General Electric/Massachusetts Redacted Documents

8/17/2019 General Electric/Massachusetts Redacted Documents

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/general-electricmassachusetts-redacted-documents 1/975

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

To: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: Accepted: Boston Project Call

Start: Sunday, December 13, 2015 12:00:00 PM

End: Sunday, December 13, 2015 1:00:00 PM

Location:



From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

To:

Cc: Cowan, Mo; Daniel Koh; [email protected]; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Tom Glynn; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

Subject: Boston means Innovation, Talent, Inspiration

Date: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 5:54:56 PM

Attachments: Boston means Innovation Talent Leadership.Dec30.2015.pptx

Ann,

On behalf of the Governor’s Office and the Mayor’s Office, attached is the presentation that we had

mentioned that helps to describe the strengths of the Boston area.

We believe it provides some helpful information.

Please let us know if you have any comments and/or would like any further information.

We have appreciated the discussions with you and your team.

Please let us know if we may help with any other questions that you may have.

As you had mentioned, the Governor and the Mayor are both interested in talking with the

Chairman.

Please let us know when next week or soon thereafter this makes sense to happen.

Very best wishes and Happy New Year!

Steven Kadish and Daniel Koh





2

oston has the complete package – the hub of

nnovation, talent and infrastructure – to meet GE’

eeds now and in the future

No other destination can confidently boast of having the

complete package: the hub of innovation, talent and

infrastructure:

• Global draw of international students

• Inspiring millennial to come as students, employees and

residents

• State and local government commitment

• Best higher education institutions in the world

• Highest # of STEM degrees granted in the country

• Most innovative universities

• Significant pipeline of capital for emerging companies

• Top incubator for life science and technology companies

• World-renowned research centers

• Development partnerships focused on growing

• Most advanced academic medical centers in the world

• A global hub for international air travel





4











nfrastructure for Supporting the Startup

ommunity: Starthub Boston

The City of Boston in partnership with IBM, Venture

Café, and Gust provides a one-stop resource forBoston’s startup community

Starthub Boston offers a one-stop resource guide to events, jobs,

investments, courses, workspaces, incubators, among other resources to

support the startup community in Boston and the Greater Boston region.

starthub.org9







A new Kendall Square envisioned in

$1.2b MIT plan

JULY 28, 2015: The plan, six years in the making, calls fo

six new buildings on what is now a string of parking lots

along Main Street. In addition to academic and business

uses, the complex would include apartments for graduastudents and low-income tenants, stores, and a tree-

covered plaza near the Charles River.

Boston, Cambridge are ground zero for life sciences

MARCH 16, 2015: BOSTON-CAMBRIDGE is ground zero

or the development and deployment of many of the

bleeding edge life science discoveries and

echnologies. One corner alone, Vassar and Main

treet in Cambridge, will likely generate 1 to 2 percent

of the future world GDP.

…On a per capita basis, nowhere else comes close in

erms of research grants, patents, and publicationshat drive new gene code, which in turn alters the

evolution of bacteria, plants, animals, and ourselves.

reater Boston - the most innovative area in the world

nd growing…

Vassar and Main: The World's Most Innovative IntersectionNOEMBER 2, 2015: If one had to pick a single corner, anywhere on the planet, as

the most innovative and productive crossroads in history, the intersection of

Vassar Street and Main Street, in the new world's Cambridge, Massachusetts,

would be a leading candidate… 12

The hub of health care

DECEMBER 8, 2015: When it comes to advancing

innovation, the Boston area is one of the world’s most

vital resources for a number of industries, especiallyhealth care.



oston-area academic medical centers are driving

he Boston economy and are a worldwide leader

medical innovation

Coalition of 14 Boston-area teaching

hospitals• Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

• Boston Children’s Hospital

• Boston Medical Center

• Brigham and Women’s Hospital

• Cambridge Health Alliance

• Carney Hospital

• Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

• Faulkner Hospital

• Lahey Clinic Medical Center• Massachusetts Eye and Ear

• Massachusetts General Hospital

• St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center

• Tufts Medical Center

• VA Boston Healthcare System

Healthcare professionals around

the world begin in Boston

#1 in the # of residents and fellows trained, per cap

#3 in the # of primary care doctors trained, per cap

Boston’s academic, professional medical enterprise

and business climate thrives from a culture ofinnovation, commitment to new discovery and

scaling thee innovations to patients across the globe

#1. Massachusetts Gene

Hospital

#6. Brigham and Wome

Hospital

13







16

he world (and the workforce) is experiencing a

ramatic shift in talent supply and talent demand

“There are 80 mill ion Baby Boomers who are going to retire over

the next 5-7 years, and they’re going to be replaced by 40 mill ionGeneration Xers. That’s 2 to 1, so you’d better be developing your

next generation now if you’re going to be ready for that transition.”

- Michael White, Chairman, President, CEO, The Directv Group, Inc

16alent mobility: 2020 and Beyond, PWC, (2012) PwC 15th Annual CEO Survey





Changed Talent Demands Supply:

Are you ready for them? (Massachusetts is)

“The millennial generation, born between 1980 and 2000 are now

entering employment in vast numbers [sic] will shape the world of workfor years to come. Attracting the best of these millennial workers is

critical to the future of your business. Their career aspirations,

attitudes about work, and knowledge of new technologies will define the

culture of the 21st century workplace.”

“Millennials matter because that

are not only different from those

that have gone before, they arealso more numerous than any

since the soon-to-retire Baby

Boomers…By 2020, millennials

will form 50% of the global

workforce.”

illennials at work, Reshaping the Workforce, (2011). PWC18





20

Likewise, millennials have made their impact

on the way Boston governs, educates and

inspires…









Massachusetts has been a national leader in

ecruiting and inspiring millennials

Over 46% of incoming freshman are from outside the state.

Nationally, Massachusetts ranks in the top 5 in both completed mastdegrees and doctorate degrees.

• Due to Boston’s world-class educational offerings and emerging industries, Boston is home to th

highest proportion of young adults of any major city in America. Over 35% of Bostonians are

between the ages of 20-34.

• Recognizing the importance of this demographic, the City of Boston launched a special initiative

called, ONEin3, to support, grow and empower Boston’s young adult population.

• In its 11th year, ONEin3 serves to engage Boston’s young adults through opportunities to particip

city government and civic affairs, facilitate communication between young adults and the city’s

leadership, and support a culture which supports the recruitment and retention of millennials.

“With the highest proportion of young adults out of any major city in the country, Boston is leading th

way in attracting and retaining millennials…Together, using innovation and creative thinking, we are

growing Boston as a sustainable place for young adults to live, work, play, and put down roots.“

Boston Mayor, Marty Walsh

24





oston is an international city that is a great place

or millennials to live, work and be inspired

Mayor Walsh and the City of Boston actively engage millennials through

civic leadership, neighborhood networks and inspirational events such as

the Imagine Boston 2030 citywide planning process and the 2014 World CuViewing Party on City Hall Plaza.

26



.S. News & World Report 2015: Ten Massachuset

chools in the Top 100 National University Ranking

#2

#7

#27

#30

#34

#47

#57

#75

#75

27

#41



Massachusetts has over 114 Colleges and

niversit ies; with over 400,000 students enrolled

28

There are 114 colleges and universities in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts enrolling over

400,000 students seeking bachelor's or associate degrees (Based on National Center for Education

Statistics, 2014).

• There are as many students seeking bachelor's or associate degrees in the Commonwealth as residents in

three of Connecticut’s largest cities (Hartford, Bridgeport and New Haven.)

50 of these colleges and universities are in the greater Boston metropolitan area, which is home t

more than 250,000 students.

In addition to the ten Massachusetts colleges and universities ranked in the top ten, there are a

number of other renowned higher education institutions in the Commonwealth:

American International College

Assumption College

Babson College

Bay Path University

Bentley University

Bridgewater State University

Cambridge College

College of the Holy Cross

Curry College

Emerson College

Emmanuel College

Endicott College

Fitchburg State University

Framingham State University

Lesley University

Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Science

Merrimack College

Mount Holyoke College

Northeastern University Global Network

Salem State University

Simmons College

Smith College

Springfield College

Stonehill College

Suffolk University

University of Massachusetts-Boston

University of Massachusetts-Dartmou

University of Massachusetts-Lowell

Wellesley College

Western New England University

Westfield State University

Williams College

Worcester State University



oston is the center of STEM education: Both the

ational leader in STEM degrees granted and top

anked universit ies in STEM

STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Math)

• MA is #1 nationally in STEM graduate and professional degrees granted per capita

• Two Massachusetts universities rank in the top five best graduate schools for

math: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (#1) and Harvard University (#3)

Science

• MA is #4 nationally in number of Science graduate and professional degrees granted

• Three Massachusetts universities rank in the top 25 of the best schools for computer

science: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (#1) , Harvard University (#18) and

University of Massachusetts Amherst #25).

Engineering

• MA is #5 nationally in number of Engineering graduate and professional degrees granted

• Four Massachusetts universities rank in the top 50 engineering schools : Massachusetts

Institute of Technology (#1) , Harvard University (#20), Boston University (#37) and

Northeastern (#43).

29















36

MAY 6, 2015: Announced plans to

eate a new drug delivery and device

innovation center with over 30

scientists and engineers.

MARCH 2, 2015: Announced t

formation of a new global innova

and R&D center in MA with plan

employ over 400 people.

MAY 19, 2015: Announced the creation of a new $25 millio

five-year research alliance with MIT and is moving its U.S. R

headquarters to MA from its current headquarters in New Y

JULY 30, 2014: Announced an expansion of

its research center with plans to add more

jobs to their existing 180 employees.

JANURY 7,2015: Manufacturer of next-

generation carbon nanotubes, announced the

relocation of its corporate headquarters from

Arizona to MA.

**, **

FEBRUARY, 4, 2014: Opened its new 1.1 million square f

corporate headquarters in Boston’s Seaport District;

bringing all 1,300 of its Massachusetts employees toget

under the same roof by mid-2014.

MARCH 18, 2013: Announced plans to

expand its Waltham research anddevelopment center over the next

two years as the company eliminates

about 1,200 positions at its US

headquarters in Wilmington, Del.

**

*MIT Technology Review: 50 Smartest Companies 2015 or 2014; ** Fortune 500 Company

Many of the world's most leading-edge companies ha

either moved or expanded in MA over the last year



37

DECEMBER 16, 2015: Announced plans to

create a new drug delivery and deviceinnovation center with over 30 scientists

and engineers.

DECEMBER 16, 2015: Unveiled a $600

million, 550,000 square-foot facility that

will campus will be a life sciences gateway ,

employing over 1,000 researchers and staff.

JANUARY 16, 2015: Announced the expansion of their existing loas part of an expanded US headquarters for Shire covering abo

900,000 square feet including the building a new manufacturing

and headquarters for its Human Genetic Therapies.

SEPTEMBER 23, 2015: Announced plans create a new operatio

house its new digital health venture, IBM Watson Health, to Gre

Boston; creating 160,000 square feet of R&D space and hiring least 500 new senior-level researchers and computer scientist

DECEMBER 21, 2015: Announced a new

$335 million joint venture with CRISPR

Therapeutics with plans to employ 40-50

people; operating out of Cambridge, MA.

*

DECEMBER 18, 2015: Announced a $300

million renovation and expansion of its

manufacturing plant in Walpole resulting in

up to 700 research and operations staff.

*MIT Technology Review: 50 Smartest Companies 2015 or 2014; ** Fortune 500 Company

**

Massachusetts is THE DESTINATION of the world's mo

nnovative, dynamic and leading-edge companies





From: Karyn Polito

To: Jay Ash; Steven Kadish

Subject: Connecticut -

Date: Monday, June 01, 2015 9:58:23 PM

There's an article in Hartford Courant about raising taxes- and response from AETNA

Travellers and GE. Would be nice to welcome more insurers to MA!

Capitol Watch

Reports from the Courant's politics staff

Politics Capitol Watch

GE, Aetna, Travelers Issue

Statements Against CT Tax

Package In Rare Move

Weather Alert inTolland, Hartford, New London, New Ha

Middlesex and Fairfield counties.

Sign up today and save up to 83% on a Ha

Courant digital subscri

GOV E-



Sent from my iPhoneKaryn Polito




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: connecting Jen, Lon,Ricks

Date: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 7:28:50 AM

Jen’s #

From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:33 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Subject: Re: MassWorks document

Yes, is my cell or home.

On Dec 7, 2015, at 8:27 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Jen,

Can I call you tonight?

What#?

Thx.

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>

Date: December 7, 2015 at 7:53:45 PM EST

To: "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"

< [email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)"

<[email protected]>

Subject: Re: MassWorks document

We just tried you.

What # can we call?

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 7, 2015, at 7:17 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

<[email protected]> wrote:

We need to talk ASAP. Jen got info from bond counsel that

significantly changes things.



From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 5:56 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Subject: Re: MassWorks document

And all to be reviewed by City too - Jay calling Barros to update him.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 7, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


Attached please find a memo from our

MassWorks director describing some of the

larger projects completed. I need to give this a

closer read tonight, but I think it is at least a

good start. On other items:

- Jennifer is doing a first draft of the 1 –

1½ page document. I will look at

tonight, made comments and send

back to her; we are then discussing at

7am tomorrow and will send to this

group ASAP guessing 8/8:30am.

