News

Longterm Water Plan Unveiled for Polk; OK Request to Be Dec. 17


By Tom Palmer
THE LEDGER

Published: Saturday, November 1, 2008 at 6:50 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, November 1, 2008 at 6:50 p.m.

BARTOW | Millions of dollars of potential water projects that local officials and consultants hope will offer a solution to Polk County's longterm water shortages were previewed for county officials Thursday.

Related Links:

County commissioners will be asked on Dec. 17 to give the plan a formal nod.

At issue is how to come up with a longterm solution - as much as 50 years into the future - for finding sources of water to supply water demand for new homes, farms, factories and businesses throughout Polk County, said Gary Fries from Polk County Utilities.

The list of projects include a mix of conservation and developing alternative sources ranging from converting abandoned agricultural wells to public use to tapping surface waters.

A favorable vote in December would give consultants the go-ahead to analyze the 15 most promising projects in more detail.

In May, they would submit a report that details which ones are the most feasible and comes up with a financial plan for implementing them, said Gene Health, a water consultant.

Fries said the goal is to find an additional 30 million gallons of water a day in addition to the 99.8 mgd that's permitted now for utilities countywide. Polk County's overall permitted water use is 270 mgd.

"The need for the project is critical,'' Fries said, and he explained that is because of changes in the way water permits will be handled in the future.

After years of using water from the Floridan aquifer, water officials are now telling utilities all over Central Florida that after 2013 they must look elsewhere for sources to meet additional demand.

Fries said much of Polk County is also under the Southwest Florida Water Management District's Southern Water-use Caution Area, which requires cutbacks on overall pumping to aid in the recovery of water resources.

Thursday's meeting was attended by representatives from seven of Polk's 17 cities as well as representatives from the Southwest and the South Florida water management districts.

That's because the plan envisions cooperation among cities and Polk County, and perhaps even utilities in adjacent counties, to develop these alternatives.

Polk officials have been seriously looking at these issues for several years.

This issued was discussed at length last December when commissioners met with the Polk legislative delegation. At the time, Heath, the county water consultant, envisioned completion of a plan by Dec. 1 this year. He said Thursday's presentation met that goal.

As county officials and consultants continue the analysis, Fries said some of the issues will be the capital costs of the projects, the source of the funding and the effect of the costs on customer water rates.

He said the longterm plan is to make water rates standard countywide. Now, different utilities charge different rates.

Fries said it's possible utility rates will be increased.

[ Tom Palmer can be reached at tom.palmer@the ledger.com or at 863-802-7535. ]


This story appeared in print on page B3

Comments

Only moderator-approved comments are shown on this page. To see all comments, please visit the forum.
    Post a comment | View all comments on this topic.
  1. tucsondon_2000 says...
    November 2, 2008 7:05:03 am

    RE: Link

    "the longterm plan is to make water rates standard countywide"

    What a folly! Each water purveyor has different operating circumstances that effect the amount of revenue required to make the utility viable. For that reason alone it is foolish to think that all should charge the same rates for water service. Who in this band of "experts" is going to make the decision on setting uniform rates and thereby deem which utility is profitable and has the wherewithal to make ongoing capital improvements to their respective systems to comply with regulatory requirements and which are not? A uniform rate will only ensure that some providers have a positive revenue stream (or more than required), some will have neutral revenue and some will not have enough.

    Keep in mind that the cost of water service is not the water itself, which is essentially free, but in the cost of conveying the water to the customer. Again, each utility system has its own unique set of operation and maintenance circumstances; labor, electrical, transportation, treatment, insurance, etc. The physical condition of the utility also has a direct relationship to the cost of service. Has the utility been well maintained or has maintenance been deferred? Have ongoing capital improvements been commonplace or are the system facilities aging and operating in an inefficient manor? The point is that no two providers are exactly alike. These factors all vary between utilities and have a direct bearing on the cost of service to provide water to customers. You certainly cannot expect to lump all systems together and set a uniform rate.

    Crazy thinking.

    Report this post

  2. tucsondon_2000 says...
    November 2, 2008 5:18:49 pm

    I'm not sure what the discussion about fluoridation has to do with this article, but you may be interested to know that many groundwaters, including the Floridian aquifer, contains naturally occurring fluoride, perhaps 0.1 - 0.3 milligrams per liter (mg/l). In addition, utilities that do add fluoride only do so at the behest of their respective communities and add additional fluoride chemical that, in combination with the naturally occurring fluoride, brings the residual fluoride level to about 1.0 mg/l, which has been determined by the dental health authorities, to be the optimum level for dental health.

    I have no doubt that the horses did indeed suffer from fluorosis, but keep in mind that, the video clip did not indicate that the Pagosa utility was feeding fluoride in doses that were in excess of health standards, they probably were not. Fluoride standards are for humans, not animals and take into account typical daily water consumption for humans, not animals. If an animal, in this case a horse, drinks a 100 times the amount of water in a day than is typically consumed by a human, it could be expected that the horse will probably suffer from fluorosis. This does not mean that the water is unsafe for human consumption.

    Report this post

  3. tucsondon_2000 says...
    November 2, 2008 6:39:21 pm

    18 Watt:

    The state did not decide for Lakeland or any other city to supplement the water with fluoride, the community did. The state does oversee it to ensure that the treatment meets the state and federal drinking water parameters. I can assure you that not all communities fluoridate.

    If you read your mail (and I presume you can read since you have added to this forum) you would have noticed that the City of Lakeland, and for that matter, ALL public utilities, provide their customers with a consumer confidence report annually that lists all contaminants (including fluoride) that have been detected in the water. Sound familiar? If not, ask the City for another one, because one was sent to you already this year and each and every year since 1999 when it was first required by regulation. I'm sure they would be glad to provide another.

    The health authorities take human water consumption into account, because that is who PUBLIC water suppliers provide water to. They are the consumers and health effects for all contaminants are determined for the effect that they may have on humans. Perhaps you would think it better to determine the action levels or maximum contaminant levels for drinking water contaminants by another method than by what is acceptable for human consumption. Or perhaps you would like to return to the glorious days of yesteryear when cholera, dysentery and other delightful waterborne diseases were in fashion in the United States. By the way, they still are fashionable in other counties. Or maybe you could join the other animals at the old watering hole for a return to the good old days. You are right on one thing; it isn't 1955 anymore. Thankfully so when it comes to the regulations today, with regard to water quality, and what they were back in the day. But where you and I disagree is on the water quality in the United States. Water supplied to our populace, although not perfect, is the most reliable and safe supply anywhere in the world.Now I think it is time for you to put your aluminum foil hat back on. After all, it is my understanding that "they" cannot see you or read your thoughts if you are wearing it.

    Good day, sir.

    Report this post