TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

City Shirking Its Canal-Dredging Obligation

ADVERTISEMENT

By MARLIN ANDERSON

Published: October 30, 2007

I am writing in response to your Oct. 24 editorial on the proposed special taxing district for canal dredging.

As far as stormwater runoff, only the Sunset Park and Beach Park neighborhoods receive significant stormwater runoff from outside their boundaries.

In these two neighborhoods, only five canals drain almost 3,000 acres going as far east as Howard Avenue, with more than 1,200 acres draining into a single canal in Beach Park. It's pretty obvious from these facts alone that the city of Tampa should be taking responsibility for the sediment entering these canals.

In addition, the city of Tampa is responsible for cleaning up the muck that discharges into these waterways under what is called the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, for which they have to obtain a permit every four years.

In the state of Florida, at least two municipalities have either fully or partially paid for the dredging of canals in their jurisdiction. Manatee County has paid between 30 to 50 percent of the dredging costs. In Cape Coral, dredging projects are funded by a portion of the stormwater utility fee collected each year.

I see no reason why the city of Tampa cannot likewise use a portion of the recently adopted stormwater utility fee to help pay for dredging the canals.

Additionally, we have a problem with the city wanting to use a $1.3 million federal environmental grant to help finance the dredging. This particular grant specifically listed five natural bodies of water in south Tampa to be dredged, including three lakes in our neighborhood.

Once the funds were approved by Congress, newly hired Stormwater Director Chuck Walter instead promised this $1.3 million (plus a $1 million city match) to pay down an estimated cost of $6.3 million to dredge the manmade canals, leaving $4 million to be paid by an estimated 500 canal property owners.

Walter has repeatedly asserted that they are going to dredge all of the five specifically named bodies of water, but at the recent public meeting he disclosed that all they intend to do is dredge is a path through the middle of the lakes.

In our opinion, this would be a misuse of federal funds. This $2.3 million should be removed from the equation for the dredging plan and used to fully dredge the lakes.

Most of the promoters of Walter's dredging plan live on one of the five canals that receive the 3,000 acres of sediment. The other canals that are candidates for the taxing district receive only sediment from their immediate area. This creates a situation in which the low-sediment canals are being asked to subsidize the high-sediment canals, and is a major source of conflict.

A better solution would be for Tampa to pay, from its stormwater fee revenue, sufficient funds to clean up the sediment flowing into these five canals on an annual basis, and thereby remove the inequities inherent in this plan. If the city of Tampa were to agree to do this, there would undoubtedly be a much higher participation.

Another flaw in the plan is that it requires only 50 percent plus one of the property owners on each canal to participate, which is not sufficient to demonstrate a clear consensus for such an expensive project. A two-thirds majority is the requirement for Manatee County canal property owners.

In conclusion, we are 100 percent in favor of seeing the canals in south Tampa dredged. We feel there are flaws in the plan presently being offered by the city and recommend the adjustments as described above so that a fair plan can be offered for all concerned.

Marlin Anderson is president of the Sunset Park Area Homeowners Association.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT