Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
1515853
label
Hudson River Tolls
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1515853
contentType
document
title
Hudson River Tolls
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Issues Files
subjects
New York
Bridges
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1515853
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-05-31
month
5
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-04-01
month
4
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0783af0add54e21d
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 18, folder "Hudson River Tolls" of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 18 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON April 13, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: JIM CANNON FROM: JUDITH RICHARDS HOPE Increase in Hudson River JRU Bridge SUBJECT: and Tunnel Tolls is BACKGROUND Several months ago, the New York Port Authority implemented the approximate 50 percent increase in tolls for bridges and tunnels crossing the Hudson River to New York City, in order to increase revenues and reduce the vehicular traffic into Manhattan. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION REVIEW Under the 1906 General Bridge Act, the Corps of Engineers was given the responsibility for supervision of all bridges over navigable waters. When the Department of Transporta- tion was created in 1967, this bridge authority was trans- ferred to DOT. Secretary Coleman, in turn, has delegated this to the Federal Highway Administration, which must review all tolls on such bridges (and tunnels) for reasonableness and justness. Further, if there are complaints about tolls, there must be an investigation, and if the investigation raises material issues of fact, those issues must be resolved at a formal hearing. There were 22 official complaints about the increased tolls on the Hudson from, among others: the AAA's of New Jersey and New York, certain members of the New York City Council, New York Assemblyman Byron Baer, New York Congressmen Gilman, Murphy and Peyser, a number of members of the New Jersey State Legislature and assorted trucking companies from New York and New Jersey. Complaints ranged from environmental concerns to assertions that the additional revenues were not for highway purposes, but for everything from paying for the World Trade Center to sending the Philadelphia orchestra to Germany! 2 Last week a hearing judge from the National Transportation Safety Board, John Faulk, was appointed hearing examiner for these hearings. He has scheduled a hearing for June 7, with a pre-hearing set for May 4. The hearing is expected to last four to five days, and the decision may take two to three months thereafter. Faulk will make his findings and recommendations to the Federal Highway Administrator (Tiemann) who will make the final decision. Indications are that, given the complex record (over 3 feet high now, and growing) there may be no decision until fall. To expedite decision will require at the least a conversation with Tiemann explaining the reasons behind the need for a quick decision upon conclusion of the June hearing. I can do this, if you like, and if you will fill me in on the background. Jam- ) this - why at not your with discuss FORD LIEVARY i 077838 art Quenn and me? THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON April 13, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: ART QUERN FROM: JUDY HOPE SUBJECT: Attached Memo As you will see from the attached, I am sending Jim Cannon the requested material on the Hudson River tolls issue. I am sending it through you for your review and prior approval. Thanks. FORDO is GERALD LIBRARY Transp. Waterways THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON INFORMATION Talls May 14, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: JIM CANNON FROM: JUDITH RICHARDS HOPE SUBJECT: Hudson River Toll Hearings Lowan The Hudson River Toll hearings have been postponed by the Administrative Law Judge by request of the 8 parties involved (unanimous). They are as follows: Congressman Pizer PEYSOR couph Congressman Murphy Mrs. Albert Lamm Mr. Sol Weil National Council of Salesman's organizations of Citizens for Clean Air New Jersey Motor Truck Association Auto Clubs of New York and New Jersey bays The hearings are now scheduled for August 9. of Again, this is now out of the hands of the Federal Highway Administrator by virtue of the Administrative Procedure Act, requiring that the Administrative Law Judge act independently. When he makes a decision, it will go to Tiemann for review. (accept or reject) A possible time frame could be: (optimistic) Hearings approx. 10 days from 8/9 Final decision of Ad. Law Judge late September Final decision of Administrator perhaps November We may wish to inform Bill Ronan. Yes No Cannon call Hope call FORD is LIBRARY SERVID THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON Date 4/27/76 MEMORANDUM FROM Jan FOR: JUDITH & RICHA Cannon HOPE The bottom line on the N.Y.C. Port authority tolls: a hearing is independent hearing set for June an examiner has been named. The hearing cannot be dropped at this point. THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON April 13, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: JIM CANNON FROM: JUDITH RICHARDS HOPE JRU SUBJECT: Increase in Hudson River Bridge and Tunnel Tolls BACKGROUND Several months ago, the New York Port Authority implemented the approximate 50 percent increase in tolls for bridges and tunnels crossing the Hudson River to New York City, in order to increase revenues and reduce the vehicular traffic into Manhattan. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION REVIEW Under the 1906 General Bridge Act, the Corps of Engineers was given the responsibility for supervision of all bridges over navigable waters. When the Department of Transporta- tion was created in 1967, this bridge authority was trans- ferred to DOT. Secretary Coleman, in turn, has delegated this to the Federal Highway Administration, which must review all tolls on such bridges (and tunnels) for reasonableness and justness. Further, if there are complaints about tolls, there must be an investigation, and if the investigation raises material issues of fact, those issues must be resolved at a formal hearing. There were 22 official complaints about the increased tolls on the Hudson from, among others: the AAA's of New Jersey and New York, certain members of the New York City Council, New York Assemblyman Byron Baer, New York Congressmen Gilman, Murphy and Peyser, a number of members of the New Jersey State Legislature and assorted trucking companies from New York and New Jersey. Complaints ranged from environmental concerns to assertions that the additional revenues were not for highway purposes, but for everything from paying for the World Trade Center to sending the Philadelphia orchestra to Germany! FORD 2 Last week a hearing judge from the National Transportation Safety Board, John Faulk, was appointed hearing examiner for these hearings. He has scheduled a hearing for June 7, with a pre-hearing set for May 4. The hearing is expected to last four to five days, and the decision may take two to three months thereafter. Faulk will make his findings and recommendations to the Federal Highway Administrator (Tiemann) who will make the final decision. Indications are that, given the complex record (over 3 feet high now, and growing) there may be no decision until fall. To expedite decision will require at the least a conversation with Tiemann explaining the reasons behind the need for a quick decision upon conclusion of the June hearing. I can do this, if you like, and if you will fill me in on the background. LIBRARY DRAFT THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON Dear Bill, Just a short note to thank you for your thoughts on the Municipal Bankruptcy Legislation, HR 10624. As you probably know, the President did sign this legislation on April 8. Some of your suggestions were developed in the analysis and decision making program here at the White House. While the President did not feel the Bill contained all that the Administration was looking for, it was his judgement that the Bill was at this time one which he should sign. I look forward to getting together with you and the Vice President in the near future. Best personal regards. Sincerely, James M. Cannon Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs Mr. William J. Ronan Chairman The Port Authority of NY & NJ One World Trade Center New York, New York 10048 THE PORT AUTHORITYOFNYGNJ One World Trade Center New York, N.Y. 10048 Commissioners William J. Ronan, Chairman W. Paul Stillman, Vice Chairman Andrew C. Axtell George F. Berlinger Robert R. Douglass Milton A. Gilbert James G. Hellmuth James C. Kellogg, III Gustave L. Levy Matthew Nimetz Alan Sagner Victor R. Yanitelli, S.J. April 2, 1976 Office of the Chairman Dear Jim: I feel I must express my profound concern that the Municipal Bankruptcy Legislation (H.R. 10624) which has been passed by the Congress may well result in a major municipal bankruptcy between now and the end of the year which could debilitate the entire municipal bond market for years to come. It should be vetoed by the President. As a result of this bill, the risk of municipal default will be enhanced markedly because the bill makes bankruptcy an eas- ier choice for elected municipal officials than the tough belt tightening which the administration has heretofore espoused. If we are right in this appraisal, an immediate result will be higher interest rates on State and local borrowing all over the country causing millions and millions of dollars of added taxes and expenditures. Further, the bill is not in the form which the President had originally requested since it is not limited to major cities as he had proposed. A whole restudy of Federal bankruptcy legislation is scheduled by the House Judiciary Committee. We suggest that after veto, municipal bankruptcy can and should be part of that study. The major change made by this legislation is the virtual elimina- tion of the requirement of consent of fifty-one percent of the creditors to a plan of adjustment prior to the filing of a petition for relief under the present bankruptcy law. That pro- vision in the current law has effectively prevented the bank- ruptcy of the City of New York. Under the new bill, a munici- pality may invoke bankruptcy law protection if it is difficult to achieve such consent. If that 51% requirement had not exist- ed during the recent fiscal turmoil, it is probable that New York would be in bankruptcy at the present time. Although the enactment of this bankruptcy legislation at some time in the future may be reasonable, at the present time it will cast a cloud over the fiscal integrity of cities and other local GERALD THE PORT AUTHORITY FNY&NJ - 2 - government entities throughout the United States. It is also clear that a major municipal bankruptcy would mean that many obligations will not be fulfilled. Contracts that have been entered into with suppliers of goods and services all over the United States will not be paid at the time such credi- tors have a right to be paid. Holders of financial obligations, bonds and notes, will not be paid when they, under the present circumstances, have a right to be paid. There will be a crisis in confidence affecting not only the City of New York but other major and smaller municipalities throughout the country. The fragile economic recovery which is now taking place across the country could therefore be placed in jeopardy. I realize the difficulty which the President would have in veto- ing this legislation and I would not advocate that course but for the fact that I believe this to be a most serious matter. Sincerely, William J. Ronan Chairman Mr. James A. Cannon Assistant for Domestic Affairs GERALS FORD The Executive Office of the President The White House Office Washington, D.C. 20500