Should Baltimore's Amazon bid be public?

When developers submit proposals to cities, or contractors proposals to developers, the submittals are always kept highly secret until either a public bid opening date (in case of public bidders) or until the winner is awarded (in case of private bidders). There are strict rules for public bids, whereas private bids may never be published, unless they include public money.

Boston's submittal

But what if the public is the bidder is private and the responder public, as in the case of Amazon? A recent SUN article sheds an unexpected light on atangled web:

In Baltimore, city officials are now hiding behind a private developer and say it was really Sagamore that submitted the bid. So no need for disclosure.  The highly publicized bid signing event, though, shows the Mayor signing the bid letter for all to see in a ceremony at Sagamore's "Garage"?

“In fact, it was submitted and retained by the developer of Port Covington, the land being proposed as the location for Amazon in the City.” (H.B. Ruley, Chief City Solicitor)

Is the city require to make its proposal public  ("Dear Mr Bezos") or is it allowed to say to keep it secret because in the competitive environment of this case secrecy suites the matter better? Baltimore is not alone with this question, especially when it comes to to the fine-print in which the matter of financial incentives are disclosed.

CNN Tech put its finger on this issue even before the bids were due with a story titled:  Cities try to lure Amazon but want to keep the details secret.

When Amazon began a search for a second headquarters a month and a half ago, its approach was radically public. The request for proposals was posted online. It outlined the company's criteria, including generous tax incentives.
Cities responded with splashy PR campaigns to woo Amazon and its 50,000 well-paying jobs. But when it comes to the nitty-gritty details of what cities are offering, which are due Thursday, officials haven't been quite so forthcoming -- which could keep citizens in the dark about what cities are giving away until a deal is nearly done. (CNN Tech)

Baltimore's favorite Amazon site: Port Covington

The answer to whether cities should make their bids public could be found in public disclosure law but it could also be found in good public policy.

For an instructive example Baltimore wouldn't have to look further than Boston, a prime competitor for landing HQ2 (by some considered a top contender).  Beantown put its entire 193 page bid package online using the affair as a giant opportunity for touting Boston as an innovation city. Just as in Baltimore, Boston's site proposed for HQ2 is in private hand and has already received various design and zoning approvals.

Maybe Boston found it easy to make the bid public because it doesn't contain any open bribes in the form of tax credits or financial gifts. Boston is assertive enough to assume just describing its policies, plans and investments along with its urban qualities will be good enough. Toronto (97 pages) also made its bid public (Including a letter from Prime Minister Trudaeu starting out "Dear Jeff") and so did the State of New Hampshire (78 pages, slogan: “Benefits of Boston, without all the headaches”).

What's inside the box?

Much speaks for for the public approach, especially since bidders are free to disclose their bids as far as Amazon is concerned. Officials told the Seattle Times that nothing on their side requires cities to keep things a secret. So it comes down to legal but also ethical issues such as how a city or state values transparency, how it treats its citizens and really nothing less than what it thinks about democracy.

The Amazon craze has put a long festering issue on steroids: the shadow existence of city and state development agencies which were frequently created with the express purpose of avoiding public discussion so they can better deal with private corporations. (See also my article "The Shady Role of Urban Development Corporations"). What rights residents have and should have to know where city leaders spend their tax dollars is laid out in disclosure and sunshine laws. Common Cause, a voter advocacy group going back to 1970, which is frequently involved in protecting voter rights and public interest, has offices in many states, including Maryland. The public interest group is concerned about the Amazon secrecy. It "raises significant red flags" told Maryland Common Cause executive director Jennifer Bevan-Dangle the SUN.

Signed bid letter: Everybody up there is a public official

Aside form law and ethics, there are practical reasons to handle the Amazon bids open and in public: The bids touting the respective bidding cities should have a much bigger audience than just Amazon.

In many bids considerable amounts of public resources were used for preparing these bid books. Anybody who has ever responded to a request for proposals knows, that the times are over when simple responses were sufficient. Today responses to proposals are thick, full color, often printed on large format paper, involve graphic designers and often animated graphics or videos, no matter how big or small a possible deal may be.

Boston's submittal to Jeff Bezos is a sophisticated propaganda brochure for, by and about Boston that can be used in many other instances than the Amazon bid. With 283 submittals received by Amazon the chances to win are relatively slim even for the most promising contenders. It is smart to leverage the resources that went into preparing the proposal for as many purposes as possible. The biggest leverage of all: A united citizenry that rallies behind its city government and pulls in the same direction from the beginning. A bottom-up consensus approach not only spares a submitter the embarrassment that would ensue when after Amazon announcing shortlist  location a fractured citizenry would begin local warfare because they were never included or knowledgeable about  the bid and its incentives. It also represents a much larger opportunity for correctly addressing the real issue of a public response: What Amazon can do for the city is chooses.

Bostons favorite Amazon site: Suffolk Downs

A united community in which the leadership not only isn't afraid of telling its residents what it stuck into the envelope that went to Amazon but arrived at the proposal based on board consensus would be most assuring to anyone considering the right location for a huge investment.

It would also be a lot more assuring to the citizens of Baltimore.

Klaus Philipsen, FAIA

Baltimore SUN: Amazon bid not made available
Goldmann Sachs and Baltimore's Amazon Bid
Boston Bid
Boston Promotional Video
To win Amazon HQ2, cities should abandon secrecy