection
7 = Dept. of Community Affairs
8 = Dept. of Ag. & Consumer Services
9 = Public Service Commission

3. Rank the acceptability of each conclusion using the following

5 = Wholeheartedly support
4 = Good, but could be better
3 = Neutral, there are pros and cons
2 = Serious concerns
1 = Opposed)

4. Turn in your computer scorable form to the front table before
you leave.

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Water Supply Development and Funding
Work Group Meeting
December 6, 1996

Comment Form

Your Input is Important!!!
This is the place to put any ideas, comments, concerns, criticisms that you
do not have time to, or want to share with the group. Your input will be kept
as a record of the meeting and incorporated into the final report as
appropriate. Please reference where in the agenda your input applies.

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96

Water Supply Development
and Funding Work Group Meeting

December 6, 1996

Your input Is important!

How well were the meeting objectives were achieved:

To clarify the charge to the Work Group
To make progress on committee work plans
To consider over-arching questions and committee


Rate the following aspects of the meeting

Clarity of meeting purpose and plan
Balance of structure and flexibility
Group productivity



What did you like best about the Workshop?

How could it have been improved?

Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group Meeting, 12-6-96



GDU D3;.. O -NV. TF;. T-L:1-o0t.-?22-6 3

The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001


All Inlereted Parties




Dan Stengle
Estus Whitficld'iv4a

Water Supply Development and Funding meeting

Dcccmber 3, 1996

Thank you for your continued interest. We will be meeting at the Public Service Commission on
Friday, December 6 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., as discussed at our last meeting, to allow time
for flights home. A mup and directions are attached.

Due to the location of the facilities and a shortened lunch break, we will arrange for ordering
lunch in.

As you can see from the attached agenda, the work for this meeting will be accomplished almost
totally in committee. We look forward to your attendance and participation.


D[Ie 32 ,

15:23 N:.020 P.02

S ;:' 3: j -- : .-'- :'- : : [, : :, .-. -' ', .C.:,

December 6, 1996
9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Public Servicc Conmission
Detty Easlcy Confercmn; Ccntcr
Shumrard Oak Doulcvfrd
Tallahnsscc, FI

9:00 OPENING REMAIlU.S: Plenary Water Supply Dovolopment and Funding Group
Discussion or lunch arrangements and day's agenda


Water Supply Development Commitlee: Wfter supply planning and regulation issues
Water Supply Funding Committee: Assignments from last meeting, PSC and Investor Owned
Utilities Presentations


12:00 Water Supply Development Committee
11:40 Water Supply Fundiln Committee


12:45 Wator Supply Development Commitice: Rcgulation issues continued,
Dcvelopment/inplcmentation issues

]2:40 Water Supply Funding Commiticc: Establishing Watlr Supply Needs (S). Ideiifying
funding options

3:()() Adjnurn


SFrom Airport: right onto Capital Circle SW. Right onto Shumard Oak Blvd. (after
approximately 4 traffic lights) at the Capital Circle Office Center.
+ From 1-10: Take exit 3 1-B to Tallahassee (90 West). Left onto Capital Circle SE. Cross
Apalachee Parkway, pass the Koger Center. Left onto Shumard Oak Blvd. At the Capital Circle
Office Center.
Go past Esplanade Way), turn left immediately pasl tht Gerald L. Gunlcr Building, and park in the area to your right. This
parking area is behind the Easley Center, hut you may enter the Ccnter through the cast entrance. The Easley Center
actually fuccs Esplaniade Way.

Existing Buildings

S i Under Construction


......, 5ETT-1 -A-L-_'r
in)COFEoCl CrI.
~ji~iC2 I o-~ SZ~I
ReI. (i i,

-** *.' f -

The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001


TO: All Interested Parties

FROM: Dan Stengle
Estus Whitfield

SUBJECT: Water Supply Development and Funding meeting

DATE: November 15, 1996

The minutes of the overall water supply development and funding group are attached for your
information. For more detailed information regarding the activities of the "development" or
"funding" committees, or to ensure that your views are expressed in your absence, please call one
of the core committee members representing your area of interest. A list of the core committee
membership is provided in this packet for your information.

The assumptions and principles, as agreed to by the larger group, are also provided for your

The number of people interested in attending our water supply development and funding meetings
is increasing and we welcome your participation. To accommodate your interest and flight
schedules, we are revising our meeting place and general timeframes. The next Water Supply
Development and Funding meeting will be held in Tallahassee on December 6 from 9:00 to
3:00 at the Betty Easley Conference Center of the Public Service Commision on Capital
Circle. One hour will be provided for lunch. The directions are as follows:

FROM AIRPORT: .,rfon Capital Circle SW. Right on Shumard Oak Blvd. (approximatcly 4 traffic lights), the
Capital Circle Office Center.

FROM 1-10: Take Exit 31B to Tallahassee (90 W). Left on Capital Circle SE. Pass Apalachec Parkway and Kogcr
Center. Left on Shumard Oak Blvd., the Capital Circle Office Center.

Parking: Go past Esplanade Way, turn left immediately past the Gerald L. Gunter Building and park in the area to your
right. This parking area is behind the Easley Center, but you may enter the Center through the east entrance. The Easlcy
Center actually faces Esplanade Way.

The agenda for the December 6 meeting (with a map and some suggestions for lunch
arrangements as well) will be sent you within a week of the meeting.

Thank you for your interest. Best wishes for the Thanksgiving holidays, and we'll be in touch
again soon.

