……I feel that the Special Interests will watch each other and will make sure all the water does not go to Atlanta or to Counties whose major industry is growth and residential development. Maybe that will help lead to compromise and an equitable solution for all Georgians…..

AVOC

.

January 16, 2008

.

State Water Plan is badly needed - its local impact in Oconee and NEGA

.

By Wendell Dawson, Editor, AVOC, Inc

.

Georgia badly needs a State Water Plan.Having served for two years on the

Georgia Water Campaign Advisory Board (97-98 ACCG and GMA Members) I became acutely aware of the complexity and critical need for a State Water Plan.  It was also informative as to the interests of various stakeholders.   Timber Companies in South Georgia, Agricultural Interests, Fishing Industry, Development Industry and Federal law and regulations (Safe Drinking Water) are competing for influence.

.

Growth and Development plans must consider water availability and impact.   We do not have an unlimited source and cannot have border to border houses in this area of Georgia.   Other areas of the state will not go along with it.

.

The State Water Plan is in the news a lot.It is presently pending in the Georgia Legislature.    Only the Almighty knows what will be passed.

.

Two major criticisms have been inter-basin transfers, boundaries of the Regional Councils and makeup of the Regional Councils.

.

Most of us do not want all decisions to be made under the Gold Dome in Atlanta.   At the same time, do we really want local officials (heavily influenced by Developers) deciding water allocations?!   The lack of responsible local leadership in water matters was evident in how the Bear Creek Reservoir was managed leading up to the drought of the summer of 2007.    (The summer of 2008 may demonstrate more weaknesses).

.

Inter-basin transfers are generally not good.Do we want area water pumped to Atlanta?

.

Unfortunately, Oconee County, in its desperate rush for water to continue fast growth, gave no thought to the consequences of Inter-basin transfers.   The Hard Labor Creek Reservoir Project involves Inter-basin transfers.   Walton County is part of the Metro-Atlanta area and is in a different Regional Council.   SEE Planning Regions Map below.

.

Generally, I feel that the Special Interests will watch each other and will make sure all the water does not go to Atlanta or to Counties whose major industry is growth and residential development.   Maybe that will help lead to compromise and an equitable solution for all Georgians.

.

The GA Association of Water Professionals recently sent out information that is very informative about a State Water Plan.Jack Dozier is very experienced and knowledgeable in Water Matters.  My first experience with him was when he was in GA EPD, Water Protection Branch, and I was Watkinsville City Attorney working on the City Sewer System.  He was also a member of the Georgia Water Campaign Advisory Board on which I served.      I strongly recommend reading those comments about the water situation in Georgia.

GA.Water Planning Regions 1 9 08.pdfx

.

Map of the GA Water Planning Regions

SEE:   8-14-07 The Walton Water Project makes no sense for Oconee County

.

.

1-16-08 GA Water Professionals support State Water Plan

.

….I want to remind you of the myriad stakeholder interests that had to be taken into account during this process.No individual, organization, or interest will be happy with every component of the Plan, but every comment or suggestion we made during this process received proper consideration, and virtually all of our suggestions were incorporated into the Plan in whole or in large part…….

.

Georgia Association of Water Professionals (gawp.org)
2121 New Market Parkway, Suite 144
Marietta, GA  30067

http://www.gawp.org/

.

January 9, 2008

.

Water Council Adopts State Water Plan

.

By Jack Dozier, P.E., CAE, Executive Director

.

The Georgia Water Council unanimously approved the draft Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Plan yesterday, setting the stage for its consideration by the General Assembly when it convenes next Monday. GAWP testified in full support the Plan.We believe it is essential in order to guide the state in managing our water resources both now and into the future.We will urge the General Assembly to approve the Plan, and to fully fund its implementation as requested in the Governor's proposed budget.We encourage our members to contact their State Representatives and Senators and to urge that they support the Plan’s approval.

.

GAWP has been heavily involved in the development of the State Water Plan by providing input throughout the entire three-year planning process, which began with the passage of HB 237 in 2004.  We have served on the Statewide Advisory Council, and have been well-represented by our members on the Basin Advisory Councils and Technical Advisory Councils.We helped to coordinate review of the Plan by a loosely-knit coalition of water user and economic development groups which met regularly over the planning period to coordinate support for positions to make the plan better, more workable, and provide for a sensible balance between water use for human consumption and environmental values. We believe the Plan which was approved by the Water Council yesterday is not only something we can live with, but is a workable plan that will propel us forward in providing for Georgia's future.  

