Okay, test on the mic. Looks like we're on here.
Check, one, two.
Okay, sure.
Call of order, the governing board of the St. John's River Water Management District, February 9th, 2021, 10 o'clock a meeting.
Welcome to the morning. I'm Doug Burnett, chair of the St. John's River Water Management District's governing board.
For those watching our live stream, please be aware that there may be a slight delay. If you have any unexpected technical difficulties with your connection, today's video will also be available for replay.
Follow board members for all items requiring a vote. We will do survey, roll call, ask them, let's show off in comments.
Asking questions, reporting that you please mute your phones in order to minimize noise and the electronic effect of echo. Thank you.
And let's begin. So, pledge of allegiance.
Where does the flag? Okay.
I pledge allegiance to the flag, the United States of America, and to the Republic of the St.
One Nation, under God, and to the physical, the liberty of justice, and so on.
One personal note, if you were at the ceremony yesterday, thank you so much for attending.
If you notice during the pledge of allegiance, I might not put my hand over my heart. It's the customary for military to stand at the position.
I'm standing at the position of attention without hand over heart. That really applies to uniform. I may have forgotten. I just don't remember.
So, if it did, it was a part of our particular approach to that piece of democracy there.
I want to thank the city of Apoco for hosting the governing board meeting.
Really classy chambers. I always told this was a former high school basketball court.
It's a high ceiling, but look at what a great job that the leadership had done. Mr. Mayor Mary Nelson. Thank you, sir.
For that. I'd like to recognize our elected officials. This important.
That's the mainstream of democracy is those that go to work for us every day.
So, I'll just call you name pass. Okay.
If it's never green, orange, auto-bottom, society.
Thank you. Appreciate what you do. Auto-bottom is important to us, part of our mission as well.
The top stamp is also served with the Auto-bottom, society. Thank you.
Channel of Rosar, save our likes. Great group up in Keystone Heights.
City of Apoco, Diane Bellords, File Reddit, right? Commissioner?
Got it. Sorry about your name, ma'am.
Just a beast, dude. I missed some of those things of text.
And former Chairman John McClose, recognized him, former Chairman of the Board, the governing board,
and started the project that resulted in the groundbreaking yesterday for our new facility here.
And Mayor Brian Nelson, sir. Thank you again. Appreciate you hosting this. Nice town.
I drove around this morning, and yesterday, and you got a lot of territory here.
Fifty-six thousand folks you got live in Apoco, terrific.
And Joe Kilsumer, FOLA. Sara, thank you.
John Grady, public trust. Very good. And CCUA, let's go over it.
There you go. Thank you. And a lean guy. Thank you. Good morning.
George Bankson, Commissioner City of Apoco.
Hi, sir. Thank you. Met one of your colleagues yesterday, the African-American gentleman.
It seemed like it's kind of guy you like to be around, you know?
Headbass Apoco City Manager. What is a big job?
Thank you. Were you the shepherd over the renovation of this, sir?
Nice job. Okay.
Bo call, Burnett here, Senator Bradley.
Here. Yes, sir. Estolen?
Present.
Mr. House.
The other button, Ron.
Jan Price. Here.
Thank you, Doug Burnique. Here.
Chris Peters. Here. Here.
Here we go. Here. Contact, Ron. Good to hear you.
Here. You always appreciate your inputs. Okay.
Council, Director of Reflect. We do have a forum.
Consideration item number two, approval going board item.
It's like a scent agenda.
Staff to have any public comments on at this point.
No, nothing heard.
So any board members wish to pull any items for consideration by the
Board. Having heard none. Do we have a motion?
Motion made by Estolen.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Peterson. Second.
Further discussion?
Having heard none.
Roll call vote. Burnett. Yes.
Bradley.
Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Allen.
President, are you?
Mr. House.
Yes.
Thanks, sir.
Mr. Price.
Mr. Bonee?
Yes.
Mr. Peterson.
Yes.
Mr. Strolley? Yes.
Are you vote? You've announced an approved item number two, the consent agenda.
Biosolids.
Dr. Marsoff.
Approach to podium.
We have a stat of public comments.
Thank you, Lisa.
Just for clarity, do we want to go through the hydroportals?
Go right to Biosolids.
Pardon me?
Do we want to go through the hydrologic conditions for report or go straight to Biosolids?
Okay. Sometimes the chair gets an agenda, not exactly that system.
So we don't see it here.
All right.
Let's have a hydrologic report, please.
Okay.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Members of the Board.
Eric Marsoff, Director of the Division of Water and Land Resources.
Here to present the February hydrologic conditions report reflecting data from the month of January.
The purpose of this report is to provide a snapshot of hydrologic conditions throughout the district.
The January rainfall was well below average in all but the most northern months, parts of the district.
Eight of the districts, 18 counties had less than half an inch of rain with Indian river receiving only 0.08 inches of rain, which is interesting.
The evaporation, the Vapotranspiration was 0.06 inches per day.
So much more evaporation than rainfall.
The counties that did receive the most rain was nas on the most northern part of the district received 2.8 inches of rain.
In spite of the very low rainfall last month on an annual average.
The district is in the average rain but ranging from 45 to 55 inches throughout the district and overall is about 1 inch below average.
Water flow conditions throughout the district were average for this time of year on virtually all the waterways.
In terms of volumetric flow rates, the St. John's at Melbourne was 116 million gallons per day, which corresponds to the 40th percentile for this day.
The St. John's station at Deland was 1.6 billion gallons per day, which is at the 56th percentile and the St. John's station at Satsuma was 3.7 billion gallons per day or the 66th percentile.
I'll now review some changes that selected lakes around the district.
Lake Brooklyn dropped half a foot during the month.
Lake Weir dropped 0.1 feet during the inch during the month.
Lake Apopka, which is part of a system of lakes where we regulate water levels with water control structures.
Stayed right at its regulation schedule through the month.
Blue Cypress Lake, which is also one of our regulated lakes at the headwaters of the St. John's dropped for 10th of a foot during January.
The upper floor in conditions at the end of January were in the normal range throughout much of the district with some zones still remaining in the high zone.
Several of our wells are indicated with red triangles indicating that at those locations we had more than a 10% decline from the previous month.
Overall, the floor in aquifer is at the 74th percentile.
I'll next review changes in flow at select springs around the district.
More members, if you have a comment on any of this, just jump right in.
I don't need to recognize you certainly want to hear your comments. So if you have a question.
And I know Dr. Marshall will be glad to hear that question.
Go ahead.
Absolutely. Thank you, sir.
Main monthly flow for silver springs was 654 CFS a decline of 14 CFS.
Main monthly flow at blue springs decreased to 180 CFS, which is remains in the high range for this time of year.
Flow at rock springs is also in the high range, but decline to CFS for the month.
Flow at when high was springs drop to CFS as well and is now in the high part of the normal range.
This month I've included a drought forecast map, which suggests predicts that drier than normal conditions through the spring in spite of the welcome rainfall we received this past weekend.
That concludes my report and be happy to address any questions.
Looks like the west got a real problem.
Was it drought?
Yes.
That goes to record.
Yes.
Equal showers.
No wait.
No showers.
Looks like.
Well, it will be interesting to see what the heavy snow is, what the snow pack in the Sierra's and Rockies provides.
Many of snow, but that's the one locally in terms of the streams and all.
Yeah.
That's the worst of all, but not necessarily.
Have you noticed anything in light meat?
Do you look at that occasionally?
Seems like a big benchmark for that area, because I know they get water and Los Angeles.
I do look at that periodically and you know, that part, you know, the Colorado River, that area is in a prolonged drought.
And you can see it in the bathtub ring that's visible around both.
That makes meat and power.
Thank you.
Okay, is that complete your brief?
Yes.
Now we're item three.
Help.
The biosolids of that next.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Members of the Board, Eric Mars, I've directed the Division of Water and Land Resources.
Today, I have the first to the contracts associated with our work funded by Grant from DEP on land application of biosolids and potential water quality issues for your consideration.
I showed you this plot last month, which illustrates the change in the land application of nitrogen and phosphorus in the upper St. Jones basin.
And we used this data and DEP's highly detailed permit records for class B applications and compared it with our ambient water quality network data to derive a strong circumstantial case that the land application of class B biosolids is associated with the increase in phosphorus.
We've observed in locations around the upper basin.
In 2018, DEP created a biosolids technical advisory committee consisting of stakeholders of environmental and cultural experts, large and small utilities, waste haulers, consultants, non-governmental organizations and academics.
That committee was convened to examine current options for biosolids management, better ways to manage biosolids to improve the protection of water resources and to consider what resource research is needed to improve biosolids management.
The district presented our data and analyses at two of these meetings.
The task concluded with recommendations for regulation as well as research to improve the understanding of how biosolids may contribute to water quality impairment.
One of their recommendations was to conduct research on the nutrient runoff through both surface and groundwater, which is the project in front of you for consideration today.
Today's items include more data collection in watersheds where biosolids have been applied and detailed study at the field scale to better understand how phosphorus moves through both surface and groundwater paths to our water bodies.
And that's the blue square circled in yellow.
In future months, we'll also have projects to evaluate environmental remediation technologies for fields with a long history of biosolids application and we also look at the feasibility of phosphorus recovery at wastewater treatment plants to reduce the total amount of phosphorus that winds up in the biosolids in the first place.
Over the next year, we anticipate bringing three additional contracts for your consideration.
At the end of this, we hope that we will have information to improve our biosolids permitting process enhance phosphorus recovery and reverse the current water quality trends we see.
The district was diligent in its efforts to advertise this applied research opportunity and to solicit input on the development of the quest for proposals.
On July 17, the district hosted a webinar outlining our research objectives and our intent to contract for applied research.
This webinar was well attended with 42 faculty from 12 different universities attending.
Ultimately, though, only one research team, a collaboration between UF and FSU submitted a proposal.
Other universities explained they lacked the relevant experience expertise facilities and time to conduct the necessary research.
The UF FSU research team has significant experience in the relevant areas.
You can see they have nearly two centuries experience amongst the ten team members in soil and groundwater work.
Nearly a centuries experience looking at organic compounds and 40 years research on biosolids themselves.
We determined this team to be well qualified and note that the ability to rely on UF FSU's agricultural extension is an additional advantage for this work.
Their proposal was within our budget and addressed our requested research topics and overall was rated highly by our team at 38.75 out of 40.
The budget for this research is 604,817 with an initial planning task that will be followed by three research tasks and ultimately followed by a synthesis and reporting tasks.
Each year in this contract will include a data delivery report.
The investigators will present their research findings and synthesis at a symposium in February 2024 with their final report expected in April of that year.
Staff request your approval of our request for proposals and reward of our contract to the University of Florida to improve phosphorus loading estimates associated with the land application class B biosolids.
And with a not to exceed amount of $65,000, be happy to address any questions.
I guess I'm the egg guy of the board and I've looked into this issue a little bit and this is nothing to do with this proposal.
My comments are general and nature but I've worked on water quality issues for this basin since 1979 trying to improve the upper basin working closely with Henry Dean and the staff here of this district to ensure a better future for this river system.
And as the state is grown, I've watched Dave Broward, Palm Beach County and the city of Tampa truck there, biosolids to our basin.
They're all moving because they've all outlawed the application of biosolids and the various basin south of us.
And yet we have a very sensitive basin with the universal lagoon and the St. John's River System that are where we're investing tens of millions to make better every day like a popgah all of the lakes or working to make a better place for our children.
And we were recently on two big ranches that are in somewhat in my backyard and in coals backyard.