November 8, 1996


OPENING REMARKS (Estus Whitfield)
* Two committees were created at previous meeting
DEVELOPMENT: Jake Varn/David Guest Chairman/vice-chairman
FUNDING: Sonny Vergara/Phil Parsons co-chairs
* By December 18th meeting, we hope to be dealing with actual recommendations
* We will need to also deal with larger overarching issues that go between committees


* Bob Jones and Tom Taylor will continue to act as facilitators
* We are trying to reach consensus on issues, while addressing each interests' concerns
* Revisited core committee group setup and guidelines for new participants
* PSC is being added as a core member to the development committee Joann Chase (see revised
core member list)
* Core members can designate substitutes for necessary absences
* Jane Hayman is seeking a replacement for herself on the funding committee representing local
government (the local government folks chose William R. Whitson as the replacement--
see revised core member list).


A revised list of assumptions and principles, based on comments at the October 17 meeting, was
distributed and discussed. The group agreed to the following (see also attached list of
assumptions and principles):


I. Accepted as revised.
2. Accepted as revised.
3. Revised further to add "economy and quality of life."
4. Accepted as revised.
5. Accepted as revised.


1. Accepted as revised.
2. Revised further to delete the language in parentheses.
3. Accepted as revised.
4. Revised further to change "actual" to "full" and to delete "to major user groups."
5. Accepted as revised.


November 8, 1996



* Crossover issues--potential funding sources, mechanism for distribution

* Is there consensus on what are the key issues that require funding--statewide vs. regional

* Each water supply problem may have unique characteristics

* Funding to do what? Exotic solutions, etc.? Clarify this.


Estus Whitfield--The committees appear to be making good progress. The development
committee seems to be moving quickly toward recommendations.

The next meeting (December 6) will be at the PSC building and directions will be sent to the full
work group. Meeting times will be changed to 9:00 3:00 to accommodate flight schedules.


Water Supply Development and Funding Work Group

Assumptions and Basic Principles
(As revised and agreed to on November 8, 1995)

Assumptions: Group's perception of current conditions and trends.

1. Increased demand for water is inevitable given Florida's projected growth rates.

2. We must ensure an adequate, affordable and sustainable water supply for domestic,
industrial, and agricultural uses, and the environment.

3. We must protect Florida's environment, public health, economy, and quality of life.

4. Unless mutually acceptable solutions are found, one or all sides of the issue may lose.
Presently all sides are in jeopardy. We either continue this high-risk game or work
together to resolve the issue.

5. Adequate water supply development and funding is the solution to both aspects of the
issue, ensuring that water is available for growth, and that increased water use as a
result of growth will not degrade the environment.

Basic Principles: Guiding principles to be used in evaluating group

1. Recommendations will address meeting the present and future water supply needs of
Florida without adversely affecting its quality of life, while recognizing the necessity to
address these issues on a regional basis throughout the State.

2. The basic principles of Florida water law will be maintained.

3. Recommendations will support the development of adequate, safe, and dependable
water supplies in a manner which sustains'water resources and the environment.

4. Recommended funding options will consider full costs and benefits.

5. Recommendations will recognize the relationship between water supply and land use

Yk. %1

November 14, 1995

Jake Varn (Chair)
Carlton Fields
Post Office Drawer 190
Tallahassee, Florida 32302
(904) 224-1585
(904) 222-0398 (FAX)

Butch Calhoun
Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association
2700 Blair Stone Road, Suite C
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 877-3181
(904) 877-0981 (FAX)

Eva Armstrong
Florida Audubon Society
102 E. Fourth Avenue
Tallahassee, Florida 32303
(904) 222-2473
(904) 224-6056 (FAX)

Water Suppliers
Oel Wingo
Post Office Box 1270
Ocala, Florida 34478-1270
(352) 629-8401
(352) 629-8391 (FAX)

Wade Hopping
Hopping, Green, Sams & Smith
123 South Calhoun Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 222-7500
(904) 224-8551 (FAX)

Chuck Littlejohn
Florida Chamber, FES
310 West College Avenue
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 222-7535
(904) 681-8796 (FAX)

David Guest (Vice Chair)
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
111 S. Martin Luther King Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 681-0031
(904) 681-0020 (FAX)

Bram Canter
Post Office Box 10095
Tallahassee, Florida 32302
(904) 222-3533
(904) 222-2126 (FAX)


Development Core Group list (cont'd)

Local Government
John McCue
Post Office Box 1263
Crawfordville, Florida 32326
(904) 926-8876
(904) 926-2071 (FAX)

Water Management Districts
Mike Slayton
South Florida Water Management District
Post Office Box 24680
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680
(561) 687-6540
(561) 687-6200 (FAX)

Department of Environmental Protection
Janet Llewellyn
Department of Environmental Protection
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Stop 46
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000
(904) 488-0784
(904) 922-5380 (FAX)

Department of Community Affairs
Charles Pattison
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
(904) 488-2356
(904) 488-3309 (FAX)

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
Chuck Aller
Director of Agricultural Water Policy
Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services
The Capitol LL29
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0810
(904) 488-3022
(904) 488-7585 (FAX)

Fred Rapach
Palm Beach County Water Mgmt. Dist.
206 Prairie Road
West Palm Beach, Florida 33405
(407) 641-3426 (FAX)

Public Service Commission
JoAnn Chase
Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0873
(904) 413-7003
(904) 413-7004 (FAX)


November 14, 1996


Keith Hetrick
Florida Home Builders Association
201 East Park Avenue
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 224-4316
(904) 224-1359 (FAX)

Gene Adams
Florida Association of Realtors
Post Office Box 1853
Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1853
(904) 224-1400
(904) 224-0702 (FAX)


Mercer Fearington, Jr.
Post Office Box 1548
Tallahassee, Florida 32302
(904) 224-1215
(904) 222-8826 (FAX)