- Jay and I discussed sending the 1 – ½

pager with two attachments (slightly

different game plan than discussed in

the meeting)

o MassPort site document – I think

I heard them commit to

getting us something mid-

morning tomorrow

o MassWorks document attached

(with edits obviously)

- Do not propose that we send either

o A separate site document from us – I think MassPort really

needs to drive this; obviously

we’ll make edits/additions

o The MOBD memo on other

benefits to GE – these points

are really all captured in the 1-

1/2 pager now



So a good concise package to them by [noon?]

tomorrow

- Cover letter

- Site document

- MassWorks

Any questions let me know.

Mike

Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary for Business Growth

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Executive Office of Housing & Economic

DevelopmentOne Ashburton Place, Room 2101

Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

<Updated - Examples of MassWorks Capabilities 20151207.docx MJK.docx>




To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); ; [email protected]; Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV)

Subject: Did you see Wall St Journal article about GE decision to move?

Date: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:07:41 AM

Immelt talks about support for the Ex-Im Bank as a key factor.



From: John Regan

To: Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: FW: BD"s number

Date: Sunday, May 31, 2015 3:38:13 PM

Brackett Denison's cell number is

And, according to Jim McGaugh, the GE team is really fired up over this

situation...

Please let me know if there is anything I/AIM can do to help...

John



From: Povich, Lon (GOV)

To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: Fw: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015 1:50:57 PM

adding Ricks

________________________________________


Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 1:47 PM

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Cc: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen

(ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn;

Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); ; Polito, Karyn (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: Re: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

If I understand the format of the proposal, I think that there are 3 documents needed:

1. Booklet of properties, including site information

2. Letter outlining the elements of the City-State proposal

3. An appendix type document that outlines the various statutes, application process, how the calculations work.

This document could also include the parking discussion and requirements, as well as a possible comparison of key

state and local tax features comparing MA, CT and NY. This document could work as a PowerPoint.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 29, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

wrote:

>

> Attached please find two documents for our call today at 12pm:

>> - An update memo

> - Jay's chart sent on Friday

>

> Looking forward to speaking then.

>

> Mike

>

> ________________________________________

> From: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)

> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 4:45 PM

> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

> Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore,

Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn;

Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); ; Polito, Karyn (GOV)

> Subject: Re: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

>

> I just sent a calendar invite. Please let me know if there's any issues.

>

> Brianna Wehrs

> Executive Assistant to Governor Charlie Baker

> Office: 617-725-4048

> Cell: 617-483-3397



>

>> On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>

>> Brianna, Lily or Devon--please send out a calendar invite for a call at noon tomorrow/Sunday for the folks

copied on this email.

>>

>> Elizabeth: please invite Jim D if you would like.

>>

>> If you have questions about the call, please contact Sec Ash, Mike Kennealy or me.

>>

>> Thx.

>> Steve

>>

>> Sent from my iPhone

> <Project Plum memo Nov. 29.docx>

> <Project Plum - Chart of Second Offer.docx>



From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

To: jdoolin

Subject: FW: Call to review proposal

Date: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:23:00 PM

Jim, looks like 2 calls – Amy and Brent. Would 5pm work today for you with Amy?

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development

One Ashburton Place, Room 2101

Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:52 PM

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

Also, let me know about a call with Brent and Massport – that discussion is maybe even more

important to understanding how to properly value the offer (assuming the sites work).

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel

General Electric Company

(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:49 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

Ok let me see about 5pm today, thanks.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640



Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





We can be available at 5 today or anytime tomorrow morning.

I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with whoever from the State and

Massport is best positioned to talk about the specifics of the structure/lease terms etc.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:41 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a call and I’ll assemble the

team here?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>;

[email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) < [email protected]>; Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)

<[email protected]>; Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)



<[email protected]>

Subject: Call to review proposal

Mike/John:

Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As I’m sure you expected, we do

need clarification of a few points.

Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of the building development

with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email as the timing of that discussion will need to

be arranged directly with him.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)



Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on this call and does 5pm

today work or tomorrow morning?








Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:41 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal


team here?

Mike Kennealy


The Commonwealth of MassachusettsExecutive Office of Housing & Economic Development


Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






[email protected]



<[email protected]>Subject: Call to review proposal

Mike/John:






Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: [email protected]



John, would 5pm work today for you?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]








Amy EisenstadtState Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:41 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Woodruff, Brent (GE Global

Operations, consultant)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal


team here?

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]



<[email protected]>


Mike/John:






Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: John Barros



John, let me see who we need from the state and their availability.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) <[email protected]>; Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)


<[email protected]>


Mike/John:






Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Kreuter, Erica (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)



FYI

Ricks



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross,

Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin;

Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


FYI – call scheduled today with GE tax, CBRE, Massport, possibly A&F. Ann Klee also emailed and

said she will be presenting the terms of the Boston proposal to Plum senior leadership tomorrow end of day. I will report back to this group after the 5pm. I expect tomorrow may be another round

of discussion/negotiation with them ahead of their presentation tomorrow.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

< [email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>;

Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; Ross, Robert (ANF)

<[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; 'Elizabeth Morse'

<[email protected]>; 'jdoolin' < [email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT) <[email protected]>


Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on this call and does 5pm

today work or tomorrow morning?










Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



team here?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:36 PM


[email protected]



<[email protected]>




Mike/John:




with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email as the timing of that discussion will need to be arranged directly with him.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)

To: "Mike Kennealy"

Subject: FW: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Date: Monday, July 13, 2015 7:20:00 PM

Attachments: Matthew_G_Cribbins.pdf Laurie Bevier bio.docPereira Outside Bio with photo.pdf Cavanaugh bio 2015.docMay Bio 1-2015.doc

Wills Bio July 2015.docCDrumgoole Bio - GE Chief Operating Officer 04102015tr (2).pdf Klee Bio.docx

You’re the one coordinating this. You, me and Nam – anyone else?

From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 4:50 PM


Cc: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)

Subject: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Jay,

I am writing to confirm your meeting at our GE offices in Fairfield, CT on July 30 at 1:30 – 3:30. We

look forward to seeing you then.

Below are the GE folks who’ll be at the meeting, and their bios are also attached.

Laurie Bevier Sr. Human Resources Manager

Eileen Cavanaugh CFO Corporate/Global Operations

Matt Cribbins VP, Investor CommunicationsChris Drumgoole CFO, IT

Ann Klee VP, Global Operations, Environment, Health & Safety

Michelle May Director, Culture Communications

Chris Pereira Chief, Securities & Finance Counsel

Sarah Wills Executive Director, Strategy

We would also request bios be provided for all those who will attend from your side.

The meeting will be held at our GE Guest House, Conference Room “B”, and upon going through

Security and obtaining badges you will be directed to Guest House parking.

If there are any changes, please be sure that you provide to me the names of EVERYONE who will

attend the meeting as I need to clear each individual through GE Security. Please confirm whether

the Governor will attend and, if so, whether you will be sending a security detail in advance of the

visit. We are a secure facility, however, we do understand that you may want to do this.

Don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions.



Have a good weekend,

Karen

Karen Kulish

Executive Assistant to Ann Klee

Global Operations – Environment, Health & Safety

O:

C:


3135 Easton Turnpike

Fairfield, CT 06828

GE Imagination at Work



Matthew G. Cribbins

Vice President

Corporate Investor Communications

Matthew Cribbins has been the vice president of Corporate Investor Communications since January

2014.

Cribbins is a 1998 graduate of GE Capital's Financial Management Program, where he rotated

through multiple finance assignments in GE Capital and GE Company. He spent six years on GE's

Corporate Audit Staff (CAS), becoming an executive audit manager for Commercial Finance. In

2003, he was named chief financial officer (CFO) for GE Energy Financial Services. He was

promoted to CFO, GE Commercial Finance Asia in 2006, based in Tokyo, Japan. In 2008, he became

the CFO of GE Capital Asia. In 2009, he was named the vice president of Financial Planning and

Analysis for GE Capital. Prior to his current role, Cribbins was the vice president of Audit Staff since

January 2011.

Cribbins is a graduate of Holy Cross College with a B.A. in Economics and resides in New Canaan,

CT.



Laurie F. Bevier

Senior Human Resources Leader

GE Corporate

Fairfield, CT

Laurie Bevier is Senior Human Resource Manager for GE Corporate. In this role, she is responsible for developing the

company’s global talent pipeline, functional learning programs, and corporate HR strategy. She also leads the company’s

global leadership development programs.

Prior to her current role, Laurie served as the Organization and Talent Development Leader for GE’s Global Growth and

Operations organization, responsible for developing the global talent pipeline from entry level to executive leadership in

key growth markets. She is also the founder and Senior HR Sponsor for GE’s Corporate Leadership Staff program (CLS),

GE’s premier, leadership acceleration program focused on developing business leadership capabilities and industry

domain expertise for the next generation of GE’s global business leaders. In November of 2012, Laurie’s role expanded

to include responsibility for all global leadership programs across GE.

Laurie began her career with GE Energy in 1992 on GE’s Human Resources Leadership Program (HRLP) with her firstassignment off the program as a Plant HR Generalist. She then became the HR Manger for GE Healthcare Latin America

team. In 1998, Laurie was promoted to Director of HR Development for GE Capital, responsible for building the

functional pipeline and leading organization and staffing activities across the business for GE Capital. In 2002, she was

named as a leader in GE’s Corporate Executive Development team working on executive slates and development

programs across the company, including the creation of GE’s Growth Traits and Employee Engagement initiative. She

became the HR Leader for GE Sensing in May 2005, and assumed additional HR responsibilities for Inspection

Technologies in April 2006 following the merger of these two businesses. Most recently, Laurie served as senior HR

leader for GE Security until the business disposition in March 2010.

Laurie holds a bachelor’s degree in Public Policy Studies from Duke University and a master’s degree in Management

from the Kellogg School at Northwestern University. She and her husband have two children.

T:E:W: www.ge.com


Fairfield, CT, 06828, USA




Christoph A. PereiraChief Corporate, Securities & Finance CounselGeneral Electric Company

Mr. Pereira serves as General Electric Company's Chief Corporate, Securities & Finance Counsel. Heoversees all legal matters for GE and its businesses relating to global securities law, corporategovernance, corporate finance and corporate law. Mr. Pereira joined GE in March of 2007.

From 2004 to 2007, Mr. Pereira served as Vice President of Legal Affairs & Secretary of Exelixis, aNASDAQ-listed biotechnology company based in South San Francisco. He reported to the CEOand was a member of the Company’s executive management committee with responsibility for a wide range of general counsel duties.

Before joining Exelixis, Mr. Pereira practiced law at Sullivan & Cromwell’s New York and Silicon Valley offices from 1998 to 2004. He specialized in mergers and acquisitions, securities law and privateequity.

From 1995 to 1997, Mr. Pereira clerked at the Federal Courts in Austria.

Mr. Pereira received his law degrees from the University of Chicago Law School and the University ofVienna Law School, and is a CFA charterholder.

Mr. Pereira is a frequent speaker on securities, finance and board related matters. He serves on the

NYSE Governance Council, the Securities Regulation Committee of the New York City Bar Association

and the Executive Committee of the Shareholder Relations Society of New York.



EILEEN M. CAVANAUGH

"EILEEN"

CFO – Corporate /Global Operations

GE CorporateFairfield, CT

Eileen was born in Long Island, New York. She attended Fairfield University

and graduated with a B.A. Degree in Economics and Political Science in

1989. After graduation Eileen joined General Electric's Financial

Management Program at Electrical Distribution & Control and had

assignments in Plainville and Puerto Rico. After FMP Eileen held several

finance positions in Puerto Rico, London and Plainville. In 1994 Eileen

joined GE Power Systems in Schenectady, NY as a Program Manager for

Sourcing Finance. In late 1995 Eileen joined Corporate Treasury in Fairfield

as a Project Manager and Analyst. In 1997 Eileen joined Corporate

Financial Planning & Analysis as an Analyst. In 1998 she was appointed

Manager of Financial Planning & Analysis for GE Supply. In 2000 Eileen

rejoined Corporate FP&A as the Senior Income Analyst for Total Company.

In 2004 Eileen was promoted to Manager – Corporate Operations &

Controllership. Eileen and her team support the Corporate Functions and

over 50 residual entities. In 2014 Eileen was named CFO – Corporate and

Global Operations, expanding her responsibilities to include the Global Ops

business. Eileen is a graduate of GE’s Experienced Financial Leadership

Program and has an MBA in International Business from RPI.

Eileen is married to Peter and they have four children – a sixteen year old

son, fourteen year old twin daughters and an eight year old boy. She

enjoys spending her time with her family, friends and traveling.

3135 Easton Turnpike W3E

Fairfield, CT 06431



Michelle MayDirector, Culture CommunicationsGE

Michelle May is the director of culture communications for GE. In this role, she isresponsible for strengthening GE’s culture by engaging employees and leaders aroundGE’s strategy helping them to think and act in new ways, pushing our boundaries to createa simpler, faster GE for our customers, employees and shareholders. Michelle is focusedon creating 360-degree communications programs working together with business,function and region communicators to deliver better outcomes for our customers. Sheleads communications for the Communications & Commercial function and participates in

the Commercial Council supporting its initiatives and best practice sharing. In addition, sheworks with commercial leaders and business communications teams to create a consistentand compelling narrative across GE.

Michelle joined GE in 1995 as communications/health care manager for GE Motors &Industrial Systems after working for a health care system leading public relations,community relations, sales and physician recruiting. She has held a variety ofcommunications, public relations and marketing communications roles across thecompany in several industrial and consumer businesses. In 2007, Michelle was namedcommunications leader for Enterprise Solutions. In December 2009, she transitioned toleading executive communications and public relations for GE Home & BusinessSolutions, IT, GE Advantage, Licensing and Corporate Leadership Staff. In February 2013,

she took on the role of commercial communications for GE Corporate and her roleexpanded in August 2013 to include employee communications for GE.

