tion and Development. I have a member of the port of Buffalo. There are four councilmen of the common council, our legislative body, and finally, the chairman of the port and waterways committee of the chamber of commerce, representing that body. We all have written statements setting forth our position in great detail, and we understand they will be given careful consideration and deliberation if presented for the record; and so our plan is to present the statements and speak to you informally. Due to my day-to-day intimacy with them, if you feel there are questions or gaps, I would be glad to fill them in to the best of my ability. I would like to introduce Mr. George E. Philleas, a prominent attorney, a man with a national reputation in Greek-American affairs. Mr. PHILLEAS. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, this committee is here to express to you and through you to the Congress the apprehensions and fears and the hopes of 1 million people who live in the so-called Niagara frontier. As you know, the city of Buffalo owes its growth, its expansion and its very existence upon her advantages to waterways. From way back to 1825 when the Erie Canal was built, Buffalo grew from a small village to a metropolitan area of 1 million people. The situation as we are facing it today is quite alarming to the citizens, to the taxpayers who within the last year turned in $1 billion in income-tax returns. We have there the third largest steel industry in the world. Ore, grain, other raw materials come, are siphoned by water from all over the West to Buffalo. Buffalo occupies the most outstanding, strategic position in the whole United States from every standpoint: industry, economic, as well as, shall we say, the military. Buffalo is situated at the terminus of the Great Lakes. Then through our own through-way which is under construction now will be connected by land from New York City and the port of New York. The Erie We have Canal is also active. A few years ago the State of New York spent some money to broaden the channels and make it active. We have got to the Bell Aircraft and such outstanding industries. make some provision for the future. Gentlemen, from even a military or strategic point of view Buffalo is situated in the heart of everything. Our people are somewhat puzzled as Congressman says that Cleveland has been able within the past few years to receive appropriations of over $11 million. We envy but we admire Cleveland, also. They did it. Buffalo and our area seem to be the forgotten place among all our strategic places. Imagine that since 1935 we received only $2 million and that $2 million did some work which is altogether useless and is going to continue being useless until those channels are deepened so that boats may navigate therein. We are in a predicament from another standpoint. The ships being built now by the shippers are what they call the 700-foot-long ships. They cannot approach Buffalo. Only a 600-foot ship can approach Buffalo. Old ships are becoming obsolete and within the next few years Buffalo will be without shipping facilities whatever. For that reason we are sort of in a predicament. We do feel that unless something is done by Congress, and done immediately, to rehabilitate the port of Buffalo and to make it useful, that the city of Buffalo will be reduced into a state of stagnation. Without port facilities it is in a state of strangulation and please remember that. We are appealing to you for rectification of wrongs that have been done to Buffalo. Although $300,000 were appropriated in the rivers and harbors bill, nevertheless not a dollar went to Buffalo. In 1953, Buffalo received no appropriation-1952-and I think we used $436,000 last year of money which was unexpended of the 1951 appropriation or something like that. So that is why we are justified in feeling that we are the forgotten people and we would like your committee to take that into consideration and rectify whatever we think is not quite fair play with the city of Buffalo. May I insert into the record some of the basic and specific facts which go right to the heart of the subject? (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF THE DIVISION OF THE PORT OF BUFFALO The Board of the Port of Buffalo is a port-authority-type organization organized in the traditional manner of such organizations to preserve, promote, and develop the port of Buffalo. A comprehensive survey of the port has been accomplished with an appropriation made available by New York State, in recognition of the port's impact on the economy of the entire State. It outlined many development projects to be accomplished with local capital improvement funds. It is desired to emphasize, however, that the future of the port of Buffalo hinges upon the accomplishment of basic harbor improvements of the type traditionally accomplished by the United States Government acting through the United States Army, Corps of Engineers. Therefore, much of the work of the port division is tied in with the fact that vessel operators and shippers are constantly in need of and seeking greater navigable depths. An inch of additional draft means 100 additional tons of cargo per average-size vessel, carried