Philip Parsons (Co-Chair)
310 West College Avenue
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 681-0311
(904) 224-5595 (FAX)


Debbie Drake
The Nature Conservancy
625 North Adams Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
(904) 222-0973 (FAX)

Casey Gluckman
Gluckman & Gluckman
541 Old Magnolia Road
Crawfordville, Florida 32327
(904) 421-0152
(904) 421-2426 (FAX)

Water Suppliers

E. D. "Sonny" Vergara (Co-Chair)
Executive Director
Peace River/Manasota Regional
Water Supply Authority
1451 Dam Road
Bradenton, Florida 34202
(941) 741-3049
(941) 741-3058 (FAX)

Steve Walker
Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A.
2000 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 900
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409
(561) 640-0820
(561) 640-8202 (FAX)


Funding Core Groun list (cont'd)

Local Government

William R. Whitson, City Manager
City of Milton
P.O. Box 909
Milton, Florida 32572
(904) 623-3817
(904) 626-7570 (FAX)

Water Management Districts

Roy A. Reynolds, Director
Boward County Water Mgmt.
2555 West Copans Road
Pompano Beach, Florida 33069
(954) 831-0767
(954) 831-0708 (FAX)

Bill Segal, Chairman (Attention: Linda)
St. Johns River Water Mgmt. District Governing Board
Post Office Box 1429
Palatka, Florida 32178-1429
(904) 329-4500
(904) 329-4125 (FAX)

Department of Environmental Protection

Pam McVety
Department of Environmental Protection
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
(904) 488-7454
(904) 414-0060 (FAX)

Public Service Commission

John Williams
Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0873
(904) 413-6986
(904) 413-6987 (FAX)

Members of the Water Supply Development Core Group

FROM: Jake Varn, David Guest

SUBJECT: Meeting Agenda for December 6

DATE: December 2, 1996

Attached are a revised issue identification/ potential solutions list and an agenda for the December
6 water supply development core group meeting. You already have the detailed meeting summary
and the revised consolidated summary of perceived problems in water supply development. These
will also be available at the meeting, along with other informational materials. (/ArAff0o)



Water Supply Development Core Group
Issue Identification and Potential Solutions
From November 8, 1996 Meeting

Planning Issues, Potential Recommendations for Fur(her
Consensus Rcconuiiendatioins: Iiscussion:

Need for more direction at the state level
with regard to water supply.

C- More focus on water sup)lyl) at the stale D-1. Either a new entity or better
level. implementation by DEP with more resources.

C-2. Address water supply development more D-2. Include timeframes in the Florida Water
adequately in Florida Water Plan (FWP) and Plan with regard to water supply planning and
State Water Policy (SWPI) rule. development.

C-3. Integrate minimum flows and levels into D-3. Include policy guidance in the FWP and
water plans--direc MFLs to areas where SWP rule adequate for FLWAC to deal with
water is being or will be developed. (Already related appeals.
being done. See Ex. Order 96-297)

D-4. Identify needs and sources in a single,
statewide document.

Need for consistency in regional water D-5a. Use conventions committee approach
supply planning, needs and sources for achieving consistency among WMDs in
assessments, with regard for regional regional water supply plans (RWSPs), similar
variations, to conventions process for District Water
Management Plans.

b. (Achieve also through DEP general
supervisory authority and guidance of
Governor's Office--See Ex. Order 96-297)

The Function and Effect of RWSPs

C-4a. To identify a menu of options for water
supply develol)ent from which 1o choose.

b. To provide actioii-oricnted s.w)s, wilth
flexibility hut as much sui.rciy as possible for

c. 7b empoweriI local gorermnmlLent.


Planning Issues, Potential Recommendations for Further
Consensus Recommendations; Discussion:

The function and effect of RWSPS
(continued) _
C-5. (Consistent with D-6) Portions of plans D-6. Consider language similar to that in s.
could be adopted by rule, as appropriate, or 187.101, F.S.:
rules could be developed or amended to
implement the plan, to the extent of the "The plan does not create regulatory authority
WMDs'statutoiy authorities. (The plan or authorize the adoptions rules, criteria, or
would not confer authority but would reflect standards not otherwise authorized by law...
strategies that could be implemented under the goals and policies contained in the [plan]
existing authorities.) shall be reasonably applied where they are
economically and environmentally feasible, not
contrary to the public interest, and consistent
with the protection of private property rights.
The plan shall be construed and applied as a
whole, and no specific goal or policy in the
plan shall be construed or applied in isolation
from the other goals and policies in the plan."

C-6. There should be a linkage between D-7. To guide funding of water supply
water planning and water regulation (e.g., projects. For instance, if a project is
A consumptive use project would have to be consistent with the plan, it is eligible for
consistent with the rule-adopted portions of funding. (Question: does "consistent" mean
the plan in order to be permittable.). contained in the plan, in concert with the plan,
not at cross purposes with the plan, ?)

D-8. The RWSP should identify means of
implementing nonregulatory pans of plans
(e.g., actual development of supplies)--a
forcing-aciion type of planning.

Need for reliable service delivery plans. D-9. (Would this be part of the RWSP or a
separate document? Who would be
responsible for it?)


Planning Issues. Potential Recommendations for Further
Consensus Recommencdations: Discussion:

Need for clear relationship between Local D-10. Require a water supply element in
Government Comprehensive Plans LGCPs.
(LGCPs) and RWSPs.
D-l 1. Require that LGCPs be consistent with
RWSPs (rule-adopted portions, data?)

D-12. (Is there really a need for a statutory
linkage between LGCPs and RWSPs? Or is it
more effective to focus on increased
communication and technical assistance--and
financial assistance where possible--between
local governments and WMDs?)
Need for coordination among local ??
governments in water supply planning.