Michelle received her bachelor of science in business from Indiana University and amaster’s degree in business administration from Krannert School of Management atPurdue University.

Michelle is married and has two children.



Sarah is General Manager, Strategy and Growth, GE Corporate HQ.

In this role, Sarah drives change to fortify the company’s overall competitive advantage

in the marketplace, including identifying disruptive trends, technologies and market

themes, and leading execution of strategic priorities. Sarah also develops and manageskey strategic relationships for GE’s market development. In addition, Sarah leads

FastWorks, GE’s tools, principles and platform for delivering speed and customer

intensity.

Prior to this role, Sarah was Executive Counsel in the Chairman’s Office. Sarah joined GE

in 2007.

Before joining GE, Sarah was Executive Director of a non-profit organization founded by

then-Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. The organization was dedicated to developing

entrepreneurs and start-ups in emerging technologies. Sarah started her career as apolicy advisor in the U.S. Senate in Washington DC.

Sarah is a graduate of Georgetown University Law Center and Illinois Wesleyan

University. She lives in Ridgefield, CT with her husband and twin sons.



Chris DrumgooleChief Operating Officer

Chris Drumgoole is GE’s Chief Operating Officer – IT. In this role, he leads the company’s IT Infrastructure

teams globally, responsible for the successful operation of the IT systems supporting all of GE’s business

units around the world. Additionally he leads GE’s enterprise and industrial cloud strategy, including the

company’s provider and application transition to the cloud as well as the company’s infrastructure

supporting the Industrial Internet and Internet of Things.

Chris has a proven reputation for transforming enterprise IT infrastructure, operating models and

services delivery frameworks.

He joined GE from Verizon Terremark, where he served as Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice

President of Global Operations with responsibilities including data center commissioning and operations,

service delivery, product development, as well as cloud computing operations across the enterprise. He

also has over 15 years of technology and financial services experience, including design and

architecture work for large retail trading platforms, high-traffic consumer Web properties, and

computing/storage grids, having held leadership and technologist positions with the Toronto Dominion

Bank, IBM, MasterCard International, Cable & Wireless, and Exodus/Savvis. Chris studied Information

Systems at Pace University in New York. He and his family currently reside in Connecticut.

About IT at GE

IT is being reimagined around us and forward thinking companies like General Electric (NYSE: GE) are

leaning in. As IT takes an ever greater role in the world, we’re finding ourselves at the center of the show,

not just in computing and communication; but manufacturing, finance, transportation and more. We’re

no longer here to support the strategy of our businesses; today, IT is a catalyst for shaping that strategy.

At GE, our IT team are the integrators of innovation, process and technology and will redefine the way

business is done.



Ann R. Klee

VP Global Operations - Environment, Health & Safety GE, Fairfield, CT

Ann Klee is the Vice President, Global Operations – Environment, Health &Safety at GE.

Prior to joining GE, Ann was a partner and co-chair of the Environmentaland Natural Resources Group of Crowell & Moring LLP. Ann served as theGeneral Counsel of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2004-2006)and Counselor and Special Assistant to the Secretary of the U.S.

Department of the Interior (2001 to 2004). She also spent time on CapitolHill as Chief Counsel to the Senate Committee on Environment and PublicWorks.

She has served on the Board of Trustees of the National Park Foundation,Center for Climate and Energy Strategies, and the Environmental LawInstitute.

Ann received her J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, and her B.A.with High Honors from Swarthmore College.






To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED); Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)


Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:01:00 PM

Attachments: Matthew_G_Cribbins.pdf Laurie Bevier bio.docPereira Outside Bio with photo.pdf Cavanaugh bio 2015.doc

May Bio 1-2015.docWills Bio July 2015.docCDrumgoole Bio - GE Chief Operating Officer 04102015tr (2).pdf Klee Bio.docxCommonwealth of Massachusetts bios.pdf

Everybody travelling to Connecticut tomorrow - please see two emails below with information about

our meeting. I have also attached bios for the GE folks as well as the bios on us that we sent over.

Could folks let me know how they are getting there tomorrow? They wanted to have some idea of

number of cars. Any questions please call my cell phone number below. See you tomorrow.

Thanks,Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: [email protected]

-------- Original message --------From: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/21/2015 3:05 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Jay,

I am writing to reconfirm your meeting with us on Thursday, July 30th from 1:30 – 3:30. The meeting will be held at our GE Guest House, 3135 Easton Turnpike, Fairfield, CT 06828, and upon going through Security and obtaining badges you will be directed to the Guest House and parking. I will be present at the Guest House entry upon the team’s arrival to guide folks to the meeting.

I would also ask that the team contact me when they are approx. 10 mins. out. My cell is 203-598-1348. Please let me know if you have any questions.



Thank you,Karen

Karen Kulish


Global Operations – Environment, Health & SafetyO:

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828







Jay,






Matt Cribbins VP, Investor Communications

Chris Drumgoole CFO, IT









Karen



Karen Kulish



O:

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828




Matthew G. Cribbins

Vice President



2014.








January 2011.


CT.



Laurie F. Bevier


GE Corporate

Fairfield, CT




















T:E: l

W: www.ge.com

















EILEEN M. CAVANAUGH

"EILEEN"

























Fairfield, CT 06431

















intensity.


in 2007.
























About IT at GE






business is done.



Ann R. Klee











COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS


Secretary Jay Ash

Jay Ash serves as the Secretary of Housing and Economic Development for the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts. Secretary Ash is responsible for directing and executing Governor Charlie Baker’s agenda

on housing and community development, job creation, business development, consumer affairs, and

business regulation. He previously served as the city manager in his native Chelsea, a position he held

from 2000 to 2014. In Chelsea, Secretary Ash’s leadership produced both economic expansion and fiscal

stability. He grew the city’s housing stock by over ten percent, expanded its commercial base with twodozen major projects, led all Gateway Cities with a 15% increase in new employment, developed 10 new

parks, secured five credit rating increases, and won two All-America City designations for Chelsea.

Secretary Ash has led statewide initiatives on health insurance, youth violence, transportation

infrastructure and expanded gaming in Massachusetts. He previously served as co-founder and vice-

chair of the Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, as past president of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council,

as a board member of the public policy think tank MassINC, the staff director to the Massachusetts

House Majority Leader, and as an elected trustee of his alma mater, Clark University.

Deputy Secretary Carolyn Kirk

Carolyn A. Kirk joined the Baker-Polito Administration in January of 2015 and serves as the Deputy

Secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development. In this position, Kirk leadsoperational management and shares policy responsibility for the Executive Office of Housing and

Economic Development, the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation, the Department of

Housing and Community Development, the Mass. Office of Business Development and its ancillary

agencies of Mass. Travel and Tourism, the Mass. Marketing Partnership, and the Mass. Office of

International Trade and Investment. In addition, Kirk is responsible for economic planning and growth in

the Maritime economic sector, oversees the MassWorks grant program, and provides direct support to

the Lieutenant Governor’s office on a number of initiatives. Prior to her appointment with the

Baker/Polito administration, in 2007 Kirk was the first woman popularly elected as Mayor of the City of

Gloucester. Kirk went on to win three subsequent general municipal elections, never lost a ward or a

precinct in any of her contests, and served as Mayor for seven years. Kirk’s administration invested

over $100 million in infrastructure thus laying the groundwork for future economic growth. The first-

ever business class hotel is under construction in the city in a long sought after waterfront location

adjacent to downtown. A new $40 million elementary school, the first one to be built since World War

II and which Kirk led the effort on for seven years, is also under construction in the city. Mayor Kirk’s

professional career spans over 25 years. She is a long-time management consultant and her clients have

included many of the Top 20 banks in the US, along with Fortune 500 companies. She and her husband

Bill Kirk have two children, Sam, 17 and Baylee, 14. Both are enrolled in Gloucester Public Schools. A

graduate of the Boston College class of 1984, Mayor Kirk was born and raised in Clinton, NY and moved



to Massachusetts to attend college. She moved to Gloucester in 1988 where she still resides, and was

drawn to the diversity and beauty of the city.

Assistant Secretary Mike Kennealy

Mike Kennealy is the Assistant Secretary for Business Growth for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

in the Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development. Mike joined the Baker-Polito

Administration in March 2015 and brings two decades of experience working with the management

teams of growing companies. He joined Spectrum Equity in 1997 and was a Managing Director of the

firm until early 2013. Founded in 1994 with offices in Boston and San Francisco, Spectrum is a leading

growth private equity firm that provides capital and strategic support to its portfolio companies. During

Mike’s more than 15 years at the firm, Spectrum grew from $360 million in assets under management to

$4.7 billion and invested in nearly 100 high growth information services, digital media, software, and

Internet companies. After retiring from Spectrum, he spent two years as Special Advisor to the Receiver

at Lawrence Public Schools. There he worked with the state-appointed superintendent/receiver on

strategic and financial initiatives to support the turnaround plan and developed and managed

relationships with non-profit partners, philanthropic funders, and the municipal government. Earlier in

his career, Mike was an Associate at TA Associates, a Boston-based private equity firm. Mike, his wife,

and three children live in Lexington, where he has served on the Town’s finance committee and a varietyof non-profit boards. He has been a member of the Board of Trustees of St. John’s Prep in Danvers, MA

since 2009 and is Vice Chairman of the Board. Mike received an AB magna cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa,

with High Honors in Government from Dartmouth College and an MBA from Harvard Business School.

Assistant Secretary Nam Pham

Nam recently joined the Baker-Polito Administration as the Assistant Secretary of Business Development

which oversees the Mass. Office of Business Development, Mass. Office of Travel and Tourism, Mass.

Film Office and Mass. Office of International Trade & Investment. Previously Nam was the CEO of

Vietnamese American Initiative for Development (VietAID). Nam has been a commercial banker for

more than 20 years in both lending and credit for premier community banks and large commercial

banks. From 1994 to 2000 Nam served as Commissioner of Massachusetts Office for Refugees andImmigrants, and Deputy Director of the Massachusetts Office of International Trade & Investment. Nam

earned his BS degree in Business Administration from the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of

Management, and MPA in Political Economy from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.

Regional Director Maria Nigro DiStefano

Maria Nigro DiStefano joined the Baker-Polito Administration in June as the new Northeast Regional

Director for the Massachusetts Office of Business Development (MOBD). MOBD is the state’s one-stop

source for businesses seeking to relocate to Massachusetts or to expand their current operations

here. It provides businesses with information on site locations, workforce availability, funding and

financing and tax incentives. Prior to joining the Administration, she worked for Boston Main Streets as

a Neighborhood Business Manager where she oversaw the development and implementation of

business strategies and provided technical assistance to local Main Streets managers and

volunteers. She graduated cum laude from Salem State College and earned a BA in Political Science &

Sociology, and she lives with her husband and two children in Rockport.

Program and Communications Coordinator Adrian Servetnick

Adrian Servetnick serves as the Program and Communications Coordinator for the Executive Office of

Housing and Economic Development. He is responsible for data analysis and research, as well as

receiving and responding to press inquiries across EOHED. Adrian received a Bachelor of Arts degree in



Political Science from the University of Washington, Seattle, and previously worked as an intern with

Representative Derek Kilmer (D-WA), and with the House Armed Services Committee.

Massachusetts Department of Revenue

Commissioner Mark Nunnelly

Mark Nunnelly serves as Commissioner of the Department of Revenue. He is responsible for overseeing

nearly 2,000 DOR employees in offices across the state who work in tax administration, child support

enforcement and local services for cities and towns. He was appointed on March 30, 2015.

Commissioner Nunnelly, who also serves as Special Advisor to Governor Baker for Technology and

Innovation Competitiveness, brings a track record of building organizations and growing companies in

Massachusetts and across the country. Commissioner Nunnelly joined Bain Capital, one of the world’s

foremost private investment firms, in 1989 as a Managing Director. He held a number of leadership roles

as part of the firm’s growth and global expansion and worked extensively in the business services and

technology industries. Prior to joining Bain Capital, the Commissioner was a Partner at the consulting

firm Bain & Company, working in the US, Asian and European strategy practices. Previously, he worked

at Procter & Gamble in product management. Additionally, Commissioner Nunnelly founded, and had

operating responsibility for, several entrepreneurial ventures. He has been deeply involved in a numberof Massachusetts and national philanthropic efforts, with a particular focus on children and national

service. Commissioner Nunnelly received an MBA with Distinction from Harvard Business School and an

AB from Centre College.




To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected])

Subject: FW: Plum

Date: Monday, November 23, 2015 3:26:00 PM

-----Original Message-----

From: Crystal Torman [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 2:29 PM

To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>

Cc: John Barros <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]>

Subject: Re: Plum

Hi all,

Please find conference call information below:

Dial-in Number:

Meeting ID:

Thanks,

Crystal

Crystal Torman

Senior Advisor to the Chief

Mayor's Office of Economic Development

One City Hall Square, 603

Boston, MA. 02201

O: (617) 635-5708

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


> Will you guys call me or send a call in number? Otherwise I can do it

> tonight or tomorrow am.

>

> Sent from my iPhone

>

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 12:11 PM, John Barros

> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>

> Amy,

>

> Michael and I can make ourselves available tomorrow morning before

> 10:30AM.

