FROM THE NEWS SERVICE OF FLORIDA:
THE CAPITAL, TALLAHASSEE, June 8, 2015………. Proponents of water and land conservation are being advised to have “low” expectations as the environmental portion of the state budget is pieced together.
The House and Senate remain split on funding for land acquisition with money from last year’s voter-approved Water and Land Conservation ballot initiative, known as Amendment 1.
Lawmakers are also struggling with a flood of requested individual water projects, leaders of the budget talks on agricultural and natural resources said Monday.
“Expectations, quite frankly, should be pretty low when it comes to water projects,” said House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Chairman Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula. “Ultimately we’ve got to figure out how we’ll get this thing landed.”
Sen. Alan Hays, a Umatilla Republican who chairs a subcommittee that pieced together the Senate’s Amendment 1 funding package, said lawmakers are trying to divvy up about $50 million among more than $1 billion in local water-project requests from across Florida.
“You can figure the delta yourself,” Hays said. “We are striving, our best, to do the right thing for as many people as we can. But believe me, it is an exceptionally difficult task.”
The ballot initiative requires for the next 20 years that 33 percent of the proceeds from an existing real-estate tax, known as documentary stamps, go for land and water maintenance and acquisition across Florida.
For the upcoming year, the increased funding under Amendment 1 for such land and water programs will grow to more than $740 million, from around $470 million in the current budget year that ends June 30. The current year’s funding includes daily operations within state environmental agencies.
With the potential for one more day of conference committee talks before unresolved issues are moved to the House and Senate budget chairmen, lawmakers from the two chambers had yet to settle a philosophical difference on bonding some of the Amendment 1 money for land acquisitions.
The House supports bonding. A number of senators, including Hays, oppose such financing.
“I made it very clear, I personally am opposed to bonding,” Hays said Monday. “Borrowing money is a last resort for necessary things, not nice to have things.”
The Senate proposal includes $57 million for land acquisition, but none is designated to be bonded. Sen. Joe Negron, R-Stuart, has proposed adding $40 million for land acquisition that could be bonded to push the amount available to around $400 million.
Negron’s goal would be to use that money to secure some land in the northern Everglades that can be used to both redirect some of the water flow out of Lake Okeechobee — away from areas to the east and west of the lake — and to increase the water supply to South Florida.
Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge urged Hays to consider bonding as a means to increase the money for land acquisition, saying voters who supported Amendment 1 wanted land buys.
However, Hays snapped back that he and Albritton are “following the complete language of Amendment 1.”
The Senate has proposed $124 million toward restoration of the Everglades, including $20 million for improvements to the Kissimmee River. The House is at $57 million for Everglades projects, with no allocation for the Kissimmee River.
The Senate wants $40 million for the restoration of the state’s natural springs and $5 million to improve Lake Apopka. The House has proposed $2 million for Lake Apopka with no match for the springs.
Both the House and Senate are at $25 million for beach projects. State park upgrades would get $15 million under the Senate plan and $20 million from the House.
The House has proposed $20 million for the Conservation and Rural Lands Protection program and $16 million for the Okeechobee Restoration Agricultural Projects, both priorities of House Speaker Steve Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island. The Senate has countered with less than $900,000 for the Rural Lands program and didn’t put any money toward the Okeechobee projects.