Need for adequate data on which to base
local water supply planning.

C-7. Data should comefronm the WMDs. D-13. (Require local govt. to use WIMD
data? How does/should the EARs process
operate with regard to best available data?)

Self suppliers need to be better considered D-14. Add requirements that water supply
in water supply planning. plans must project water supply for self
suppliers (WMDs already do this? What
about LGCPs?.).

D-15. Have self suppliers provide data on
themselves to planners, with no penalty to self
suppliers (for inaccuracy of data, for not
supplying data, etc.?).


November 8, 1996

* In committees, we need to come to conclusions where possible to bring back to full group -
these can be basic principles or specific recommendations
* Committees need to decide what to do between meetings

* Several handouts:
"Entities and their Roles";
"Perceived Problems with Water Supply Development"
"Chapters 163 & 373: Water Supply Planning"



* [Littlejohn]Florida Water Plan & State Water Policy don't deal with water supply
development issues very well; not a balanced document with regard to water supply;
the problem is implementation
* [Pattison] LGCPs not based on good data addressing water supply state issue? >; the LGCPs have authorized development beyond that which could be
supplied; come from WMD >
* [Rapach] We need more definitive timeframes at state level for water supply planning
Policy go into enough detail > ; < Slayton: what is it that you want is it the verbiage
or the identification of specific wellfields, etc. >; and not pictures; there is debate about how detailed state should go; needs to be enough
policy guidance in the FWP and SWP for appeals going to FLAWAC >; Canter: FWP is simply a reiteration of existing state laws; may need statutory change
to expand it and become more detailed >; < Chuck Littlejohn need for more intent on
providing "adequate water supply" for all users> ; Executive order deadlines giving more certainty on the WMD water supply plans >;
; adequate emphasis on water supply implementation >
* [LITTLEJOHN] Need to address integration of minimum flows and level priorities with
water supply planning priorities
* [Audience/Fred] Do we need a statewide entity to deal with water supply planning at the
state level ; this could possibly be done by DEP by
giving them more authority; authority but not being fully exercised, with adequate resources > ; < Aller & Janet -

need to look at the whole picture before we can decide whether the solution is to
expand authority, etc. >
[audience] we have no picture at the state level that outlines needs & sources for the entire
state ; because we have parallel planning processes that don't
link together ; we have no state-
wide view; comprehensive land use planning is not tied to water planning can't try to link Future Land Use Maps with water supply planning; they are irrelevant]
[Littlejohn] Does PSC do planning;


[Mike Slayton] WMD PLANNING: Regional Water Supply Plans(5 years) <---DWMPs(5
years)--> Needs & Sources(5 years); question is how plans are implemented since only
regulatory rules done, none for plans -- budget process is the means for ensuring that
the regional water supply plans are implemented; years >; no, but for acquisition, etc., we do those on 5 year cycles;
WMDs have extensive databases available & now no longer have to charge for our
computer access;
Plans need to be adaptive, flexible in order.to do adaptive management, but users
need longer term surety which must be based on most effective use of resources based
upon WMD plans; plans are approved, not adopted because they are not meant to be
binding, except where portions are later rule promulgated
WMDs focusing on water use caution areas planning; focusing planning & funding in
these areas; extensive SOR funds made available for water storage; looking at
ecological, as well as public and business, water supply deliveries
Trying to upgrade water supply facilities, additional structures to enhance recharge
and storage
cost sharing (SFWMD $5.7 million this year) with local governments
doing exploratory drilling based on SW Plan
* [Fred Rapach] shouldn't the plans be adopted by rule? used for land planning it isn't regulatory by itself; only those portions would be
adopted as rules would be regulatory; see the chapter 187.101(2), FS, type language>
* [Pattison] LGCPs are 20-year plans with 5 year fiscal planning
* [Janet] Funding should be consistent with the needs & sources' plans < Wehle if it isn't
in plan, then funding wouldn't be allowed until plan is changed to include the issue>
* [Littlejohn] once adopted, then certain actions would have to be done according to the plan
an example is operational schedule how are people assured that this will happen

* [Hopping] why are these structures operated flood control, water recharge to aquifer,
etc.? reasons >
* [Littlejohn] we're really talking about having service delivery plans meaning something;
the WMD has to commit to do what's in the plan service delivery plans & the WMDs do not think they have that
responsibility >;


do we make the plans dependable>; should give you that predictability >; we're making structural changes >; made to plan for 5-10 years in the future & my future needs won't be assured for how
they operated this past year> future> ; ; on SFWMD, they're probably the exception to the rule; the issue is what is the role of
the WMDs in water supply development, rather than planning >; you make the non-regulatory portions of the plans meaningful > ; inter-agency and multi-party agreements like SJRWMD has done with farming
interests >; their other actions; the "sleeping dog" is OPAGA the setting of performance
standards (performance-based budgeting) >;
* [audience] aren't we going to have to get to dividing up water allocations what the plans are attempting to do
* [Mark Farrell/audience] needs & sources approaches are very different between the
districts; < Wehle but the districts have differing situations, so why shouldn't there be
differing approaches> ; standardizations that can be used for the regional water supply plans between the
districts, as we did for the DWMPs> ;
* [LG rep] when LGCPs are talking about 5 year CIE, we also have to identify the funding
* [audience] we have problem doing agricultural demand planning part of the needs & sources? >; missing from LGCPs? > ; greatly for water supply demands depending upon the type of agr. & industrial users,
especially when they're self-supplied; aren't self-suppliers the issue? However, it's not
clear what use this information would be for land use planning > ; < Hopping: self-users
could provide this if there was a "no-fault/no foul" system in place to not penalize
them >
* [Littlejohn] action oriented planning vs. passive level planning problem; we need more
FDOT-type planning in water supply planning a forcing action type of planning is
needed to focus on problem prevention, solutions and options; < Hopping: private
sector has a better ability to redirect itself; we don't need "a" plan, but plans to give
direction >;


