Specifically, our objectives were to review the Commission’s efforts to finance and administer its capital program and the Commission’s internal controls used to ensure that its business affairs were appropriately conducted. The Commission issued $121 million in tax-exempt bonds in 1992 to finance its capital program and refinanced this debt by issuing $133 million in bonds in 1993 to take advantage of the very favorable interest rates available at that time. Although the Commission began efforts to seek agreements as early as 1990, it did not enter into a formal agreement on the process for obtaining them until May 1995, in part because of misunderstandings about the types of approvals needed and the appropriate authorities from whom the approvals and agreements were needed. Conclusions

The Commission’s capital program is a complex and sophisticated undertaking that required extensive coordination and agreements, as well as entry into the capital bond market. We found that the Commission had new policies in place to guide procurement and the remuneration of commissioners but that in some instances it had not ensured that these policies were consistently followed. We found errors in payments made in both procurement and commissioner remuneration. No federal or New York State legislation specifically provides for oversight of the Commission. The costs for these services were not supported by detailed billings.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the operations of the Niagara Falls Bridge Commission, focusing on its: (1) efforts to finance and administer its 30-year capital program; and (2) internal controls used to ensure that its business affairs are conducted appropriately.

What GAO Found

GAO found that the Niagara Falls Bridge Commission: (1) is a complex undertaking that requires extensive coordination and agreements with several federal and state entities, as well as entry into the capital bond market; (2) began efforts to obtain agreements on historic preservation and environmental assessment as early as 1990, but its projects were delayed because of misunderstandings about approvals or agreements needed to implement the project; (3) financed its capital program in 1992 by issuing over $120 million in tax-exempt bonds and refinancing the debt a year later to take advantage of lower interest rates; (4) had new policies in place to guide the procurement and renumeration of commissioners but, in some instances, the Commission did not follow the policies consistently; and (5) made errors in payment for procurement and commissioner renumeration, and some attorneys' fees were not supported by detailed billings. In addition, GAO found that there are no federal or state laws that explicitly provide authority for governmental oversight of the Commission.