4 ms·

What the HQ2 malfeasance? Ie, if they committed unlawful acts why not pursue that in court? I know they selected a location in New York they shouldn't have / t

What the HQ2 malfeasance? Ie, if they committed unlawful acts why not pursue that in court? I know they selected a location in New York they shouldn't have / the community rejected, and after a big outcry ended up going with not against community pressure. I think the one in Virginia is going ahead, they just got permits there for a metro station. Are there protests in Virginia they are not listening too?

et2o 7y ago
The "malfeasance" was how they negotiated ridiculous amounts of taxpayer money for their private enterprise.
- sokoloff 7y ago
  I believe (from having read a fair amount of the process hullabaloo) that they were taking advantage of tax incentives available to all employers choosing to locate in that area. To the extent that’s the case, I see absolutely no malfeasance. There were additional, negotiated real estate related credits that are also likely to be similarly negotiated by any other developer.
  - throwaway2048 7y ago
    There was extra money ontop of said tax incentives.
- privateSFacct 7y ago
  malfeasance is an unlawful act. They were negotiating with the government - who writes the laws. I was curious about the malfeasance - but if this is the the claim of criminality - uh... not a good look for the folks yelling at amazon. I think MUCH stronger claims may be possible around just their fake product volume and consumer harm there, but good luck with these claims - are they being litigated anywhere?
unreal37 7y ago
Actually the scale is larger than that. Amazon got over 100 cities to bid on the project. Entered into deeper negotiations with at least 20 of those. Got many cities to spend hundreds (or thousands) of hours putting proposals together, pitching teams, crunching numbers, offering deeper tax incentives than anyone else can get. In the end, they chose the location they were going to choose anyways. So it was a colossal waste of time for 5,000+ people across North America. Burnt a lot of goodwill. Many cities learned a valuable lesson on dealing with these big multi-nationals as a result of it. So it won't likely happen like this again.
- nik_0_0 7y ago
  Genuinely curious - I thought it was strange when it first started - but surely every company must do this? Wouldn't making the investment of a large presence likely involve seeking concessions from each location as part of the scouting process? What did Amazon do different here? Instead of in back rooms, it was all out in the open. Curious of there are other examples of this.
  - privateSFacct 7y ago
    The posters here are misusing malfeasance terribly. Other examples are federal grant programs - they are required to publicize them and lots of folks / nonprofits spend lots of time applying but reality is most will renew to existing partners etc

et2o 7y ago

The "malfeasance" was how they negotiated ridiculous amounts of taxpayer money for their private enterprise.

sokoloff 7y ago
I believe (from having read a fair amount of the process hullabaloo) that they were taking advantage of tax incentives available to all employers choosing to locate in that area. To the extent that’s the case, I see absolutely no malfeasance. There were additional, negotiated real estate related credits that are also likely to be similarly negotiated by any other developer.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  There was extra money ontop of said tax incentives.
privateSFacct 7y ago
malfeasance is an unlawful act. They were negotiating with the government - who writes the laws. I was curious about the malfeasance - but if this is the the claim of criminality - uh... not a good look for the folks yelling at amazon. I think MUCH stronger claims may be possible around just their fake product volume and consumer harm there, but good luck with these claims - are they being litigated anywhere?

unreal37 7y ago

Actually the scale is larger than that. Amazon got over 100 cities to bid on the project. Entered into deeper negotiations with at least 20 of those. Got many cities to spend hundreds (or thousands) of hours putting proposals together, pitching teams, crunching numbers, offering deeper tax incentives than anyone else can get. In the end, they chose the location they were going to choose anyways. So it was a colossal waste of time for 5,000+ people across North America. Burnt a lot of goodwill. Many cities learned a valuable lesson on dealing with these big multi-nationals as a result of it. So it won't likely happen like this again.

nik_0_0 7y ago
Genuinely curious - I thought it was strange when it first started - but surely every company must do this? Wouldn't making the investment of a large presence likely involve seeking concessions from each location as part of the scouting process? What did Amazon do different here? Instead of in back rooms, it was all out in the open. Curious of there are other examples of this.
- privateSFacct 7y ago
  The posters here are misusing malfeasance terribly. Other examples are federal grant programs - they are required to publicize them and lots of folks / nonprofits spend lots of time applying but reality is most will renew to existing partners etc