Documents suggest cover-up by officials

Christie appointees concerned about political fallout

TRENTON, N.J. — Officials squabbled over media leaks and worried about bad publicity in the days after lane closings near the George Washington Bridge caused huge traffic jams that now appear to have been politically orchestrated by a member of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s administration and key allies, documents released Friday show.

In the documents, officials appointed by Mr. Christie seemed more concerned about the political fallout than the effects of the gridlock in Fort Lee, the town at the New Jersey bridge egress to New York, during four mornings in September.

The thousands of pages were released by a New Jersey legislative committee investigating the scandal, which could haunt Mr. Christie’s expected run for president in 2016. The documents mostly involve the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the agency that runs the bridge.

Lawmakers are looking into allegations that Christie loyalists engineered the tie-ups to punish the Democratic mayor of Fort Lee for not endorsing Mr. Christie for re-election.

The documents show that the traffic mess created tension between New York and New Jersey appointees at the Port Authority, with the New York side angrily countermanding the lane closings.

In the correspondence, Port Authority chairman David Samson, a Christie appointee, suggested that the authority’s executive director, Patrick Foye, s appointed by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, had leaked to a reporter an internal memo ordering an end to the lane closings. Mr. Samson called that possibility “very unfortunate for NY/NJ relations.”

On Thursday, Mr. Christie moved to contain the damage from the scandal, firing his deputy chief of staff, cutting ties to one of his chief political advisers and apologizing for the traffic jams. Two Christie appointees at the Port Authority resigned last month as the scandal unfolded.

Mr. Christie has denied any involvement in the lane closings, and the two batches of documents released Wednesday and Friday do not implicate him.

The latest documents contain several emails from Port Authority media relations staff to higher-ups reporting on calls from reporters with questions about the closings. The agency did not respond to those calls.

It was Mr. Foye’s Sept. 13 email ordering that the lanes be reopened that generated deep discussion. In it, Mr. Foye called the decision to close the lanes “abusive” and added, “I believe this hasty and illadvised decision violates federal law.”

Bill Baroni, the Christieappointed deputy director who has since resigned, forwarded a copy of the angry email to Mr. Christie’s scheduling secretary. Later that morning, Mr. Baroni emailed Mr. Foye: “I am on my way to office to discuss. There can be no public discourse.”

Mr. Foye responded: “Bill, that’s precisely the problem: There has been no public discourse on this.”

Mr. Baroni later authorized a statement for reporters explaining that the closings were part of a traffic study. But in recent weeks, there have been questions about whether the closings were part of a legitimate study.

Mr. Christie himself said Thursday: “I don’t know whether this was a traffic study that then morphed into a political vendetta or a political vendetta that morphed into a traffic study.”

The newly released documents show that there was, in fact, a traffic study done, or at least a preliminary one.

The documents include study findings that Mr. Baroni gave to lawmakers at a hearing last year.