>

> Does 9:30AM work for you? If not please suggest a time. Thanks.

>

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


> Tuesday morning. Name a time other than 11.



>

> Sent from my iPad

>

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:24 AM, John Barros

> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>>

> wrote:

>

> Amy,

>

> Michael and I are glad to figure out some time that would work for a call.

> Do you mean a call today when you write "tomorrow morning?"

>

> Johh

>

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>>

> wrote:

> Thanks for the submission last night. I have reviewed it and the

> regulations for the bond program. I have a number of technical questions

> about the program and the proposal. Can we do a call tomorrow morning to

> discuss?

>

> Sent from my iPad

>

>

>

> --

> John Barros

> Chief of Economic Development

> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

> 6th Floor, Room 603

> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

> t: 617-635-5729<tel:617-635-5729>

> http://www.cityofboston.gov<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u> =http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_

> RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHCl

> D6TJ9Utqq8My3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=Yp8Q2FkaDt5VOCPwk7VwK0U6s0RF3A

> nrXGGa6yjQyZM&e=><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__

> www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrD

> QYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=yeZwLS-2ZvzF_yUv

> vwNYojMtP8veZ9qUaI_ookgDCKI&s=cN_PGwsTRHc0I3bRzjbl8vq7xcQF6Aun_D0tRlso

> hXI&e=>

>

> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

> http://imagine.boston.gov/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=

> http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_Ri

> V3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHClD6> TJ9Utqq8My3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=P8mngFNGSQ-ikKcF-ksivLmgchQU2UQ_

> UGwN65Ddnh4&e=><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__im

> agine.boston.gov_&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYW

> SI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=yeZwLS-2ZvzF_yUvvwN

> YojMtP8veZ9qUaI_ookgDCKI&s=DEmswgJBMCfMzTbh8Bm7W3VEnXvZMRclqCoEmU7WvjI

> &e=>

>

>

>

>



>

> --

> John Barros





> t: 617-635-5729

> http://www.cityofboston.gov<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u

> =http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_

> RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHCl

> D6TJ9Utqq8My3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=Yp8Q2FkaDt5VOCPwk7VwK0U6s0RF3A

> nrXGGa6yjQyZM&e=>

>


> http://imagine.boston.gov/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=

> http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_Ri

> V3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHClD6

> TJ9Utqq8My3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=P8mngFNGSQ-ikKcF-ksivLmgchQU2UQ_

> UGwN65Ddnh4&e=>

>

>



From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) on behalf of Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

To: "Morse, Elizabeth"; "Doolin, James"; JPranckevicius; "McDonald, Catherine"

Subject: FW: Plum

Date: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 11:44:00 AM

-----Original Appointment-----From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 11:31 AM

To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Woodruff, Brent @ Atlanta

Peachtree ([email protected])

Subject: Plum

When: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 12:00 PM-1:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: participant code




To: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Presentation on why Boston!


Attachments: MA talent_slides draft1.pptx

Mike: Some quick comments.

Jay, Mike, Carolyn – can you please help out on slide 20?

Thx!

Steve

___________________________

p.13: please add Boston University. I think that they are ranked about the same as Northeastern.

p.18: drop the chart at the bottom as the stats presented could be interpreted in a number of ways.

p.19: are there sources for these statements?

p.20: is slide about who has moved here recently or expanded? That’s how I think it should be

titled. I would add Novartis and its enormous new campus in Cambridge, the new Vertex facilities in

the Seaport along with others who have moved to the Seaport, Siemens has a major expansion in

Walpole, BASF has a major facility/expansion in Worcester. (Mike Kennealy, Jay Ash, Carolyn – can

you please help out here?)

p.21: I would drop the quote from Barry Bluestone.

p.23: Please include Lincoln Labs and add a slide that has some of the centers at Northeastern, BU,

Tufts…especially NU. This may be an additional slide?

p.26: This is interesting! What do you mean when you indicate GE under the innovations?

p.27: Can you provide a statement about destinations to key GE locations in the US

p.28: Please do the same for the innovation centers you mentioned internationally? Are there any

direct flights to South America???

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 3:28 PMTo: ; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Peyser, Jim (EOE); Reale, Ann (EOE); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Conroy, Jim (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV)Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: Presentation on why Boston!

Governor, Lt. Governor and colleagues:



Attached is terrific presentation on Why Boston/The War for Talent as it relates to the Boston

project.

I want to thank those that have provided the source information.

And I want to especially thank our newest member of the Cabinet Relations team – Michael Keller,

along with support from Lily and Adam – to put this presentation together.

Comments, edits, further additions welcome.Please share your thoughts with Michael, Adam, Lily and me.

I will share this now with the folks from the City.

Best,

Steve

From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:47 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: RE: draft for your review

Steve,

Please see attached for your review a draft slide deck for discussions with GE. You will find herein 30

slides (25 or so with real content). I am not 100% sure the length of time that is available but these

are the slides I would present as the most compelling for “why Boston?”

I am around all day if you want to discuss further or have specific edits/suggestions.

Look forward to your feedback.

Thanks,

Michael

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 11:18 AMTo: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: FW: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Impressive!

And very much on the right track.

More ideas:

1. Please take a look at the GE website and other sources to see about themes, and other info

that may be relevant. I am hearing on their ads that GE is your industrial and tech

company. For example, the health group and the energy group (Current) are or will be

locating here. What are the other parts of GE that would find the MA ecosystem attractive?

2. I am hearing that Massachusetts is a leader in robotics and industrial design. Can you find



out more and present how this would be attractive to GE?

3.

There are some more War on Talent slides that Adam would have.

4. Can you check on where the top firms go for their recruitment?

5.

Please develop a list of the various institutes on health, tech, innovation, engineering, etc.

Please check the university websites. Broad, MIT’s Center for the Brain, etc.

Good stuff!I will provide more feedback, but please keep going.

From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:49 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Steve,

Attached are some slides Lily and I put together in the last day or so for your review and comment. I

will look into your questions below re: total # of engineers and scientist going to school in the

Boston area. The slides attached do not have that data but I will dig up tomorrow.

Look forward to your review and guidance,

Michael

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 6:28 PMTo: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: Re: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

If you aren't already, please look at US News and World Report.

Can you also research the # of scientists, engineers who:

-work in the area and a comparative % of the total in the US, World, or whatever makes sense

-were educated in the area

Total # of engineers and scientists going to school in the Boston metro area and how many

graduate each year and what % that may be of the total in the US

More to come!


Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:00 PM

To: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

Subject: Re: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?



Great!!

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 18, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Kelleher, Michael (GOV)


Steve,

Thanks for the additional guidance for the war on talent materials. Lily and I were able

to add a few slides based on previous direction you and Adam provided. We are going

to plow through the list of additional items (as outlined below, assigned to Lily or

myself) and will send you a revised PPT later this evening/first thing tomorrow for your

review and additional edits.

• list of universities in the top 50 - mk

• list of the top colleges - mk

• Top 10 engineering schools - mk

• Top Schools for Innovation in the United States- mk

• Top schools or departments for the sciences - mk

• # of international students going to school in Boston, what specialties - mk

• Top academic medical centers - mk

• List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of how many of

their leaders went to school here – mk

• # of international patients traveling to Boston AMCs to receive care – mk

• Insert language from innovation one pager that HED put together - Lily• List of all the bio tech, IT, pharma, etc firms that have determined to locate, grow

here in the last few years. (Vertex, Shire, Novartis, Pfizer, Siemens...and all the small

firms) - HED

• Locations of all the company's national and international locations with a map

showing flights from Logan - Massport

Thanks,

Michael

-----Original Message-----From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)


To: Weikel, Adam (GOV)

Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)


Adam, Michael, Lily,



Ok for you to add more slides on the war on talent idea. I am remembering a pretty

rich set of them that we cut back on in later versions. More to review/include is better

now.

Include a list of universities in the top 50? Also a list of the top colleges?

Top 10 engineering schools?Top schools for innovation?

Top schools or departments for the sciences?

# of international students going to school in Boston, and if possible in what

specialties? I remember lists that would show this.

Top academic medical centers?

Include information where the top firms go to recruit talent?

List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of how many of their leaders went to school here?

...you get the idea!!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 18, 2015, at 8:29 AM, Weikel, Adam (GOV)


>

> Great!

> I added a few slides overnight and brought Michael into the loop this morning.

> He will keep building and send us something revised this afternoon. He is also able to

help and edit over the weekend.

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 6:46 AM

> To: Weikel, Adam (GOV)

> Subject: Re: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>

> Not a problem!

> We may have more time and I will let you know.

> Please think if this is something to assign to Michael. It may be good to see what he

can do with something like this!!

>




>

>> On Dec 17, 2015, at 9:55 PM, Weikel, Adam (GOV)


>>

>> Thanks Steve. Good to hear we have a little more time.

>>

>> I know this is an important assignment and I feel guilty responding with an excuse.I'm usually all over these kinds of assignments, but we are driving to North Carolina on

Saturday/Sunday for a week with the family.

>> I can find a couple more hours to work on it Friday but I just don't think I can do any

major work by Monday.

>>

>> I will review the info from Sec Ash to see what I can incorporate and I'll try to add a

couple more slides to fill-in the story.

>>

>> I hope this isn't a huge problem.

>> -Adam>>

>>

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

>> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 6:19 PM

>> To: Weikel, Adam (GOV)

>> Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>>

>> Wow!

>> This is terrific!

>>

>> We just got the word that rather than making a decision this week, that they will not

make a decision until mid-January.

>> So both the good and bad news is that we have more time.

>>

>> With this in mind, what further would you do by Monday?

>>


>> From: Weikel, Adam (GOV)


>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>>

>> I'm sorry it is so late.

>> We only had a 20 min break midday and 10 minutes in the afternoon.

>> Attached is what I came up with

>>

>>



>>

>>





>> Subject: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?>>

>> Thx.

>>





Your hub for Top Talent

1



2

Talent Landscape

The world (and the workforce) is changing!

“Let’s face it. There are 80 mill ion Baby Boomers who are going to

retire over the next 5-7 years, and they’re going to be replaced by40 mil lion Generation Xers. That’s 2 to 1, so you’d better be

developing your next generation now if you’re going to be ready

for that transition.”

- Michael White, Chairman, President, CEO, The Directv Group, Inc

2alent mobility: 2020 and Beyond, PWC, (2012) PwC 15th Annual CEO Survey



“Talent management has become a headache for CEOs, with only 30%

saying that they have the talent they need to fulfill their future growth

ambitions.

3

It is hardly surprising, then, that talent

management is right at the top of CEO’s

agendas. Two-thirds say that they plan

to devote more attention to developing

the talent pipeline and the future leaders

of their organization

78% said they expected to see changes

in the way their company manages talentin the near future.”

he War for Talent (2001). McKinsey & Company Inc.

alent Needs?

Massachusetts is positioned to meet them!



GenY is here & GenZ is on their way!

Are you ready for them? (Massachusetts is!)

“The millennial generation is now entering employment in vast

numbers, will shape the world of work for years to come. Attracting thebest of these millennial workers is cr itical to the future of your

business. Their career aspirations, attitudes about work, and

knowledge of new technologies will define the culture of the 21st

century workplace.”

“Millennials matter because that

are not only different from those

that have gone before, they arealso more numerous than any

since the soon-to-retire Baby

Boomers…By 2020, millennials

will form 50% of the global

workforce.”

illennials at work, Reshaping the Workforce, (2011). PWC4



Millennials have made their impact on the way GE

ecruits, inspires and designs products

In order to adjust to the needs of emerging leaders,

companies are moving beyond the traditional, closedmodel of innovation and embracing a new paradigmthat is more collaborative, creative, and focused ondelivering local solutions.

GE Artistry™ Series, GE’s designers focus on the needsof Millennials and their desire to uniquely expressthemselves. Inspired and created by a 27-year-old GEindustrial designer with his own generation in mind.

GE’s new commercials are aimed at showing techminded millennials that they’re the place to work ifyou want to make a real impact on the world. GE’snew television commercials tell the story of Owen, amillennial software developer and his new job at GE.

“A 135+ year old company can on

survive if it is constantly re-engineernot just its product portfolio, but i

culture as well," said General

Electric spokesperson Laura Parede

Millennials comprise a significan

number of first-time homebuyers;

fact, the 25- to 34-year-old age gro

make up the largest proportion o

homebuyers.

“GE..Manufacturer….Yes, GE make

powerful machines but I will be writ

the code that will allow those machi

to share information with each othe

5



6

Likewise, Millennials have made their impact

on the way Boston governs, educates and

inspires…



oston is at the center of the innovation universe

ith all the right ingredients to continue to lead

Boston

• Best universities in the nation

• Strong pipeline of emerging talent• Highly skilled workforce

• Top destination for international students

• Top academic medical centers

• Research centers that attract the brightest minds in the world

• Number #1 in STEM degrees granted, per capita

• Worldwide leader in medical professional training

• World renowned business incubators

• Number 1# U.S. state recepient, per capita, of federal research funding• Long standing government commitment to recruiting and inspring Millenials

• Significant seed money and investment capital availale for funding for new

compaines

• Strong public-private partnerships focused on housing, lab and office space

development

• Recent investment and long-term strategy to expand international air travel

capacity, particularly to Asia



What we have…

A strong and diverse economy in both growing and stable industries

Highly educated and skilled employment base

Unemployment rate that is and has been below the national average

Solid pipeline of students as Massachusetts ranks in the top 5 in Best High Schools in successfullypreparing students for college

World renowned hospitals with two in the top ten 2015-2016 U.S. News and World Reports(Massachusetts General Hospital & Brigham and Women's Hospital)

A fertile ground for recruitment of established medical professionals with six of Boston’s largestprivate employers are teaching hospitals

A federal research funding pipeline second to only California in NIH funding per state, per capita

The brightest Millennial minds are working on life-saving treatments, devices and advancedtechnologies as Massachusetts is home to more than 400 biotechnology and medical devicecompanies

Meeting the needs of your employees

Greater Boston has what your workforce wants!

