The new legislation aimed to make sure there’s enough water for everyone. But, there was a lot of arguing over the details. Some people wanted to plan ahead and protect the environment, while others were more focused on getting more water now. It’s still a work in progress. In 1996, the Florida Legislature tried to pass laws about water, but they couldn’t agree on much. Then a group of different people from agriculture, development, and other areas got together to try and come up with a plan for using water in the whole state. The governor also made some rules to help guide the state on water issues. The Governorâs Office and the Florida Water Coalition worked together to come up with recommendations for getting more water in the state. They had some disagreements and couldn’t resolve everything before the new legislative session started. The House of Representatives was now mostly Republican, which meant things were going to be different. The Governor didn’t have as much support as before, and he had to work harder to get his ideas passed. In 1997, Speaker Webster appointed John Laurent as chair of the House Water and Resource Management Committee, which was a big deal because Laurent was known for being really knowledgeable about water issues. The Governor had to negotiate his position through the committee process just like everyone else, which led to a sensible plan for managing Florida’s water resources. Several important water proposals were brought up in the legislative houses, with different focuses and recommendations. Senator Latvala was also dealing with other environmental and resource legislation. In 1997, the Florida legislature passed a new water bill to address issues with water management and supply. The bill made changes to state and regional water plans, created new requirements for water management districts, and clarified marine fisheries provisions. The main focus of the bill was to ensure that there was enough water for everyone to use, while also protecting natural systems. The bill was the most significant change to Florida water law in 25 years. Water management districts are responsible for identifying and carrying out projects to develop water resources. They also have to find the money needed for these projects. Each district has to include the necessary funding in its annual budget to implement these projects. The law clearly outlines the responsibilities of the water management districts and water suppliers in developing water sources. The districts must focus on finding potential water sources and creating plans to bring them into use. The law also requires the districts to include funding for these priority projects in their annual budgets. This gives the districts some oversight that they didn’t have before. In 1997, a new water bill (HB 715) was passed in Florida, which had many important changes to the state’s water policies. Some key points include:
– Districts had to assess their water supply and plan for future needs.
– They had to consider physical changes to water resources when setting minimum flows and levels.
– They had to prioritize water resource development and bring new sources online when cutting back withdrawals.
– The bill also changed governance and budgeting provisions for water districts.
– It renamed and redefined the state water policy and gave more legislative oversight.
– It included changes to the West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority and district employment and spending practices.
Overall, the bill aimed to better manage and protect Florida’s water resources. Swiftmud did a good job with the science behind setting the minimum aquifer level, but they went too far with giving special treatment to existing water users. The court said they can’t do that. The ruling also said that water users don’t have to use alternative sources if it’s too expensive. This is all happening because there are more and more people using the water, and the laws don’t give special privileges to people who have been using it for a long time. The District has a lot of power to make decisions about water use, but they don’t have specific criteria for how they make those decisions. A judge recommended that the District give 10-year permits to existing wellfields in the Tampa Bay region because using the water is beneficial and won’t cause any problems for other water users. This is important for providing clean drinking water to people in the area. The evidence shows that the water being taken from the wells in St. Petersburg is being used to the fullest extent possible. There is no proof that there is enough water closer to St. Petersburg for the people living there. The judge’s findings only apply to the people who want to use the water for drinking. Even though taking water from the wells has caused some problems, even if pumping stopped, it’s unlikely the affected areas would go back to how they were before. The government needs to think carefully about its decision on the wellfield permits, especially with other important water issues in the area. Everyone in the Tampa Bay region needs to work together to solve the water supply problems. If they focused on solving the problems instead of fighting and blaming each other, they could be a great example for other places facing similar challenges. The resolution of ongoing water wars in the region is being closely watched by other districts, governments, environmentalists, agricultural and development interests, and legislators. It’s unclear if the disputes will be resolved through litigation or legislation. The outcome will have a big impact on everyone involved. Sally Bond Mann is an attorney in Tallahassee who focuses on environmental and land use law. She’s really knowledgeable about water management and has written articles on property rights and habitat regulation. She’s also involved with The Florida Bar Journal.
This column is written on behalf of the Environmental and Land Use Law Section.
Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/more-than-a-drop-in-the-bucket-florida-water-resources-act-ii/
Leave a Reply