Lawmakers Quiz Administration On Jackson Lab Deal
by Christine Stuart | Oct 13, 2011 5:30am
(10) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Business, Town News, Labor, Nonprofits, Special Session
With Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration doesn’t need the support of Republicans to give Jackson Laboratories $291 million to build in Connecticut, but it’s hoping it gets at least some.
The nonprofit genetic laboratory has plans to build a 175,000 square foot building, including 35 dry labs and 20 wet labs in Farmington on the University of Connecticut campus—an opportunity that presented itself after the state of Florida decided not to offer the company any incentives.
Executives from the company joined Malloy’s Chief of Staff Tim Bannon and Department of Economic and Community Development Commissioner Catherine Smith Wednesday to answer questions about the proposal they hope to pass during the Oct. 26 special session on jobs.
At a meeting of Republican lawmakers, Jackson Laboratories Chief Financial Officer Charles Hewett explained that the project in Connecticut is much bigger than the one it planned to build in Florida.
“More importantly it will be much more closely integrated with UConn Health, the UConn Medical School, the medical school at Yale, and hopefully with the hospitals in both Hartford and New Haven,” Hewett said.
The lab which specializes in personalized genomic medicine hopes to use the Connecticut site as a place to do clinical trials on humans. It will maintain its headquarters in Bar Harbor, Maine where there are about 1,300 employees and it specializes in breeding and selling more than 6,000 types of research mice.
“We’ll move from using the mouse, more or less exclusively, as a research model with a human being to using human DNA, human clinical outcomes to develop these new insights,” Hewett said.
The lab expects to hire 330 researchers and support staff before the end of the first 10 years. If it does the $291 million loan could be forgiven by the state. The total cost of the project is $1.1 billion.
Smith explained the money will be bonded at the rate of about $25 million a year and will not exceed the current amount of bonding the state planned on doing over that period.
She also estimated that the net revenue to the state after the initial investment will be $472 million. Most of that will come from personal income taxes paid by the laboratory employees because it’s a nonprofit it won’t be paying any corporate or property taxes.
But it was difficult for Republican lawmakers to grasp the fact that this proposal came to them a month before they’re expected to approve it. And like additional $254 million in bonding for the expansion of the Uconn Health Center in Farmington some couldn’t help but express reservations about the pace of the project and how it was being presented to them.
Sen. John Kissel, R-Enfield, said 330 jobs over 10 years will be a tough sell to his constituents.
Other Republican lawmakers were having flashbacks to the failed deal with Robert Kraft to move the New England Patriots to the state during former Gov. John G. Rowland’s administration.
House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, said when he was talking to Jackson Labs President and CEO Dr. Edison Liu he told him that more than a decade ago he attended a similar reception for the New England Patriots, who had planned to build a football stadium in Hartford after talks with Massachusetts lawmakers broke down.
“I looked the gentleman in the eye to try to read him and I said, ‘Are you committed to Connecticut?’ And he looked at me in the most sincere way and said absolutely,” Cafero. “It was Robert Kraft. The next day I went out and bought every Patriot thing I could think of, lamps, coats, hats. That Christmas I burnt them all.”
“He broke my heart. I said ‘Dr. Liu are you going to break my heart?’ And he said no,” Cafero said.
Deep down, Cafero said he believes Jackson Labs wants to be here and he believes it is different than Florida.
“The guy said it very honestly. You’re between Boston and New York. You’re dealing with two premiere universities, Connecticut and Yale. I couldn’t duplicate that scenario in Florida. I couldn’t duplicate it in Maine. I can’t duplicate it in many places in America,” Cafero said. “So I believe him. There’s truth to that.”
Cafero said he doesn’t blame the governor for pushing the issue and he applauded him for trying to develop a process and explain it to lawmakers.
But Cafero is still struggling with how Malloy will separate the $291 million low-interest loan to the laboratory during the same special session on jobs. He said there has to be something for small business in the jobs package. If there’s not then the spirit of bipartisanship will come to an end.
Rep. Rosa Rebimbas, R- Naugatuck, asked if the legislature waited to pass this during the regular session in February if it would be a deal breaker for the laboratory.
“I’m certainly not issuing any ultimatums,” Hewett said. “I will tell you that within the last week I’ve had three calls to say come to us if Connecticut doesn’t work out. Would we explore those? Start to explore those? If it looked like this was going to drag on we might.”
“Do I have the appetite to go through what we went through in Florida in Connecticut? Absolutely not. Is Oct. 26 an ultimatum? No,” Hewett replied.
Smith said the deal to bring Jackson Labs to the state is more than just a concept, as some lawmakers suggested. She said the administration just doesn’t have the amortization worked out just yet.
“It’s an opportunity we think is urgent to get in on the ground floor of a burgeoning industry,” Bannon said. “I think it’s an opportunity. I think we have answers to all their questions, so I hope they will be satisfied.”
Rep. Pamela Sawyer, R-Bolton, said there’s a lot of interest in the project, which is largely seen as positive for the state. However, there seemed to be more questions than answers Wednesday.
