Loading...
076-1998 LTC LiTY OF MIAMI BEACH CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139 http:\\cl.mlaml-beach.n,1a L.T.C. No. 76-1998 LETTER TO COMMISSION June 5, 1998 TO: Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and Members of the City Commission FROM: Sergio Rodriguez City Manager " SUBJECT: CORRESPONDENCE FROM REP. E. CLAY SHAW, JR. REGARDING FEDERAL FUNDING FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT Attached please find a letter from Representative E. Clay Shaw Jr. regarding proposed changes in federal funding for beach nourishment projects. Copies of Representative Shaw's statements before the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Appropriations is also included. If you require additional information please contact me. SR:lli:jh Attachments DISTRICT OFFICES: COMMITTEE: E. CLAY SHAW 22D DISTRICT, FLORIDA WAYS AND MEANS SUBCOMMITTEES: 2408 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, DC 20515 (202) 225.-3026 CHAIRMAN HUMAN RESOURCES TRADE BROWARD COUNTY 1512 EAST BROWARD BOULEVARD SUITE 101 FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 (954) 522-1800 PALM BEACH COUNTY 222 LAKEVIEW AVENUE, #162 WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 15611632-3007 (tCongre55 of tbe Wntteb ~tate5 ~oU{)C of l\cprt{)cntatlbc{) 'IDmasbington, 1D(!c 20515-09: CHAIRMAN FLORIDA CONGRESSIONAL DElEGATION DADE & PALM BEACH COUNTIES TOll FREE 930-7429 May 26, 1998 ~~ ~/. ~ #ee Mr. Sergio Rodriguez City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33 139 Dear Mr. Rodriguez: The ongoing battle between the Congress and the Adm responsibility for beach renourishment is once again heating UT outcome, I thought you would appreciate an update. The Administration simply does not recognize the enormous economic benefits the federal government reaps from beach nourishment projects and the consequences which will result from withdrawal of any federal support. In the President's Fiscal Year 1999 Budget, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers budget was slashed dramatically. In the Administration's recently released Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), the President proposes to drastically change the cost share formula for beach nourishment maintenance projects. Currently, the federal portion is 65 percent, with state and local sponsors responsible for the remaining 35 percent. The Administration proposal would reverse that percentage. If the Administration plan is adopted, our beaches will literally wash away. You can be assured that I will continue to fight the Administration's plan to neglect our beaches. For your review, I've enclosed copies of my recent testimony to the congressional subcommittees with jurisdiction over this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or need further information. - ~~;$; -11m V ~;J. yq;r ECS:psl THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS Statement of the Honorable Clay Shaw, Jr. before the Subcommittee on Energy & Water Development Appropriations March 27, 1998 Mr. Chairman, thank: you very much for the opportunity to submit written testimony in support of funds for energy and water projects that are of such crucial importance to South Florida. Thank you also to Ranking Member Fazio. As a co-chairman of the House Coastal Caucus, I would like to direct your attention to the broader perspective of coastal communities across the country. These areas, represented in the Congress by 117 of our colleagues, rely on beaches and their related industries for economic sustenance as well as public safety. Many coastal communities across the country are being thrown into confusion and disarray by the Administration's ongoing effort to eliminate beach nourishment and even some navigational projects from the mission of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. State and local matching funding streams are completely reliant upon the federal share of the project funding. . Currently, the federal government is responsible for some 60% of the cost of renourishing beaches. Some states, like Florida, are attempting to craft comprehensive, regional beach management plans, as well as dedicated funding sources, but the pote~tial reduction in need for federal involvement is many years away. There is a willingness between states and local sponsors to begin a dialogue to discuss a reduction in the federal share. However, it is difficult to initiate discussion on this possibility when, despite a legislative mandate to the contrary, the federal agency responsible for the execution of these projects insists on divesting itself of the job. The policy of both the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the President's Office of Management and Budget is that no new projects will be initiated unless this committee funds the entire cost of the project in one fiscal year. That is patently absurd. If the Administration continues to refuse to enforce or even acknowledge the Shore Protection Act[ PL104-303, Section 227], and if the OMB continues to impound the funds Congress has authorized and appropriated, I believe there will be dire consequences for coastal districts. The current effects of the EI Nino winds have been a startling jolt for communities unused to devastating weather, and I feel certain there will be requests to this subcommittee for emergency mitigation of the horrible consequences of this ill wind. Those of us