* [Janet] regional water supply authorities issue; DWMPs and other WMD plans>
* [LG rep] Remove Obstacles: we have a lack of WMD information, uncertainty of changing
regulations; un-coordinated providers and service areas, lack of planning for identifying
future wellfields and wellfield protection; < Wehle we're helping identify which lands
are the best for wellfield locations> ; local governments from which to choose >;

process >; < Jake-the land use decisions are made by local governments, based on
WMD data >;
[Hopping] inability to rely on long-range regional & state plans;
[LG rep} lack of integrating planning and regulations between WMDs and local
governments; follow and be consistent with these planning directions a link between planning and
regulations; need to plan to match these two issues up >;
[LG rep] an issue is linking land use & water planning; government has done 20 year water supply planning?; LGCP planning has focused on
hardware, not resource> ;
[audience/Gene Bowles] we did 20 year planning from valid permits, but these got taken
back; permits? >; < Pattison the EARs they showed 5 possible sources for supply,
including R.O. plants, one of the most controversial issues in the Pinellas area>
[audience/Gene Bowles] nothing allows you to protect a wellfield in advance from
competing uses such as agriculture, development, etc. water rights law; a major problem is the split between]
[Wehle] the WMDs are doing 20-year water supply planning; we could reserve certain
types of water for any use those mechanisms are in place, but we can't stop the
accompanying land use decisions that may be happening in the meantime; we need water supply element in chapter 163, to address the sources for potable water
supply >; ; may not be holding our feet to the fire on this> ; between regional water supply plans and LGCPs LGCPs would have to be consistent
with regional water supply plans> ; ;
< Hopping: is there a way to move towards this?>

** We will try to figure out a way to summarize and distribute today's comments to everyone
** We will try to get out a list of comments that we feel are consensus items
** Next meeting is December 6th
** Next we will take up Development, then address Regulation

Consolidated Summary of Perceived Problems
Related to Water Supply Development
Committee on Water Supply Development


Statewide vs. regional problems and solutions: Need for flexibility of approach to develop
regional solutions; lack of regional consensus on source development and funding allocations;
parochial view of resource use.

Lack of clarity of roles: Of local governments, regional water supply authorities, WMDs, and
state agencies in water supply planning. Who takes the lead? How many levels of plans are

Lack of information: Regarding needs and sources, minimum flows and levels, water
availability, projections for water demands, etc., upon which to base water supply planning.
(Question: What is the cause of this and how can it be remedied? Is it due tofunding,
workload, and technical limitations or poor coordination among governmental entities?);
inability of agriculture to predict its future demands; lack of peer review of modeling

Absence of linkages between plans and between permitting and planning: At the local,
regional, and state levels; confusion regarding the connection between regional water supply
plans and regulatory programs, and the legal significance of the plans; inadequate
consideration of the tie between land use plans and the availability of sustainable water

Inadequate representation in planning processes: Agriculture is not adequately represented
in water supply planning process due to lack of technical/industry resources and unified
position: the present system for making water supply development decisions denies the public
the opportunity to participate in a consensus-building process.

Gaps in statutory guidance: Inconsistent or inadequate statewide goals regarding
development of alternative supplies; lack of statutory definitions for key terms such as
"sustainable," "minimum flows and levels," and "water supply development"; lack of defined
criteria or level of service for supplying source water.


Uncertainty, confusion, and inflexibility in regulation, including: Changing regulatory
regimes and slowness of agency responsiveness; different interpretations of regulations, e.g.,
wetlands policies, permit conditions, groundwater management criteria, reuse; inconsistent
criteria at WMD boundaries; lack of coordination between DEP and WMDS, at both state


headquarters and regional district levels; inability to mitigate wetland impacts from wellfield
withdrawals like other wetland permitting criteria; delays in adapting existing regulations to
accommodate the utilization of emerging technologies for alternative water supply
development, such as aquifer storage and recovery, desalination, and reuse; Unclear law and
policy regarding how MFLs are to be established and enforced; PSC rate setting (does not
allow reasonable cost recovery); inconsistency between PSC, DEP, and WMD regulations;
lack of regulatory incentives for alternative technologies and sources; barriers to interconnects
between private and government-owned utilities.

Inadequate protection for existing legal users: There is a need for short-term source
security, e.g., stronger "rights" to permit renewals for existing legal users and issuance of
maximum duration consumptive use permits; permit durations generally are insufficient to
recover investments or provide certainty to agricultural users.

Inadequate protection for the environment: Water is not being managed to assure that it will
be a sustainable resource over time.

Interdistrict transfers of water: Concerns regarding both inappropriate water transfers and
unreasonable prohibition of water transfers.

Lack of independent scientific peer review: To verify data, which would foster confidence in
and acceptability for the scientific basis for regulations.


Lack of clarity of roles of state, regional, and local entities in water supply development:
Lack of consensus on what entity should have primary responsibility (e.g., local government,
water management districts, others); problems with structure and function of regional water
supply authorities.

Resistance to development of alternative sources,to conservation, and reuse (because of
lack of funding, regulatory obstacles, inadequate incentives, perception ?).

