Laserfiche WebLink
<br />millions of dollars have been applied to achieve the present status <br /> <br />of these projects. Now it is proposed that the hopes. dreams and <br /> <br />aspirations of thousands of our citizens be callously crushed by <br /> <br />administrative fiat. We may be forced to submit to this type of <br /> <br />administrative tyranny, but not without a fight. <br /> <br />We vigorously dissent to this limitation in all of its <br /> <br />aspects. Its adoption would constitute a flagrant invasion of the <br /> <br />powers reserved to the Congress. Its use would constitute an effec- <br /> <br />tive veto over acts of Congress in a manner neither contemplated <br /> <br />nor permitted by the Constitution or statutory law. Not even a <br /> <br />tortured construction of the Water Resources Planning Act can <br /> <br />justify this limitation as a part of planning principles and stan- <br /> <br />dards. We therefore urge that this provision be eliminated. <br /> <br />The proposed principles provide that: "The regional <br /> <br />development objective will be used in formulating alternative plans <br /> <br />only when directed." lfuile we are not sure what this means, the <br /> <br />statement appears to violate Section 104 of the Water Resources <br /> <br />Planning Act. That section plainly states without reservation that <br /> <br />special regard shall be given to achieving optimum use of water in <br /> <br />the area involved. While national goals are also to be given special <br /> <br />consideration under the quoted section, there is nothing in the act <br /> <br />which indicates that national goals are to have any preference. <br /> <br />Neither national goals nor the national economy are <br /> <br />-8- <br />