Tags: Jackson Lab, Connecticut, UConn, Florida, special session, Bannon
(10) Comments
posted by: Disgruntled | October 13, 2011 8:14am
Hmmmm…$291M for 330 jobs over ten years. Seems like a steep price to pay for “job creation” and one wonders why our neighboring states did not jump on this? Smells PEZ-like to me.In the unregulated free market that Dan reveres,there would have been a bidding war for this deal.
Now on the CBS front. Rumors are flying that they will relocate ops to Stamford. I think not. I hear Florida.Shelton will be the first to suffer.
posted by: ... | October 13, 2011 8:58am
Oh Cafero, you bring so much life to any meeting you’re in!
This seems like an overall great plan, though part of me hopes the loans would not be forgivable under any circumstances. Its obviously an incentive to come to CT (any state would offer the same), but the bonding is still monies being paid off over time through revenue.
posted by: Disgruntled | October 13, 2011 10:41am
More than ever it sounds like citizens,lucky enough to get a job,become slaves to The Leviathan,aka state government.
“She also estimated that the net revenue to the state after the initial investment will be $472 million. Most of that will come from personal income taxes paid by the laboratory employees because it’s a nonprofit it won’t be paying any corporate or property taxes.”
posted by: ... | October 13, 2011 10:56am
Well Disgruntled you shouldn’t listen to only Senator Kissel and other Republicans who are only speaking about just the lab jobs.
Some lawmakers are (most likely) purposely neglecting to inform their constituents about construction jobs and indirect jobs from this facility that will be needed throughout the process. Why? What seems to be an attempt produce uninformed anger from the voter, which them gives them a reason to not vote in favor of the plan.
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | October 13, 2011 11:13am
A SEBAC haz duty worker retiring at age 43 and living to age 78 (based on longevity table) and earning a $75,000 yearly pension as is now common?
That’s $2.625 million in sitmulus money for that job plus COLA increases and health care.
Trickle down stimulus jobs are getting real expensive in CT.
Is there any potential that the retired Prison Guard will open a spin off BioScience project that creates thousands of jobs?
Or that the prison guard creates thousands of cosntruciton jobs and spin offs?
Or is it more likely they start double dippingadn smell like more pork?
Here’s the situation with Haz Duty unions. It would be cheaper to pay the union for no-show jobs than to fund them and deal with lawsuits like “Re-open Bergen”.
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | October 13, 2011 11:28am
Should we ask about the morality of what they do? Breeding mutant mice for lab torture?
As for Mr Kissell (and speaking as a 30-year Enfield resident) if he explains the fully burdened cost of retiring prison guards at age 43 with $75,000 pensions and fully paid health care and then compares that cost to the Jackson Lab investment and speaks to the prospects for additional investment and job creation potential of the two scenarios I think he’ll have no problem selling Jackson labs over haz duty pensions.
I’m pretty sure if he puts in in chart form and goes to the 5th graders in Enfield and asks them which is the better investment and which is the better use of taxpayers money, the Jackson labs proposal or Haz Duty pensions at age 43 he’ll get an overwhelming response from kids who don’t understand how elections are won and the undue influence of public sector labor unions which would be considered organized crime if the laws were written correctly to mirror other states where they are outlawed.
posted by: NOW What? | October 13, 2011 1:17pm
Disgruntled - You mentioned that there “rumors” that “CBS” will relocate back to Stamford but that *you* “hear” that it’ll be Florida. I take it you meant UBS, not CBS. UBS is planning on re-establishing itself in Stamford, but not its entire headquarters. And as far as I know it has *no* plans to establish headquarters in Florida; that would be insane, as its primary reasons for moving back to NYC were to consolidate its operations to save on overhead costs while at the same time being geographically closer to its primary customers and business partners.
posted by: Disgruntled | October 13, 2011 3:24pm
My mistake.
Look for CBS to pull out of Shelton,or so I have heard.Heading for warmer climes?
NBC SPORTS,is the rumor,to Stamford.Nice,if true.Now THAT would be a coup!
UBS is,for all intents and purposes,gone. The place is a ghost town.
posted by: Noteworthy | October 14, 2011 10:51am
Stupid. Buying jobs for $250K a piece; low interest forgiveable loans to seduce somebody to move here - forget it. If they come, they come. It’s going to be another non-profit that pays no property taxes; no sales taxes and only brings a payroll and that payroll is highly questionable. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. We are a state run by ninnies and nitwits.
posted by: NOW What? | October 15, 2011 4:25pm
UBS does already have a presence in Florida, but I just can’t see them locating their national headquarters down there *unless* they determine that operational costs in the northeast (Conn., NY, Mass. & NJ) will continue to be *so* high - and their financial status so poor - that they feel they’d have to relocate headquarters to the absolutely lowest dirt-cheap location in the country in order to remain viable and profitable. UBS could care less about the weather surrounding their offices or national headquarters, and the cost to relocate their national headquarter staff to Florida would be very high.