Lack of feasibility of options: For particular user groups and areas of the state (e.g., ability
to pay for options or geographic constraints such as for desalination)

Funding constraints: Lack of adequate, equitable,long-term funding, resulting in delays in
development and lack of infrastructure; utility revenues re-directed to non-water supply uses,
diverting a substantial source of funding for water supply development; need for increased
access to public funding sources by private utilities.

GOV OFF. OF ENU. AFF. TEL:1-904-922-6200 Dec 03.96 15:26 No.011 P.02


TO: Water Supply Funding Core Committee members

FROM: onny Vrgara and Phil Parsons, Co-Chairmen

RE: December 6, 1996 Meeting

DATE: December 2, 1996

Attached please find the following items:

1. Agenda for Friday's meeting at the Betty Easley Conference Center, Public Service

2. Annotated/amended proposed committee charge for your review and consideration.

3. Compiled/categorized problem statement/solution submittals.

We've got a lot to accomplish prior to putting our February package together and we're looking
forward to seeing and hearing from all of you at the meeting. Thank you for your interest and

GOU OFF. OF ENV. AFF. TEL:1-904-922-6200

December 6, 1996
9:15-11:40, 12:40 3:00


9:00 Full Group Plenary

9:15 Funding Committee Introduction and Agenda Review

.9:20 Overview of Committee Meeting Plan- December-January

9:30 Review of Problems/Solutions Framework

10:00 Review of Committee Charge/Overall Problem Statement

10:30 Stretch Break

10:40 Public Service Commission Presentation- Questions and Answers- Problems and

11:10 Investor Owned Utilities- Questions and Answers- Problems and Solutions

11:40 Early Lunch

12:40 Funding Goals to meet future water Supply Needs
Water Management District discussion

1:30 Identifying Funding Options and Combinations of Funding Options

2:30 Review and Adoption of Committee Charge/Overall Problem Statement

2:40 Next Steps and Review of Assignments

3:00 Adjourn

*There will be an optional Full Group Wrap-up aftcr the 3:00 adjoumunent for those who are interested In hearing
and discussing hoe status and progress of the other group's activities, discussion, and possible recommendations.
"The next full group meeting is scheduled for December 1 S at the Public Service Commission Betty Easley
Conference Centor.

Dec 03.96

15:27 No.011 P.03

GOV DFF. OF ENU. AFF. TEL:1-904-922-6200 Dec 03.96 15:27 No.011

The Core Committee's Charge: Amended/Annotated December

Water Supply Funding Core Committee Charge problem statement :recommended

CG: Casey Gluckman
FM: Frank Matthews
PM: Pam McVety

a. Florida has an abundance of water, having vast quantities stored both above and
below its land surfaces and being surrounded on three sides by the Gulf of Mexico
and the Atlantic Ocean. FM recommends that this initial sentence be retained as
critical to the charge. CG recommends the replacement of this sentence. PM
reworked CG's draft, therefore the original sontonco was not included in her

The challenge for Florida Is to provide water for human uses in light of a growing
population while developing and maintaining sustainahle water supply sources nd
proLecting the environment from slnilficant harm. FM recommends that CG's
paragraph be modified as the emboldened language above provides.

b. Competition between parties, therefore, is not over water, per se, but over the
lowest costing water. FM recommends that the original sentence be retained as
critical to the charge. CG recommends the replacement of this sentence. PM
reworked CG's draft, therefore the orginiel sentence was not included in her

To meet this challenge will require assessing the need for additional wator:
eliminating and minimizing impediments and disincentives to water supply
development: determining the best sources for this water identifying the cost of
develoPing these sources and funding their development in an equitable manner.
FM recommends that CG's paragraph be modified as the emboldened language
above provides.
c. Water for human uses becomes problematic when cost or price:

1. becomes so great that the general public perceives it as affecting their
standard of living (political);
ii. becomes so great that businesses find they cannot compete (economical):
iii. causes competition with and adverse harm to natural systems which, in
turn, adversely affects the human condition (environmental).


GOU OFF. OF ENU. AFF. TEL:1-904-922-6200 Dec 03.96 15:27 No.011 P.05

d. The primary factors that influence the cost of water are:

the status of the source; i.e. is it depleted or impacted (availability) PM;
I. the physical distance between source and demand (transmission);
ii. the political "distance" between source and demand (governmental
cooperation and public acceptance: CG and PM);
Iil. the legal "distance" between source and demand (water use permitting);
the Incentives or lack of incentives for conservation and reuse of water: CG
and PM.
iv. the capital facilities needed to capture, treat, store and deliver water
v. the cost of money.
the status of infrastructure: PM;
the growth of demand: PM;
environmental requirements: PM
increasing environmental impacts:PM;and
the historical under-pricing of water :PM.

e. Currently S(s)ome areas have ample water supplies at acceptable cost or price. Other
areas have over-spent their local water budget and are looking either to transport
of water from outside their area or to high tech solutions, both of which are costly
to the donor and donee local governments and the environment: CG. FM
recommends the the original e. be retained as the non-italicized text provides.

f. The problem, therefore, Is how to make water available for human uses at a price
that is economically, politically and environmentally acceptable when and where
such availability does not exist. CG recommends that the emboldened words be
deleted. FM recommends that the original f. be retained as the non-Itallcized text

The basic objective of the Water Supply Funding Core Committee might be further stated,
therefore, as:

1. To determine wayc that will maintain the price of delivered water at levels that
are economically, politically and environmentally acceptable where needed,

