Squadron

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a conservative business-funded lobbying group, has been sneaking around New York’s state capital pretending to be a charity when it is in reality responsible for authoring at least 39 bills during the current session of the legislature.

Sen. Dan Squadron, the ranking Democrat on the state Senate Investigations and Government Operations Committee told the Wall Street Journal the corporate-backed group should be registered a lobbying group and not a charity.

“You know they say if it looks like a duck quacks like a duck, it must be a lobbyist,” said Sen. Bill Perkins, a Manhattan Democrat. “As such it is required to be registered, and its activities are required to be transparent, and apparently that is not what’s happening right now.”

ALEC provides legislators with corporate-written sample legislation that elected officials can use as templates to produce their own bills that favor corporate interests. The group claims a 20 percent success rate getting bills passed through the New York State Legislature, which is not bad in a legislative body legendary for its dysfunction.

Maziarz

Common Cause New York says it will file a formal complaint next week with state ethics officials about ALEC’s failure to properly register itself as a lobbying group.

That brought a strong response from ALEC, which accused Common Cause of being part of a grand liberal conspiracy with George Soros to harass and silence the group.

Two state senators with reportedly close ties to ALEC are Sen. George Maziarz, a Republican from Niagara County, and ALEC state chairman Sen. Owen Johnson, a Long Island Republican.

Maziarz, who accepts campaign contributions from Verizon Communications, was in the middle of a 2010 dispute over a proposed Verizon data center to be built in Somerset, N.Y. Maziarz sided with Verizon and verbally attacked one of his constituents who opposed the pace of the project, and its lack of a complete environmental impact review.

Verizon ultimately changed its mind about the project after purchasing Terremark, which operates data centers.

Economically-challenged western New York will take any new high-tech jobs it can find, which is why local politicians threw parties when Verizon announced interest in building a multi-billion dollar data center on the shores of Lake Ontario, in the Niagara County community of Somerset.

Covered last fall by Stop the Cap!, the project would have created up to 200 high-paying jobs, representing a feather in the cap for economic development efforts upstate cities have been engaged in even before the Great Recession.

Verizon’s Wish List

Just a few things seemed to be standing in the way, according to Verizon’s lobbyists.  Among them, an unfavorable piece of legislation that was pending in 2010, introduced by Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester) and Senator Brian X. Foley (D-Blue Point).  New York Assembly Bill 2208/Senate Bill 7263 came in response to watching Verizon selling off pieces of its landline network to Frontier Communications, and both Albany politicians did not want to see a repeat of that in New York State, unless Verizon shared the wealth with ratepayers in the form of credits on their monthly phone bills (or expanded broadband rollout in rural areas of the state).

That bill languished and eventually failed to be adopted by the legislature, so Verizon ultimately had few worries from Albany.  But Verizon’s wish list grew longer even as the fall days grew shorter.

The proposed site for Verizon's data center in Somerset, N.Y., which will now continue to offer a clear view to Lake Ontario. (Courtesy: WIVB-TV Buffalo)

The company sought a 20-year payment-in-lieu-of-taxes, or PILOT agreement, getting Verizon off the hook for high New York State taxes — particularly western New York’s property taxes, recognized as the highest in the nation.  The company would also be able to obtain cheap hydropower, an important proposition in an area charged some of the highest electricity rates in the country.  Verizon even sought a sales tax exemption on building materials and technology to be used inside the new data center.  That’s nothing to sneeze at either, considering Niagara County’s 8% sales tax rate.

In all, Verizon would have saved at least $330 million if their wish list of taxes waivers and benefits was approved.

With the help of state senator George Maziarz (R-Newfane), Verizon seemed well on its way to winning those concessions from the state.

And Then Came The Neighbor Across the Street, Ms. Mary Ann Rizzo

As the state worked to fulfill Verizon’s checklist, all seemed on track to break ground until one Somerset resident in her 70s, Ms. Mary Ann Rizzo, began asking some hard questions.

Rizzo owns 116 acres of land across the street.  She wondered what kind of impact a multi-billion dollar project like this would have on her and other neighbors, and wanted the state to complete due diligence on an environmental impact review that somehow magically got cut short within five weeks of the application being filed.

She hired attorney Art Giacalone to make sure New York State was following its own procedures in approving the largest project ever proposed for Niagara County in more than a half century.  Giacalone found a lightning-fast approval by Somerset town officials and one of the fastest reviews by state officials he’d ever seen.

Rizzo filed suit, but it was dismissed by a judge back in January.  Rizzo’s attorney filed a notice of appeal, and Verizon’s attorneys asked the court to speed up the process, something the Rochester judge hearing the case refused.

