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 10/18/2005Letters 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 LondonEditor’s note: The writer is assistant general counsel with Pfizer Global
Research and Development.
Comments are closed.