with the same crew at about the same fuel cost. These depths are vital to the port of Buffalo if she is to maintain her competitive position. They have always been recognized as vital to the Nation as a whole because savings in shipping costs are passed on to the consumer under our system of competitive free enterprise. Congress has authorized three projects for the improvement of Buffalo's harbor. Each of these projects was approved by the Congress only after an exhaustive survey had proven that they would produce at least a dollar's benefit for every dollar proposed to be spent. The first project, briefly mentioned below, was approved in 1935; the other two in 1945. Progress in industry and modernization of lake carriers have increased the economic justification for these projects each year since their authorization. One project involves the deepening of the south outer harbor to provide a deeper channel, for example, to the third largest steel plant in the United States. In fiscal year 1953, a $436,000 appropriation was employed to provide a minimum 25-foot channel, which was immediately used by modern lake carriers to set alltime speed and cargo records for this port. Completion of this project involves enlargement of the deepened area to provide adequate mooring space within the harbor for boats waiting to unload, and turning space. These safety features can be accomplished for about $600,000. Nothing was appropriated for this project in fiscal year 1954. A second extremely important project involves deepening the Buffalo River and Ship Canal, and their approaches, from their present 20 feet, to 22 feet in earth and 23 feet in rock, at an estimated cost of $17 million. The entrance channels are to be deepened to 25 feet in earth and 26 feet in rock. Most of Buffalo's important waterfront industry is served by these channels. Thus far, $500,000 was provided in fiscal 1949, $550,000 in 1950, $900,000 in 1951, and $305,000 in 1952. These relatively small appropriations, although they now total over $2 million, have produced no additional depth or benefit because certain control points remain to be deepened. This vitally important project could be greatly progressed, and substantial benefit realized from sums already expended, if rock were removed to project depth from half of the Buffalo River entrance channel, at a cost of approximately $875,000 and if earth dredging were completed to 22 feet at an approximate cost of $575,000, in the forthcoming fiscal year. Local interests are alarmed that this particular project has received no appropriations for 2 successive fiscal years. The city of Buffalo has in the meantime conscientiously discharged its obligations of local cooperation as required by the authorizing legislation. Necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way have been acquired and furnished. Under an obligation to save the United States harmless from claims, the city waived its claims for severe damage to a city-owned bridge resulting from blasting by the contractor employed by the United States. The city has furnished the land and bulkheaded, at considerable expense, to eliminate a dangerous bend at Ohio Street. Principal terminals have agreed to deepen between the Government proiect and their docks. The project itself has, however, lagged badly. Finally, an authorized project for widening the Lake Erie entrance to Black Rock Canal, at an estimated cost of $300,000, has not even been started for lack of funds. The national importance of the Harbor of Buffalo and the economically dependent metropolitan area around it cannot be overemphasized. It is the largest inland port in the United States in value of waterborne commerce handled, and This in turn results in its the 12th largest port, inland or coastal, in tonnage. The treatment being the first city in the world in flour and feed milling, the 2d largest rail center in the United States, and the Nation's 6th ranking steel center. of this area on the matter of civil works appropriations seems grossly inequitable when we consider a report of the local director of internal revenue that for the 1st time, collections in this area exceeded $1 billion. We fully recognize the need for cooperating with the administration in its efforts Yet a rivers and harbors bill was enacted last year to to achieve economy. provide $300 million for rivers and harbors projects and Buffalo was completely bypassed. If all such appropriations were eliminated, we in this area would certainly endorse that uniform policy in the interest of the national welfare. However, since these appropriations represent a relatively small segment of the national budget, and are uniformly made each year, the importance of the city and port of Buffalo justifies its receiving its fair share. Finally, there is considerable alarm over the fact that lake levels are dropping for the first time in 10 years, indicating the reversal of a cycle which has produced higher levels and unusually increased depths for some time. Extensive editorial and other comment in the local newspapers indicates the concern with which this lack of recognition of Buffalo's harbor needs has been viewed. It is impossible to conceive that the