Or they were doing it right. They were doing everything as prescribed by law. They were they were had great beautiful pastures for the cattle.
Use applying that and doing it the right way. So this my comments are not towards people that are doing it.
Wrong. But I think we need to take as a board, we need to take a hard look, because Florida is continuing to grow exponentially with this tremendous
gross effort we're going through and we're going to get more of this product. And all that it has inside of it, which are the chemicals everybody
ingest and the long-term impacts they'll have in the dry and wet part of the biosolids. I just think
we need to work closely with the utilities and encourage their next step in technology to, so that
the biosolids are at the next level. There is technology available already that they can
is expensive, but if they want to invest in the next level, the biosolids are a much higher grade
and much safer. It's not upon us of this district, but it's upon, I think, the utilities to take that
next step. And I know they're expensive for the counties of Palm Beach, State, Broward,
a Lee County, a lot of them that are shipping it towards us. I understand that I'm in a business where
every dollar hurts is citrus grower, but I think you need to, I think we need to be a part of that,
thinking process to push them to make that product better. And I hate for our river system that
this governing board is to govern over to be degraded by accepting everybody else's unwanted biosolids.
Because they don't want them in Dave County, they don't want them in Palm Beach, they don't want them
in Broward County. They don't want to dump it in their own backyard, yet we're putting it in our backyard.
And I just think we need to take a good, hard look at that. I think it deserves a broader look.
And the egg folks have done it right. They're applying it right by law with the E.P. standards.
My guys have looked into it in citrus and we're not allowed to do it because of our trading partners.
It's not a lot on fresh fruit vegetables. You can't have it or Europe and Japan and all our major
ports that we ship to don't allow it. So we can't do it. So our guys have backed away from it.
And the 500,000 acres of citrus. But I'd sink and need to deserve the hard look. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you Doug. Appreciate that. If I might follow up. Just a real quick.
Doug, you talked about it's very, it's more expensive for the utilities to treat it to a better level.
But I'm not so sure that in the end that it's less of a cost because it's so expensive for us to take it out of the
environment once it is there. And I think as we see over and over again,
remediation is tremendously more expensive than just dealing with it at its source.
And quite frankly, those utilities, they're charging customers. So it is their waste that they're
having to dispose of. So they really should bear the cost. It shouldn't be upon us in the St. John's
River Water Management or the St. John's River. He takes 89% of all of the state's biosolids end up here in
the St. John's River mostly in the waters. Yeah, I agree. I agree. Well, last month we were at Desiree
Ranch, 300,000 acres. And I saw 18 wheeler after 18 wheeler. That's what are they doing here.
Hearing all the biosolids, I wonder where they were taking it, too. But certainly something we
got to look at. That's a good input. Yes, madam. That had a question. Could you go back a couple of slides
to the slide that had the yellow box around the that one. Yes. So can you tell me at what point
you should wear this project with the square around or the yellow square around it went through
2024. Can you tell me where those next two projects, the environmental remediation and the next project,
the resource recovery, where those come in and what timeline? They're going to be a little bit delayed
after this work. To your point, Doug, Mr. Grinique, we completely agree that the operators are working
within their permits. We think there's a gap in the permitting framework that doesn't anticipate
how the phosphorous is moving off the fields. And that's what this work is to better understand.
I understand that. I'm not talking against this research. We need to do this.
But I think the bigger picture we need is, yes, we need you and the great staff here to take a hard look at
how we can press utilities to take that next step and to take a hard look because even the gray water
that's going on the golf courses along these coasts and old fishing holes that I know very well
in the bank and the mangrove back part of any river county in the guard county. Now have the algae outbreaks
that never did because they've accepted gray water and the golf courses along the barrier island. And so
there's a phosphorus loading coming off of that that was not planned. And these were beautiful,
pristine places until they started accepting the gray water. So the whole complex puzzle of what
we do when we flood their toilets is still a toughie. Yeah, as a society we need to take a hard look at that
and invest in it or it's going to really hurt this river system. And I think that while that's a subject
matter of extraordinary complex discussion, sooner Bradley could probably help us with how you would
go about that from a legislative perspective. Well, it seems like it's a higher order than just
our district. Yes, certainly our district needs to take it on somewhere the data needs to be pushed
to legislators and say, okay, do you want to make this difference? Sure. Just a quick question for you.
I know that I'm not calling with asking about the square box in yellow and that program is going
to run at 2024. I just want to make sure that we're not talking about these not starting these next two
boxes or mediation technology pilots and the research recovery options that we're not waiting to
2024 to start researching those. And what would be running parallel paths on all of these not
consecutive paths? No, point taken and you will see all of the contracts for all four of those boxes
in this year within several months. Anything we can do to accelerate addressing this problem is going to
I think save the district a lot of money and a long time because, you know, to the point over there,
it's very expensive to get it out of the system once it's in there, right? And this work will really help
guide, amending the rule framework for how biosolids are applied. And this piece will leverage what we learn
and look at how we can, what can we do on the fields between the fields and the water bodies to
prevent that phosphorus from reaching the water bodies? But I think the long term solution is this last
box which is, how can we recover phosphorus at the wastewater treatment plant? Right now, wastewater
treatment plant gets a pipe in and there are two outlets. One is reclaimed or effluent. The other is biosolids.
We really need that third alternative, a resource recovery of phosphorus. And the end result then
is both reclaimed water at a lower concentration that we can use as an alternative water supply and also
biosolids, which are then with a nitrogen phosphorus ratio that's agronomically sensible that then can be
a land applied to take advantage of their agronomic value that they have because of all the carbon and
organics and nutrients. The challenge now is that the phosphorus is so high that when you apply
based on end, which is the current rule framework, you over apply for phosphorus. So that last piece of
creating the third outlet at the wastewater treatment plant, I think is really the, to my mind,
the most likely solution in the long term. So what's the, what's the normal term duration for these
permits? Are they five years, ten years longer? I think it's changed. I want to say five five
requirements. So they'll be coming up for renewal on a fairly regular basis and there's room for
adjustments as you pointed out there's a gap perhaps in the permitting. Right and part of the advisory
committee's recommendation was for DDP to more closely track applicants and I think they're doing
that. I think ultimately amending that process for the application permitting. Yeah, that's one
way to get a handle on this. You start to turn things. That was probably so I agree with that. But I think
we need to give them a heads up maybe in newsletter. Hey, this is what we're looking at. We've gotten
a grant. So they can see down range for their long range strategic plans how to deal with
biosolids because rather than come up the application, well, if you're not doing this, we can't go there and
that's probably not there either. So we need to give them a heads up. It's coming. You got some time.
Maybe we want to adjust your processes, your workers strategic plan to accommodate what probably is
going to happen in the next 35 years. I think the utility industry is pretty aware of what's going
on. There's a shift in biosolids from Class B, which are what we're talking about here,
which are highly regulated by DEP, to Class A, which undergo greater disinfection and essentially
become characterized as fertilizer and applied there. So there's a general shift towards
the utility perspective towards Class A, creating a higher value product that then they can use.
But there's still remains that elevated phosphorus relative to nitrogen in Class A. And again,
so that's in my mind why this phosphorus recovery at the plant, so that whether it's Class A or Class B,
it's balanced in its and in P will be who regulates the fertilizer application.
Then it becomes the purview of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
And the permit the reporting for fertilizer is nothing like what you see for Class B.
Which goes the point that if they move more and more to Class A, it's not taking the Tier P out or the
application of it, it's just the reporting goes down tremendously. So we don't really know
sometimes where that would be even being applied within the St. John's River.
That's correct. For the Class B permitting, we know which field, when, how much, what facility
provided the material? For Class A, it will be fertilizer, which I think we learn about on a county-wide
basis annually. So a very different density of data available.
Thank you for the questions. Dr. Ortell. Senator Bradley's trying to be
well. I'm sorry. Sir Bradley, Chair of Reckonology, and sorry I didn't hear the call. Go ahead, sir.
That's the date, can you hear me? Yes, sir. Copy line, Claire. Go ahead.
Right. I just wanted to follow up on some of the things that Doug and Ron had talked about
as well as Susan. I think it's important at this moment in time to recognize why we're here
in the history of what has happened. The folks in South Florida are obviously facing a lot of the challenges
that we're facing when it comes to water quality. We care deeply about their concerns and the
Everglades and all the things that they're dealing with. But make sure to make them a sick
out of the decision that they made was very deliberate and very straightforward. They decided
this isn't going to be our problem anymore. And we're going to take this so we're going to jump it
on Prince and North Florida. And that was a policy decision that was made. And I appreciate our
abilities, our research, and understand the nuances of what has happened. And we need to do that and I
support the item on the agenda today. And I'm glad that we're learning more about it. But I
think that we know what is going on. There's already evidence on the record sufficient to demonstrate
that this policy decision has negative effects on the things on river. So while I understand the
idea of giving people as up and when there's opportunity to address this matter, what I'm trying
to understand a little bit better is what are our authorities as a district? And this is a question directed
to our attorney and her staff. Because I personally, with what's for those options, for instance,
do we have rule making authority to do what was done in South Florida? I know that was done by legislative
actions. But district have the ability to do things as well. Do we put a more authority on these
activities until such time as we get further research? I would like a menu of options to get more
breath of now, rather than wait towards. And...
And that's the message I want to send. And I'm sure we'll hear from our friends, and the utilities are even in
Tallahassee about their reactions to those ideas. But that's what we have to get that conversation started. And
and I, through my, my, I, if my vote is that over the next 30, 50 days, we get a better picture of what our options are as a district.
And not just, you know, right now, for things we can do from regulatory standpoint to stop this from happening.
Good, good input center, Bradley, I'm looking at General Counselor, his winkler, she's shaking her head tells me she'll get back to us at the next board meeting.
I can do that. And the DEP is actually the Department of Environmental Protection is actually in rulemaking now. And I believe their intent is to seek ratification of those new rules at this session.
We made a presentation today, Senate committee on the environment and natural resources last week on those rules. So they are actively engaged and happy to provide a summary of what they're doing.
And specifically asking is what, what can we do as a district to, um, it's legally. That doesn't mean that we can't be a return.
That doesn't mean that they may disagree and they may have commented. I'm just literally trying to find out what we'll make in power as we suggest under the DEP is doing what they're doing.
And if the answer from legal is that it's completely within these programs, we have no stake in the matter or no ability in the matter.
And that's meant that would surprise me because we have the authority of what we're going to do to that.
Totally agree. We need to go to war with the weapons we have. So let's see what we have from a regulatory and legal perspective.
And again, it's it's not a battle. It is a discussion needs to take place about what's happening to our state.
So we'll come forward next the board meeting and have a good presentation where that is appreciate that input, Senator.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate you indulging me and I'm sorry I can't be there with my good friends today. I have some scheduling issues that I couldn't avoid, but I really appreciate all my colleagues and friends there. Thank you.
You bet got a good group mayor of Pocosir and we're just excited about moving forward in partnership with this great community. Okay, I'm happy.
Great guy too former representative former colleague Brian and really.
Good former state representative. Oh, that terrific. Okay. Well, thank you.
This is a director Kelly any public comment cards on this issue. Okay. I don't remember three to have a motion to approve.
So moved by Mr. Board. Any second.
Still on second. Foot discussion. I mean, heard none have a roll call vote. Burnett. Yes, Bradley.
Yeah.
Dolin. Yes.
House.
Yes.
Price.
Yes.
Yes. Peterson. Yes. And all over. Yes.
I hear you now as vote. You approved item number three.
Thank you. Item four.
