This morning I posted on a Pfizer's role in the Kelo takings, as reported in the New London Day newspaper using documents obtained under Connecticut's Freedom of Information Act. Pfizer responded to the article in a Letter to the Editor (registration required). Here is Pfizer's response to the article (reproduced in full):
Featured in Letters to The Editor
Pfizer Didn't Call For Razing Fort Trumbull Published on 10/18/2005
Letters To The Editor: Your story "Pfizer's fingerprints on Fort Trumbull plan," published Oct. 16, simply recycles a well-worn, untrue myth - that our company's decision to invest here was conditional on the replacement of the surrounding neighborhood.
That charge is unjustified and plain wrong. The documents and conversations you report show that, in 1997, the state and city asked Pfizer executives for ideas on how our arrival might impact Fort Trumbull.
At that time, we believed our $300-million investment and 1,500 new employees would act as magnets - drawing many others to this area.
Our architects shared our optimism and their diagram includes ideas about how our new neighborhood might evolve if we built here. We had optimism and ideas, but we had only two demands. First, we wanted the next-door sewage plant capped to reduce odor. Second, we wanted the restoration of the long-abandoned and derelict Revolutionary war fort. Both conditions were met and brought considerable benefit to the city.
We insisted on nothing else. Anyone who doubts that should consider a glaring truth. If there were other demands, and these were not met, why did we go ahead and build?
We share our neighbors' frustration and sadness for the city's troubles. Rather than making Pfizer a scapegoat, please judge us on our record.
We have made huge investments here and we have delivered all our promises on employment, investment and taxation. We are a good citizen and neighbor.
William Longa New London
Editor's note: The writer is assistant general counsel with Pfizer Global Research and Development.
Related Posts (on one page):
- Pfizer Responds to New London Day Story:
- Pfizer's Role in Kelo Takings:
I have no trouble believing that this letter is technically and documentably accurate, and that Pfizer's people negotiating with New London still managed to convey the importance of razing Kelo's neighborhood. I like Pfizer as a company, but their obvious involvement in all this still has not been punished enough.
Pfizer started the ball rolling, and has to accept some blame for where it went, intent be damned.
What's to punish? Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, businesses try to work the system to their interest. I wouldn't respect Pfizer if they didn't try to work the angles to the fullest extent permitted by our Supreme Court.
I'm amazed at how those who profess an affection for free markets have put Pfizer on the defensive throughout this whole thing. I don't fault New London for the bargain they made; if you disagree, go after the city. Making Pfizer into a bogeyman is shameful and beneath conservatives.
And I'm ashamed of fellow conservatives for pumping Ms. Kelo up the way the lunatic left props up Cindy Sheehan.
Pfizer didn't push the city to buy the land on the open market. Pfizer pushed a plan to bypass free markets and force sales from unwilling sellers. Isn't this similar to what Pfizer complains that Canada does with Pfizer drugs--forcing a sale at a government-set price?
If Pfizer had any qualms about kicking people out of their homes so that the NLDC could build luxury condos for Pfizer employees, the company could speak up to try to stop the evictions. Instead, Pfizer plays a major role in the NLDC, which is actively working to evict the homeowners.
Pfizer's attempt to distance itself from a plan it helped create is cowardly and less than honest. We should remember this the next time Pfizer makes claims about the safety of its products or about how much of a drug's price is really for R&D.
If businesses can legitimately seek positive PR for their activities that are good for the community (and I agree they can), they shouold also suffer the bad PR resulting from activities that are bad for the community. I think the Kelo situation is clearly in the latter category, but some disagree.
To put it another way, sure "businesses try to work the system to their interest", but that doesn't mean they can escape the consequences of their actions. Sometimes those consequences are a loss of goodwill, which is appropriate here. I'm not suggesting Pfizer should be prosecuted.
The fact that they have not moved to rein in the NLDC tends to suggest that they are getting something from the arrangement, and whatever that something is it is worth the bad publicity they are getting.
cathy :-)