Within days of that, Verizon announced it was pulling the plug on the data center in Somerset, and Maziarz promptly laid blame at the feet of Ms. Rizzo.

Maziarz - 'It's all that woman's fault.'

The Misdirected Blame Game

“It just shows you how one person who owns property across the street, doesn’t even live on the property, but just owns property across the street has killed this up to $5 billion project,” Maziarz said.  “She is totally responsible for [Verizon’s] decision.”

That set local talk radio afire as local residents vilified Rizzo, as did some in the Buffalo and Niagara Falls press.

Verizon said it was considering taking its data center to Wyoming instead.

While Rizzo was in court and Maziarz was spending time cutting red tape for Verizon, the company acquired Teremark, a very large provider of data hosting services and cloud storage.  So large and important that Verizon touted the acquisition as providing at least $500 million in “synergies,” allowing cost-cutting and Verizon to transfer some of its data center needs to Teremark facilities, which is exactly what happened.

Nope, it's not being built in Laramie, Wyo. either.

In fact, while Verizon was complaining about New York’s foot-dragging, company officials were planning to close several of Verizon’s existing data centers, making the need to break ground for a new one on the shores of Lake Ontario unnecessary.

Wyoming officials rolled out a similar red carpet for Verizon, with Gov. Matt Mead budgeting $14 million towards a data center incentive package.  That’s a considerable sum for a state with only a half-million residents.

This week, we learned Wyoming was the second state to be left behind by Verizon, who abandoned plans for the data center proposed near Laramie.

“As a result of the acquisition, we do not have plans at this time to build a data center in Wyoming,” Verizon spokeswoman Lynn Staggs told the Laramie Boomerang. “The Terremark acquisition, announced earlier this year, provides Verizon with the chance to accelerate its data center and cloud strategy.”

In other words, Verizon bought its own solution.

Even if New York delivered on all of the legislative and tax abatement changes Verizon wanted, and Ms. Rizzo never existed, Verizon would still not be spending time on the beach at Somerset or wandering the wide open spaces of Laramie.  But they might have walked away with some nice deregulatory parting gifts without having to show a thing for it — gifts that the state of Wyoming already budgeted for companies like Verizon, all for a data center they won’t build.

A tip for rational living: Before handing everything a large telecommunications company wants on a silver platter, get the commitment in writing and be prepared to rescind those offers if the company pulls out.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Buffalo Media React to Verizon Data Center Project Canceled 3-2011.flv[/flv]

Watch as Buffalo’s TV newscasts opened the floodgates for a wholesale blame game over a failed multi-billion dollar project Verizon was unlikely to ever build after acquiring Teremark.  (WGRZ/WIVB/WKBW)  (15 minutes)

Verizon’s lobbyists are warning western New York politicians that unless they defeat a state measure to allow Verizon ratepayers to share in the proceeds of any future landline network sell-offs, Verizon may take a multi-billion dollar proposed data center elsewhere.

The Niagara county community of Somerset, population 2,900, is the planned home for the new high-tech infrastructure project.  Verizon officials propose to use Lake Ontario breezes and water to help cool the energy-intensive facility, to be located on 160 acres just yards from the shoreline.  In all, the Verizon campus will consist of three buildings — each 300,000 square feet in size.  If built as proposed, it would be among the largest of Verizon’s 250 data centers around the world.

But there’s a hitch.

While Verizon project manager Bruce Biesecker showed drawings and answered questions from an eager audience of local residents, Verizon lobbyists were telling reporters the entire project could end up in another state because of legislation under consideration in the state legislature.

Our regular reader Smith6612 dropped us a note wondering if we knew about the project.  Yes, we did.  But we also noticed company officials spending almost as much time complaining about interference from Albany threatening to derail the data center as they spent talking about the project itself.  Company officials also rarely named the exact bill in question or how it would directly threaten its data center investment.

Stop the Cap! covered the introduction of New York Assembly Bill 2208/Senate Bill 7263 earlier this year.  Introduced by Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester) and Senator Brian X. Foley (D-Blue Point), the companion bills came in response to watching Verizon sell off large segments of its landline network in a dozen states to Frontier Communications.  Both legislators were concerned the deal forced subscribers to deal with a new phone company that earned an “F” rating from the Better Business Bureau, all while personally enriching company executives and shareholders in a tax-free transaction.  They don’t want to see a repeat performance for rural New York residents.

