Boston has released its 218-page bid for Amazon’s proposed second headquarters for all to see. So has Toronto, with its 190-page pitch. And just across the state, Philadelphia has revealed its three proposed sites for HQ2, complete with glossy renderings.
But don’t expect Pittsburgh to follow suit, even though Amazon is not standing in the way of any city that wants to do so.
For Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald, it’s all about staying ahead of the competition. And if that means keeping the proposal secret, so be it.
“My goal is to win, not to do what other cities are doing,” he said Tuesday.
All Pittsburghers have gotten so far is a feel-good video touting Pittsburgh’s virtues and a snappy HQ2 campaign slogan, “Future. Forged. For All.” Other details are scant.
Local public officials have not publicly identified any of the proposed sites for Amazon’s HQ2, although some of them — like Hazelwood Green and the former Civic Arena site — are commonly known.
Nor have Pittsburgh officials released any information on what local or state incentives they may be offering — ones that could top $1 billion — or other details of what they are pitching to the Seatte online retailer other than general statements about talent, cost of living, and the like.
Mr. Fitzgerald wants to keep it that way, at least for now. To gain the best possible competitive advantage, “It’s best not to show other cities what we’re doing,” he said.
There could be other rounds in the frenzied competition for HQ2, which could bring up to 50,000 jobs and $5 billion in investment over a period of up to 17 years. Amazon has received 238 proposals for what may be the most coveted economic development prize of the century to date. It plans to make a decision next year.
“Do the Steelers put their playbook out when they are playing the Patriots or the Ravens? No. They want to keep their plays secret. Why wouldn’t we do the same thing?” Mr. Fitzgerald asked.
Kevin Acklin, chief of staff to Mayor Bill Peduto, cited other reasons for the decision not to release the Pittsburgh bid.
He said the proposal is “subject to a non-disclosure agreement with Amazon ancillary to a highly competitive process, as well as agreements with owners of private property that were included as potential development sites in the Pittsburgh region.”
“Until those agreements are released, we are under legal commitments to keep the proposal terms confidential. We look forward to sharing further details as we hopefully advance through the Amazon selection process,” he said.
While Mr. Acklin mentioned a non-disclosure agreement with Amazon, the e-commerce giant is not preventing cities from releasing their proposals.
The non-disclosure applies only to Amazon-related confidential information that the company may have shared while cities were preparing bids. Other than that, from Amazon’s perspective, it’s up to the cities themselves whether they want to release their proposals.
Melissa Melewsky, media law counsel for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, believes the Pittsburgh bid — or at least a good portion of it — as well as those filed by other cities or regions in the state should be public under the Pennsylvania Right-to-Know Act.
“If the bid is successful, it could have a significant impact on Pennsylvanians. Pennsylvanians have a right to know what is being proposed for them by their government,” she said.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, as well as other media outlets, have filed formal right-to-know requests to gain access to Pittsburgh’s proposal.
Ms. Melewsky said that the information is presumed to be public and that it will be up to the city to prove why it is not. She noted there are a number of exemptions Pittsburgh could claim but it is up to the city “to prove one would actually fit” to deny access.
Wanting to maintain a competitive edge, as Mr. Fitzgerald argued, “is not a basis for denial under the right-to-know law,” she said, although she added there may be exemptions that recognize such concerns.
Erik Arneson, executive director of the office of open records for the state, said the Amazon proposals are “an unusual circumstance” in the sense that usually governments accept bids or proposals, rather than submitting them.
Mr. Arneson said Pittsburgh or other jurisdictions could try to cite trade secrets or confidential proprietary information or a provision in the right-to-know act dealing with real estate transactions that may provide some protection until a decision is made.
All of that said, “If you’re looking for a gut level reaction, I think by and large these would be public documents,” he stated.
Pittsburgh is not the only community keeping its bid secret.
Adanya Lustig, an intern with MuckRock, a collaborative news site focused on helping citizens, journalists, and others file requests for public information, said most of the Amazon HQ2 bids haven’t been made public yet, although that has varied from state to state.
Of roughly 165 right-to-know requests MuckRock has filed, it has obtained about 30 bids, or less than 20 percent. About 25 others have been rejected and another 25 stated they did not file a proposal. The organization is still waiting for answers from about 80 other cities.
MuckRock undertook the effort because “we were frustrated by how much of the coverage surrounding Amazon’s second headquarters focused more on towns’ publicity stunts than on the consequences of Amazon’s second headquarters actually landing in a place,” Ms. Lustig said.
“We wanted to find out what exactly those consequences might be, based on the information in the bids, and we wanted to provide local reporters with both a road map for analyzing the bids and the bids themselves.”
Mr. Fitzgerald sees it differently. Cities that are releasing their bids are “making decisions that I don’t think are in their best interests, but that’s up to them.”
As for the Pittsburgh region, “We want to give ourselves the best chance of winning,” he said.
Mark Belko: mbelko@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1262.
First Published: November 22, 2017, 12:00 p.m.
Updated: November 22, 2017, 1:41 p.m.