Location plays a key role in attracting top talent and ours

provides a culture which naturally appeals to the recruitment a

retention of the millennial generation.

8



Massachusetts has been a national leader in

ecruiting and inspiring millennials

Over 46% of incoming freshman are from outside the state

Nationally, Massachusetts ranks in the top 5 in both completed Mastdegrees and Doctorate degrees

• Due to Boston’s world-class educational offerings and emerging industries, Boston is home to th

highest proportion of young adults out of any major city in America with over 35% of Bostonia

between the ages of 20-34.

• Recognizing the importance of this demographic, the City of Boston launched a special initiative

called, ONEin3, in 2004 to support grow and empower Boston’s young adult population.

• In its 11th year ONEin3 serves to engage Boston’s young adults through opportunities to participa

city government and civic affairs, facilitate communication between young adults and the city’s

leadership, and support a culture which naturally appeals to the recruitment and retention of th

millennial generation.

• Leadership understand that it is not only important to draw the brightest minds to the

Commonwealth, but inspire them to stay.

9



he Millennials targeted by Onein3 Boston are the

feblood of the city and the foundation of our futur

32% speak alanguage other

than English at

home

35% of Bostonians are between the

ages of 20-34

They contribute

more than $1

billion to the

Gross CityProduct

They makeup 48% of

the city’s

workforce

94% have a high

school diploma,

48% have abachelor’s

degree or higher

60% were born

outside of MA

26% were born

outside the U.S.



oston is an international city that is a great place

or Millennials to live, work and be inspired!

One example of the result of Boston’s desire to be a popular destination for

Millennials to l ive and work was the decision of former Mayor Menino tobroadcast the 2010 World Cup on City Hall Plaza.

The Boston Globe

GLOBE EDITORIAL

World Cup: Boston shows its international face

June 15, 2010

Walking around downtown, Boston’s international character is barely vi

So Mayor Menino’s plan to broadcast the World Cup finals on City Hall P

— and the explosion of interest in the tournament, replete with costum

and flags, at downtown sports bars — is a welcome expression of the cit

makeup.

The fact that Boston is among the most international of American cities

evident at most times in its public center, amid all the tourist sites, offic

towers, and expense-account steakhouses. But Boston is a diverse city,

even in terms of national origin than race: while about 1 in 6 Massachus

residents is foreign-born, in Boston that number is closer to 1 in 3.

The World Cup gives Boston a chance to show its true face. From Roslin

to Beacon Hill, thousands of people have taken to the streets wearing th

colors of their ethnic homelands and proudly supporting their favored sq

The city’s melting pot will be on even greater display most prominently

11, when a multinational crowd of fans will converge on City Hall. The sc

will be festive and multi-cultural — and truly Bostonian.11



he Milken Institute identified MA as the top tech &

cience state across five major economic factors

12

Based on Five Major Factors

• Human Capital: Who is investing in Human

Capital?

• Risk Capital: Who has been successful in

converting research into products and

services?

• Research and Development Inputs: Which

states have R&D capacity to attract funding

• Technology Concentration: Who has been

successful at turning assets into prosperity?

• Technology and Science Workforce: Where

are the best places to find high-tech talent?



.S. News & World Report : Nine Massachusetts

chools in the Top 100 National University Ranking

#2

#7

#27

#30

#34

#47

#57

#75

#75

13



oston is the center of STEM education: Both the

ational leader in STEM degrees granted and top

anked universit ies in STEM

STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Math)

• MA is #1 nationally in STEM graduate and professional degrees granted per capita

• Two Massachusetts universities rank in the top five best graduate schools for

math: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (#1) and Harvard University (#3)

Science

• MA is #4 nationally in number of Science graduate and professional degrees granted

• Three Massachusetts universities rank in the top 25 of the best schools for computer

science: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (#1) , Harvard University (#18) and

University of Massachusetts Amherst #25).

Engineering

• MA is #5 nationally in number of Engineering graduate and professional degrees granted

• Four Massachusetts universities rank in the top 50 engineering schools : Massachusetts

Institute of Technology (#1) , Harvard University (#20), Boston University (#37) and

Northeastern (#43).

14



hompson Reuters The World's Most Innovative

niversities: Boston has two of the top five schoo

1,222

46.4%

150.3

761

35%

102.5

149

28.9%

53

236

38.1%

53.2

Patents Filed

Patents

Granted

Commercial

Impact Score

Ranking #2 #3 #57 #59

Rankings based in patent volume, patent success, global patents, patent citations, patent citatio

mpact, % of patents cited, patent to article citation impact, industry citation impact, percentage

ndustry collaborative articles and total web of science core collection papers.

15



oston is the third most popular destination for

nternational students

• The number of international students nationwide grew at the fasted rate in 35 years

increasing by 10% over the previous year.

• The surge of international student brought the total number of foreign students in

Boston to 47,895, up from 43,801 the previous year.

• With 55,447, Massachusetts ranks #4 in the number of foreign students

• The majority of international students are from China, followed by India, South Kore

Canada and Saudi Arabia.

• Eight Massachusetts colleges/universities have over 10% of international students

within their student body

• Northeastern (10,559)

• Boston University (7,860)

• Havard University (5,749)

• MIT (4,220)

• Umass Amerst (2,352)

86% or 47,985 attend

a metro-based school

16



17



early 40% of the MA workforce is employed in the

nnovation economy- more than any other state

• Massachusetts added roughly 50,000 new innovation economy jobs since 2006

• Science & Engineering occupations make up 6.5% of all occupations inMassachusetts, a higher percentage than in any other Leading TechnologyStates. This has steadily increased since 2003 in Massachusetts

• During 2011 – 2012, the Commonwealth attracted a higher share of college-educated adults to the state when compared to other LTS. This statistic countersrecent trends which pointed to a ‘brain drain’ of MA

mployment By Industry Sector: MA 2009-2013

MassTech 2014 Innovation Economy Inde18



19

eed and investment capital for

unding for new companies



20

Announced plans to create a new 23,000

square foot drug delivery and device innovation

center in Cambridge with a planned staff of 30

scientists and engineers.

Announced the formation of a new global innovation

and R&D center in Cambridge that began operations at

the end of 2014 with plans to employ over 400 people.

Announced the creation of a $25 million, five-year

research alliance with MIT and is moving its U.S. R&D

headquarters to Cambridge from its currentheadquarters in Westchester County, New York.

Announced expansion of its research centerin Kendall Square with plans to add more

jobs to its 180 employees in Cambridge.

Announced relocation of its

corporate headquarters from

Phoenix, Arizona to Cambridge.

Announced a $335 million joint venture with CRISPR

Therapeutics to develop treatments for blood

disorders, blindness and congenial heart disease with

plans to employ 40-50 people.

Massachusetts is THE destination of the world's most

nnovative, dynamic and leading-edge companies



Massachusetts is a top incubator of cutting edge

fe science and technology companies

Massachusetts has won a third of all U.S. seed stage funding for biotech from 2009 to 2013- mo

than $761 million (2015 MoneyTree Report, a joint study produced by PwC and the National Venture Capita

Association)

Nine of the world’s 10 biggest drug companies have opened offices or research and developme

labs in Massachusetts over the past few years

R&D jobs in the Massachusetts Biotech industry have grown more than 21% over the last few

years, nearly three times the U.S. rateIn the last year, Massachusetts has committed up to $88M in matching funds for the

implementation of public private research projects, under the federal National Network

Manufacturing Innovation advance manufacturing competition.

The bottom line: ”State subsidies for startups helped Massachusetts win more than $76

million in seed stage biotech funding from 2009 to 2013”- Bloomberg Businessweek

“If you can attract small companies that are on the cutting edge of research, th

big companies will follow because they want a front-row seat,”

- Barry Bluestone, Northeastern University economist

21



nfrastructure for Supporting Innovation: Life

cience, engineering and technology incubators

Greater Boston possesses mature and expanding

infrastructure for supporting innovationambridge Innovation Center:

Companies originally

eadquartered at CIC have

reated between $3.5b and $4.3b

n publicly disclosed exit value

ince 2001” cic.us

LabCentral: A Launch Pad

for high potential, highgrowth Life-Science and

Biotech startups. Alumni

companies have attracted

over $100 million in

combined venture funding.

xconomy.com

GreenTown Labs: The Countr

largest cleantech incubator.

Greentown has housed nearl

organizations since 2010.

Together have raised over $2

and employ over 100 people

greentownlabs.org

22



23

Projects included physical electronics, microwav

physics, electromagnetic properties of matter,

and microwave communication principles. The

"Rad Lab" designed almost half of the radar

deployed in World War II, created over 100

different radar systems, and constructed $1.5

billion worth of radar.

The McGovern Institute for Brain Research’s

mission is to understand how the brain works

and to discover new ways to prevent or treat

brain disorders

The Institute’s core facilities include the Martino

Imaging Center, which provides neuroimaging

technologies for human and animal research,

including magnetic resonance imaging,

electroencephalogram and

magnetoencephalography.

nfrastructure for Supporting Innovation: Life

cience, engineering and technology research centers

Highlights of several research centers

current research include:



A new Kendall Square envisioned in

$1.2b MIT plan

JULY 28, 2015: The plan, six years in the making, calls f

six new buildings on what is now a string of parking lotalong Main Street. In addition to academic and busine

uses, the complex would include apartments for gradu

students and low-income tenants, stores, and a tree-

covered plaza near the Charles River.

Boston, Cambridge are ground zero for life sciencesMARCH 16, 2015: BOSTON-CAMBRIDGE is ground zero

or the development and deployment of many of the

bleeding edge life science discoveries and

echnologies. One corner alone, Vassar and Main

treet in Cambridge, will likely generate 1 to 2 percent

of the future world GDP.

…On a per capita basis, nowhere else comes close in

erms of research grants, patents, and publications

hat drive new gene code, which in turn alters the

evolution of bacteria, plants, animals, and ourselves.

endall Square, the most innovative area in the world

nd growing…

Vassar and Main: The World's Most Innovative IntersectionNOEMBER 2, 2015: If one had to pick a single corner, anywhere on the planet, as

the most innovative and productive crossroads in history, the intersection of

Vassar Street and Main Street, in the new world's Cambridge, Massachusetts,

would be a leading candidate…24



Aoston-area academic medical centers are driving

he Boston economy and are a worldwide leader

medical innovation

Coalition of 14 Boston-area teaching

hospitals• Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

• Boston Children’s Hospital

• Boston Medical Center

• Brigham and Women’s Hospital

• Cambridge Health Alliance

• Carney Hospital

• Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

• Faulkner Hospital

• Lahey Clinic Medical Center• Massachusetts Eye and Ear

• Massachusetts General Hospital

• St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center

• Tufts Medical Center

• VA Boston Healthcare System

Healthcare professionals around

the world begin in Boston

#1 in the # of residents and fellow trained, per capi

#3 in the # of primary care doctors trained, per cap

Boston’s academic, professional medical enterprise

and business climate thrives from a culture ofinnovation, commitment to new discovery and

scaling thee innovations to patients across the globe

#1. Massachusetts Gene

Hospital

#6. Brigham and Wome

Hospital

25



AMany of the innovations produced on a the global

cale have been supported by MIT-based research

nd graduates

1905861

MIT

corporated

1892 Invention of the transistor

which became the basis

for the electronic age.:

William Bradford Shockley

received his Ph.D. degree

GE ELECTRONICS

1936

Geophysical

Analysis

Group

founded at

MIT

GE OIL

1954

MIT graduate Yet-Ming Chiang

developed technology with

materials that would allow

batteries to produce more

power and charge more quickly

GE ELECTRONICS

2001

2011

X-Ray Machine: William D. Coolidge

ttended MIT from 1891-1896esearch assistant at MIT from 1899-1905

esearcher at General Electric in 1905

irector of GE research laboratory in 1932

Vice-President of GE in 1940

GE HEALTHCARE

Arthur Thomas Ippen

developed

Hydrodynamics Laboratory

and built up a research

program

GE ENERGY

1971General Electric

Founded

GE joined with MIT to cre

Medical Electronic Devi

Realization Center to drrevolutionary improveme

medical imaging systems

devices that take medic

diagnosis, treatments a

monitoring.

GE HEALTHCARE

Brian Wardle

Director of MIT's Nano-

Engineered Compositeaerospace STructures

Consortium, and is a principal

member of the Technology

Laboratory for Advanced

Materials and Structures

GE AERONAUTICS

1986

26



Note: Includes Seasonal Service, Source: OAG & Innovata Schedules

oston Logan has Nonstop

omestic Service to 75 Destinations

27



Note: Includes Seasonal Service, Source: OAG & Innovata Schedules

oston Logan has Nonstop

nternational Service to 53 Destinations

28



Logan is preparing for more international service and connections to new markets

• International interest and activity continues to grow

– 32% growth in international passengers from 2010 to 2014

• $160 million modernization project underway in Terminal E

– Will upgrade three gates to serve A380s for Emirates, British Airways andLufthansa

• $500 million Terminal E expansion project in development

– Will add 500,000 square feet of terminal space and 5-7 new internationalgates to accommodate increased international flights

– Currently, in permitting phase; construction anticipated 2016-2018

ogan Airport is a crucial and expanding connectio

o the global marketplace

Logan Airport has increased the number of nonstop

nternational markets served by 142% since 2006 rising to markets served in 2015.