Brodsky and Foley argue that such sales should be in the interests of ratepayers, especially rural customers who have few alternative choices.  Their legislation would compel Verizon to share 40 percent of the proceeds of any sale with their customers — the ones that pay the monthly bills that made Verizon’s network possible.  Alternatively, Verizon could spend an equal amount on verifiable infrastructure improvements and escape writing checks to ratepayers.  In either case, the legislation forces Verizon to spend less on bonus bonanzas for a handful of deal-making executives and more on the customers who have to live with the results.

Verizon lobbyists and company officials have routinely mischaracterized the legislation, claiming it singles out the state’s largest phone company with a “40 percent tax” that “exempts cable companies.”  They have also repeatedly hinted the legislation could force Verizon out of the state.

“That weighs as heavily in our decision as do things like power, taxes, environment,” Verizon spokesman John Bonomo said. “The business climate in the state is as important as some of those other factors.”

Verizon officials have not exactly been subtle about what they want to get the multi-billion dollar project ultimately built:  solid opposition to the two bills, which garnered support from consumer and ratepayer groups and the Communications Workers of America.  The legislation passed the state Assembly but ultimately died in the Senate several weeks ago.  Verizon is obsessed about keeping such bills from being reintroduced.

With billions at stake, the western New York delegation of politicians in Niagara and nearby Erie Counties have been especially supine to Verizon’s arguments.  In particular, some Republicans in the state legislature have made it their mission to see the bill permanently killed.

Unfortunately, the quality of the reporting done by local media about Verizon’s lobbying agenda has been especially underwhelming — frequently shallow, lazy, and downright inaccurate.  The assertions raised about the Brodsky/Foley legislation in area newspapers and television news reports makes one wonder if any of the reporters actually read the bills in question.

Take Bill Wolcott’s piece in the Lockport Union-Sun & Journal.

Wolcott never strays far from Verizon’s talking points, describing the bills as “[containing] conditions for givebacks of 40 percent for telephone providers, but does not do the same with cable TV corporations.”

Wolcott does not bother to accurately depict “givebacks” in terms of what they actually are — refunds to Verizon customers.

Verizon’s red herring complaint of unfair treatment is also repeated by the reporter, who apparently does not realize there are major differences between Time Warner Cable, which controls the overwhelming majority of cable subscribers in western and central New York and Verizon’s telephone operations:

1. Time Warner Cable has no plans to sell off its network to the highest bidder, abandoning rural and suburban areas served today.  Verizon did exactly that in most of the dozen states it left on July 1st;
2. Verizon’s landline network provides universal service to New York telephone customers, for which it receives a substantial subsidy from the Universal Service Fund;
3. Time Warner Cable is not held to universal service standards, something Verizon rarely complains about these days now that the phone company is in the same business as Time Warner through its selectively deployed FiOS network (which incidentally is not available in the Niagara county area where the data center is proposed.)
4. Verizon’s prior landline selloffs have almost always resulted in bankruptcies for the buyers, leaving phone customers uncertain about the level of service they will ultimately receive.

The proposed site for Verizon's data center in Somerset. Lake Ontario is visible in the distance. (Courtesy: WIVB-TV Buffalo)

The Buffalo News reporter did little better, misrepresenting a fundamental part of the bill (underlining ours):

Under the weight of a multibillion- dollar deficit, the State Assembly in the spring passed a bill that would require telephone companies to return 40 percent of their proceeds to the state if they reached a joint venture with another company or sold off some of their properties in New York.

Reporter Teresa Sharp managed to bungle an important fact.  The state of New York would not receive the proceeds — Verizon ratepayers would.

Most television coverage didn’t bother to challenge the inaccurate assertions made by Republican lawmakers or Verizon representatives either.  Talking points were read and reporters simply nodded their heads.

As a public service to the Buffalo-area media, Stop the Cap! presents a primer on the actual language of the legislation Verizon wants to see dead (underlining ours):

         (1) PROVIDES SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO RATEPAYERS.
   49    (2)  EQUITABLY ALLOCATES, WHERE THE COMMISSION HAS RATEMAKING AUTHORI-
   50  TY, THE TOTAL SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM FORECASTED ECONOMIC BENEFITS,  AS
   51  DETERMINED  BY  THE  COMMISSION, OF THE PROPOSED MERGER, ACQUISITION, OR
   52  CONTROL BETWEEN SHAREHOLDERS AND RATEPAYERS.  RATEPAYERS  SHALL  RECEIVE
   53  NOT  LESS  THAN  FORTY  PERCENT OF SUCH BENEFITS; PROVIDED, HOWEVER THAT
   54  REINVESTMENT OF SUCH BENEFITS  IN  A  TELEPHONE  CORPORATION'S  IN-STATE
   55  INFRASTRUCTURE MAY BE DEEMED TO SATISFY SUCH REQUIREMENT.

