65 



be ripped away from the rest of the estuarine system — and that word 

 "system," by the way, I got from Dave Adams. I am very happy it fits 

 into my talk better than it does into his, usually. 



It was ripped away from the State system and now we are going to 

 create a new city in New Jersey. There were many cries, "Gee, I don't 

 know if legally you can do this. You can't just rip this away from the 

 rest of the estuarine area and stick it into a State agency." 



By the way, the State agency will govern completely this estuarine 

 area when it comes to planning, when it comes to financing. Eelated to 

 it, also, it will have a word to say with regard to clearance of titles in 

 that area. Titles always raise a good question in the New Jersey marsh- 

 lands, because in this same State while this was happening, our Gover- 

 nor, who, by the way, has been a very progTessive Governor, put forth 

 the well-known term today, a "moratorium." 



There is ^oing to be a moratorium in the State of New Jersey with 

 regard to riparian grants. In New Jersey, I suppose it is similar to 

 many other States, as my research has shown, in certain questionable 

 areas the State government will grant away its rights with regard to 

 property rights to private owners. 



So this moratorium was called. 



However, it was soon discovered that it was only called for the 

 Hackensack Valley meadowland area. It was not called because of any 

 conservation purpose. It was called so that the State agency could get 

 its feet on the ground and so that the State agency could start building 

 anew, without the problem of private ownership in that 18,000 acres. 



But then our commissioner of conservation and economic develop- 

 ment was getting pressure from some conservation groups and he called 

 his own little moratorium. Soon it was discovered that that moratorium 

 was only called for the lower part of the system, the southern part of 

 New Jersey. 



So now we are living with two alleged moratoriums called by two 

 different individuals in the State hierarchy, and in the meantime, in 

 the middle of the State, it was discovered that 16 acres was conveyed 

 to private interests, $16,000, and on the same day reconveyed for 

 $710,000, and 2 weeks later mortgaged for over $4 million. 



In one State we have had a tremendous difference in standardization. 

 We are working within one set of State boundary lines. 



I would submit that today we must recognize that we are living with 

 a new jurisprudence and a new look at the Constitution, and a new 

 look at government, and a new look at political structure. We cannot 

 be limited by old cliches. 



I made the mistake in Williamsburg. I said old cliches like "States 

 rights." I am not saying that here today. 



Back home, I represent many of the municipalities that are involved 

 in the battle with the State, and they call me "the guy who is sticking 

 up for home rule." So there isn't really a conflict here, because what 

 I am saying is that government today can no longer be put in little 

 cubicles and surrounded by certain boundary lines. 



Government today has to be looked at in terms of problem areas and 

 in terms of function, and where they overlap we have to recognize that 

 they overlap, and legal jurisdictions have to recognize that they are 

 going to overlook. 



Something occurred down in Williamsburg that I think is very, very 



