How Do Stakeholders Get a Voice …
Author(s)
Rooks, Wilton
Advisor(s)
Editor(s)
Carroll, G. Denise
Collections
Supplementary to:
Permanent Link
Abstract
For 20 years the states of Georgia, Florida and Alabama have been arguing through the courts and direct contact over how the waters of the Apalachicola- Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) watershed will be used. In 2003 there was actually an agreement reached among all three state Governors with signatures on the dotted line. Then someone decided it was not fair to them and convinced the Florida Governor to withdraw support from the agreement. So it was back to the courts… When 6 or 7 law suits were consolidated into a single Multiple District Litigation (MDL) court and a federal judge with prior water resolution experience assigned to the case, there was a sense that some movement would be made in reaching some kind of settlement. Although it was well known that finally there would be winners and losers no one knew who would be which. Judge Magnuson reviewed all of the cases and decided that there were really two key issues; 1) arguments over water supply usage by upstream municipalities and industries and 2) rights to augmented flows to protect the endangered species in the lower reaches of the watershed. His decision to take the water supply issue first resulted in his ‘draconian’ decision’ (his words) that Lake Lanier was not authorized for water supply purposes and that the Corps of Engineers had overstepped its authority under the ‘incidental usages’ provisions of their authority to allocate the waters in Lake Lanier for water supply purposes. His subsequent ruling however was that the waters of the ACF watershed could not be used to augment the flows into Apalachicola River beyond what was already established as being sufficient by the Fish and Wildlife Service in their Biological Opinion supporting the Corps of Engineers operating rules for the reservoirs on the ACF watershed. Given this history and frustration over numerous aspects, a small group of ACF stakeholders met in August 2008. This meeting of representatives from all three states and from numerous water interests resulted from one person calling another person and posing a question. Attendees included representatives from the Atlanta Regional Commission, City of LaGrange, Southern Nuclear, Lake Lanier Association, Apalachicola Riverkeeper, and the Tri Rivers Waterway Development Association. The central question at the meeting was: “Can the stakeholders achieve something that the political structures of the three states have not achieved, i.e. agree to an equitable sharing of the waters of the ACF watershed”? From this first meeting a process evolved that not only involved the original 7 stakeholders who met in August but expanded to become a dynamic organization of over 100 members representing large corporations, cities, counties, advocacy groups, agriculture interests, and environmental organizations. But getting to that stage was not an easy task. The steps along the way were measured and carefully taken. First, it was recognized that due to the history of conversations about the issues separating the states, a professional facilitator would be required to managing the dialogue among the stakeholders. And the facilitator could not have a mailing address that ended in GA, FL or AL. As circumstances played out, representatives of the Environmental Conflict Resolution (ECR) organization from the Morris K Udall Institute (now U. S. Institute) were in the Atlanta area and a preliminary meeting was held with them. Being located in Arizona, they met the criteria. ECR acknowledged that the federal government had a vital interest in a settlement to the water dispute so they agreed to provide pro bono services to the fledgling organization. Under their meeting and process facilitation services, a series of workshops were held throughout the ACF watershed from the Metro Atlanta area to the Apalachicola area. The intent was to put forward the concept of a stakeholders group and solicit participation in a Steering Committee. With a core group of 30 stakeholders who met 4 times in meetings up and down the watershed and facilitated by ECR, various organizational issues were developed, culminating in a Charter and Bylaws document that established a far reaching governance structure.
Sponsor
Sponsored by:
Georgia Environmental Protection Division
U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Water Science Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia Water Resources Institute
The University of Georgia, Water Resources Faculty
Date
2011-04
Extent
Resource Type
Text
Resource Subtype
Proceedings