WSP08207 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

00232'1 ~w .,~,. '..">:-;;' ~;~i? .. ~ 12 ~ enabling legislation permitting them to undertake and finance the best possible type of projects to .meet their particular needs. Many states have legislation authorizing communities, counties and other existing units of government to cooperate in the development of water supplies. They also have authorized the creation of metropolitan special districts, frequently not coinciding with any existing unit. There is already legislation in most states authorizing the creation of a variety of special districts among whose functions is the development or conserva- tion of water supplies. Many of these districts are tailored to special federal programs such as the utilization of Bureau of Reclamation irri~ gation supply, the contracting for space in federal flood control reser~ voirs for municipal water supply, or participation in the Watershed Pro~ tection and Flood Control program. . One question of increasing importance is the extent to which special~purpose resource districts are a satisfactory means of providing local resource management. It may be that states need to develop a smaller number of multiple or general purpose districts with broad powers to participate in resource development. Otherwise, many special districts with inadequate powers and financing may be established. Furthermore, through sheer proliferation and overlapping jurisdictions, the state may find it impossible to give adequate assistance or exercise necessary supervision. Finally, where there are many small special districts in an area, co-sponsorship or multiple sponsorship of projects may be neces~ sary in order to make available their collective powers and purposes. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to achieve coordination and to allocate responsibilities, and initiative may go by default to the cooperating federal agency. The states should be equipped to offer substantial guidance, assistance and supervision to local agencies -- municipalities, special districts, counties and others. TWo major areas of such contributions have already been discussed. The states can help localities foresee their needs, locate water of the quality necessary, survey possible sites and develop programs that are coordinated with other phases of water de- velopment, local, state and federal. State review of proposed projects, where this is required, should be searching and comprehensive. But, beyond this, a state agency should be equipped to offer the necessary technical assistance in all areas to help the localities develop their projects. In most states, this will call for increased staffs of pro- fessionally trained people, Certainly, full use should be made of the larger and more specialized staff and facilities of cooperating federal agencies. State efforts should be closely coordinated with available federal resources, and overlapping and duplication should be avoided. But only by retaining the competence to interject into decisions a re- flection of local conditions, local desires and local needs can the states maintain initiative in the development of their water resources. Some states may find it necessary or desirable to supplement local financial resources through grant or loan programs, Under various conditions, including lack of an adequate tax base to finance necessary facilities, or adoption of a state policy to encourage local developments, direct grants may be justified. In any case, when a broad general benefit results from a project, particularly when the state as a whole or areas