By Jim Hunter
Citrus County Public Information Officer

Citrus County Commissioners appeared relieved Tuesday that they did not have to consider higher water rates for Sugarmill Woods and some other county utility systems.

Their relief quickly turned to consternation at Tuesday’s regular meeting about how Citrus water permit quotas are figured.

As a result, the commission has asked its staff to write a white paper for the 2010 legislation delegation in December on the unfairness of the way water permit quotas are set for Citrus County by the Southwest Florida Water Management District.

The situation was precipitated when the county – and by extension the Sugarmill ratepayers — had found itself facing a steep fine for pumping more than its permit allowed. As a result, the commission, the rate setter for county utilities, was looking at having to raise water rates to cover the fine and reduce water usage in Sugarmill Woods.

A consultant asked to review and analyze the situation notified the county just before the rate hearing, however, that according to updated population statistics, Sugarmill Woods was likely within its permit limits, given that the consultant had come up with a greater population number for the area than had been previously used.

The larger number would reduce the per capita usage to within limits set by the water district. The county had believed it was within its limits, but because readings from one well were not taken into account by the county’s contractors responsible for reporting water use numbers, the water district said the county had to pay when the error became known.

The county may not have to pay the fine at all now, or at least any fine would be relatively small, but the whole affair got the commissioners questioning the rationale behind the water quotas.

After a number of Sugarmill residents pointed out in the meeting what they felt were inequities in the water quotas, the commissioners agreed, saying they didn’t buy the logic that set a per capita usage for homeowner with an acre or more of property the same as one in an apartment.

Because the acre-or-more landowner accounts for a multitude of residential users in Citrus, they said, the county should not be on the same scale as a dense urban area like St. Petersburg, where very little irrigation is needed, or even The Villages, where homes are set very close to each other and require much less irrigation than the average Citrus homeowner’s property.

The white paper questioning the methodology of the use quotas will be presented to the state legislators representing Citrus at an annual Legislation Delegation meeting Dec. 17.