The Tom Lonton access road. Mr. Dale Jenkins is approaching the podium now.
Go ahead, sir. You recognize.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. Good morning board members.
Dale Jenkins to visit the projects.
I have two items for your consideration today. The first one is paving the Tom Lotton access road.
This item was approved in October of 2020 as part of the Bureau of Operation and Maintenances.
Annual work plan for fiscal year 2020, 2021.
The recommendation reads as follows.
Approval of the bid and award of contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for paving the Tom Lotton access road project.
The Tom Lotton resurfacing projects located west of the city of Palm Bay in the three forks conservation area.
The section proposed for paving is a yellow portion indicated on the map to the right, which is nearly a mile long.
The photo on the left is a Tom Lotton recreational area parking facility.
The wreck area is a primary access point to enjoy the expansive saw grass marshes and open visitors in the three forks conservation area.
As such, it is highly visited by the public and receives a good amount of traffic flow.
This road was last paved about 20 years ago and is one of only two roads in the district that we routinely paved.
The other one is just south of the Apoca field station and that's the McDonald Canal Road under North Shore.
The Bureau of Operation Maintenance has performed temporary repairs to this road.
These photos were taken last spring and as you can see there was a bunch of potholes.
Additionally, the roadway cross section was flat and didn't sheet flow water to the sides of the roadway during storms.
This road was last paved 20 years ago and it was only over the last few years that the Bureau of Operation maintenance has had to routinely pave these potholes.
So last spring, rather than just patched the existing potholes, we decided to use a mixing machine attached to a front end motor as you can see in the photo on the left.
This process mixes the existing pavement with the underlying lime rock base.
Then, Operation Maintenance staff regrated the road with the end result shown in the photo on the right hand side.
This finished project also had a little crown so the water would flow after in storm events and this cost about $12,000.
However, this repairs only temporary, which is why we're before you today requesting to repay this.
The district received two responses to the invitation for bid, CW Roberts submitted the winning bid.
However, it exceeded the $125,000 budget that was in the work plan.
Therefore, a $55,000 budget transfer as discussed in the board memo is part of the funding recommendation.
The reason for the increased cost is that we estimated a 1-inch asphalt surface during the fiscal year 2021 budgeting process.
We advertised the bid calling for a two-inch paid surface, which will provide a longer service life of the roadway unless short and long-term maintenance.
And so that brings me back to the recommendation for your consideration.
I'll be happy to take any questions.
Tell me the thickness again of the roadbed the asphalt, the tarval talking about.
Good. One inch to me would be one coat of pay on the houses.
Just asking for trouble there.
Mr. House, are you up to inches sound okay to you on this paving of the.
Yes, sir. I spoke to Neil Jenkins and I agree with this request and his hypothesis and he and Woody have done a good job specifying what payment needs to be done.
Thank you. And I'm sure everybody knows that Mr. House is extensive experience of the DOT boards chair and a member and in the development business.
So he knows this piece of it quite well. Mr. Dick and you'd probably agree with that. Yes, sir.
Okay.
Discussion questions from the board.
All right. We have a motion to provide a number four.
Motion for approval, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. House. Second.
Thank you, Mr. Oliver. And for the discussion.
Have you heard none? We'll call for a roll call vote. Bernanke. Yes, Senator Bradley.
Yes.
Mr. Stone.
Yes.
Mr. House.
Yes.
It's price.
Yes.
Mr. Bonique. Yes.
Peterson.
Yes. Oliver.
Yes.
Are you now as vote you approved item number four.
Thank you and I don't sit down.
We're chair calls on Mr. Jenkins on matter water control structure rehabilitation proceed.
Thank you Mr. Chairman board members. My last item for your consideration is approval of the bid and contract award for sliplining four culverts in the upper St. John's river basin.
This also was part of the Bureau of Operation Maintenance's Board approved 2020-2021 work plan.
The recommendation reads as follows.
Approval the bid and award of contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for minor water control structure rehabilitation.
As local sponsor for the Army Corps of Engineers Federal projects,
the district is required to provide underwater inspections of all culverts that perforate federal eddies and provide a report for repair recommendations.
The most significant deficiencies identified were four metal culverts in this item for your consideration.
These culverts exhibit moderate to advanced corrosion and staff determined at the most effective cost effective method of improving their condition would be sliplining.
These culverts are about 30 years old.
These are the locations of the four culverts structure six A is a single 48 inch corrugated metal pipe located under levy l 75 near pump station six.
These corner of the fells near water management area or FWMA.
It provides a connection between blue cypress conservation area and the FWMA.
The three remaining culverts to 52 A, B, and C all eye under levy l 78.
L 78 is an earthen levy with a lime rock cap driving surface that forms the northern border of the four drum conservation area flows from four drum to blue cypress.
These three culverts are 60 inch corrugated metal pipes under l 78, 252 A and B are double culverts and 252 C is a single pipe.
Also 252 C transitions to a reinforced concrete pipe beneath state road 60 which is why you see the much longer length is compared to 252 A and B.
The sliplining process is relatively straight forward as discussed during the before the board last December when you approve the fells near grade CS2 sliplining repair.
In a way, every view the pipe is welded together floated into the water at whichever end the contractor feels would be the simplest to access.
Sunk and then pull through the existing culvert the void space between the new pipe in the existing pipe is filled with concrete with grout.
Excuse me pump from the surface the ends of the pipe are plugged to help limit the grout from leaking out out of the ends.
The district received two beds to responses to the invitation for bid.
Central pipe rehab submitted the winning bid at 384,634 dollars. However, it exceeded the 300,000 dollar budget for the project.
Therefore, a 84,644 dollar budget transfer is part of this recommendation as discussed in the board memo.
We set the 300,000 dollar budget based on historical budgets for annual cover repairs and estimates for cleaning and sliplining 48 inch and 60 inch pipe from a previous cost proposal.
The increased cost that you see here was primarily due to a larger than anticipated mobilization cost for an amphibious track home to do the work to install the pipe as well as a sliplining cost of approximately 10% of an increase over what we estimated.
We could have considered just sliplining structure six A and two fifty two A and B and if you add the numbers real quick here, you can see that that gets to about 284,000 dollars, which is less than the budget.
But we recommend rehabilitating all four culverts because the bid on culvert two fifty two C, which you see here at 99,588 dollars.
There's a good chance that might go up next year if we bid it out as a single mobilization.
And so that brings me back to the recommendation on this item and I'll be happy to answer any questions.
Questions of the presenter?
I just had one quick question. Does the slipline party have the same lifespan as replacing it with an invite?
It may be even a little bit better because it'll, I think it's HDPE pipe, so it'll probably less at least 30 years.
Look, I good.
Yes, sir.
This is a dumb boba question, but why wouldn't DOT kick in a part of this funding?
Because it's a state road.
Well, we have permission to go under state road 60, but it's part of, it's part of our work that we required to do for the court to repair the culverts.
This being the only, it goes under the levy, which is why we're doing it because it's part of our commitment to the court.
But also going under 60 is just a continuation.
And I haven't looked into that Mr. Borneak and I don't know what the answer to that would be, but we're just considering a part of the same culvert, which starts going under L78.
Well, we have a very savvy governing board member that probably can help you look into that.
Who's on the phone?
I gotcha, I heard exactly what you're saying, and I can find that out.
The reality is, and I'm not positive, I don't know the purpose of the crossings, whether we cause the purpose and their our pipes or their, we're fixing DOT pipes.
And that really makes the difference, but we certainly know the right people to ask that question, sir.
Good enough.
So what we can do, whenever the questions are done, we can make a motion that's that approved subject to Jenkins talking to the DOT for any maintenance matching funds for, etc.
I'll get the answer to 252C.
I'll move Ron House's wording.
And Councillor, could you capture that in the motion?
Okay, any other questions?
Okay, we have a motion.
Mr. Borneak.
Second by Susan Dolan.
And for the discussion, having heard none to call for the vote, Bernat, yes, sir, Bradley.
Mr. Stolen, Mr. House. And again, noted the amendment proposed by Mr. Doney, so we get to the language right.
Mr. Price. Yes. Mr. Orney? Yes. Peterson? Yes.
Mr. Schroller. Yes. By your name, I spoke your approved item number five with the amendment as proposed
of the adjustment to the language as proposed.
And thank you, Mr. Jenkins, for your usual professional presentation.
Consolidate and report, Mr. Frick.
Prof. Supportium. Chair is recognized for the report.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning. Members of the board.
My name is Tom Frick. I'm the director for the Division of Strategic Planning and Initiatives.
And I'm here this morning to present for your consideration.
The 2021 consolidated annual reports.
Water management districts are required by statute to submit a consolidated annual report to the Governor and Legislature and the Department of Environmental Protection by March 4th of each year.
The report, known as the car, combines nine legislatively mandated reports regarding the status of water resources within the district.
You should be noticed that you may recognize a number of these reports as is over the last five months.
We brought a few of them for your consideration and approval.
For example, the minimum flow in levels annual priority list and strategic plan.
I'd be remiss at this point if I forgot to thank all of the district staff who helped compile these reports.
These reports do touch on pretty much every part of the district.
Thank you very much to them.
In that regard, I'd also like to point out that chapter one of the consolidated annual reports is reporting on the accomplishments for the prior fiscal year for the district.
And I've listed out some of the highlights that we accomplished over the past year.
And this is in spite of the fact that we were in unprecedented times with the COVID-19 situation.
So on the water quantity side, we brought forward a multi year effort on the Central Florida Water Initiatives brought that to you for consideration in your approval.
I'd also like to point out that we brought three minimum flow in level water bodies to you last year for your consideration and approval and move those along.
Also, in addition to the considerable amount of nutrients that we've prevented to go into water bodies throughout the entire district.
I'd like to point out that there were two projects, one a muck removal project that removed over 189,000 pounds of nitrogen and nearly 116,000 pounds of phosphorus from the Indian River Lagoon.
That was a one time removal of removing those.
And also we removed over 7,500 pounds of phosphorus with our Shad Removal program.
Also, I'd like to point out one of the, in spite of the COVID-19 activities, our monitoring folks were out and doing business as usual.
And we had less than 2% of our regular routine sites that were interrupted due to considerations from last year.
And that was information that you all relied on not only the hydrologic report, which we saw earlier and you consider every month, but also for harmful available looms.
So we assist with the Department of Environmental Protection, along that.
Our natural systems, our landfokes, also were very busy last year didn't skip a beat over 61 prescribed burns.
And then we also controlled more than 27,000 acres of invasive plants throughout the district.
So that's quite a bit of activity.
On the flood protection, Mr. Jenkins brought some of the efforts for that you saw at least on the the culvert side, but we also had some considerable improvements on our levies over six miles of improvement on the L75 levy last year.
So that was pretty significant.
And then also on the L73 we improved the S161 and 161 A structures to make sure that we are eroding and also flooding folks downstream.
And one thing that gets missed Mr. Jenkins pointed this out as well is federally rear required to inspect our our structures.
We have to do that semi annually and so staff completed those and also is completing the repairs on time.
So that's quite an accomplishment.
And lastly on the supporting activities, the district contributed more than 23 million dollars in cost share.
That's district funds.
That was for a total of nearly 74 million dollars in projects that included local district and also state funding to those.
So that's a significant amount of water quality improvements and also water quality improvements throughout the entire district.
But not on here, but I would like to point out as the fact that you all in the prior year strategic plan had really challenged our cost share folks to go out and engage cost share applicants.
And so of these projects, we had three that's three brand new applicants that applied and then we also were out and did 12 agricultural presentations to get them involved.
So quite a bit of efforts from district staff and they should be congratulated for for those accomplishments.
With that Mr. Chair, it brings me to the recommendation from staff for the board to accept and approve the 2021 consolidated annual reports.
Questions of the presenter sir.
Okay, we have a motion to prove.
Stolen second.
Second anniversitation.
Thank sir for the discussion.
Have heard none roll call vote.
Burnett.
Yes, Bradley.
Yeah.
Dolen.
Yes.
House.
Yeah.
Price.
Yes.
Peterson.
Yes.
You can ask for five six.
Got one question for Dr. Short Hill.
Who's the individual that runs our prescribed burn program now.
So that's in.
West Steve Miller wasn't it before he left to go to.
So the bureau chief is Brian Emmanuel.
And so the last thing again.
Emmanuel.
Got it.
And that's an Eric's division of bureau of land resources.
It would be an excellent topic for an informational item in the next.
Little while I think they're still doing a lot of prescribed burning right now.
So they might appreciate waiting until past fire season.
Okay.
Maybe an April.
We could look at a presentation on what they're doing.
What they're covering.
My biggest concern in the reason I really even raised it.
Does he have all the equipment he needs.
When you do prescribe burns.
The thing that's most concerning to the leadership.
I'll ask he's.
We're doing it right.
I'm sure we are.
Can can we.
Keep it from getting away from us and do we have equipment to keep.
That prescribed burn from getting away.
I've seen it happen all my life up in North Florida.
And.
It was a private individual rolled his own equipment out.
Uh, his bulldozers and.
Other equipment that he had.
Which stopped it.
But I know that's easy to do.
I'm going to be approved.
I see like a cat these six bulldozers.
A couple of years ago.
Is there something more needed as a backup to make sure.
We don't get overrun with a change of wind or a weather.
It might be just have to ask the question.
Counselor, you know, I'm asking.
We got to make sure that we're funded with the equipment to do something.
It's extraordinarily important to our communities.
I'm sure.
There are also what a great on that.
So if you come back with a presentation.
I appreciate it.
Yes.
I have a comment.
I wanted to.
Awesome.
Am I on.
Can you hear me.
I also send a make a comment.
Mr. Frick about what's going on with the annual report because you're right.
I'm I made some comments last year about getting out into the community.
And staff really took that seriously and went out and did a lot of hard work.
And that was a big thing for me.
I really want to say I appreciate the hard work that everyone did.
Getting out and getting more people and more municipalities engaged.
And I'm really happy to see that.
So great work.
And I look forward to a continuation of that.
So I just do want to point out that.
You guys listened and I appreciate it.
So thanks.
Okay.
Thanks for presentation.
Chair recognizes Mr. Jeff Prather.
Approaching the podium for the consumptive use.
Overview or cup overview.
My Mr. Chairman members of the board.
My name is Jeff Prather and I'm the director of the Division of Regatory Services.
It's my pleasure to be here this morning.
Present to you an informational item regarding the districts and some of you's permitting program.
You remember during last month's governing board meeting.
The board expressed interest in hearing more details regarding water conservation.
Our conservation practices utilized by a regulated communities.
My goal this morning is to start with an overview of our consumptive use permitting program.
We will then provide additional informational presentations on specific and some of you subjects at future meetings.
Starting with water conservation.
Our consumptive use permits reflect a sustainable use of water that's protected for both the public and the environment.
For today and into the future.
Our consumptive use permitting bureau is a part of the Division of Regatory Services.
It's made up of 18 staff primarily geologist engineers and environmental scientists.
This group works closely with all of our partners both internal and external to draft quality permits.
That builds a foundation for water supply protection in and around our district boundaries.
It's important to note that not all users of water within the district require a consumptive use permit.
Exceeding any one of these three thresholds on the bottom of the current slide require a user to receive a consumptive use permit.
This slide represents on the other hand several water uses that are exempt by rule from needing a consumptive use permit.
The largest use in this category is domestic cell supply wells.
Throughout the district, domestic cell supply accounts for 7% of the total groundwater use at nearly 74 million gallons per day.
Our staff evaluate applications for new uses, renewals, modifications using an approach that you'll hear often in consumptive use permitting the three prong test.
This test is defined by statute and some of the specifics in this criteria include is the quantity of water necessary for economic and efficient use.
As a request, reasonable purpose consistent with public interest does it interfere with an existing legal user.
And of course, we ensure there is no harm to the areas resources including established minimum flows and levels of nearby lakes rivers and springs.
Additionally, as part of the review process, the applicant is required to do an evaluation of alternative water sources that can be used and lieu of a withdraw from the upper floor in aquifer.
Our most vulnerable water resource.
The most common of these alternative water sources include reclaimed water from wastewater treatment processes, storm water, surface water, and lower quality groundwater such as brackish water and water from the lower floor to the aquifer.
And of course, the applicant or permit team must have an approved water conservation plan in place.
Again, we will go into further detail about conservation with informational presentation at the March Board meeting.
We issue two types of consumptive use permits, individual permits, and general permits by rule.
The larger, more specific type of CUPs are the individual permits.
Further district delegation policy, you can see in the first subble of the criteria that requires governing board approval.
Of course, any permit with height and public concern can also be brought to the board to be approval.
Below this criteria, the district delegation policy outlines that certain staff have the authority to issue individual permits ranging from the executive director down to the supervising hydrologists, again, depending on the size and criteria of use.
Last year, nine out of a total of 340 permits actions required governing board approval.
General permits by rule simply state that if an application is doing a specific activity covered by rule.
And the conditions with the rule are followed in the user qualifies for the GP.
Most typical of these are environmental restoration environmental restoration projects, and short term dewatering activities.
We currently have 2,680 active consumptive use permits throughout the district, allocating more than 1,260 million gallons a day of groundwater.
The graph on the left illustrates the greatest volume of CUPs by type.
You'll see that some 59% of our CUPs are for agricultural operations, 21% is landscaping recreation, 13% public supply, and 7% are for commercial industrial purposes.
The right graph illustrates the largest allocations by category.
Here the lion share of the allocation is in the public supply at nearly 815 million gallons per day followed by ag commercial industrial and then landscaping recreation.
This slide shows the historic and projected water use in the central Florida water initiatives planning area.
Ground water makes up 95% of the water use with surface water use for the remaining 5%.
You'll see our water demands are turning very well versus historic water use considering the anticipated growth and population.
The planning area is population is expected to have a 49% increase to 4.4 million people by the year of 2040 as indicated by the black line on the graph.
Potable supply remains alert.
Our just water use category, followed by Ag, overall water demands are projected to increase 36% to over 900 million gallons a day in year 2040.
The regions of efficient use of reclaimed water and implementation of conservation has contributed to offsetting the groundwater demands in this area.
Currently, over 95% of treated wastewater is reused, and that's more than 210 million gallons a day.
Reclaimed water flows are projected to increase by 55% to nearly 340 million gallons a day.
Providing even more of an offset in groundwater demands, which is very good news.
This next slide represents?
Yes, sir.
Do you have reconous?
Yes, sir.
Repeat that, Ron, it didn't quite get it.
Would you like us to ask question now or wait till the end?
Jump in here, Ron, when you got one, I think that works better for the subjects to go in back.
So, everybody feel free jumping when you have a point you want to make.
Go ahead.
That's it.
So, hey Jeff, I'm going to ask Doug, but I'm going to also ask you, because a lot of times like in agricultural permits, there's a tremendous amount of irrigation used for free.
Protection and things of that nature, which is a high gallonage that's really used for a couple days.
But you have a peak flow demand.
Is that, and Doug, you probably know more about that than I do.
But I didn't know if you're utilizing average daily flow or if you're using permitted volume, i.e. for peak flow demand.
Yeah, you're, you're right, Ron.
We, a consumptive use permit for a citrus grove.
You'd never, unless it's the 83 freeze or the 89 freeze or you were in flat areas of Florida like the east coast.
Or you can flood your grove.
What we used to try to do is bringing the water level up to the trunk of your trees, because that water radiates out its heat.
And protects the crop for just that two night freeze of it.
And then you let the water out into the canal systems that surround the grove and it back into the system.
The water's only borrowed for 48 hours, but we haven't seen a freeze of it where people crown flooded since 1989.
We've known micro jets.
They're on a watering system.
We're using a tenth of the water.
We used to use with it, with rain birds and or or flooding our groves.
What that was done.
Two or three or four decades ago.
So what, what is truly lost.
The only water truly lost in a grapefruit grove is what goes out in the crop.
The rest and we have we have switched because of the disease of reigning.
We can't use the the deep wells into the Florida aquifer because the TDS is too high.
As to salty it burns the skirt of the tree and we'll actually reduce the trees life because it accelerates greening.
We we only can use surface water, i.e. rain water in our local canals.
So even though the growers want to maintain their ability if we have a devastating 100 100 100 year freeze event.
We never even come close to utilizing the totals in our consumptive use permits.
And probably now never will because of this disease of reigning.
It's just staying in the peninsula of Florida.
We can't get rid of it.
We don't have the holy grail to replace it in the way of trees that are resistant.
So we're living with greening and forever will never come close to utilizing with the consumptive use permit says we would we could use.
So.
Answer your question.
It does and I guess the question based on that goes back to Jeff.
Are you using the allocation of the permit is amount in your pie charts in your graphs or use an a the average daily flows because.
It might be deceptive that irrigation's using more because it's permitted more for freeze protection.
But like what Doug said is basically even though you fled your field that's still going right back in the ground.
The only thing you lose is like that.
Transpiration and the trees or evaporation that the trees you don't have a vibration.
Got it.
Ron.
Dr.
General counsel.
We and for purposes of allocation.
We actually for purposes of water supply planning.
We're required to use a 1 in 10 year drought scenario.
So in planning numbers of this nature you'll see a 1 in 10 scenario.
For purposes of our permitting program we allocate to the 2 in 10 year drought.
And in some areas we're also moving to a 5 in 10 year which is like an average condition.
Particularly we already have that implemented in our silver springs prevention area.
To kind of make sure people understand that on a typical year they should be using that average allocation.
They shouldn't be using their 2 in 10 year drought allocation every year.
And that is actually the proposal on the CFWI Central Florida water initiative rule making is also to give a dual allocation a 2 in 10 and a 5 in 10 to make sure.
Our permitties understand that the drought allocation is for that drought year it shouldn't be used every year and that on average.
To give them an idea of what their average use should be said that's.
There's different allocations required by statute for planning and then we have different things for permitting so it depends really.
What you're looking at what allocation we review.
Thank you.
And I'll just say we also allocate there's a max allocation for frost freeze protection that folks can also request if it's appropriate for that crop.
Looks like you're on top of what I can see Mr. morning.
I just want another consideration that the margins are so thin for citrus production that growers.
They're resistant to even use their diesel pumps to move the water floor to so flat and a growers got to move water to other acres of citrus CS to use diesel dollars.
To to move that water and because of greening again that disease the margins are so thin people are just not utilizing their permits like they weren't used to 20 years ago.
So I the water availability is there and I'm seeing in Barton the St. Lucy in any river county.
The surface levels of the floor back over there come way up.
Known as utilizing it but the utilities are licking their chops going man this is this is wonderful.
We have more water here that we can use so that cities are looking at that but as far as eggs use and in our part of the world it's dropped considerably.
We found from an enforcement perspective that agusers are very good stewards because of the cost it as you mentioned Mr. Bernie to pump the water there's some of our best stewards of the resource.
Okay it's one of the questions.
Mr. Chairman.
