MEDC Declares Amount of Tax Incentives offered Amazon a "trade secret"

So what and how much exactly was offered to Amazon?The MEDC [Michigan Economic Development Corp.] won't reveal the numbers declaring them a 'trade secret' that would require Dan Gilbert's approval to release.

Quote:

---

From Crain's Detroit Business:
Chad Livengood, reported this week that the MEDC is keeping secret the tax incentives offered to Amazon for an economic development project in Detroit that never materialized. Despite an impressive regionwide effort led by Gilbert, Detroit didn't make Amazon's list of finalists.

When Livengood requested the incentive figures, the MEDC cited a Freedom of Information Act exemption that protects trade secrets from public disclosure if the information is submitted under a promise of confidentiality.

In fact, the MEDC had promised confidentiality to Gilbert's Rock Ventures.

In a nondisclosure agreement signed in 2016 — before Amazon announced its second-headquarters sweepstakes — the MEDC promised to keep secret any commercial and financial information provided by Gilbert's companies while the agency considered incentives on his potential projects. The broadly worded NDA expires in 2019.

---

Do we have a right to know this or is it to our advantage to keep it secret by not tipping our hand to future projects?

Quote:

---

It also raises questions about whether Gilbert and Rock Ventures are getting special treatment from the state, and why the state is keeping secret incentives that it and the city of Detroit had offered. Public money was being offered that would have benefited Gilbert, but the public isn't being told how much.

---

This will likely also reveal what Gilbert stood to gain. He get out in front of this and release this immediately.

Not nice to dedicate taxpayer funds without telling the taxpayer how much they are going to be on the hook for.

They still have not said who transferred the 14 city owned properties during the bankruptcy to an untraceable company in the Bahamas.

There is no expectation of privacy by any taxation authority. Simple rule.

This is unacceptable, unless the offer was contingent upon future approval by voters, much like property taxes for libraries or schools. The government is not a private corporation. It is an agent of its citizens.

MI taxpayers have no right to know how much they would be subsidizing the richest person on the planet?

Welcome to Plutocracy. Govt. by and for the .0001%. Gilbert runs things, and the peons have no right to public notice.

Don't like the decision? Change the law.

The MEDC needed information from Gilbert in order to make it's proposal to Amazon. If that information was delivered in confidence, especially pursuant to a written agreement, the State is bound by it.

Case closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3WC

Don't like the decision? Change the law.

The MEDC needed information from Gilbert in order to make it's proposal to Amazon. If that information was delivered in confidence, especially pursuant to a written agreement, the State is bound by it.

Case closed.

---

So the state was sub contracted by Mr Gilbert in order to present a bid useing taxpayer funds,who runs who?

The state is beholden to the taxpayers,first and foremost.

Well, Richard, the State could have pitched Amazon without Gilbert's data. Where would the taxpayers have been then?

Once the State needed Gilbert's data, and agreed to keep it confidential, the State, and the taxpayers had a better chance of prevailing. Are you suggesting that the State should have gone it alone, or, breached its agreement with Gilbert. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

No mystery here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3WC

Don't like the decision? Change the law.

The MEDC needed information from Gilbert in order to make it's proposal to Amazon. If that information was delivered in confidence, especially pursuant to a written agreement, the State is bound by it.

Case closed.

---

It has nothing to do with a law. It's the state entering into negotiations without transparency. The state should never be in a position to promise taxpayer outlays without some degree of transparency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

MI taxpayers have no right to know how much they would be subsidizing the richest person on the planet?

Welcome to Plutocracy. Govt. by and for the .0001%. Gilbert runs things, and the peons have no right to public notice.

---

“Welcome to Plutocracy”......exactly. And it will only get worse as our “leaders” and policies are hell bent on accelerating the transformation of our country to a total plutocracy. The idea of shoveling $$$$ to an already obscenely rich man like Bezos and his companies is repugnant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3WC

Well, Richard, the State could have pitched Amazon without Gilbert's data. Where would the taxpayers have been then?

Once the State needed Gilbert's data, and agreed to keep it confidential, the State, and the taxpayers had a better chance of prevailing. Are you suggesting that the State should have gone it alone, or, breached its agreement with Gilbert. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

No mystery here.

---

Thats what they should have done,the state as a whole saying this is what we have to offer then Mr Gilbert should have said in his private deal,I will add this as an extra incentive.

As it stands the whole entire state put Mr Gilbert in the position to handle it for them,he is not an elected official voted in to look out for the taxpayers best interest,you are in essence turning state control over to a private corporation.

I am pro business,if I put a business in your state useing my own funds then it is my business how I spend them,the second I ask you to front me money from the taxpayers pocket then the taxpayer or shareholders have every right to know where and what those funds are spent on.

No funding source operates on the principle of give me money and do not ask where it is going.

3WC is quite correct in that MEDC is right, and legally obliged, in holding to its confidentiality agreement.

I'm looking for an answer as to how, in the future, such a legal circle can't be entered and the public be denied this knowledge. Maybe legislation to that end or just a change it the MEDC's rules. If that handicaps us in future bids, so be it. Grand Rapids let it be known to its citizens that their taxpayer handout bid was two billion; we should know too.

Obviously Gilbert stood to benefit hugely, and that doesn't bother me because he deserved to. Still he needs to do it as openly as possible as his currently positive image is his greatest asset and the reason for my support and that of others.

He has some ugly court cases and decisions that will require him to burn some of his good will like the one from today where he [through his Amrock affiliate] has been ordered to pay $702 million for data and trade secrets stolen and used Amrock from a small Texas company. 470 million was punitive. [Amrock is appealing]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3WC

Don't like the decision? Change the law.

The MEDC needed information from Gilbert in order to make it's proposal to Amazon. If that information was delivered in confidence, especially pursuant to a written agreement, the State is bound by it.

Case closed.

---

I'm not a lawyer. Looking at this as a commercial transaction, I get the idea. But the government is not a party to a voluntary transaction when it taxes citizens. Its operating in a role as a government with responsibility to its citizens. I think that responsibility overrides the obligation of confidentiality to a third party. Their first obligation is to the citizens. MEDG is some manner of quasi-governmental beast. The quasi- part requires first responsibility to citizens.