who have experienced the catastrophic effects wind and rain can wreak on our environment have first hand knowledge of the economic and public safety benefits of erosion control programs. No one disputes that America's shorelines are a vast economical and environmental resource, and renourishment protects that resource. If the federal role is discontinued, we will see a direct reduction in the federal tax base in coastal regions throughout the country. In addition, economic conditions in these areas of the country will be greatly destabilized. Although I have heard the media herald the environmentalist lament of wasting money by throwing sand into the ocean, I wonder if anyone is prepared for the monumental costs to the federal government when a beach is blown away and the sea imposes itself into aquifers and residences. The President's budget request is inadequate to meet even a reasonable portion of the projects needed across the United States. Mr. Chairman, I urge the subcommittee to disregard the Administration funding request and provide adequate funding for the Corps' civil works program. Broward County, Florida Regional and long range approaches to the ongoing need for sand replacement are ultimately the most cost-effective and efficient way to renourish the beach until structural solutions are found. Broward County has recognized that fact, and is to be commended for their long range planning and regional approach to shore protection projects. Broward has this year undertaken a $28.9 million project, which will be fully constructed in 2002. The project stretches the length of the county's coastal boundary, and encompasses all phases from design through construction completion. The federal share of the project is approximately $17 million. However, we recognize that at this time, given the ongoing battle with the Administration as well as stringent budget requirements, a request for full up-front funding of the federal share is unlikely. In addition, Broward's contract allows for reimbursement only after the completion of construction. Accordingly, I am requesting authorization in this year's Water Resources Development Act that reimbursement be provided in two phases; for pre- design work when the construction contract is let, and then again after construction is complete and an audit has been performed. In that context, I request an appropriation of $1.7 million for funds which will be expended by Broward County for design and engineering work performed in Fiscal Year 1998. Palm Beach County, Florida / I am requesting $5.19 million on behalf of The Port of Palm Beach for maintenance dredging of Palm Beach Harbor. The dredged material will ultimately be used for beach renourishment. The Administration included $2.19 million in its budget, the traditional amount for standard harbor maintenance. The additional $3 million will provide for modifications to the upland disposal site at Peanut Island, to allow for year round dredging activities at Palm Beach harbors. For Palm Beach County I request $869,000 for construction of a navigational dredging project, which would deepen the Intracoastal Waterway from ten feet to twelve feet to accommodate the growing megayacht traffic. The distance of this portion of the project is 2.1 miles. This request is a result of a Limited Reevaluation Report funded by Congress in 1996. Miami-Dade County, Florida ,; , Although Miami-Dade County, FL has congressional authorization through the year 2025, they are currently experiencing a severe lack of sand available for renourishment. Due to the large number of previous projects and the increasingly stringent environmental safeguards, all nearby sand sources will be exhausted by this year's end. In response to this problem, the local sponsor has developed the North Miami Dade Alternative Sand Test Project. The project funds will be used to conduct the required large scale environmental and engineering tests of potentially cost effective Caribbean sand sources, while renourishing the beach. The chosen site is the north segment of Miami Beach, from 63rd Street to 71st Street. The total cost of the project is approximately $12 million. I therefore request $6.2 million for the federal share of the test project. In closing, thank you once again Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to express my support for these projects which will keep South Florida residents safe and prosperous. Statement of the Honorable Clay Shaw, Jr. before the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment April 22, 1998 Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the opportUnity to submit testimony in support of energy and water projects that are of sucli crucial unportance to South Florida. Thank you also to Ranking Member Borski. . Shore Protection Policy As co-chairman of the House Coastal Caucus, I would like to speak briefly about the broader perspective of coastal communities across the country. These areas, represented in the Congress by 117 of our colleagues, rely on beaches and the business they generate for economic sustenance as well as public safety. Unfortunately, many coastal communities across the country are being thrown into confusion and disarray by the Administration's policy to eliminate beach nourishment and even some navigational projects from the mission of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. State and local matching fu.flding streams are completely reliant upon the federal share of the project funding. Currently, the federal government is responsible for some 60% of the cost of renourishing beaches. Some states, like Florida, are attempting to craft comprehensive, regional beach management plans, as well as dedicated ftuiding sources, but the potential reduction in need for federal involvement is many years away. There is a willingness between states and local. sponsors to begin a dialogue to discuss a reduction in the federal share. However, it is difficult to initiate discussion on this possibility when, desl'ite a legislative mandate to the contrary, the federal agency responsible for the executIon of these projects insists on divestin~ itself of the job. The policy of both the U.S. Army COIJls of Engineers, and the PresIdent's Office of Management and Budget is that no new projects will be initiated unless this committee funds the entire cost of the project in one fiscal year. That is patently absurd. If the Administration continues to refuse to enforce or even acknowledge the Shore Protection Act [P.L. 104303, Section 227], which this subcommittee included in the last ~ate! resources authorization bill, I beli'~ye th~re will be dire consequen~es for coastal distrIcts. The current effects of the EI Nnio wmds have been a s~g Jolt for communities unused to devastating weather, and I feel certain there will be requests to this subcommittee for emergency mitigation of the horrible consequences of iliis ill wind. Those of us who have experienced the catastrophic effects wind and rain can wreak on our environment have first hand knowledge of the economic and public safety benefits of erosion control programs. . No one disputes that America's shorelines are a vast economical and environmental resource, and renourishment protects that resource. If the federal role is discontinued, we will see a direct reduction in the federal tax: base in coastal regions throughout the coun!I'Y.. In addition, economic conditions in these areas of the country will be greatly destabIlized. Although I have heard the cynics scoff by comparing renourishment to throwing sand into the ocean, I wonder if anyone is prepared for the monumental costs to the federal government when a beach is blown away and the sea imposes itself into aquifers and residences. Mr. Chairman, I urge the subcommittee to continue to reject the Administration policy on beach nourishment in the strongest possible terms, and to au!horize shore protection projects wherever necessary across the country for the public good. Broward County. Florida Regional and long range approaches to the ongoing need for sand replacement are ultimately the most cost-effective and efficient way to renourish the beach until structural solutions are found. Broward County has recognized that fact, and is to be .commended for their long range planning and regIonal approach to shore protection ~rojects. Broward County has undertaKen this year a $28.9 millIon project, which will be fully constructed in 2002. The project stretches the length of the county's coastal boundary, and encompasses all phases from design ilirough construction completion. The federal share of the project is approximately $17 million. :::/ Currently, the Army Corps of Engineers reimburses Broward County only after the completion of construction. In order to facilitate more timely reimbursement, I am requesting authorization of reimbursement in two separable elements. The county would be elIgible for reimbursement for pre-design work when the construction contract is let, and then again after construction is complete 8.&~d a..'l audit has been perfoITned. . -- In addition, I am requesting authorization of a Feasibility Study to determine the federal interest in participating in sand bypassing at Port Everglades Inlet. Broward County estimates that since this federal navigatIon project's construction in 1926, several millions of cubic yards of sand have eroded along the beach to the south. The State of Florida is poised to approve a conceptual Inlet Management Plan which would include cost sharing in sand bypassing. Finally, The Army Corps is currently conducting a Feasibility Study to determine the need for navigational improvements to the harbor and Southport Access Channel to Port Everglades. I am requesting, conditional authorization language for the Army Corps to begin construction of these navigational improvements immediately after the Study is complete. Palm Beach County. Florida For Palm Beach County I request ':~~thorization for construction of a navigational dredging project, which would deepen the Intracoastal Waterway from ten feet to twelve feet to accommodate growi.ng commercial traffic and marine industry needs. Everglades Restoration As you know, WRDA 1996 included a three-year authorization (FY 1997-1999) for critical projects related to Everglades restoration. Unfortunately, there was no appropriation for FY 1997 which delayed the projected schedule. Therefore, I am respectfully requesting an extension of critical project authority for fiscal years 2000 and 200 I as well as an increase in the authorized level of funding. I am hopeful that this adjustment will provide the Corps enough time to complete these projects. In closing, thank you once again for the opportunity to express my support for ~e continued federal involvement in shore protection, navigatIon, and Everglades restoratIOn.