 .

The last Section of the draft Plan (Section 14) is one of the most important components, dealing with Regional Water Planning.GAWP expressed serious concerns with the proposed make-up of the regional water planning councils in the previous draft, calling for at least half of the appointees to each regional planning council to be local government officials or water utility representatives.  In addition, we expressed concerns about the proposed regional planning boundaries (which were initially drawn along the lines of service delivery areas), and asked for a return to the concept of watershed-based boundaries, to the extent possible.

.

The revised map of proposed Water Planning Regions which was incorporated into the Plan is a huge improvement over the initial proposal.It is virtually impossible to make everyone happy when you start drawing lines on a map, but with the inclusion of an opt-out provision to allow border counties to move into an adjacent planning region, most of our members’ concerns should be resolved, or at least mollified.

.

Over the past month, GAWP worked tirelessly with our partners at the Georgia Municipal Association and the Association County Commissioners of Georgia on the issue of representation on the regional planning councils.We especially want to thank GEFA Director Chris Clark and DCA Commissioner Mike Beatty for the personal attention they gave to resolving this issue.The entire success of the Plan’s implementation depends on heavy local involvement and buy-in during its development.Since local government will undoubtedly be responsible for the vast majority of the costs of implementation of regional plans, it is imperative that a significant number of seats on each regional council be guaranteed to local elected or appointed officials or utility directors.

 .

The Plan calls for each regional council to be comprised of 25 members, with 13 appointed by the Governor, and 6 each by the Lt. Governor and the Speaker of the House; of those appointments, a minimum of 8 are to be local government officials.GAWP still believes that at least half of the seats in each region should be dedicated towards local government officials and water utility directors, and that these representatives should be chosen locally rather than through a process of political appointments.However, recognizing the efforts that had to be made toward compromise on this issue, we fully support the Plan’s provision to guarantee that at least eight of each regional council’s 25 appointees will be local government officials, and that a local government advisory council will be established in each region with each city and county having a representative.Senator Ross Tolleson and Representative Lynn Smith (who chair the respective Natural Resources Committees in the Georgia Senate and House, and served as ex officio members of the Water Council), further assured that the Governor, Lt. Governor, and Speaker would consult with local delegations in making their appointments.

.

GAWP is very appreciative of the dedication and hard work of the Water Council members, as well as the countless stakeholders involved in the development of this draft Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Plan.As stated above, we fully support the Plan, and we will urge the General Assembly to approve it and to fully fund its implementation as requested in the Governor's proposed budget. We also urge our members to actively support the Plan, and begin thinking about who should be considered to serve on the regional planning councils, as EPD will be seeking nominations as soon as the Plan is adopted.We also ask that you keep GAWP apprised of communications you may have with your legislators or EPD as we move into the legislative session, so we can be prepared to respond to their requests for clarification or additional information.

.

In closing, I want to remind you of the myriad stakeholder interests that had to be taken into account during this process.No individual, organization, or interest will be happy with every component of the Plan, but every comment or suggestion we made during this process received proper consideration, and virtually all of our suggestions were incorporated into the Plan in whole or in large part.A great deal of compromise was necessary to come up with a Plan that serves the entire State’s best interests, and that achieves the Policy statement from the Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Planning Act of 2004:

.

"Georgia manages water resources in a sustainable manner to support the state’s economy, to protect public health and natural systems, and to enhance the quality of life for all citizens."

1-1-08 AJC- Water Plan Changes make it far less useful  

.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/printedition/2007/12/31/bookmaned1231.html

 .

December 31, 2007

 .

Water plan changes make it far less useful

 .

By Jay Bookman,

 .

A lot of work, thought and money went into the drafting of Georgia's proposed statewide water management plan. As this drought has taught us, a lot will also ride on the plan's success or failure.

 .

But in the last few weeks, as state political leaders began demanding changes in the water plan as the price for getting it passed in the Legislature, a lot of that hard work and wisdom has gone right out the window. Fundamental, last-minute changes in the plan have rendered parts of it pretty much useless in addressing the complex water issues facing the state.