GOV OFT. O ENV. A;;. TEL:1-904-922-6200

To: Water Supply Funding Core Conuniticc tmemibers
Date: December 2, 1996

The responses received to date from seven members (Oluckman, McVcty, Matthews, Whitson, Sogal, Reynoldb &
Wnlker) have boon organized below into several categories that relate to the committee's tasks. The problemc/eolutions
are In synopsis form with referral back to each member's numbered suggestion. Uacll member's full statement of the
problem/solutions is available for your review in the packet you received by mail. The task categories include:
1. Overall range and amount of funding needs
2. Funding Options and combination of options
3. Factors in Determining Equitable Cost Distribution
4. Roles and Responsiblhlllties In Water Supply Funding
5. Options for Adiilnlstra(lon and Distribution of New Sources of Funds
6. Other identified problems/solutions regarding water supply funding
At the meeting we will look at these categories as the products nnd aclionn needed in our Committee workplan and
discuss whether additional or different categories (or actions) are appropriate. Those problem statements and solutions
that fall within the Inck\cntegory will be discussed fully when we begin that task, We will also look at those problem
statements and solutions submitted that do not fall within the 5 tasks/categories above (See page 7 of this packet) and
decide how they should be addressed by this colmittcc before moving through the workplan tasks.

1. Overall range of future funding need

Identify the amount (or range) of funds needed to meet future water supply needs (Co-chairs- Vergara/Parsons)

Funding for continuing current supply is adequate, except in few areas where supply sources aic conuuninalcd or
causing significant adverse impacts to the water sources. Determine costs to fix there problems (Gluck-man ll &2

SPaying for the full cost of water supply development. (including environmental impacts, impact on adjacent property
values etc.) (Scgal U6)

True economic and environmental costs must be assessed. Identify factors to be used in determining the "true cost"
of water. (full cost accounting) (McVcty #1 (a))

2. Options/Combinations of funding

*Identify in a clear formal. all existing sources of potential funding. Then, i.d, which of those can be enhanced through
beer usage, through increases, or through restructuring how they are used. (C(luckman)

State revolving loan fund for small and medium systems, (10-15% set aside) to support drinking water systems
(SDWAA 1996) (Local Govi/Whitson #3)

Access to public finding for investor owned utilities should be the same at that available to government owned
utilities (Walker #3)

* Mood at all government levels not to raise taxes or fees (Gluckman U5)

3. Identifying Pactors in determining equitable cost distribution

* Accounting for "ability to pay" in paying for waler supply development. (Segal #1)

* Identify beneficiaries of water supply development and have them pay. Those receiving the most direct benefit (i.e.
customers) should shoulder the most burdcn.(Segal #3)

Dec 03.96

15:28 No.011 P.06

GDV OFF. OF ENV. AF:. TEL:1-904--922-62000 Dec 03.96 15:29 No.011 P.07

SLocal govt. choosing to encourage growth should bear greatest burden of cratIng means to pay for Inf rstructure for
growth through impact fees, user fees, bonds, general revenue, etc. (Gluckman ft)

Once source of water supply is agreed upon and all local sources identified, only thcn should outside Afuds be
considered (Gluckman #9)

Paying for multi purpose projects. (e.g. flood protection, water quality and natural ricsurce benefits). WMD nood
funding options to equitably allocate among the project benefits and user groups. (Segal S5)

4. Roles and responslbilltlos In Water Supply Funding

Local govorunoint identify growth it seeks ind water needed to support growIt, Identify supply sources In cooperation
with water supply utilities, WMD, the public etc. (Gluckman 1/7)

Regional supply facilities should look to all govt. jurisdictions benefitting (Gluckinan #8)

Paying for regional supply solutions. Develop model institutional frameworks for funding regional (multi-
juriadictional water supply development projects. (Sogal 14)

Identify the private and public entitles which should have responsibility for funding water supply facilities in some
priority order. (Gluckrnan)

To extent diat a multi purpose project provides additional benefits. WMD may choose to participate in the capital cost.
(Sogal fB5)

Limitations on NWFWMD's ability to partclpate in developing alternative water supplies. (Segal #9)

1'or the Lower East Coast. a key finding problem involves determining the method of allocation of costs and
responsibilities of water supply (over 1 billion) and Everglades restoration (over 2 billion). (Reynolds)

5. Options for administration/distribution of new sources of funds

SPSC and reuse, & environmental compliance/policies (Matthews #3)

Reward vs. punish for rcusc/conscrvation/ recycling will long term 20 yr CUPs (Matthews #6)

Paying for reuse projects (public and private utilities) (Segal #7)

Increase conservation/reuse through funding incentives etc.(Gluckman fS)

Funding for alternative supply development options. What new sources can be found for altenmtive supply
development including conservation and new technnlngies) What aspects need most funding (research, planning, land
acquisition, inirastnicturc, etc.) Review funding incentives, rate structure. regulatory incentives, overcoming
technological obstacles. (McVety #3)

Identify a list of potential new funding sources, with consideration to the doable. lThese new sources should be
triggered only when all existing sources havo been included. (Gluckman)

I Paying for water supply solutions for existing users. Should funding of project reducing existing withdrawals or
mitigating unacceptable impacts be different from more traditional water supply projects? (Sogal#8)

Remove financial disincentives for investor owned utilities to promote conservation because their financial return is
dependent on level of customer's water consumption. (Walker #2)

GOV OFF. OF ENV. AFF. TEL:1-904-922-6200

6. Other Problem/ Solutions Offered

Below are problems/solutions offered which didn't fit neatly into the 5 categories above. Upon your review of these,
we can discuss each to determine: 1) should it be placed in one of the 5 categories? 2) should it be placed in a new
eslcgory? 3) should it be delivered to the Development Committee for their work? 4) Doos it need to be dealt with by
both committees? or 5) la it not port of this overall work group process?