Yes sir.
It seems like to me as we grow in population.
And the comparison of water use and population change it seems like the band of green on the bar graph would have to get narrower as we basically eat more ag land.
Because really you think about you can't really grow in wetlands too much but you grow in citrus grows and that's great housing.
Maybe the trees are making profits anymore but that you can build a lot of houses and citrus trees is high and dry.
So it seems like that band should be decreasing as our growth increases.
That makes sense.
Yes it makes sense so we're going to grow less oranges and more folks from up north.
Exactly so it seems like that band the green band from 20 15 20 20 20 25 20 20 20 30.
That green band stays relatively consistent where it seems like that would go down.
Does it sound degree.
I'm not saying about it.
It seems like that's the trend a little differently.
Ms. Flanko you want to respond there.
Sure.
Actually as part of the planning process use what's called F said.
Which the department of agriculture and consumer services works to produce.
So that part through statute.
The Department of Ag is supposed to help us produce those estimates.
So we rely heavily on the F said products in the work that DAX does and estimating.
But that is correct.
We are in the CFWI area.
From present time to going 20 years into the future.
Most of the growth is in public supply.
Ag is staying about the same but which is reflected in the graph.
So but we rely on DAX and those folks to assist us with those projections.
That's true and right don't forget.
We currently use 5% of our groundwater for golf courses as we build more communities and more people.
They'll build more golf courses.
And so you're going to have some offset there.
Golf courses go up.
Maybe citrus goes down.
I'm not sure what that relationship would be.
I just know they build a community build a golf course.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Good job.
I prefer lakes.
I'll water ski.
I don't play golf.
Okay.
Thank you, Ms. Price.
I appreciate it.
I'm done yet.
It only gets better.
Then you better get done pretty soon.
Just 20 more minutes.
I think I'm tired of listening for your tired of talking.
But I'll shut up.
You go ahead sir.
All right.
The next slide represents a number of consumped views permits issued by the District of
Calendar year of the 344 permits issued in 2020.
75% of those were renewables.
70 were permit modifications.
And 5% were permits for new uses.
The graph shows we're in the midst of an accelerating permitting cycle.
And that's over the next three years.
It really does represent tremendous opportunity.
With the projection of a large number renewables coming in.
Our staff looks forward to staying those applications up to the latest,
most relevant science available.
And ensuring that there's a sustainable use of water for both the public and
environment for today.
And then the future.
Last slide general.
We're there and closing.
I want to leave y'all with positive note.
As you can see, the permitted amount of groundwater from the upper floor
to knock for again.
The most vulnerable of our water resources has been decreasing annually since 2015.
Or a total reduction of just over 36 million gallons a day district wide.
In 2020 allocations were reduced by 5 million gallons per day with an additional 2.9 million
gallons a day.
Reduce from the ledger due to file closures and voluntary resisions.
Which is a good thing.
We're proud of this success and we look forward to working with our partners.
Continue this trend of reducing upper floor to knock off our withdrawals.
With the use of alternative water sources and conservation.
And this sir concludes my presentation.
I'll be more than happy to answer any questions.
That's encouraging a chart right there.
Questions for the board?
Yeah.
I had one.
Could you go back one slide?
Yeah.
The downward trend in 2022 and 2023.
What's the driver for that decrease there?
Well, a lot of these can be 510 20 year permits.
So we have a good idea of who's coming in for renewal.
But a lot of times they will try to come in early depending on rules that are being put in place.
And so forth.
So we expect it'll be a busy busy 3 years.
Still a lot of permits.
Yes.
The just what congratulations on the turnaround of the permits.
From 15 years ago.
That's all I heard in my end of the equation.
The agon was a tick forever.
And you guys have streamlined it and have done a great job of making it quick and efficient.
And getting it back to the the permit holder.
So great job.
And by the way, I know that data.
Because I briefed it just secretary some months ago.
We were in the 90 days to 120 or more.
The bigger the permit, the longer.
We're now down to.
May not believe this data.
Ten and a half days for the average permit.
I think that was the data you got me, Dr. Short Hill.
So want to thank Dr. Short Hill and the team for getting in there.
Helping our clients our customers process the permit.
And when there's an error, go back and say, okay, here's how you please set up.
That's pretty big deal going to tell us about the effectiveness and efficiency of government, Dr. Short Hill.
Your team was done that.
Don't know how the other management this or two.
I don't keep up with what the kid down the streets doing.
But I know we're doing pretty darn well.
So thank you.
Number one.
I like sounds that.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Appreciate it.
Well, if you're number two, you just a second loser.
Number one is a great place to be.
No, that's way worse.
They told him five hundred's coming up folks.
That's high words.
Well, everybody remembers Chuck Egg was the first guy to go supersonic.
Nobody remembers who the second guy was.
I went.
And he did it the second day.
Bob Hoover.
I've been knocked.
I've been mocked too, but it wasn't an experimental orange crate.
With a big gin inches on the back.
That's a lot of what you had.
I still see I went super.
Great.
Some of the owns.
It's really a rock and roll.
There's.
Oh, yeah.
One of six.
Okay.
Sorry about the side discussion here.
We're talking about airplanes in the speed.
I get excited.
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Breaver.
And chair recognized Mr. Mike Register again.
Information for the MFL.
Mental Flow that was development and status.
Board, I'm Mike Register, Director of Water Supply Planning and Assessment. And I'm mainly here today to introduce Tom
Merding, the Deputy Executive Director for the Swani River Water Management District, who's going to
provide an update on the current rulemaking as they have for the reevaluation of MFLs for the
Lower Santa Fe River, it should tuck me river and the associated priority springs. Now, also to give you a
little background on why he might be here, talking about MFLs within the Swani District. Some of the
MFLs are for water bodies that were designated as outstanding Florida Springs by the legislature. And
also due to cross boundary effects of pumping within our district being in the low effect of these water
bodies. It's actually the Department of Environmental Protection that will be adopting these MFLs,
so there'll be applicable in both districts. And further, because they are outstanding Florida Springs,
also by statute, our district could be responsible for financially responsible for up to 25%
of the recovery costs to address impacts from our district. So, with that introduction, I'll turn it
over to Tom Merding to give you an update on it. Thank you. Yes, sir, step forward to the podium there.
And again, in your districts, a very important place to me, Bob, should ever place last
that a country is swimming holes in the world. Please, not for the faint of heart, though. Yes,
sir, go ahead. I'm pleased to be here and bring you greetings from all greetings from live oak. Thank you, Mike,
for the introduction. And as he, as it Mike said, I'm here to present the status, status assessment for the
proposed lower Santa Fe river and it should tuck me system minimum flows and minimum water levels.
This presentation is a continuation of a series that had been presented to the Swani board over the
past few months as we've worked through reevaluation and peer review of the existing MFLs for that same system.
Today's presentation that you will see is substantial of the same as another being shown or one being shown
today at the Swani River Water Management District by John Good, who's in our MFL office there.
This PowerPoint, this presentation has a few more slides because we gave them a refresher last month
on the situation. So you all need that refresher too. So the introductory slides here will be
to orient you all with the with the situation with the system. Because you haven't seen those things lately,
we did present on this. John Good and I both a year ago to this board.
As a just as an overview to to orient you, this is the location of the Santa Fe River
Watershed outlined in black. It's shown in the context of two green areas. Both of those areas
together form the North Florida Regional Water Supply Planning area or North Florida Regional Water
Supply Partnership between the Swani River Water Management District and the St. John's River Water Management District.
The dark green area on the right is the St. John's portion of that partnership and the later green area on the left
is the Swani River Water Management District part of that partnership area. And again, the Santa Fe River fits in
fits in that notch on the western side of the St. John's River Water Management District.
The, as part of that background, I wanted to show you how we got to where we're at for you know,
bringing you the status assessment for the Swani River. In 2010, the Swani River District
issued a published its water supply assessment in that assessment. It recognized that they were
groundwater level declines in northeast Florida and it recommended a regional groundwater flow model
to be produced or built essentially. And so at that time, initial planning began on the
MFL for the Lower Santa Fe System and and the North Florida Southeast Georgia model or refer to that
again, I'll refer to it as the NFSAG and FSEG. Also subsequent to that and interagency agreement
but with DEP and St. John's was also entered into by Swani District that forms the basis of the
partnership that I referred to. Between 2011 and 2013, the existing MFL studies were completed and it
went to peer review. 2004 that that rule was challenged at the time that challenge was we went through
that process in 2014. 2015 after the legislative session, the existing MFL rule became effective.
And if you'll excuse me, I'll need this. Hopefully I'll keep you all listening though.
The existing MFL rule that's in place, 6240.300 says that the department, again, this is a cross boundary
MFL, so it's issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the department establishes
the following minimum flows and levels for the Lower Santa Fe and it should tuck me rivers
and associated priority springs. One of the key components or pieces of that rule was that upon
completion of the NFSAG model, DEP in conjunction with the two districts, she'll re-evaluate the MFLs
and the present status of the of the river and springs using the best available scientific or
technical data methodologies and models and so that's been done and that's where we're here today.
So as a follow on to the how we got here since the publication of the existing rule.
In 2016, a stakeholder advisory committee composed of stakeholder from both sides of the partnership.
unanimously recommended the North Florida Regional Water Supply Plan. That plan was approved by both
district governing boards in 2017 and in 2018, we started work on the re-evaluation of the Lower
Santa Fe System. 2019 saw the completion of the NFSAG model and the draft lower Santa Fe System,
MFL report at the end of 2019. Last year, 2020, the peer review was ongoing and we went through several
peer review meetings and we completed the MFL report. I want to note here that this also included
peer review responses and addressing separate stakeholder comments from the partnership areas.
One of those stakeholders has let us know that they've felt our responses were not complete.
I think it was a result overall of a misunderstanding in how the comments were presented but in any case,
we'll address those moving forward. I want to show the major differences between the existing MFL,
the one that's in place now and what's proposed. One of the things that is part of that is there's a new
hydrologic starting point. We've got the NFSAG in place that allowed us to do what we call a reference time frame or a
reference flow that shows that presents the system as unimpacted and then
modeled uses are subtracted from that estimated unimpacted use. We also expanded our
in-stream habitat evaluation in the Santa Fe River, so we updated the river model, that's called
Hekraz. I'm not sure what it stands for but it comes from the core of engineers with updated geometry
of the river bottom and we also are using new habitat modeling software with additional analysis tools.
We use something called P. Habsim on the first go around this one uses Sifa, S-EFA,
not sure what that stands for either. You've got a question. I can take them any time.
Yes, sir. I think I swam in every spring along the Santa Fe River. Many of us do that over three days.
They seem like they're starting these colder, is it? Are they all still 76 degrees?
What are they? They should all be 72 degrees still. I think alcohol? 72 degrees. Yeah 72.
That's cold water. Some of them are not. But you preside over some beautiful, beautiful springs and
florida. And you're sickly just tucked me. It's an honor. Be gentle with them.
Why is that important? Okay. I'll get right to it on this slide. So I wanted to point out
that we'd also add it on a new reference gauge at the U.S. 441 bridge across the river during the
interim period. We were able to collect more data so it was sufficient to be able to use that gauge.
And then I think to your point about water temperature on the Itchatuckney, one of the comments that we got from
the last purview was it didn't speak to manatees using the Itchatuckney River as a thermal refuge.
And the question there is the question that we were looking at is we know that manatees do use it, not quite as much.
Actually, not anywhere near as much as is seen in volucia blues for example. But they are using it.
The challenge is that when the water levels get low, we had to evaluate both the temperatures in the river.
