859 



coordination by the State management agency with units of local gov- 

 ernment in administering the coastal zone plan and requires the man- 

 agement agency to delegate as much responsibility to local govern- 

 ments as possible. 



I believe that within our federal system of government, the best de- 

 cisionmaking is done at the level of government closest to the problem. 

 Indeed, this is the rationale behind the 1972 Coastal Zone Manage- 

 ment Act's posting of management authority with the State. But if 

 our commitment to returning authority and decisionmaking to the 

 levels of government most in tune with the needs of our citizens is 

 sincere, we must provide a mechanism to allow meaningful participa- 

 tion for local government in coastal zone management decisions. Just 

 as we wish to avoid erecting a huge Federal coastal zone bureaucracy, 

 we must avoid spawning huge State coastal zone bureaucracies. 



There are over 80,000 units of local government in this country. In 

 the Northeast, many towns and villages have been in the land-use 

 zoning business for over three centuries ; their charters and rights an- 

 tedate the Constitution. In the towns and villages of Nassau County, 

 the desire of my constituents and their local elected leaders to have a 

 say in their own affairs runs strong. 



This provision in the committee bill allows the elected leaders in 

 these towns and villages the right to request a public hearing on any 

 decision which the State management agency made which would im- 

 pact on that area. 



In conversations regarding this provision with New York State's 

 coastal zone manager-designate Hank Williams, it was pointed out 

 that the allowing to local governments of the right to a public hearing 

 for- "any" decision might well open the gates to unconscionable delay 

 by any group committed to blocking an action, as the characterization 

 of "any" decision would include minor, perhaps even internal, deci- 

 sions by the management agency. The amendments I offer today would 

 tighten up this language by limiting the right to a public hearing to de- 

 cisions by the State agency which would specifically violate or over- 

 ride a local government's zoning ordinances. 



The zoning-related nature of this provision cannot be too greatly 

 emphasized. This provision does not delegate new authority, or under- 

 mine the State management agency's prerogative to exercise power, as 

 granted to it under the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. It does, I 

 believe, provide the State agency with a strong incentive to ensure local 

 participation in decisions affecting local citizens, and I urge its 

 adoption. 



Mr. Du Pont. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? 



Mr. Lent. I yield to the gentleman from Delaware. 



Mr. DU Pont. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 



I think the gentleman's amendments are a definite improvement 

 over the language of the bill. They tighten up the language considerably 

 and are certainly acceptable to the minority side. 



Mr. MtjRPiiY of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman 

 yield? 



Mr. Lknt. I yield to the gentleman from New York. 



Mr. Murphy of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 