a. Water Supply Problems in Different Areas have Differont Optimal Solutions. (i.e. one size does not fit all). WMDs
in consultation with local governments and private utilities recommend optimal and optional funding solutions for area
(Sogal #2)

b. Remove existing impediments to water supply production, transmission and distribution. Prior to socking additional
dollars to expand supply. (Matthews Nov. 15 letter)

c. PSC rating making-"used and useful" discourages utility Inveslment In both traditional and Innovative water supply
projects (Walker #1)

d. Consistency regulatory message and mechanism for investor owned utilities. PSC's ratemoking practices haven't'
evolved with same focus as DEP and WMD's environmental policies. (Walker #4)

e.Large Capital Costs (debt service) and permit acdustments in allocation. Coordinate permits to coincide with financial
mechanisms wherever possible.(Local Govt. Whitson #2)

f. State Land Acquisitions- recommend authorizing state acquisition funds and existing state lands for water supply
development, transmission and distribution ( Matthews #1)

g. Cost of Monitoring for Contaminants. less restrictive monitoring requirements enacting to alleviate cxooss burden
of monitoring 100s of contaminants/ tests (Local Govt. Whltson, #4)

h. Surface Water Supply Development- disposing of byproducts from reverse osmosis and desal. Financial and
regulatory incentives to promote envir. sound alternatives. (Local GovtJ Whitson f'1)

I. Underground Injection- water quality constraints limit aquifer storage and recovery. Adopt Safe Drinking Water Act
criteria (Matthews #2)

j. Interconnection- between public and privately owned utilities to falllalte ctmClent and cost effective delivery of water
(Matthews #4)

k. Lower Iast Cnait- COE and SFWMD full partners with water suppliers and modify surface water storage and
conveyance systems for water supply purposes. (Mnttlhws #5)

1. funding sources for LEC projects. Funding for projects that supply water to ENP or that provide water to ENP by
diverting water from local users may be funded by the federal government. (Reynolds, possible solutions)

m. Growth mnnagemcnt- tic a piece water supply funding to government growth management planning to make sure
both considered together and rely on best available information. (Gluckman #6)

n. Water Supply Resolution Process. Recommend a process for local govcnnomnt, regional water suppliers or water
management districts to use to identify how much additional water must be supplied in a particular area and what the
new water supply source or sources will be. (Gluckman)

Dec 03.96

15:29 No.011 P.08

Water Supply Development and Funding

Development Roles

Local Governments

Private Utilities






DEP Water Facilities

DEP Districts




Actual Capital Facility Development
Part of capital improvement plans, CIE of LGCPs (Public Utilities)

All aspects of development. Regulated by PSC in 38 counties.
(These serve a small fraction of users, about 10%.)
Varies by RWSA (373.1962) (Public Utilities)


Water Resources Capital Projects. Land Acquisition.








Water Supply Development and Funding

Regulation. Planning and Monitoring Roles

Entity Regulation, Planning &/or Monitoring
Local Governments Land use, water supply planning; wellhead protection; LDRs; Monitoring (CUP
Requirements) (163.3177, 373.1961, 9J-5)
Private Utilities None? (may request WHP plan from LG)
Monitoring (CUP Requirements)
RWSAs Water supply planning Monitoring (CUP Requirements)

RPCs Strategic Regional Policy Plans (186.507-508) LGCP review
Mitigation of extra-jurisdictional impacts DRI review
Land use and water supply planning linkages
Growth Management Technical Assistance (186.505(20))
WMDs Well Construction Permitting (Ch. 373 Part III) Technical Assistance (373.0391)
Consumptive Use Permitting (Ch. 373 Part II) Demand Management
District Water Mgt. Plans (Ch. 62-40, F.A.C.) Regional plans
Promotion of Alternative Sources
Exploratory Drilling, Canal Operation, Land Acq. for regional storage (varies from
DCA LGCP reviews; DRI and FQD reviews; ACSC; Environmental siting
(Ch. 163, 240, 380, 403; 9J-5)
DEP State Water Policy (Ch. 62-40, F.A.C.) Oversight of WMDs

DEP Water Facilities SDWA and CWA SRF implementation (Drinking Water and Wastewater);
Ambient Monitoring: Surface Water and Ground Water
Facility permit, monitoring, and compliance rulemaking
DEP Districts Drinking Water and Wastewater Facility permit processing and oversight

PSC Rate setting limited to private utilities

HRS Oversight of Limited Use Drinking Water facilities (Ch. 10D-4, F.A.C.)

Federal SDWA, CWA requirements


Water Supply Development and Funding

Funding Sources

Entity Funding Sources
Local Governments Revenue, municipal bonds (180.08(1)); customer revenues.
(Mortgate revenue certificates, debentures)
Private Utilities Bond, stock sales; bank loans; customer revenues (367.081, Rates; procedure for
fixing and changing).
RWSAs Ad valorem taxes (373.1962(2)(a)); revenue bonds (373.1962(2)(f)); loans,
indebtedness bonds (373.1962(2)(h)); customer revenues (from LGs, not users).
RPCs Various (186.505(8)-(9))

WMDs Ad valorem tax revenue (373.503) Revenue Bonds (373.584)
Loans (373.559) P-2000 (others?)
Obligation bonds (373.563)
DCA Federal HUD funds for Community Dvpmt Block Grants

DEP None

DEP Water Federal SRF moneys from SDWA, CWA
DEP Districts None

PSC Fees on regulated community

HRS None

Federal EPA: Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act State Revolving Funds
(moneys to state; administered by DEP Water Facilities Funding)
USDA: Rural Utilities Service (administered by USDA Rural Dvpmt. Office)
HUD: Community Dvpmt Block Grants (moneys to state; administered by DCA)

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