And how much room there was in the Itchatuckney River as it entered the Santa Fe River to see if the manatees would have room to
to get up into the Itchatuckney and benefit from that thermal refuge. So we incorporated both temperature and water levels in that assessment.
They're beautiful creatures. I'm sure you know they're not indigenous to Florida. They came from the West Indies.
I think I've got this slide as well later on, but I wanted to show it again is how to do the proposed
MFLs and the existing ones compare. This is shown at the three reference points, the Santa Fe River near Fort White, which is just downstream from Jenny Springs, the US Highway 441 bridge location, which is just north of high springs on the Santa Fe River.
And the Itchatuckney River at US Highway 27. The main thing to see here is that the difference, the reference flow is what I referred to before is the estimated unimpacted flows. The MFLs, which were presented to our board last week are in the second line.
They're shown in cubic feet per second. The difference, the line highlighted in red is the is the amount of
Impacted, allowable impact essentially. And so the amount of allowable impact is roughly comparable.
On the Fort White location, 103 CFS for the proposed versus the existing of 106
For US Highway 441, which wasn't, which isn't in the current MFL, but is new. There is in the comparison there, so that shown is not applicable. And the impacts, or the difference for the Itchatuckney River goes from 11 to 10 CFS. So they're relatively close to what it had been before. The fourth line shows the difference in million gallons per day as a reference, but we have been using cubic feet per second for the period of time.
The relative flow reductions in percentiles are also relatively close, 8.1 for the proposed versus 8% at Fort White, 2.8% at the Itchatuckney River versus 3.1%.
This links us to the change due to from the NIFSAG model due to pumping, but we'll come back to that as I get into the status assessment process.
And so that brings you up to speed, hopefully, with where we left our board last month. And so what are the next steps after the NFL document is prepared and come through peer review.
And so the next step is to do a status assessment to assess the status of those water bodies that we just saw the Santa Fe River and two locations in the Itchatuckney River.
One of those after that, we would depending on the outcome, the result of the status assessment, which you will see, that would implies the development of a prevention or recovery strategy as appropriate, and then ruled development by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection with assistance from the water management districts.
Thank you, sir. You represent a superb district in so many communities over there in the Swan River district and the springs that you have per view over just a national treasure for this state.
Thank you.
I wanted to question here, how do MFL's fit into the water management and water water law is MFL's, MFL's are used to determine the water needs of natural systems.
This is also includes water supply assessments that are conducted as part of the water supply planning process, and they inform our water supply planning and the district's progress in fulfilling legislative intent as embodied in regional water supply plans.
It is the intent and as that stated here, it's the intent of the legislature that sufficient water be available for all existing in future, reasonable beneficial uses in the natural systems and that the adverse impact effects of competition for water supplies be avoided.
The cross, I wanted to talk to cross boundary withdrawal effects as well in terms of a background.
Waters in Florida are waters of the state, but are managed and allocated through regional water management districts.
And regional means just that that you're planning may involve just more than one water management district, as we've seen with the North Florida regional water supply partnership and the Central Florida water initiative as examples.
Waters allocated to water use applicants through the permitting process and is not allocated amongst water management districts.
Water management districts also were established on surface water drainage basins back in 1972.
And ground water basins, which are feed water to springs, may differ from surface water basins and in fact they do.
As groundwater use in the state has increased over time, it became apparent that groundwater withdrawals in one district had the potential for a cross boundary or cross district impacts.
That's why we have the North Florida Regional Water Supply Partnership that was between the Swansea River and the St. John's Water Management District.
As noted, the Central Florida Water Initiative between the three southern districts in the state is also another example of this.
In addition to MFL's supporting water supply planning, MFL's are also used for permitting, and in the case of an MFL where a water body has the potential to be impacted by withdrawals in another district, and MFL is developed jointly as this one was.
In the current case, the two districts, Swansea and St. John's are joint groundwater model was a key component in that effort.
MFL use in water allocation in water allocation in order to obtain a water use permit from the respective districts or renewals or modifications.
In the applicant must provide reason.
It's not just an MFL that guides whether or not a permit is issued there.
I won't go into it, but it's one of nine other criteria that are evaluated for the issuance of a permit.
Mr. Prater alluded to some of those things in his prior presentation.
Coming back to our main topic is the status assessment.
Why do we conduct one when an MFL is established, and the reason for that is we're directed to and floor to statutes.
So the MFL establishment is to be accompanied by an evaluation of the current and 20 year projected status of the water body or water bodies.
If the existing flow in the water body is below or is projected to fall within 20 years below, the applicable minimum flow.
The government or governing board shall concurrently adopt or modify and implement a recovery or prevention strategy.
And to break it down a little bit further, we want presenting it here kind of like a traffic light illustration.
So if an MFL is not met that implies a recovery strategy is needed.
If an MFL is being met currently, but is expected to fall below the MFL during the next 20 years,
then the yellow arrow means that a prevention strategy is needed.
And if MFL is being met or expected to be met over the next 20 years, then no recovery or prevention status strategy is needed.
Once again, just to re-step you, I'm going to orient you back into the Santa Fe Basin so that we can look at our locations.
Can I get a copy of the slide before in this slide?
Certainly.
You can.
So that was repeated slide, but we pretty much zoomed in on the Santa Fe Basin itself.
It's broken into two subwater sheds.
The colors don't look a little bit better up on the screen, but not so good on my hard copy here.
On the left hand side, it's a slightly darker green.
That's the lower Santa Fe Basin.
And then on the right hand side, a very light green, up is the upper Santa Fe Basin that had an MFL established in 2007.
The compliance points of the reference gauges in that basin are the werethings and springs gauges in the Graham gauge.
On the Santa Fe on the lower Santa Fe, the compliance points of the reference gauges that we mentioned are the US Highway 27 gauge for the Chatechni River.
I think I'll remember to use the pointer here.
Is there a spring actually at werethings and springs?
There was one.
Let's see, I got it back up.
That's a little zoom in on that location that might make it easier.
So the Chatechni River at the US Highway 27.
The Fort White location, again near downstream of Ginny Spring, July Spring, and the US-441 location at the upper end of the basin, just downstream of Elino State Park.
The existing rule is a reminder just has the Fort White and the Chatechni gauges in it.
And for the reevaluation due to the availability of data, we've been able to make use of the gauge near high springs on US-441, which is appropriate based on the changing character of the River Channel along its length in that reach versus downstream near it at Fort White.
There are six priority springs on the Chatechni River.
The upper end of the river, but it's classified as a springs group.
For the purposes of the outstanding floor to springs, there are 11 springs on the Santa Fe River, five of which the ones that are highlighted in all the priority springs are shown as yellow, the ones that are circled in, I guess that's a green or turquoise color or the outstanding floor to springs.
In that's part of the system, but the Chatechni itself counts as a single one of the six outstanding floor to springs in the system that we're looking at.
These associations are shown on the following slide.
There's a table, so the Lower Santa Fe River at Fort White includes those springs on the left hand side, the Lower Santa Fe River, or they're associated with that location.
The Lower Santa Fe River at US-441 is associated with Hornsby Treehouse in Columbia Springs, and the Chatechni River at Highway 27 is associated with the six springs that are up in the State Park.
Where's the Orange Springs?
Is that our district or your district?
We have South of Ocalo.
If it's South of Ocalo, it's not an our district.
We've got an our district.
That's in Saint John's.
I think that's on private land.
I tried to swim and they said I couldn't until I told him what I did and they said, well, how old would you like to swim?
I think they told me it was on private land.
Yes it is.
This is a repeat, a simplified repeat of the earlier table we saw showing the proposed flow values for the Lower Santa Fe and its Chatechni rivers.
Again, that the difference between the unimpacted flow and the MFL is shown in the highlighted in red.
And that's the key, that's the key location to focus on.
The results, as we had seen earlier, haven't changed much.
Moving forward from this and we've stripped out the existing columns in here, so this is just the new proposed values for the proposed MFL.
Let's see.
Big numbers at 2040.
Yeah, I'm going to get my sheets right.
So this table shows the status for the river gate for the three river gauges.
And again, this is in, at the top, it shows that it's in CFS or cubic feet per second.
That's the units of flow that we're looking at.
The current 2015 impact, as you know, developed with the FSAG model, was 70.7 for the Lower Santa Fe River at Fort White.
So the net is 32.3.
So it is, you know, it is currently meeting the MFL as based on the model.
Also, the Lower Santa Fe River at US441 as a current impact of 48.9 versus that RTF number in the first column of 50.
So it's also currently meeting it by a very small amount.
This is as of 2015 recall.
The Etch of Tuckney River has an RTF of the RTF less the MFL flow is 10 cubic feet per second.
And the current 2015 impact is 15.4.
So that shows that it's in recovery.
I think I'll present this just in terms of the, the colors we use on the previous slide of the traffic light.
It shows that the Etch of Tuckney River would be shown to be shown to be in recovery.
But both at based on the 2040 expected impacts both Lower Santa Fe River and Lower Santa Fe River at Fort White and at US441 are shown to be in prevention.
Based on the expected water use from now up until 2040.
And as compared to the existing status, the existing MFL currently shows that the Lower Santa Fe River at Fort White is in recovery.
And that the Etch of Tuckney River is also in recovery.
So the introduction of an F-sag model, which is our best tool for evaluating impacts of the upper floor at an aquifer in North Florida.
And North Florida is, you know, came up with the difference, the main difference for why we've got prevention on those two Lower Santa Fe systems and a slightly higher recovery than we had before on the Etch of Tuckney.
So recovery prevention strategy is required as a result of that analysis and recovery prevention strategy must be adopted concurrently with the MFL.
It must be expeditiously implemented and include a phased approach or timetable, which will allow for the provision of sufficient water supplies again for all existing and projected reasonable beneficial uses, including development of additional water supplies and the implementation of conservation of other efficiency measures concurrent with and to the maximum extent practical to offset reductions in permitted withdrawals.
The goal of the prevention strategy is to achieve recovery to the minimum flow or minimum water level no more than 20 years after the adoption of a recovery or prevention strategy, that's in the case of recovery, or to prevent the existing flow or water level from falling below the established minimum flow or minimum water level for those locations that are in prevention.
And that strategy must include consideration of water resource and water supply development additional regulatory measures above and beyond what we have now an additional water conservation measures.
The next steps now then are the development of a prevention strategy for the Santa Fe River and a recovery strategy for the Etch of Tuckney River.
Rule developments will be spearheaded by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Technical Assistance will be provided by both water management district staff.
And I'd be happy to take any questions.
Just a comment off I've been following your modeling initiative for quite some time.
Forced landowners are are very interested in the benefits for groundwater recharge that the abundance of timber land in that part of Florida provides and we've been I believe there's been some comments to help to in the model to understand and recognize how those things.
contribute to the recharge side of the equation and we talk a lot about consumption and planning for future supply and protecting these waterways and what doesn't get talked about.
I think as much as the recharge side of the equation and how land use and particularly timber land use has a value and a benefit that goes beyond just growing trees in terms of providing those opportunities.
to get water back into the aquifer and I bring it up because the Swan and District I know has had some really interesting cooperative projects with forest landowners to do some of those things but there's a much greater opportunity out there I believe to incentivize forest landowners to.
continue to maintain that land use and preserve the value not only of the production of the timber crop but but to get the water back into the ground in a way that is is natural as it gets in that part of Florida.
So I would just encourage both the Swan and our district to continue to think about that growing interest there's a name for it.
It's ecosystem services there's been some discussions they're very early around the state of how can there better framework to encourage incentivize those kinds of land uses.
