[lbo-talk] Kelo v. New London: About that condemned home...

Michael Pollak mpollak at panix.com
Thu Nov 12 20:50:44 PST 2009


[They had tax incentives for 10 years and, coincidentally, that's exactly how long they ended up staying.]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/nyregion/13pfizer.html

The New York Times

November 13, 2009

Pfizer to Leave City That Won Supreme Court Land-Use Case

By PATRICK McGEEHAN

<snip>

"Look what they did," Mr. Cristofaro said on Thursday. "They stole

our home for economic development. It was all for Pfizer, and now

they get up and walk away."

<snip>

Economic development officials in Connecticut used that plan -- and

a package of financial incentives -- to lure Pfizer to build a

headquarters for its research division on 26 acres nearby. With an

agreement that it would pay just one-fifth of its property taxes for

the first 10 years, Pfizer spent $294 million on a

750,000-square-foot complex that opened in 2001.

By then, Ms. Kelo, the Cristofaros and several neighbors had sued

the city to stop it from using its power of eminent domain to take

their property. The dispute, known as Kelo v. New London, wound up

at the Supreme Court in 2005 as one of the most scrutinized

property-rights cases in years.

<snip>

After Pfizer completed its $67 billion acquisition of Wyeth, another

drug giant, in October, Ms. Power said, "We had a lot of real estate

that we had to make strategic decisions about."

<snip>

The complex is currently assessed at $220 million, said Robert M.

Pero, a city councilman who is scheduled to become mayor next month.

The company pays tax on 20 percent of that value and the state pays

an additional 40 percent, Mr. Pero said. That arrangement is

scheduled to end in 2011, around the time Pfizer, which is currently

the city's biggest taxpayer, expects to complete its withdrawal.

<end excerpts>

Michael



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list