29



oston is at the center of the innovation universe

ith all the right ingredients to lead the world

… for we must consider that we shall be as a City upon a

Hill, the eyes of all people are upon us.

John Winthrop's

City upon a Hill

1630

We’re a global leader in health care, biotechnology, high

technology, education, finance, energy efficiency and

advanced manufacturing…

The time has come to write the next chapter in the history

of this great Commonwealth. To build on what makes us

great.

Gov. Charlie Baker’s

Inaugural Speech

2015




To: Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Project Plum -- Boston RFI

Date: Friday, July 24, 2015 9:43:00 AM

Attachments: Boston RFI - Plum (2) (1).docx

Adrian FYI - I will work with Mike on finalizing (this needs work) but

sending to you now in case anything in here that's helpful.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

-----Original Message-----From: Quinlin, Michael (MOTT)

Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 5:46 PM

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Pham, Nam (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Project Plum -- Boston RFI

Hi Mike and Nam,

Here is the completed form. I ended up putting reference links to some of

them in case you have time to dig deeper.

Any questions about the material herein, let me know.

Best,

Mike

________________________________________


Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 5:08 PM

To: Quinlin, Michael (MOTT); Pham, Nam (EOHED)


FYI apparently they want this tomorrow so would be great to get this very

soon so we can review then send.

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place,

Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




From: Quinlin, Michael (MOTT)

Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:22 PM



Hi Mike,

I can work on the remaining info on Thursday morning.

Mike

________________________________________



To: Pham, Nam (EOHED); Quinlin, Michael (MOTT)


Nam, Michael – thank you. Question – how and when can we get the

remaining items filled in?

Best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

From: Pham, Nam (EOHED)


To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Subject: FW: Project Plum -- Boston RFI

Please see the attached.

From: Quinlin, Michael (MOTT)


To: Pham, Nam (EOHED)


Nam,

I’ve added data to this file, you’ll see the new material in red, just so

you can differentiate from the existing info from Monday.

I see the deadline is this afternoon so I’m sending what I have to date.

If the HED crew need me to track down anything else, let me know and I can

do that.

Thanks,

Mike




Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 9:21 PM

To: Quinlin, Michael (MOTT)


Hi Mike,

Can you help with this information? Thanks

Best Regards,

Nam Pham

Assistant Secretary of Business Development & International Trade

Massachusettts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development

10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116

617-352-8435 (Cell)



To: Pham, Nam (EOHED)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)

<[email protected]<mailto:Adrian.Servetnick@MassMail.

State.MA.US>>


Nam, Adrian,

I wanted to send this along and ensure that we are all on the same page

re: “Project Project” –

- Nam’s office is going to fill out the attached RFI so that we

can provide GE with all the data points they are requesting. We should

send this to them ahead of the meeting, say Monday of next week so, Nam,

can MOBD fill this out and send it back to me by end of day Wednesday?

This will also help with . . .

- Adrian is creating the presentation deck that we will use in

the meeting – this will cover a bunch of topics discussed with Jay today

plus, Nam, I will include some content from the EDIP slides. Adrian,

please take a look at their requested data points, and if any of these

prompt ideas for slides or other analysis let’s discuss.

- Adrian - Nam also said that there is a researcher in his office

who has access to all sorts of data; so if any of the interns run into

roadblocks or need help they should reach out to MOBD. Nam, who is the

person you are thinking of?

Any questions please let me know.

Mike



Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762



Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 12:01 PM



FYI

From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [

Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 9:52 AM


Subject: Project Plum -- Boston RFI

Jay,

As promised, I’ve attached a version of the RFI for Boston that includes

the information that we have gathered during our internal due diligence.

Please feel free to amend and supplement as appropriate. I would also be

happy to set up a call with you and your team over the next week to answer

any questions you have and/or discuss the RFI and your presentation at the

end of the month.

Regards,

ann



PROJECT PLUM: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

STATE: Massachusetts

COUNTY: Suffolk County

CITY: Boston

# Criteria Units of Measure Response

1 State/County Data

1.

01

Populati

onNo. of People

4.7 Million in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area as of 2013 (US Census

Bureau)

1.

02

Populati

on

Growth

2005-

2015

% Growth2.6% growth in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area from 2010 to 2013 (US

Census Bureau)

1.

03

Projecte

d

Populati

on

Growth

2016-

2020

% Growth

Suffolk County’s population is projected to increase by 240,000 or 16% between

2010 and 2035

http://suffolkcountyny.gov/Portals/0/planning/CompPlan/vol1/vol1_chpt2.pdf

1.

04

Domesti

c

migratio

n rate

%2.3% migration from Massachusetts to other US states at % of population in 2013

(US Census Bureau)

1.

05

Regional

diversity

rank

RankBoston ranked # 32 in Wallethub's 2015 study of cities with most and least ethno-

racial and linguistic diversity

1.

06

Size of

Labor

force

within

County

% of Population & No. of

People617,466 workforce (June 2014)

1.

07

Real

Estate

Foreclos

ure Rate

2014 HUD rate1 in every 3040. US Labor Statistics

1.

08

Median

Home

Value

(andbasis for

estimate

)

2015 USD$389.8K 2014 median home value in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area

(National Association of Realtors)

1.

09

Median

Rent

(Cost per

Calendar

Month)

2013

$2,400

http://www.zillow.com/suffolk-county-ma/home-values/

1.

1

Median

Househo

ld

2015 USD$83,867 median household income in Massachusetts from 2011-2013 (US Census

Bureau)



Income

1.

11

Increase

in

Househo

ld

Income

2010-

2015

2015 USD

3.7% wage gain, 29th highest in USA

http://www.bls.gov/regions/new-england/news-

release/countyemploymentandwages_massachusetts.htm

1.

12

Per

Capita

Income

2015 USD $61,992. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost

1.

13

Percent

Below

100%

Federal

Poverty

Level

20.8%

20.8%

2009-13

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/25/25025.html

1.

14

Drug

Abuse /

Sale /

Possession

Statistics

(per UCR

program

)

909.8 per 100,000

909.8 per 100,000

http://wwwn.cdc.gov/CommunityHealth/profile/currentprofile/MA/Suffolk/31005

2

1.

15

Top 2

School

Districts

including

State

Rank

District & Rank

Ratings 1-5, with 1 being highest and 5 lowest in terms of proficiency.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/

Revere Level 2

Winthrop Level 2

Chelsea Level 3

Boston Level 4

1.

16

Unemplo

yment

Rate

% & No. of Persons Affected

3.8% unemployment as of April '15 in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area

(Bureau of labor statistics)

4.6% unemployment in Suffolk County, Dec 14

http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/SandP%202015ratingsreport.pd

1.

17

2010-

2015

Increase

in

Employ

ment

% / Total Number of Jobs

3.7% gain between 2nd quarter 2013-14.



1.18

Cost of

Living

Index(closest

urban

area)

US Census BureauCost of living index of 132.5 as of 2010 in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area(US Census Bureau)

1.

19

Commer

cial real

estate

average

cost per

foot

2015 USD

$413 sf in Boston

http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Boston-Massachusetts/market-trends/



1.

2

County

& State:

Standard

& Poor

Bond

Rating

-

MA rated AA+ by S&P in 2014

Boston rated AAA on 4/1/2014

http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/SandP%202015ratingsreport.pd

1.

21

Business

friendlin

ess

ranking(CNBC &

Forbes)

- State ratings: CNBC 2015: 7 | Forbes 2014: 13

1.

22

Name

and # of

Fortune

1000

compani

es in

nearest

metropo

litan

area

Appendix 1 9 in Boston, 25 total in Massachusetts. See Appendix 1.

1.

23

History

of

Natural

Disasters

(Last 10

Years)

NOAA National Centers

for Environmental

Information

https://www.ncdc.noaa.g

ov/billions/events

Dollar Figure is Damage

Amount.

Hurricane Sandy 2012

-$67 billion

Hurricane Irene 2011

-$14 billion

Flooding 2010

-$2 billion

Severe Weather and Flooding 2011

-$3 billion

Tornado 2011

-$50.3 million

Snowstorm October 2011

-$3 billionWinter Snowstorm 2014

-$2 billion

Winter Snowstorm 2015

-$2.5 billion

2 Tax Considerations

2.

01

Total (all

applicabl

e

jurisdicti

ons)millage

rate for

business

real and

personal

property

Number

Boston Tax Rate: Residential is $12.11; Commercial is $29.52 per thousand dollar

value

Chelsea: Residential $14.40; Commercial $33.45

Everett: Residential $14.61; Commercial $39.45Winthrop: Residential $14.34; Commercial $14.34

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/bbj_research_alert/2015/01/massachus

etts-property-tax-rates-in-2015-by-town.html

2.

02

Assessm

ent ratio

for

business

Percentage



real and

personal

property

2.

03

Local

Business

Tax

Yes or No No

2.

04

Local

Personal

Income

Tax

Yes or No No

2.

05

Local

Sales Tax

Rate (if

applicabl

e)

Yes or No No

2.

06

State

personal

Income

Tax

If Yes, % State income tax based on $50K salary: 5.2%

2.

07

State

corporat

e IncomeTax Rank

Rank Ranked # 24 in 2015 by taxfoundation.org

3 Workforce/Talent

3.

01

Average

Age of

Populati

on

Age in YearsAverage age 31 (Suffolk)

(39 in Massachusetts)

3.

02

Populati

on Age

18-45

Percentage of Workforce 79% of workforce is 18+

3.

03

Age 18 &

OverEnrolled

in

College /

Graduat

e School

Percentage of Workforce Couldn’t find any matrix on this question.

3.

04

Percent

of

populati

on with

high

school

degree

or higher

(Includes

Equivale

ncy)

Percentage of Workforce

83.9% Suffolk County 2009-13


90.6% of population in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area with high school

degree or higher

3.

05

Percent

of

populati

on with

bachelor

's degree

or

Percentage of Workforce

40% Bachelors degree or higher 2009-2013


43% of population in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area with bachelors degree

or higher



Higher

3.

06

# of

accredite

d

universit

ies with

campuse

s in

potential

city

26 colleges and universities

in Boston.

Bay State College

Benjamin Franklin Institute of Technology

Berklee College of Music

Boston Architectural College

Boston College

Boston Conservatory of Music

Boston UniversityBunker Hill Community College

Emerson College

Emmanuel College

Fisher College

Harvard University

Laboure College

Massachusetts College of Art and Design

MCPHS University

New England College of Optometry

New England Conservatory ofMusic

New England School of Law

New England School of Photography

Northeastern University

School of the Museum of Fine Arts

Simmons College

Suffolk University

Wentworth Institute of Technology

Wheelock College

University of Massachusetts/ Boston

3.

07

Enrollme

nt Size of

Universit

y orCollege

in above

question

# of Full /Part Time

Students

250,000 college students live in Suffolk County, according to Association of

Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts (AICUM)

4 Quality of Life

4.

01

No. of

Local

Health

Systems

Provider

s (i.e.

Trident,TriHealth

, Kaiser,

etc.)

Massachusetts has 15 major hospital systems, 64 acute hospitals, 55 community

health centers, 9 provider networks, and 169 major medical groups (2013 data)

http://bluecrossmafoundation.org/delivery-system-map-archive/

There are 36 federally funded Health Center organizations in MA serving 659,521

patients, 18.7% of whom are uninsured.

http://www.nachc.com/client/documents/research/maps/MA2015.pdf

4.

02

Primary

Care

Doctor-

to-

Populati

on Ratio

Per 1,000 Residents31.4 for every 1,000 patients.

4.

03

# of

ranked#17

17 nationally or regionally ranked hospitals in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro

area



hospitals

in the

metro

area

Mass General is ranked #1 and Brigham & Women’s ranked #7 in the most recent

US News & World Report rankings.

http://www.usnews.com/info/blogs/press-room/2015/07/21/us-news-releases-

201516-best-hospitals

4.

04

#

Specialty

Health

Care

Facilities(e.g.

Cancer,

NICU)

#17

Here is a list of specialty facilities

http://www.massleague.org/Programs/ClinicalQualityInitiatives/ClinicalResources.

php

4.

05

Major

(Felony)

Crime

Rate

Per 100,000 Residents

343.3 per 100,000 (U.S. average is 294.7)

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Boston-Massachusetts.html

4.

06

Average

annual

high

tempera

ture

Degrees in FAverage high 59 degrees based on weather data collected from 1981 to 2010 by

the NOAA National Climatic Data Center

4.

07

Average

annual

low

tempera

ture

Degrees in FAverage low 44 degrees based on weather data collected from 1981 to 2010 by the

NOAA National Climatic Data Center

4.

08

Average

days

with

rainfall

#Average 127 days based on weather data collected from 1971 to 2000 by the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

4.

09

Gallup

wellbein

g score

- State rank in 2014 Gallup Wellbeing index: 17

4.

1

# of

professio

nal

sports

teams

# 5 major league sports teams in urban area

4.

11

Forbes

coolness

ranking

Rank Ranking: 9

5 Transportation

5.