And I would just recognize again the cooperative projects that I'm familiar with particularly work sinks which is very interesting sometimes you might want to tell our board how that project went on to place very large recharge project.
Brook sink is the largest sink home state of Florida and it's on project timber land and it had been ditched and drained around it and with cooperation from the Swan and District and was instrumental in getting this project launch.
We got some money to route the water back into the sink where it goes basically fills up during a big flood event and recharge is right to the aquifer.
So those are that's an interesting and unique one but there are other broader opportunities that I think we should be considering.
Yes, that is probably the most cost-effective recharge project that any water management district will ever get done.
For the record, over the weekend there was a three to four inch rain in Bradford County.
We finally got, it's not an easy place to monitor, we put monitoring in the bottom of the sink last year sometime.
The water level in the sink came up from 13 to relative terms, 13 to 50 feet in the last three days.
And that water is just waiting to get recharge.
So again, really, really cost-effective project.
But I wish there were more sinks like that.
There are, there are a lot of timber land.
And that has the same value, it's just a slower process.
There are some other really, you know, some with not quite that potential to close.
And I'd also like to note that we're undertaking research on timber companies land right now with the University of Florida to do just that.
You know, it's starting right now, but we'll be working on that over the University of Florida.
We're working on it over the next three to four years.
Excellent. Thank you.
Again, to stream Florida, and important, like the other industries are.
Yes, sir.
And that's why a doctorate tell us Black Creek project is important.
Because we bring the flood water, some saffron or black creek down the Keystone Heights.
That's going to help with MFLs.
And that helps J.E.A. in North Florida.
Because you flush the toilet and the Jacksonville comes right out of Keystone Heights.
And I think that, one of our mission strategies to get that done,
and we're working on that.
That's a good presentation today.
So we'll be looking at that project as well as a model for how we're going to be moving forward.
You bet.
We have a public comment now for this for this presentation.
Okay.
If it's regarding this item, then let's so recognize and pronounce today.
Sir.
Here, recognize.
So Johnson's approaching the podium.
Public comment relative to.
Looks like MFLs item.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and governing board members.
Before I make a quick comment on this agenda item,
I want to point out on the biosolids item.
CCUA produces a class double A biosolid of which we begin investing in that 15 years ago.
Significant investment in a public utility to make sure we're doing it properly.
Along with representing CCUA, we're closely with the members of the fellow utilities in the North Florida utility.
Coordination group.
Eight North Florida utilities.
Make up this group.
And they are CCUA.
J.E.A.
The City of Neptune Beach Atlantic Beach.
Jacksonville Beach and the town of Orange Park.
Collectively, the customers.
We serve total roughly 1.2 million people in thousands of businesses in North Florida.
We consider the publication of this assessment of the status of this MFL concerning.
We have expressed our intention to work with this wanting district staff and the development of these MFLs on
many occasions.
Based on the poor response, I perceive our efforts have not been well received.
For example, the North Florida utilities prepared and submitted comments to this wanting district staff on January 20, 2020.
In early January 2021, we receive responses to stakeholder comments.
The swanie district staff only responded to our summary page while ignoring 13 pages of technical content.
The North Florida utilities have serious and significant issues with the scientific and technical foundation of the assessment of the status of this MFL.
Several of our comments on the MFL were consistent with the swanie district's own peer reviewers, as well as other stakeholders.
With our comments being largely ignored, we do not consider the peer reviewers and other stakeholders comments adequately addressed either.
This MFL was first adopted in 2015 by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
Even then, stakeholders knew and understood this MFL required additional scientific evaluation and development of sound public policy approach.
This time, the swanie district has approved 120 new and modified consumptive use permits.
These new or modified it modified cuffs translate into an increase of 7MGD of water supply allocation and relative proximity to the MFL in question further impairing these water bodies.
In the past few years, we have been able to do a lot of things and not for protection act as previously mentioned.
It requires the St. John's district to provide a minimum of 25% of the total project cost to address these MFLs.
I understand the swanie district is exempt from the funding requirement.
Based on these facts and the significant investments the public utilities are already making an alternative water supply development.
The district may adversely impact many people given the potential size and cost of the projects without the support of sound science or public policy.
Given the stakes to protect Florida's natural resources and the cost to all of us.
We have invested interest to make sure the science supporting these MFLs is sound and they support rational public policy.
The majority utilities respectfully request the support of this governing board and that of the St. John's district staff and requesting the swanie district.
Return to a process that meaningfully engages public stakeholders aimed at scientifically defensible MFLs and sound public policy.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Thank you for the presentation sir.
I'll ask Dr. Shortel to review your comments and we'll proceed accordingly again.
All right. We've all in information item nine Mr. Rockwell on the investment report.
Greg and ask for a short report.
Good afternoon Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
My name is Greg Rockwell. I am your accounting director.
My pleasure here today to report and present the highlights of agenda item number nine our investment report.
The full presentation as prepared by public trusted advisors is including your governing board packet.
Today I'm going to present a condensed version but I will use the same page numbers to so if you were to follow it would make it easier.
Mr. John Grady with PTA is here today should you have any questions of his report.
Just as a reminder to public trusted advisors they manage our long for term investment portfolio and for our district's long term expenses and reserves whereas the counting office we manage the day to day cash and our liquidity needs for the short term.
Okay.
This slide here we can see that the investment yield is 1.37 as of December 31, 2020 and the duration was 1.95 years.
If we compare that to October 1, 2020 you can see that the duration is going up and the investment yield is going down.
That's because when we have maturities we are having to invest those at rates that are lower we can.
The bottom chart by chart there you can see 99.5% of our individual district investments are double a rated or better so can't get much better than that.
Right here we can see we have a well-duked diversified and highly where he said it was highly rated portfolio here and 42% of our individual investments holdings are at a book value of 1.75% or better.
The far right home you can see that the district's investments are all in compliance with our district policy and with state statutes.
The slide here this illustrates the current labor market and the unemployment rates.
The top chart you can see that the economy lost 22 million jobs March and this through April then it recovered 12.3 million jobs from May through November.
And we keep having renewed restrictions for COVID.
In the bottom chart we have a nationwide unemployment rate that dropped to 6.7% in November from April high of 14.7%
And Florida's unemployment rate which is in the green line went from a pre pandemic low of 2.8% to April 20 high of 13.8 and then came back down to 6.4% in November.
Next slide here shows that the CPI the customer price index is below the feds 2% target rate you see that red box so interest rates will not rise until our economy gets back up to 2% level that's a federal like to see in the bottom chart shows that the GDP gross domestic product.
Contracted the most ever since it was recorded in 1947 and then quickly rebounded as just as fast in the same year in the strength and speed of the economic recovery will depend upon consumer and business spending.
In this last slide we can see the interest rates for the US treasuries which are at historically low levels back where we saw back for 10 years there were low levels while they're back there now and they are expected to remain low.
For the near term as the market value it's economic recovery efforts the government stimulus and efficiency and effectiveness of the new covid vaccine.
With that I'm happy to answer any questions and Mr. John.
Thank you very much for that presentation appreciate good work thank you sir and back for good work you're doing for us.
Okay that includes I'm not a conclusion I'm not information only.
Item 10 public comment I think we have a visitor.
Chair recognizes Mr. Linda Moss for three minutes.
Moss is approaching the podium now and when you get to a map he's state your name and city for the record and you recognize for three minutes.
I'm Linda Moss.
I'm from the very sport.
I live on the apocalyptic now that comes right off of Lake Apapaca and goes right into the hair's chain of lakes into Lake Bucclair.
I've lived there for 28 years.
I had nine foot of water behind my house to put my boat up until 2004 when we had the hurricanes.
And then I still didn't have muck behind my house until about two weeks later when someone decided to open the lock the the dam.
And then everything that they held back up in Lake Apapaca downstream which was 623 acre feet if you know how much that is that's enough to fill the entire state bill.
So therefore the residents or canals were filled to the top and the community of innocent village we had.
We had about 250 homes there but one of the canals this by my house goes about three and a half miles all the way back to Shirley shores.
Another sort of division and we're a community or community of about 250 to 750 thousand dollar homes.
Not that it makes any difference on what the value of the home is.
The tragedy is what we've all lost and what we lost then.
Eventually eventually 10 years later after we all sat on muck.
We finally got a small dredging we got.
They passed it off as the Lake Boat Claire Dredging project and so therefore there was some dredging done there.
I believe that DEP and St. John's paid for that then but you'll have to double check with your officers now.
The thing of it is they came in to our residential canals as an afterthought then and they took out four feet of the nine feet that was in there and said they didn't have any more money.
So that's.
We were left all these years, and with the smell. My way of life, and all of my neighbors way of life, has disintegrated entirely since that time, but then, come 2017, we have another event, and with that, comes more muck, comes more sediment, and comes directly into our canal,
to our canal, more than even goes out into Lake Boclair. So, I have thought that, I have Lake Jim Cleanwater Project that has been brought about by this, and there are, of course, the neighborhood, we have about 300 and some members, plus all of the fishermen, I am a fisherman, and I belong to all the clubs, and our fishing has been just incredibly in that area.
So, I assume that if you all do cover the Harris chain of lakes, because this has really, really put a downfall on the Lake Boclair and Lake Dorf fishing, and the FWC has been involved, Harris restoration council, while they were still in business until somebody's sunshine, was right in, it's right on it, and they were really working with Lisa, to, to come in.
Come up with the solution, because we can't even dredge because it's going to happen again, so until there is a resolution found, I'm begging you, to please bring in the core of engineers, because your engineers are not capable of apparently finding a resolution.
Now, I didn't have a muck problem into your 2000, remember that. So, there is a reason, there has to be a way, I've been on the water, my entire life, I've been in sediment and muck in other places, but I've never seen anything like the liquid muck to sit on the bottom of Lake Boclair.
I'm asking you to please as a board to bring in the core of engineers to help us, because this is my life, this is 13 years of my retirement life, spent on this subject, to the point where I have no life anymore to speak of.
So, if you would please help us, I really beg of you, and to help save the Harris chain of lakes, you know, you're transferring the muck from Lake Apopka for the restoration, it's just been transferred down to Lake Boclair and Lake Bora.
I mean, that's where it's at and bravo, because everybody is glad of it, they don't have the expensive grazing it, let it go. So, you know, and I have one question that I would like to know.
I've been very generous and talking.
You have your three minutes over, so please bring it to a question.
I will, I think.
And thank you.
And thank you very much, sir.
I have one question that I would like to know, I would like to know the wind, any pumping at all goes on on the north shore of Lake Apopka.
I'd like to know where it gets, where the water, where it gets pumped too.
I'd like to know exactly where the pumping is going on, and where out in Lake Apopka, this is getting pumped too.
I'd like to know the answer to that question today.
I'm not on trial here, ma'am. I appreciate the input. I'll defer to staff for that, but that's not what we do.
I understand.
But I brought a position.
I wanted to bring it up.
Thank you very much.
Please call me.
Listen, we've looked into this. Chairman McClows before me has looked into it extensively.
Our legal staff looked into it.
Experts look in.
Ma'am with with with just the strong conviction I can make.
This is not our liability.
Sir, I'm not.
I'm not.
I'm not even saying it.
We're not arguing.
I'm talking.
Yeah.
Perhaps you need to make a presentation to the core of engineers, because it is not ours.
It looks like from what I can tell I'm not an expert.
That you're original developer, miscued on how they set this up.
And it's set conditions.
So when a hurricane comes, you get what you got.
We didn't do this.
