| Company | Kidder Peabody |
| Date Announced | 10/30/1993 |
| Site | 30 Rockefeller Plaza |
| Total Subsidy | $31 million |
|
??? |
| Promised Job Creation | ??? |
| Promised Job Retention | 3,000 |
| Length of Contract | 15 years |
| Competing Sites | Jersey City and Stamford, Conn. (for data processing operations and corporate headquarters, respectively) |
| Conditions | none |
| Notes | This
deal to keep Wall Street brokerage firm Kidder, Peabody in New York City
was announced by then-Mayor David Dinkins just days before the election he
lost to Rudolph Giuliani. One year afterward, investment bank PaineWebber
purchased most of Kidder Peabody and laid off many of Kidder's employees.
Less than two years after that, PaineWebber received a retention package
worth over $14 million. The deal with Kidder was more about politics than anything else, as Giuliani had repeatedly criticized Dinkins for losing companies to the suburbs. Other investment banks such as Morgan Stanley and Prudential securities had recently received similar subsidies. |
| Corporate Notes | Kidder, Peabody was a unit of General Electric company in 1993. Kidder was acquired by PaineWebber one year later. (See separate entry for PaineWebber's subsidy deal.) |
| Critics | "Such incentives are not available to companies like mine. … By not making demands on City Hall, we pay higher taxes to subsidize those who have the leverage to hold the city hostage. … City Hall must protect the small-business people who contribute to the city's coffers and its welfare as much as those that are more politically visible," says Carolyn S. Konheim, president of Konheim & Ketcham, environmental consultants in a letter to the New York Times, 11/9/93. |
| A
note on sources -- or why many of these profiles appear incomplete.
They are. Good Jobs New York compiled the numbers in these profiles from
press releases and news accounts of the deals. Unfortunately, more
detailed information on these subsidies is very difficult to obtain --
even though it should be readily available to the public. In many cases,
neither the company nor the city nor state released certain information,
particularly the terms of the agreement, i.e., the conditions which the
company had to meet in order to receive the subsidy. It should also be
noted that the value of the subsidy may not end up being equal to the
value estimated at the time of the agreement. And it should not be assumed
that the actual number of jobs retained and created will be the same as
the numbers predicted.
Because the public deserves easy access to information about how taxpayer dollars are being spent, Good Jobs New York will update these profiles as we uncover more information. Good Jobs New York - May 25, 2001 |
|