01

Distance

to

nearest

major

Internati

onal

Airport

Miles 5 miles to Boston Logan International

5.

02

Distance

to

addition

al

airports

(domesti

Miles

55 miles to Worcester Regional Airport

32 miles Lawrence Municipal Airport

66 miles to Gardner Municipal Airport

138 miles to Pittsfield Municipal Airport

22 miles to Laurence G. Hanscom Field

92 miles to Westover Metro Airport



c, civil

aviation,

internati

onal)

5.

03

# of

direct

flights to

domestic

cities

76 domestic cities, non-stop76 direct domestic cities from Boston Logan International

126,593 domestic flights per year.

5.

04

Direct

flights to

Europe

14 cities, 7,556 flights per

year.

AmsterdamDublin

Frankfort

Istanbul

Lisbon

London

Madrid

Munich

Paris

Reykjavik

Rome

Shannon

Terceira, Port.

Zurich

5.

05

Direct

flights to

Latin

America

17 cities, 3,589 flights per

year

Aruba

Barbados

Bermuda

Cancun

Grand Cayman

Mexico City

Nassau

Panama City

Ponta Delgada

Port Au Prince

Providenciales

Puerto Plata, DRPunta Cana, DR

Santiago, DR

Santo Domingo, DR

St. Lucia

St. Maarten

5.

06

Direct

flights to

Asia /

Africa

7 cities and 2,361 flights per

year

Toyko

Tel Aviv

Beijing

Shanghai

Hong Kong

Dubai

Doha

5.

07

Public

transpor

tation

systems

ranking

Rank Ranked # 34 metro area for public transportation by Brookings.com

5.

08

Inrix

traffic

scorecar

d

ranking

Rank Ranked # 9 by Inrix (lower numbers reflect worse traffic commute)



6 Incentives

6.

01

Available

incentive

packages

Please describe



APPENDIX 1 Fortune 1,000 companies in Massachusetts

1.2.2

FleetBoston 80 Boston MA 02110 Boston

Raytheon 82 Lexington MA 02421 Boston

Liberty Mutual Insurance 111 Boston MA 02117 Boston

Gillette 172 Boston MA 02199 Boston

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance 173 Springfield MA 01111 Springfield MA

Staples 192 Framingham MA 01702 Boston

TJX 196 Framingham MA 01701 Boston

Reebok International 515 Stoughton MA 02072 Boston

Boston Scientific 523 Natick MA 01760 Boston

New England Electric System 555 Westborough MA 01582 Boston

Harcourt General 646 Chestnut Hill MA 02467 Boston

Polaroid 694 Cambridge MA 02139 Boston

John Hancock Financial Services 233 Boston MA 02117 Boston

EMC 260 Hopkinton MA 01748 Boston

State Street 345 Boston MA 02110 Boston

Thermo Electron 369 Waltham MA 02254 Boston

BJ’s Wholesale Club 377 Natick MA 01760 Boston

Allmerica Financial 440 Worcester MA 01653 Boston

NSTAR 733 Boston MA 02199 Boston

Teradyne 750 Boston MA 02118 Boston

Cabot 786 Boston MA 02109 Boston

PerkinElmer 798 Wellesley MA 02481 Boston

Bradlees 859 Braintree MA 02184 Boston

Analog Devices 874 Norwood MA 02062 Boston



Stone & Webster 983 Boston MA 02210 Boston




To: Durante, George (EOHED)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Project Plum

Date: Saturday, December 05, 2015 4:18:00 PM

George

A late, last minute request. Erica has not confirmed her ability to participate in a call in about 15

minutes. If you get this and are able, could you dial in? It should be about a half hour or so, I

suspect. Many apologies for the last minute notice on a Saturday.

Ricks


Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2015 8:07 AM

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

Subject: RE: Project Plum

It looks like we have folks available for a call at 4:30pm today. Please use this number:

access code .

Looking forward to speaking then and discussing ideas from the group.

Mike

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PMTo: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected]); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Subject: Project Plum

I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this weekend and into Monday to

advance the Project Plum work. As you know, we presented a proposal to Plum that relies heavily

on I-Cubed and Massworks funding, and we also suggested some sites. The good news from today

is that we are very much in the game here, and the company will be visiting Boston on Wednesday

to look at sites, with a significant internal meeting in about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what

involvement they want from us on Wednesday, possibly none though of course we are pushing).

As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission at this point is to make this

proposed infrastructure funding more tangible for them – how could these dollars be used to the

direct benefit of their project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80 MM I-

Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax incentives; they know how to value the $20 MM



but are unsure how to value the $80 MM, and we need this proposal to look a lot closer to $100

MM than $20 MM, especially in the face of competition offering incentives that are much easier to

value.

To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to the company by noon on

Monday:

1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and MassWorks projects. I have attached

a draft memo from Erica and the language that Jen provided for our letter. What other

examples can we provide, and in what level of detail, specifically ones that are as analogous

as possible to their project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be deployed at the MCCA and

Massport sites. I have attached information about those sites. No site or building has been

ruled out, but initial guidance from Plum’s location advisor was to focus on the sites vs. the

buildings.

Could I ask the following:

1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above and develop specific ideas.

2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from your organization that could help in

this effort.

3. Can we all get on a call tomorrow at 4:30pm to discuss.

On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the deliverables should look like and

discuss specific examples. We can then decide what other needs we may have, and plan the work

over Sunday and into Monday.

I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with questions. Please respond as soon as

you can with respect to your availability tomorrow at 4:30pm.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED); Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)

Cc: McMorrow, Paul (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Project Plum: MA Thank you

Date: Friday, August 07, 2015 2:36:08 PM

Attachments: Scanned from a Xerox Multifunction Printer.pdf

FYI - nice note from the folks we met last week. We have a letter and

materials going out to them today to say thanks and to answer some of

their questions. Will keep you all posted.

Best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)

Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 4:12 PM


Subject: Project Plum: MA Thank you

Mike,

Please find attached a thank you letter from Ann Klee to the team. Thank

you for your assistance in forwarding to the others.

Karen Kulish


Global Operations - Environment, Health & Safety



Fairfield, CT 06828







To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected])

Subject: FW: Project Plum

Date: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:04:00 PM

Attachments: Ground Lease Process Memo JPD updates 12 7 15.doc

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Doolin, James [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 11:46 AM


Cc: Morse, Elizabeth <[email protected]>; McDonald, Catherine

<[email protected]>; DeTour, Michele <[email protected]>


Mike – here’s one memo that incorporates our ground lease statement and our procurement

statement. Jim

James P. Doolin

Chief Development Officer

Massachusetts Port Authority

O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 10:25 AMTo: Doolin, James

Subject: Re: Project Plum

Jim can I get this incorporated in the memo sent earlier.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 7, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Doolin, James <[email protected]> wrote:

Mike – here’s our language on the ground lease as requested. Jim



James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:19 AMTo: Doolin, JamesSubject: RE: Project Plum

Will come back to you likely later today on this Jim. More urgent is the lease language

we talked about – coming over this morning?

Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary for Business GrowthThe Commonwealth of Massachusetts



Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 9:44 AMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>


Mike – yes we do have folks that can do some graphic layout type production. We can

look at once we have the pieces to see if possible (I assume its close of business

Monday?) Jim

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2015 8:17 PMTo: Doolin, JamesSubject: Fwd: Project Plum



Jim, suggestion from Sec Lepore that Massport has a marketing dept that could help

package/present whatever we come up with - thoughts?

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>


To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)"

<[email protected]>, "Doolin, James"

<[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)"

<[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>

Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore,

Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>


Same number tomorrow please 10am Jay, Mike, Ricks, Erica, others if

interested and available. Whole group to reconvene when Jen has

feedback from outside counsel.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:08 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


It looks like we have folks available for a call at 4:30pm today.Please use this number:

access code .


Mike




I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a

team this weekend and into Monday to advance the Project

Plum work. As you know, we presented a proposal to Plum

that relies heavily on I-Cubed and Massworks funding, and

we also suggested some sites. The good news from today is

that we are very much in the game here, and the company

will be visiting Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a

significant internal meeting in about 10 days. (Note – not

clear yet what involvement they want from us on

Wednesday, possibly none though of course we are

pushing).

As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our

mission at this point is to make this proposed infrastructure

funding more tangible for them – how could these dollars

be used to the direct benefit of their project? Said

differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80 MM I-

Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax

incentives; they know how to value the $20 MM but are

unsure how to value the $80 MM, and we need this

proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM,

especially in the face of competition offering incentives that

are much easier to value.

To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to

send to the company by noon on Monday:

1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed

and MassWorks projects. I have attached a draft

memo from Erica and the language that Jen

provided for our letter. What other examples can

we provide, and in what level of detail, specifically

ones that are as analogous as possible to their

project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks

could be deployed at the MCCA and Massport sites.I have attached information about those sites. No

site or building has been ruled out, but initial

guidance from Plum’s location advisor was to focus

on the sites vs. the buildings.


1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2



above and develop specific ideas.

2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others

from your organization that could help in this effort.

3. Can we all get on a call tomorrow at 4:30pm to

discuss.

On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think

the deliverables should look like and discuss specific

examples. We can then decide what other needs we may

have, and plan the work over Sunday and into Monday.

I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with

questions. Please respond as soon as you can with respect

to your availability tomorrow at 4:30pm.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

<ground lease terms statement.docx>



TO: Elizabeth Morse, Chief of Staff

FROM: James Doolin, Chief Development Officer, Catherine McDonald, Acting Chief

Legal Counsel and Michele DeTour, Deputy Chief Legal Counsel

SUBJECT: Massport’s Ground Lease Process Regarding Massport Parcels A-2, H, D-2 and

D-3 and WTC Avenue Parcel

DATE: December 7, 2015

Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) Ground Lease

As part of its mission to be an economic engine for the Commonwealth and New England and to

further a shared civic vision of creating a new and vibrant part of the City of Boston, the

Massport property within the South Boston Waterfront has been developed to include a mix of

commercial, residential and maritime related uses. Massport has made significant investments in

roadways, utilities infrastructure and public open space.

Within the commercial / residential area clustered around Seaport Boulevard, Congress Street,

Summer Street and D Street, Fidelity, John Hancock and a host of other major companies have

made major investments and have a strong corporate employment presence. In addition, two firstclass apartment buildings have been built with additional units on the near term horizon. Two 4-

star hotels are immediately available in the Seaport Hotel and the Boston Waterfront

Renaissance Hotel. There is also a destination restaurant cluster centered around Liberty Wharf.

These projects which are all on Massport land and many others in the South Boston Waterfront

have established the area nationally as a highly desirable location for real estate investment.

On Massport property projects have been undertaken by private third party developers / investors

under long term ground leases. Long term ground leases present the opportunity to be creative in

how the ground rent terms for rent are structured over time. In order to stimulate project

execution and based upon the asset type and the realities of the market conditions, Massport has previously structured rent payments for certain projects that delay or reduce payments in the

early years of the lease while still achieving fair market value for land through a combination of

fixed rent and participating rent. For Project Plum, Massport would expect to work closely and

creatively with the development entity to establish terms that facilitate project execution while

meeting fair market value for the long term ground lease.



2

In response to a request from Michael Kennealy to prepare a memorandum similar to

MassDOT’s District Six Headquarters Memo dated November 30, 2015, we have prepared thefollowing summary of pertinent issues related to Massport’s ground leasing process for internal

discussion (and if desired to form the basis of the memorandum to Michael Kennealy).

• Massport’s long-standing practice, as a public agency, is to solicit bids for thedevelopment and direct long term lease of its property, although not specifically required

by statute to engage in a competitive bid process. (When Massport did not engage in a

competitive bid process for a Seaport development parcel, the State Auditor stated in a2002 Independent State Auditors Report that “there are no circumstances that we can

envision where a public agency such as Massport, could justify awarding a no-bid real

estate development contract”.)

• At a minimum, Massport would, in accordance with its Trust Agreement (furtherdescribed below) and its public mission, determine the property’s fair market value. A

fair market value determination may not relieve Massport of a competitive bid obligationin the eyes of independent state oversight agencies and/or other interested parties. (A fairmarket value determination did not persuade the State Auditor in 2002.)

• Massport’s Enabling Act, Chapter 456 of the Acts of 1956, as amended, provides that

Massport may lease its Port Properties (Parcels A-2, H, D-2 and D-3 and WTC Avenue

Parcel are considered Port Properties under the Enabling Act) if Massport’s Board

determines that the property is no longer needed for its original maritime/industrial use.

• Massport’s Trust Agreement dated as of August 1, 1978, as supplemented and amended, between the Authority and U.S. Bank, National Association, as trustee, governs

Massport’s relationship with its bondholders and generally provides that Massport willnot enter into any contract or take any action that might impair or diminish the rights ofthe trustee or the bondholders. This section may need to be further reviewed based on the

specific terms of the proposed transaction, however, evidence of fair market value is

generally sufficient to satisfy this constraint.

• In order to comply with the grant assurances included in each federal grant agreement

under the Airport Improvement Program, Massport requires its tenants to limit the height

of structures constructed on Massportproperty so as not to constitute an obstruction to airnavigation under 14 CFR Part 77. (See Grant Assurance No. 21 – Compatible Land Use.)

•

Any long term lease is subject to the approval of Massport’s board.