Our staff says we didn't do this.
We tried to do everything we could to see if there was some opportunity for mitigation.
It's not legally there.
We cannot do that.
We don't have the authority to do it.
And maybe take your case to the head of the water.
Core of engineers in Jacksonville.
And maybe they look at something they can do.
So thank you.
May I just say that?
Ma'am.
It's not for debate.
I appreciate your input.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate your listening.
We have new board members.
I thought might be expensive.
Yes, thank you.
Okay.
Assistant Director Kelly has another public comment.
Is that correct?
Sure.
Commissioner.
Yes, I think at the groundbreaking.
We there.
Another John Wayne looking individual.
Okay, sir.
Chair recognizes you and you appreciate you being here in your public services.
Well, Commissioner.
Good afternoon.
I guess it's afternoon slightly afternoon.
It's nice to meet all of you.
The only governing board member I do know is.
Remember going because she lives in our neck of the woods.
We thank you very much for all that you guys do to protect our waterways and our water supply.
I wanted to mention, I'm not here really in an official capacity on behalf of the city.
But.
Our city in December adopted a real pro conservation initiative.
had a planning meeting on that, and there's more to come, and we're going to be reaching
out to your staff to work with us, our city borders on the south side of, like, just
up. And so we're going to be working a lot more with the district on those water quality
issues and how we can be a better partner in that regard. But a neighbor of my not Galloway
who's retired Naval Officer and engineer on his own initiative did a 13-month study
of the Hunter Smart System. These are the Smart Water Irrigation Control Systems. I wanted
to bring this to your attention. I know he had been communicating with Deirdre Irwin,
but in a 13th month period in 2019, and he single family home right around the corner
for me, literally right around the corner. His 13-month water irrigation was 147,340 gallons.
By implementing this Hunter Smart System in the same 13-month period 2020, he reduced it
to 23,590 gallons. For an 84% reduction in irrigation utilization using the Smart Systems.
And I understand the district has a cost sharing program on things of this matter. We're
going to probably be, I'm going to ask my commission to launch an initiative to do this.
We have too many of our residents using potable water for irrigation and we're 90% residential
community. And we're going to look at this and look at partnering with the district to see how
quickly we can bring down so that potable water utilization using this technology. And I thank
you for I haven't had any dialogue just yet. Nor has our commission, but we're going to be doing
it shortly. We're looking at ways to conserve potable water. And we think this might be
a very smart one. I don't know if the district has ever considered regulations mandating systems
like this going forward. I don't know exactly, and I'm not, I'm not, you're, I'm not, you're
going to be up to the municipalities in terms of mandating, but we certainly, well, we're going
to appreciate your interest in what conservation. I'm going to bring it up because I know
that's very important to the district. And so, when I brought this information to my attention,
I thought I would stop by since you guys are here today. Sure. And share it with you. So thank
you very much. And thank you for all the good work that you do.
Thank you, Commissioner, for that presentation. And all of us need to do better at water savings
and water recycling. So thank you for that. That takes us down to governing board comments.
Ladies and gentlemen, comments. Thank you. Next slide of 25.
Executive director's board, Dr. Shorttell. You're recognized.
Thank you, General. Members of the board. First off, I'd like to pass my time over to our General
Council. Mary, I'm a clerk for an update. And as required by District Policy, I am to report to you
any new lawsuits that receives receives since the last board meeting. In your black folder,
there's a very short summary. We did receive. We were named in a lawsuit filed in Duval County
in the last week. It appears to be a matter involving a property dispute between a homeowner
and a homeowner's association and a lot owner. We were named in the lawsuit primarily because we have
a conservation easement that is part of the dispute. So there appears to be a slight
encouragement into that easement. As the property ownership dispute is resolved, it'll likely
be that will resolve our issue with regard to the conservation easement. So they're not asking us
for anything at this point. We've just been named because we have a property interest. But this isn't
the first time we've had a case like this, where there's been a dispute and there happen to be
a conservation easement in the middle of the dispute. They usually work themselves out and we get
things taken care of, but I did want you to let you know that that had been filed last week. That's all
I had on that. Thank you. Appreciate that. Doctor Short Hill. Thank you. I'm understand on my borrowed
time. Stand up between you and lunch boxes. So I'll be brief. Take all the time you need, ma'am.
Thank you. Appreciate you. Next slide. So our February employee of the month, LaDana, it's the
teams meeting that we had to announce that she's the one right in the middle of this screen with a nice
big grin on her face. She is a Senior Business Support Specialist and in our Palacca office
and the Office of Business and Administrative Services. She is very well thought of by her peers and by
all of us who are the beneficiaries of the work that she does. She's very adaptable and flexible. She
overcomes obstacles creatively without making a big fuss. Instead of saying, well we can't do it
because of all of these things. She's like, hmm, let's turn this on a dime a little bit and do it a
little bit differently. So she's solution oriented and that's what we all aspire to be to get our
jobs done. She works across our organizational boundaries, you know, from a staffing perspective,
which is probably a very, very important attribute, right, to be flexible and to look for solutions.
She especially supports the needs of finance, procurement and facilities and she's positive and
optimistic and everyone loves working with her. Congratulations to LaDana.
Let's fight the counterperson. We all like to be around. Absolutely. Not very long ago, a couple of weeks ago,
we were invited by the Florida Councilman's Association to tour a couple of ranches in the upper basin.
Here's a few of the pictures from that day. It started out very foggy, but we were happy to join
in that tour and many of you participated. We appreciated that. I certainly learned a lot about
the land and water stewardship of our ranchers, very impressed on lots of different fronts and we also
got the bonus of getting to see Taylor Creek Reservoir and the associated areas of agriculture for
those tea cups that you approve every each and every month. That was fabulous tour.
Most people don't understand it. We do have a 300,000 acre ranch in Florida that's managed by
purple. People very concerned about water use in the environment and another 100,000 acre ranch. That was
a Desiree ranch and then Billy Kimford's a Kimford family, small 100,000 acre ranch. Just people so
concerned about the environment, what they're doing, how efficient they're using our water supply. That was
well, well earned tour. Thank you. Thank you. Our chemistry laboratory in Palacca has once again
shined in what turned out to be a virtual assessment this year. I think I've already reported on the fact
that when we were initially shut down with the pandemic, our monitoring folks were still out in the
field, collecting data, bringing in samples, what we're going to do about the laboratory and they
proactively went to two shifts and have done a fantastic job in keeping that laboratory going and really
adapting to the years that all of us have been in and they remain right now on two shifts because
it's working out fabulously for everybody. Meanwhile, the need for audits of laboratories and the
like, that doesn't go away. I mean, it's the audits that provide that third party look in to ensure that
integrity of the data upon which all of the scientific analyses that we do, that then back up the
recommendations that we make to you all, these are important things. This was-
As done virtually this year, they pass with flying colors again. Their track record is outstanding. And if I may, I just want to read the comments from the lead, assessor, no concerns. This was a very well-organized laboratory with very knowledgeable staff. The electronic processes you have in place are excellent in preventing errors in quality.
All data were easily retrievable and traceable in your current systems. Congratulations on a job well done. Congratulations to the laboratory.
Please pass along to Board's appreciation to your team that's making that happen. And also, as you know, if you have a laboratory, you need to modernize it no matter if you got it yesterday.
So make sure you keep the Board of Prize a what, technologically advanced equipment they need to continue to do this good work.
I've seen some of these labs of National Guard as a mobile lab.
It's not that big of vehicle. Probably has $2 million worth of lab equipment in it for analyzing all sorts of things in the air, whereas you're analyzing mostly things in the ground.
So bring that to us. We'll look at it. We want to make sure someone is working that hard has the latest equipment to do business with.
We appreciate that. General, I will pass on the Board's thanks and this is a perfect segue into the next item because we do upgrade our equipment.
We put items in the budget and have been keeping up with technologies so that we have not necessarily the next shiny object,
but keeping up with industry standards. And as we do that, we have useful serviceable equipment that gets surplus under our governing board policy for surplusing, which is still very useful equipment in the right hands.
And it turns out, the right hands are in Silver River Museum and we're in Marion County Schools. We have leadership there at Vanguard High School that have worked under the Blue Schools grant program and became inspired to develop a, you know, a water related laboratory at the museum.
That, that could benefit school students throughout Marion County that teachers names, I think, Mr. Hunter.
And you see some of the pictures here. They very happily are the recipients of some donated equipment that's perfectly serviceable.
The original acquisition cost for the equipment that they now have to set up this laboratory, a quarter of a million dollars.
So our lab is very well equipped and now Marion County Schools has one too.
We have signs up with the help of Lake County Water Authority in we have locks on the upper Oklahoma lakes in the district in the Lake County Water Authority as the water quality improves.
We have more manatees coming up moving around. We've even had reports of them all the way up to Lake Apaca. That's still rare, but not, they're out there.
So with more manatees moving around and up and down that system, it's important to remind voters who are not as used to seeing manatees in this part of our chain that, you know, slow down and watch for manatees.
So we've got new signs up, thanks and a shout out to Lake County Water Authority.
And I also wanted you to know that under our lock tenders contract, we have them increasing their surveillance and observations of manatees.
So that we have better information to share with FWC and the local counties about the sea cows that are in our midst.
Those of you who are able to join us yesterday, we had such such a great event for the Apaca Service Center ground breaking.
Generally you did a great job as our primary speaker want to thank everybody I especially wanted to thank Lisa and her team for their work with the contracts and with the consultants that are working on this.
But yesterday was a lot, it was just fun. It was great to be together. It was great to be able to look out over Lake Apaca.
It was great to share those moments with the city of Apaca, the mayor and councilmen and women who were able to attend, which we appreciated.
And lots of stakeholders, friends of Lake Apaca, Orange, Audubon, and many others.
We then had time for a tour on the North Shore and many of you got to see some of the projects that are in place and going into place on the North Shore to help improve water quality in the lake.
I'm going to copy that slide right there.
Sure.
Let's meet, join everybody together.
I have an important question.
Who won bird bingo?
Who cheated the least?
Bird bingo was awesome.
It was fun. That was a great idea.
Janet, are you climbing to climb in the wind?
Okay, last but not least.
You heard yesterday on that tour that the bald eagle population on the North Shore is expanding.
There's several nests in unexpected places.
And you saw with your own eyes thousands upon thousands of birds everywhere.
So this is a wildlife haven, the restoration there.
It's it's working for the water quality in the lake, but it's also working for habitat restoration.
And sometimes we can human beings can kind of love things a little too much or a little too closely.
And on the North Shore, when the wildlife drive is open, it can get very crowded and sometimes.
That combined with nesting and new families of baby birds can be.
Abalancing act right everybody wants to see and when you when you see nature.
And it's right before your eyes, I think people learn to be conservationists in their own right because they understand what they're protecting.
Which is important, but you can't love them so much that you're writing.
Birds off the nest and abandoning nests and things like that.
So recently, we had the opportunity to see that we had nests in an area that got a little bit too much attention.
We shut down that area, which for the protection of the of the family of birds until the birds fled.
And we're very thankful to our Audubon Florida Eagle Watch volunteers who are, I'll say, keeping an eagle out for all of our eagles nest and helping us with that data collection.
So thanks to everybody who is patient when we have to close areas like this and happy Valentine's Day.
Uh-oh, you needed that little shout out there.
From like from a calendar perspective, we will be back in Palacca for our governing board meeting per usual second Tuesday in March, March 9th.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Dr. Chow. That report.
Any other comments from the board?
Well, adjourn a meeting.
Thank you.