Title: Water Supply Funding Core Group - Draft of Jan. 23, 1997
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004811/00001
 Material Information
Title: Water Supply Funding Core Group - Draft of Jan. 23, 1997
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Water Supply Funding Core Group - Draft of Jan. 23, 1997 (JDV Box 39)
General Note: Box 29, Folder 4 ( Water Supply Issues Group (File 2 of 3) - 1996 ), Item 11
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004811
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

Attorneys at Law
541 Old Magnolia Road
Crawfordville, Florida 32327

FAX: 904-421-2426


To: Water Funding Core Group

From: Phil Parson, Co-chair
Keith Hedrick
Pam McVety
Steve Walker

Date: January 22, 1997

This transmission contains 4 pages including this cover sheet.


As your drafting group, we have attempted to include all the ideas and
positions on which this group reached consensus (or appeared to). This attempt
resulted in the draft which follows. Please review the attached draft and be prepared
to discuss it when we meet on Wednesday, January 29. Please also identify any
issues which we missed in preparing the draft.



January 23, 1997


To review existing funding authority for water resource development and water
supply development and recommend new funding as necessary.


There is considerable existing revenue-raising authority for water projects at the
local, regional and state levels. However, increasing water demand and limited
natural resources suggest that limited new revenue sources.are needed to meet a
few specific circumstances.


1. General principles:

a. Beneficiaries of water projects should pay the costs of the projects from which
they benefit.

b. Water management districts should take the lead in identifying and
implementing water resource development projects. Most regionally significant
water resource projects should be paid for through water management district

c. Local governments and water utilities should take the lead in identifying and
implementing water supply development projects. Most water supply projects
should continue to be paid for through local water users and other local funding

d. An entity with revenue-raising authority should have the ability to allocate those
funds and should not be mandated to spend those funds on a particular program or

2. The Regional Water Supply Plans developed and adopted by the water
management districts should provide the framework for identifying water resource
development projects, water supply development needs, reasonably available water

sources, and options to assist local government and water supply decision-makers in
identifying funding needs.

3. It appears there is a need for water resources development. These needs are best
identified through the Regional Water Supply Plans. Each water management
district's Plan should include both existing funding and additional funding needs to
carry out their responsibilities as these water resource development goals are

4. Each Regional Water Supply Plan should include the amount of funding; the
source of funds, where appropriate; and the existence of any funding shortfalls for
the implementation of the water management district responsibilities identified in
the Plan.

5. The water supply and water resource problems of the Lower East Coast are
different from other areas in the state and may require a unique funding solution.

6. To meet existing and future local capital needs for production of water supply,
local governments and water utilities should be given additional revenue-raising

While local referenda requirements should not be attached to any additional
authority provided, the following policies should be required to provide
local governments should expressly articulate the public policy
considerations for selecting the new funding source, how the money will be
spent and the relationship to other existing sources of funding for water
local governments may use the new money on projects of primarily local
impact, but, if the project will have interjurisdictional impacts, the project
must serve a regional purpose and avoid interjurisdictional conflict.
if private water utilities exist in the area, a local government accessing these
new funding sources must allow the private utility to share in these monies
since the utilities' customers will contribute to the payment of these taxes.
these new monies must not be used to replace, supplant or support the
diversion of existing levels of funding for water projects for use on projects or
activities unrelated to water.

7. There should be new funding to allow the districts or state to provide limited
funding for projects which contribute to the greater public good. To be of "greater
public good", a project must be of regional or statewide significance, must support
the strategies of the Regional Water Supply Plan and must:
create a nearby, dependable, sustainable supply of water which is not
otherwise financially feasible through use of other available funding sources,

be economically or environmentally superior in preventing or limiting
adverse areawide water resource impacts but which is initially more
expensive than other potential alternatives, or
make significant implementation of reuse or conservation of water in a
manner which contributes to the sustainability of regional water sources.

8. It is in the long-term best interest of Florida for the Legislature adopt enabling
legislation and to appropriate the required 20% matching funds to allow the use of a
revolving loan fund through access to new moneys available under the
amendments to the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
State appropriation of $8.8 million for federal FY 1997 generates a total of
$57 million.
State appropriation of $6.9 million for federal FY 1998 generates a total of
$41 million.

9. Given the likelihood of limited new funding and recognizing the various types
of problems which need to be addressed, the Legislature should consider providing
further public policy direction on prioritizing the use of new funding.

The drafting group has reviewed the definitions for "water supply development"
and "water resources development" as currently proposed by the Planning
Committee. We suggest that the Funding Committee adopt the following changes:

"Water resources development" means the formulation and implementation of
regional water resource management strategies, including the collection and
evaluation of surface water and groundwater data; non-structural programs to
protect water sources; the development of regional water resource implementation
programs; and the construction, operation and maintenance of major public works
facilities to provide for flood control, surface and underground water storage, and
groundwater recharge augmentation; and technical assistance to local governments
and water utilities.

"Water supply development" means the planning, design, construction, operation,
and maintenance of public or private facilities for water collection, treatment,
transmission and distribution for sale, resale, or end use.

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