What this means is that Verizon has two choices if it chooses to throw its rural New York landline customers overboard — before paying enormous cash bonuses to executives and deliver subscribers into the waiting hands of a potentially unstable buyer, up to 40 percent of the proceeds must be reinvested in improving the existing telephone network.  Barring that, the same percentage of proceeds must be returned to ratepayers in the form of refund checks or service credits.

Verizon may have a major problem giving customers their fair share, but they have no problem asking New York taxpayers for generous tax breaks.

Verizon has applied for a 20-year payment-in-lieu-of-taxes, or PILOT agreement, which would deliver substantial property tax savings, not a small matter in a region with the highest property taxes in the country.  It also wants a sales tax exemption on building materials and the equipment to be installed at the data center.  The sales tax break alone is expected to cost state taxpayers up to $330 million in lost tax revenue.

Because Verizon is upset about the legislation, local politicians have done one better expressing outrage that Albany politicians could drive Verizon to pack up its data center and head out of state.

Corwin

Somerset Supervisor Richard Meyers was quoted in Wolcott’s piece suggesting New York residents don’t want any part of a bill that returns money to phone customers if Verizon sells them out.

“I’ll tell you who’s calling the shots in the Senate, and that’s the residents of New York state,” Meyers said. “The average citizen in New York state does not like this bill, and I don’t either. I think it stinks. It’s not a necessary bill, and there’s a lot of time and energy wasted.”

Assemblywoman Jane Corwin, (R-Clarence) characterized the legislation as a union plot, quoted bashing the bills in the Lockport newspaper:

“It’s a very bad bill, being pushed by the Communication Workers of America, the union that represents the workforce at Verizon,” she said. “Of all the people that stand to get hurt, it’s the employees that would get hurt the most, and the investors as well. The whole bill doesn’t make sense.”

“This bill chills any business incentive to invest in New York state … because they stand to lose 40 percent of that investment down the line. The playing field will be made uneven, if we start taking 40 percent of that potential away from Verizon and not from the cable companies and Internet companies.”

She  contends that the CWA was putting pressure on the Assembly. “The shame of it all is that it’s been driven by a special interest group. They are the ones pushing this bill.”

What is especially chilling is that Corwin never bothers to mention concern for the one group affected above all others: Verizon landline customers.  To her, they are incidental.  The CWA?  A “special interest group.”  Verizon?  A source of campaign contributions for her.  This year, she has already picked up some nice change from the folks at Big Red:

Source: New York State Board of Elections

That’s not bad for a New York Assemblywoman serving a rural district whose total campaign take since her first election is just under $125,000.

State senator George Maziarz (R-Newfane) is just as bad.

“It’s a terrible piece of legislation, and I’m doing all I can to make sure it doesn’t pass,” said Maziarz, who heads the Senate’s Energy and Telecommunications Committee.

Verizon also thanks Maziarz for his efforts, for which he has been well-rewarded in the last two election cycles:

Source: New York State Board of Elections

Maziarz

The prospect of new high technology jobs and investment are more than promising to an upstate economy that has suffered difficult economic times for years.  But Verizon’s threats to skip Somerset for its new data center because of “anti-business” hostility ignores the company’s own willingness to abandon its rural customers.  In states where Verizon has sold off landline service — ending the prospects for real improvements in broadband and other modern services — communities like Somerset were the first to go, seen as too small and isolated for Verizon’s urban-based business plans.

The legislation Verizon fears protects New York residents, including those in Niagara County, from deals that enrich a handful of executives and Wall Street bankers while delivering sub-standard service to customers left behind.  Verizon’s record of sell-offs has been a disaster for customers, forced to endure long-term service disruptions, inaccurate bills with unfair charges, low quality broadband, and high prices.

Ironically, Verizon’s fear is totally misplaced, assuming they intend to remain committed to serving customers across the state — from cities as large as New York -and- towns as small as Somerset.  Even using Verizon’s own language, they can avoid the 40% “tax” if they simply keep providing service to their customers.

That’s just one of many facts the media in western New York needs to do a much better job of communicating to their readers and viewers.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Verizon Data Center 10-18-10.flv[/flv]

WIVB and WKBW-TV in Buffalo delivered several one-sided reports about the proposed Verizon Data Center while allow inaccurate information about Assemblyman Brodsky’s proposed bill to go unchallenged.  (8 minutes)