This chapter explores how public authorities in the United States evolved, with a particular focus on Robert Moses and his profound impact on New York City’s urban landscape. It opens by outlining the origins of public authorities—hybrid organizations that blend government powers with corporate structures to build and manage public projects funded by user fees. While these entities had a long history in England, they were rare in America until the early twentieth century. The creation of the Port of New York Authority in 1921 marked a turning point, introducing the first major American example. At first, public authorities were intended for single, self-contained projects, expected to dissolve once their debts were paid and tolls removed.
Robert Moses initially followed this model. However, when projects like the Henry Hudson and Triborough bridges began generating unexpected surpluses, he saw an opportunity to redefine the purpose of public authorities. Instead of simply retiring debt, Moses realized these revenues could be used to finance new projects, creating a self-sustaining engine for urban development.
This insight transformed the role of public authorities. By 1938, the steady income from Moses’ projects was so reliable that banks were eager to lend more, often at lower rates, confident in the security of toll revenues. This financial strength allowed Moses to dream bigger, envisioning an expansive network of highways, parks, and bridges. Yet, he faced significant hurdles: traditional public funding was drying up, and bureaucratic red tape limited his flexibility. Moses understood that to achieve his ambitions, he needed ongoing, discretionary control over authority revenues—freeing him from the constraints of city budgets and regulations.
Civil service rules posed another major obstacle. Strict hiring practices, salary caps, and rigid assignments made it difficult for Moses to assemble and retain a skilled team. Tight controls on spending slowed down construction and hampered his ability to promote projects effectively. Moses saw that if he could control the flow of authority funds, he could sidestep these restrictions, reward loyal staff, and plan projects independently. This autonomy would let him present city leaders with fully developed plans, leaving them with little choice but to accept his proposals, since the city lacked the resources and expertise to offer alternatives. Securing legal control over authority revenues, then, was not just about money—it was about consolidating power.
Moses’ real genius lay in his legislative maneuvering. He embedded sweeping powers into the bond contracts of authorities like the Triborough Bridge Authority, making them nearly impossible to revoke. On the surface, his legislation appeared to include safeguards—such as limits on borrowing and authority lifespan—but hidden clauses allowed for endless refinancing and expansion into new projects. These legal tricks ensured that the authorities could operate indefinitely, well beyond their original mandates, and with little oversight from lawmakers who often failed to grasp the full implications. In effect, Moses created a quasi-independent “fourth branch” of government, shifting the balance of power in the city.
Through careful legal drafting, Moses expanded the authority’s reach, granting it the ability to acquire land, build roads and parks, and exercise powers usually reserved for governments, such as eminent domain and law enforcement. He centralized control in his own hands, designing board structures and legal barriers that made it nearly impossible for anyone to challenge his leadership. The legal framework of these authorities shielded Moses from interference by state or city officials, freeing him from many democratic checks like public hearings and transparency requirements.
By harnessing the unique structure of public authorities, Moses was able to bypass traditional bureaucracy and deliver large-scale public works with remarkable efficiency. His independence, however, led to clashes with Mayor La Guardia, who eventually realized that Moses’ legal arrangements made him almost untouchable. The public’s admiration for Moses’ accomplishments, combined with his political connections and proven ability to get things done, made it politically risky to oppose him. In the end, Moses—despite never holding elected office—wielded as much influence over New York City’s transportation and recreation decisions as the mayor himself, securing his place as a powerful and nearly unassailable figure in the city’s history.