important Buffalo River project could be ignored for 3 successive fiscal years, and the outer harbor project previously Yet that would be the result if Buffalo's mentioned, for 2 successive fiscal years. needs are not recognized in the 1955 budget. The availability of increased harbor depths and the utilization of such depths by the modern, more economical superfreighters is so closely interrelated that it is often difficult to determine whether the deeper-draft vessels give rise to the greater depths, or the improved depths encourage the utilization of the larger vessels. It is certain, however, that no port can accommodate these new vessels, which are replacing the smaller ships as fast as they become obsolete, unless and Buffalo needs these increased depths and these until its channels are modernized. larger vessels to take full economic advantage of present trends, and to retain and progress its present position as a leading port. The failure of the executive department to recognize the needs of Buffalo Harbor in its budget recommendations to the Congress, is incomprehensible. Buffalo's case for Federal appropriations is clear and persuasive, and has been presented continuously and forcibly to the administrative leaders who make up this budget, during the past several months. They have, no doubt, a heavy responsibility in making recommendations which will fit within the ceilings imposed upon them. Why they have for the second and third successive years failed to recommend a cent for Buffalo's congressionally authorized projects while, for example, they once again recommend appropriations in excess of $1 million for Cleveland's harbor, is unfathomable, particularly since portions of Cleveland's prior appropriations are as yet unexpended. It is not that the case for Cleveland's It is that Buffalo's position is at least equally meritharbor is without merit. orious. Since ports, particularly Great Lakes ports, are in competition with one another for greater depths, among other things, this kind of illogical distinction could be destructive. We respectfully submit that it is your privilege and responsibility to see that vitally important projects above-described are progressed to completion with all reasonable dispatch. Mr. SPECTOR. Gentlemen, there are two representatives here of the Niagara Frontier Citizens Committee and I would like to introduce Mr. John Bryan who is president of the Buffalo Real Estate Board. Mr. BRYAN. Mr. Chairman, I, too, have a prepared statement. In the interest of saving time, I would like to submit it. The fact that I am president of the Buffalo Real Estate Board is secondary to my importance here although I do just want to make a comment that the board and its members in Buffalo are closely assembled and affiliated with the builders, the Niagara Frontier Builders Association. We occupy the same offices. This matter has been discussed and given good authority on consideration by both those organizations and I can speak officially for them in stating that we wholeheartedly endorse this request. Of more prime importance, however, is the fact that I do-Mr. Heffernan and I do represent this Niagara Frontier Committee for Development. We have attached to the back of our statement a list of the gentlemen who are on that and I do hope that at this point I may introduce to you Mr. Heffernan who is chairman of the Propellor Club of Buffalo. (The statement referred to follows:) Statement on Behalf of tHE NIAGARA FRONTIER Committee for PoRT PROMOTION AND DEVELOPMENT We wish to emphasize at the outset that we who are here today are merely representatives of a total of 29 members of a committee which in turn represents the entire area economically dependent upon the port of Buffalo. Attached to this statement is a listing of the committee members. They are leaders in Government, business, and industry, labor or public groups. Each in turn represents a large community or organization in western New York. This committee was formed in recognition of two important facts. Firstly, it is recognized that the vital relationship between the port of Buffalo and the economic growth and prosperity of the city of Buffalo, and the whole Niagara frontier cannot be too strongly emphasized. Secondly, basic harbor improvements have been a traditional Federal responsibility since the early days of this Nation, and the port of Buffalo has been so poorly treated in this respect in recent years that it, and the area of which it is the heart, are threatened by such discriminatory omissions. The metropolitan area and the port which we represent are far from insignificant in the national picture. Permit us to review a few statistics in that regard. Greater Buffalo embraces a population of over 1 million. It is worthy of note that every year since about 1928, the port of Buffalo has handled an average of about 20 million tons of waterborne cargo. This usually includes about 5 million tons of grain and about 10 million tons of ore, coal, and limestone, the ingredients of steel. The remainder of the tonnage is made up of petroleum products, automobiles, and other miscellaneous items. From the standpoint of tonnage, Buffalo ranked as the 12th biggest port in the United