HB1808, titled the Keep America’s Waterfronts Working Act of 2025, would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to create a federal framework for preserving and expanding “working waterfronts.” The bill defines working waterfronts as coastal properties that provide access to coastal waters for commercial and recreational fishing, boating-related businesses, aquaculture, boatbuilding, and other water-dependent coastal industries. It directs the Secretary of Commerce, through NOAA’s coastal management program, to establish a task force to identify critical needs, assess threats, and recommend federal responsibilities and solutions for working waterfronts in participating coastal states, tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations.
The bill also allows covered entities to submit working waterfronts plans for federal approval. Those plans must assess the economic, social, cultural, historical, and environmental value of waterfronts; identify areas under threat of conversion to incompatible uses; and outline strategies for preservation, expansion, improvement, and public access. Approved plans would be valid for five years and would be a prerequisite for participation in the bill’s grant and loan programs. The bill authorizes a competitive grant program for acquiring, improving, restoring, adapting, or developing working waterfronts, with technical assistance available to recipients and a requirement that most projects preserve or improve reasonable public access to coastal waters where safe.
HB1808 would also create a Working Waterfronts Preservation Loan Fund program for eligible coastal states. Under that program, the federal government could provide capitalization grants to state revolving loan funds that finance preservation, acquisition, rehabilitation, and related projects for working waterfronts. The bill sets matching requirements, allows subsidized financing for disadvantaged communities, reserves a small share of funds for tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, and requires prevailing wage compliance for construction projects. It further authorizes $50 million annually for fiscal years 2025 through 2029 for both the grant and loan programs.
The bill’s impact on state law is indirect but significant: it would not preempt coastal management law broadly, but it would add a new federal planning, grant, and loan layer within the Coastal Zone Management Act that states must work through to access funding. Coastal states with approved management programs could seek approval of working waterfronts plans and, if eligible, administer revolving loan funds and allocate grants to local governments, nonprofits, fishing cooperatives, and other entities. The bill also contemplates coordination with existing state and local waterfront plans, while requiring covenants and enforcement mechanisms to keep funded properties in working-waterfront use.
Overall sentiment appears supportive and bipartisan in concept, as shown by the bill’s broad list of House cosponsors from both parties and from coastal delegations. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided material, there is no documented floor or committee opposition in this dataset. The main points of potential contention are likely to be the federal role in coastal land-use planning, the covenant and reversion provisions tied to funded properties, the matching requirement for grants and loans, and how public access requirements are balanced against commercial fishing and industrial waterfront safety needs.
The bill would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 by adding new sections 306B and 306C, creating a federal task force, a grant program, and a state revolving loan fund program focused on working waterfront preservation. It would affect coastal states, coastal Indian Tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, local governments, nonprofits, fishing cooperatives, and other entities involved in coastal access and water-dependent industries. States seeking funding would need approved working waterfronts plans and, for the loan program, would need to establish and administer a dedicated preservation loan fund with federal and state matching contributions.
The available context suggests generally favorable sentiment. The bill was introduced with a large bipartisan group of cosponsors, including members from coastal states and both parties, which indicates cross-party interest in protecting fishing, boating, and other coastal economies. No committee hearing transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of formal opposition or amendments in the supplied materials.
Likely areas of contention include the scope of federal involvement in coastal land-use and property preservation, the requirement that funded properties remain subject to working waterfront covenants in perpetuity, and the reversion/right-of-entry provisions if those covenants are violated. Some stakeholders may also question the 20 percent state contribution for loan funds, the 75 percent federal share cap for grants, and the balance between preserving waterfront access and protecting private property rights or local development flexibility. Public access requirements could also be debated where they may conflict with safety or operational needs at commercial or industrial waterfront sites.