 …………………………..

.

A second major change in the plan also seems designed to undercut the independence and authority of water planning councils. Under the newly revised plan, each regional water council would still have 18 members. However, 10 of those members would be appointed by the governor, four by the lieutenant governor and four by the speaker of the House. In other words, nobody within those watersheds or service districts will have any direct voice in who is appointed to plan on their behalf.

 .

That's a sad outcome to a process that featured meetings and hearings all over the state, with lots of fine talk stressing the importance of local involvement in water planning. In the end, the folks under the Gold Dome aren't willing to give up enough power to make those promises real.

1-3-08 Oconee Commissioners oppose parts of State Water Plan

.

“…. The county government also is partnering with Walton County to build the Hard Labor Creek Reservoir, which conflicts with the water coalition's resolution, Davis said - that project requires an interbasin transfer because Walton County straddles two river basins.

…………………

Restricting the transfers could make it difficult for counties like Walton to get enough water, Davis said.

"This needs to be looked at on a case-to-case basis," he said. "My personal belief is that you can't make a blanket statement."………………..

.

The Athens Banner-Herald

http://onlineathens.com/stories/010308/news_20080103035.shtml

.

January 3, 2008

.

Oconee to buck state water plan

Mulls resolution

.

By Adam Thompson

.

Oconee County commissioners will have a few options ……………..

.

Only one of the proposals contains any language about the controversial practice of transferring water across river basins - so-called "inter-basin transfers" - an issue originally brought to commissioners in November by a local conservation group.

.

Opponents of inter-basin transfers say the practice hurts downstream communities environmentally and economically by withdrawing too much water upstream. Critics also are wary of water being piped to Atlanta.

.

As lawmakers head for an up-or-down vote on the statewide water plan, members of the Georgia Water Coalition have been trying to get local officials to lend support for tougher rules on inter-basin transfers.

.

They've succeeded, especially in downstream communities. So far, 10 cities and 18 counties have approved the coalition's resolution, said Jessica Day, assistant director for Georgia Conservation Voters, a group tracking the resolution.

.

The Oconee County group Friends of Barber Creek asked Oconee commissioners in November to approve a resolution with strong language against inter-basin transfers.

.

Oconee County Commission Chairman Melvin Davis resisted putting the resolution on the agenda, however, citing the lack of an endorsement by the Association County Commissioners of Georgia.

.

The county government also is partnering with Walton County to build the Hard Labor Creek Reservoir, which conflicts with the water coalition's resolution, Davis said - that project requires an interbasin transfer because Walton County straddles two river basins.

.

Restricting the transfers could make it difficult for counties like Walton to get enough water, Davis said.

"This needs to be looked at on a case-to-case basis," he said. "My personal belief is that you can't make a blanket statement."………………..

.

Published in the Athens Banner-Herald on 010308

1-13-08 Walton County fails to decrease water use

.

“….the goals established by the Georgia EPD actually require a 14 percent reduction for the WCWSA system considering this growth in total customers.”
.

The Walton Tribune

http://www.waltontribune.com/story.lasso?ewcd=3a9b949c6ffcaeb8

.

January 13, 2008

.

Walton fails to decrease water use

.

By Robbie Schwartz

.

WALTON COUNTY — Though recent weeks have proven to be damper than recent months, the issue of Gov. Sonny Perdue’s mandatory 10-percent reduction in water usage statewide continues to be a problem locally.
.
Based on a recent Georgia Environmental Protection Division report, no utility system in the county achieved compliance with this goal for November.
.
“A major issue that has impacted the Walton County Water and Sewerage Authority’s efforts to comply with the mandatory water use reductions is that we have experienced 4-percent customer growth over the past 12 months,” WCWSA Director Wendell Geiger said. “Since the baseline for the reductions is based on the December 2006 to March 2007 time period, the goals established by the Georgia EPD actually require a 14 percent reduction for the WCWSA system considering this growth in total customers.”
.
Average WCWSA water use for the reduction time period used as a baseline was 3.76 million gallons per day, putting the target goal at 3.38 MGD to meet the governor’s mandate. For November 2007 average water use was 3.91 MGD — 15 percent higher than mandated levels — and for December 2007 average water use was 3.82 MGD — 13 percent higher than mandated levels………