States based on 1950 statistics. It is a sad commentary on the very subject of this hearing that in 1951, the port of Buffalo had dropped to 15th rank. Its annual waterborne cargo is valued at about $1 billion making it the largest inland port in the United States in value of water borne commerce handled. These figures in turn contribute to the fact that Buffalo is the largest flour and feed milling center in the world; the second biggest railroad center in the United States, and the sixth greatest steel center in the United States. They help to make Buffalo a very diversified manufacturing center, the eighth largest in the Nation, with the economic stability which that diversification affords. About $400 million has been invested along the harbor's 37 miles of waterfront, providing most of the jobs which have thus become available in steel, grain, cement, petroleum, automobiles, sand and gravel, to mention the most important ones. Buffalo is within 500 miles of half of the population of the United States and 70 percent of Canada's. Located at the western end of the Barge Canal, and at the eastern end of Lake Erie, Buffalo is in a position to siphon off a large proportion of the Great Lakes traffic. It is no wonder that Buffalo has been called the Queen City of the Lakes and has been compared to the ivy flourishing at the neck of a bottle. It is extremely important to insure that our port is treated equitably in the matter of Federal appropriations for harbor improvements. Although three such projects have been authorized here by Congress, they have lagged badly for want of appropriations. The failure of the Executive Department to recognize the needs of Buffalo Harbor in its budget recommendations to the Congress, is incomprehensible. Buffalo's case for Federal appropriations is clear and persuasive and has been presented continuously and forcibly to the administrative leaders who make up this budget, during the past several months. They have, no doubt, a heavy responsibility in making recommendations which will fit within the ceilings imposed them. Why they have for the second and third successive years failed to recommend a cent for Buffalo's congressionally authorized projects while, for example, they once again recommend appropriations in excess of $1 million.for Cleveland's harbor, is unfathomable, particularly since portions of Cleveland's prior appropriations are as yet unexpended. It is not that the case for Cleveland's harbor is without merit. It is that Buffalo's position is at least equally meritorious. Since ports, particularly Great Lakes ports, are in competition with one another for greater depths, among other things, this kind of illogical distinction in treatment is downright dangerous. By way of example, the city of Cleveland has a congressionally authorized project for its harbor roughly equivalent in estimated cost to that authorized in Buffalo. In fiscal year 1949 Cleveland received $2 million, $1,500.000 in 1950, $237,000 in 1951, $1 million in 1952, $4,720,000 in 1953, and $500,000, in 1954. $1,200,000 has been recommended for fiscal 1955. Buffalo Harbor, on the other hand has received average appropriations of $500,000, starting in 1949 and dwindling away to nothing in fiscal 1954. How can this be squared with Federal tax collections of $1 billion, in this area this year? The case for Buffalo will be stated and restated until it receives the recognition which it deserves. If our national importance as a defense area and a potential target in the event of enemy attack is any indication of our importance as a port, few, if any, industrial areas would outrank us. At its February 9 meeting, the Buffalo chapter of the National Defense Transportation Association emphasized this relationship by enacting a resolution memorializing you to make a fair and equitable appropriation for Buffalo Harbor this year. We ask you on behalf of each of the persons named on the attached list, and the communities and organizations which they represent, to reverse the practice of the past several years that has resulted in the treatment of the port of Buffalo as a stepchild in the matter of Federal appropriations for harbor improvements. MEMBERS OF THE NIAGARA FRONTIER COMMITTEE FOR PORT PROMOTION AND DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT Hon. Steven Pankow, mayor of the city of Buffalo, 201 City Hall, Buffalo, N. Y. Hon. John J. Janiga, mayor of Lackawanna, Lackawanna, N. Y. Hon. Eugene H. Duffy, mayor of Tonawanda, Tonawanda, N. Y. Hon. Myles W. Joyce, mayor of North Tonawanda, N. Y. Hon. George D. Toomey, mayor, Village of Kenmore, 24 Lincoln, Kenmore, N. Y. Hon. Ernest W. Mirrington, Jr., mayor of Niagara Falls, N. Y. Hon. Flmer F. Lux, president of the council, Buffalo, N. Y. Hon. Chester Kowal, comptroller, City of Buffalo. Hon. Frank J. Caffery, New York State assemblyman, 98 Milford Street, Buffalo, N. Y. Hon. Walter J. Mahoney, majority leader, New York State Senate, and president pro tem of the senate. LABOR Mr. James Miller, president, Greater Buffalo Independent Union Council (CIO). Mr. John J. Higgins, president, Buffalo Federation of Labor. PUBLIC Mr. C. Edward Berryman, president, Greater Buffalo Advertising Club. |