HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 04E_01/09/2003 f Y �
.�-
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 1 /2/03 '
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER AND VII.,LA�E COUNCIL
FROM: BETTY LAUR, ADMINISTRATION �'
RE: AGENDA TTEM RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SC�UTH FLORIDA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS PRESERVATION OF THE
LOXAHATCHEE RNER ''
At the December 5, 2002 Village Council meeting, the Village Council unanimouslp '
approved pla.cing an item on the agenda for the ne�t Village Council meeting in support
of the minimum flow requirements as proposed by the South Florida Water ,
Management District Resolution No. 19-Q2/03 in support of 5FWNID's preservation !
of the Loxahatehee River is attached for considera.tion of approval. '
CC: Mary Miles, Village Clerk
�
I
AGENDA ITEM IV E
�
�
�
� '!
�
��n I
�Y�
RESOLUTION N0.19-02/03
A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE
VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY,
FLORIDA, SUPPORTING THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER i
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT'S PRESERVATION OF THE ��
LOXAHATCHEE RIVER . I
. i
Whereas, South Florida Water Management Distxict (SFWMD, the �
"District"), has established m?n;mum flow levels to address preservation of ',
the Loxahatchee River; and � '
Whereas, the District has implemented a minimum flow Rule of 35 cfs,
which is the first step towards preserving historical flows to the River, and has
identified other steps which will be taken to enhance seasonal flows above the
35 cfs as part of an overall plan to return the River to a sta.te which is viable,
healthy, and productive; and
Whereas, the River is one of the most valuable resources to the Village,
enhancing our recreational lifestyle, our property values, and our sense of
environmental awareness; and
Whereas, the SFWMD has documented its intention to expand its studies and
ad.d to available data.bases information which will achieve the goals of River
restoration which will preserve the River for future generations,
Now, Therefore it is hereby Resolved, that the Village of Tequesta supports the
implementa,tion by SMFFIVID of steps to preserve the Loxahatchee River.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS OFFERED by Councilmember
, who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Councilmember , and upon being put to vote, the vote was as follows:
FOR ADOPTION AGAINST ADOPTION
, �I