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Subject: FW: Proposal from Boston


Attachments: Project Plum Dec 8.pdf Massport 12 8 15 Deck Final.pdf

FYI, and many thanks to all!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Ann R. Klee 'Cowan, Mo'

<[email protected]>

Cc: 'John Barros' <[email protected]>

Subject: Proposal from Boston

Ann, Mo,

Please see the attached documents – we look forward to discussing.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



1

December 8, 2015

Ann R. Klee

Vice President

Corporate Environment, Health and Safety



Fairfield, CT 06828

Dear Ms. Klee,

We are pleased to provide some additional thoughts on a partnership between General Electric,

the Commonwealth and the City. We again have endeavored to listen to your feedback and

accordingly have strengthened our proposal and added some additional elements:

1. Public support for your headquarters through a partnership with Massport: Our

December 1 proposal contemplated up to $80 million in public infrastructure improvements

financed by the state. We now propose that Massport be your development partner,

construct a building on a Massport site and, by discounting the construction cost by $80M,

arrive at substantial lease savings for GE. Massport also proposes to build a parkingstructure nearby, allowing GE the benefit of proximate parking. Further, Massport has

previously structured lease payments for certain projects that delay or reduce payments in

the early years of the lease while still achieving fair market value overall, and they expect to

work closely and creatively with you.

Massport has a mission to promote economic development and a record of success in

developing its extensive real estate portfolio (including in the Seaport District). Massport

has great experience working with City and state officials, federal regulators and private

parties and in dealing with security and public safety concerns. Attached please see the

specific sites and other information related to this Massport opportunity.

2. Corporate Jets and Helicopters: We understand the importance of immediate access to

your corporate fleet. We now propose:

Parking of one executive jet and one helicopter at Logan Airport for 24/7 access.

A hanger for executive aircraft at Hanscom Airport, with on-call service to Logan.

State financed construction of a new public helipad in Boston (one-site has FAA

approval; other site options can be reviewed).



2

3. Innovation Center – a premier talent pipeline: As presented on December 1, we propose

a $5M investment to launch an Innovation Center in your building or another location with

MassChallenge, an internationally renowned start-up accelerator. To advance this potential,

we propose to invite participation from Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, the UMass schools and

others, bringing together the best of our public and private universities and research

institutions. This partnership would allow you to collaborate with, and recruit, the world’smost talented students, engineers, scientists, programmers, MDs, and entrepreneurs.

4. Local property tax incentive: Same $20M as proposed before.

5. Coordinated Permitting: Coordinated and streamlined permitting process by City and state

authorities and a permitting Ombudsman to assist in addressing any permitting issues. We

will dedicate staff in the office of the Secretary of Administration and Finance, supported by

the Governor’s Office. A similar dedication of staff will be provided by the Boston

Redevelopment Authority, supported by the Mayor’s Office.

6. GE’s Current: We are prepared to support the launch of your Current business here in

Boston with a grant of $5-10M over two years.

7. Improvements to Local Transportation:

Investment of public funds to purchase new vehicles and provide additional service to

the GE headquarters site as part of the Seaport Transportation Management Association

Up to $50 million of improvements through our I-Cubed program, including streetscapes,

water taxi, parking, utilities, public safety features and other public infrastructure

Up to $125 million in City and state financed improvements to streets, transit, bridges

and bikeways.

8. Workforce Training Fund: Same $1M as proposed before.

9. Concierge and housing service: As discussed in our December 1 proposal, a Concierge

team will be dedicated to easing the transition for GE and your employees, including home

buying assistance with the Boston Home Center and MassHousing.

We believe we are presenting to you the premier ecosystem to grow your business, an

exceptional place to live, substantial public investment in your project, and other amenities that

will make it as easy as possible for GE and your employees to move to and live in Boston. We

look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Charles D. Baker Martin J. Walsh

Governor Mayor of Boston



MassportEconomic Development Partner

December 8, 2015

DRAFT 12/8/15 12:45 pm



Massport Overview

• Quasi-public authority – “a body corporate and politic”

• Governed by a seven member board

• Financially self-sufficient – can “fix, revise, charge andcollect tolls, rates, fees, rentals and charges”

• Operates three business lines• Aviation

• Maritime Operations

• Real Estate

• FY16 budget is $667 million• Logan Airport is 85% of total operating budget

• Maritime business is 10%, all other is 5%

• Massport bond ratings• Moody’s Aa2, S&P AA, Fitch AA

2



Why the Massachusetts Port Authority can assist

1. Massport has a proven track record as a successful

development partner2. Massport has Six development ready parcels in

Boston’s Seaport – “Innovation District”

3. Massport can execute flexible, creative, anddeliverable development opportunities to suit

commercial tenant needs expeditiously

3



uccessful History of Innovative Developments

• Massport is a Proven Development Partner• Since 1996, 5 million square feet of new mixed use, commercial, and

hotel developments were executed by Massport in South Boston• These developments have created $2.4 billion new value for the

Commonwealth and the City of Boston• 11,660 jobs in the Seaport Innovation District have been added as a

result of Massport’s Real Estate development initiatives

• Massport produces these positive results by working withdevelopers to:

• Execute creative and strategic “win- win” Long Term Ground Leases that afinanceable

• A proven track record and ability to Execute a One-Stop Shopping

approach to development• Streamlined Permitting

• 7 million square feet of mixed-use development master plan successfullypermitted for Commonwealth Flats

• Expedited / coordinated review process by the Commonwealth and City ofBoston managed by Massport

4



uccessful History of Innovative Developments in Southoston

1. Fidelity - World Trade Center (1996)

2. Fidelity - Seaport Hotel (1998)

3. Fidelity - East Office Building (2000)

4. Fidelity - West Office Building (2002)

5. John Hancock U.S. Corporate Headquarters (2003

6. Park Lane Seaport Apartments (2006)

7. Boston Waterfront Renaissance Hotel (2008)

8. Liberty Wharf (2011)

9. Waterside Place (2014)

5



Seaport WorldTrade Center

Boston

FidelityInvestments

6



Six pad ready Parcels owned by Massport available inthe Seaport / Innovation District

1. World Trade Center Parcel (WTC Avenue)

2. Parcel D-3

3. Summer Street Parcel

4. Parcel D-2

5. Parcel A-26. Parcel H

7



8

Location Overview of 6 pad ready parcels in the South

Boston Innovation District



9

World Trade Center Parcel • Development site

adjacent to the

Massport’s 1,500 spa

Air Rights Garage (un

design)

• Able to achieve 150,0to 200,000 sf of offic

development

• Parking provided in

adjacent Massport Ai

Rights Garage

• Prominent views ofdowntown

• Adjacent to MBTA Silv

Line station

Air Rights

Garage Site Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Parcel

A-2



Parcel D-3

• 2.8 acre parcel

• Frontage on Summer

D Streets

• Master plan program

allocation of 500,000

650,000 sf

• Suitable for commerc

office use within mixe

use

• Directly across from t

BCEC/Westin Hotel

• Potential for on-site

structured parking



11

3 acre parcel

Summer Street

Frontage

Site capacity of 400,000

sf

Potential for on-site

structured parking

Opportunity to expand

site through acquisition

of U.S. Army property

South BostonTransportation Plan

recommended

extension of E Street to

Summer Street

Summer Street Parce

Summer Street

Parcel D-3

E

S t r e e t



Parcel D-2• 2.1 acre parcel

• Frontage on Summer,

Street and World Trad

Center Avenue

• Subject of RFQ which

issued by Massport onNov. 9 for hotel/mixed

development

• Requirement for mini

250 room hotel

• Opportunity for well i

excess of 150,000 sf ooffice


adjacent Massport Air

Rights Garage (under

design)

Air

Rights

Garage

Site



Parcel A-2

13

• 1.2-acre parcel

• Frontage on Congress

Street and World Tra

Center Avenue


allocation up to 450,0

sf, suitable for

commercial office us

• Adjacent MBTA Silver

WTC Station, with

potential direct

pedestrian connectio

• Available parking in

planned Air Rights Ga

(adjacent with poten

direct pedestrian

connection)

Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Air Rights

Garage Site



Parcel H

14

1.8 acre parcel

Frontage on Congress

Street

Master plan program


sf, suitable for

commercial office use


structured parking

(either below or above

ground)

Adjacent to existingSilver Line Station

Potential air rights

overbuild of Silver Line

Way and T Station

Air Rights

Garage Site

Parcel

A-2



Flexible, creative, deliverable, and financeabledevelopment capabilities

• “Turnkey” development capabilities

• Using a selected private developer,• or through Massport itself

• Tenant Improvements to suit occupiers’ needs included

• Construction costs for parking options or otherinfrastructure needs are available

• Flexible space lease terms are negotiable to produce lowerinitial occupancy costs

• Attractive pre-packaged lease terms are available in partnershipwith Commonwealth / City investments opportunities

• Early lease periods are discountable with gradual adjustments toover a longer lease period

15



Massport Aviation – Logan International Airport

• Minutes from South Boston Innovation District

• Provides access for private aircraft 24/7, including overnight

parking• General Aviation activities operated by Signature Flight

Support (Fixed Based Operator)

• Automobile parking available at Signature

• Helicopter pad and parking at Signature

16



Massport Aviation – Hanscom Airfield

• 13.5 nautical miles from Logan Airport

• Easy, efficient access to and from Downtown

• Readily available sites for permanent hangars for aircraftfleets

• Full services available

• Existing and new construction options

• Will accommodate multiple planes and helicopters

• Home to multiple Fortune 500 corporate fleets

17



oston Logan Has Nonstop International Service to 53 Destinatio

• 13.5 nautical miles from Logan Airport• Easy, efficient access to and from Downtown

• Readily available sites for permanent hangars foraircraft fleets




18Note: Includes Seasonal Service, Source: OAG & Innovata Schedules



Boston Logan Has Nonstop Domestic Service to 75 Destinations




Massport Air Cargo

• Air cargo is reported on a calendar year basis by the carriersthemselves

• The YTD December 2014 numbers reflect the full year’s total• Total Cargo & Mail: 585,459,955 lbs.

• Express (FedEX, UPS etc): 334,315,119 lbs.

• Freight (“belly of plane”): 203,877,671 lbs.

• October 2015 YTD is nearly the same (+0.3%) as Calendar2014 October YTD

20



Massport’s Port of Boston

• Multiple public and private maritime assets that provide New England businesseswith connections to the global marketplace.

• Weekly service to North Europe/Latin America, the Mediterranean, and Asia; easyaccess to Logan Airport and interstate highway system.

• Home to New England’s only full service container terminal; serves over 1,600businesses that use it to export and import goods.

• Annual economic impact of $4.6 billion. Record-breaking volume in FY2015 with221,000 twenty foot equivalent units (TEUs) and 13% growth year to date in FY2016.

• Working with state/federal officials to dredge Boston Harbor to prepare for largercontainer vessels; estimated to double volumes.

21



Massachusetts:An Innovation Capital

22



23



24



25





Appendix

27



Governing Documents

1956 Enabling Act• Quasi-public authority – “a body corporate and politic”• May only borrow for capital construction, not working capital

• Maintain, repair and operate, or extend, enlarge and improve itsbusiness facilities

• Construct or acquire additional facilities

1978 Trust Agreement, 1999 PFC Trust Agreement, and 2011 CFCTrust Agreement

• Massport’s contract with bondholders, includes specific covenants• Defines use of Massport’s generated revenues (funds flow

requirements)• Federal tax regulations restricts the use of bond proceeds

Current Federal Aviation Law• Restricts the use of aviation revenue (revenue diversion)• Regulates the calculation of aeronautical rates and charges• Regulates the collection and use of Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs)

28




To: Milano, Peter (MOBD)

Subject: FW: Responding to the RFI

Date: Thursday, September 03, 2015 3:02:00 PM

Attachments: Boston RFI Response - 2015.pdf

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)


To:


Subject: Responding to the RFI

Karen-

I hope this finds you well. Please find attached the RFI requested for Metro-Boston/ Massachusetts.

If you have any questions or follow-up requests, please contact Mike Kennealy, CC’d here.Phone: 1-617-788-3640

Mobile: 1-617-634-4762

All the best, and many thanks-

Adrian Servetnick

Program and Communications Coordinator

Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development

e: [email protected]

p: 617-788-3615

t: @MassEOHED



PROJECT PLUM: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

STATE: Massachusetts

COUNTY: Suffolk County

CITY: Boston

# Criteria Units of Measure Response

1 State/County Data

1.01 Population No. of People

4.7 Million in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area as of 2013 (US Census

Bureau)

State population: 6.745 million (2014)

1.02

Population

Growth 2005-

2015

% Growth

2.6% growth in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area from 2010 to 2013 (US

Census Bureau)

State population growth: 3% (2013 to 2014)

1.03ProjectedPopulation

Growth 2016-

2020

% Growth

Suffolk County’s population is projected to increase by 240,000 or 16% between

2010 and 2035

http://suffolkcountyny.gov/Portals/0/planning/CompPlan/vol1/vol1_chpt2.pdf

Greater Boston is expected to see a 2.7% increase in population between 2015

and 2020

http://pep.donahue-

institute.org/UMDI_LongTermPopulationProjectionsReport_2013.11.pdf

1.04Domestic

migration rate%

2.3% migration from Massachusetts to other US states at % of population in 2013

(US Census Bureau)

1.05Regional

diversity rankRank

Boston ranked # 32 in Wallethub's 2015 study of cities with most and least

ethno-racial and linguistic diversity

1.06

Size of Labor

force within

County

% of Population &

No. of People621,794 workforce in Suffolk County, 81% of county population (June 2014)

1.07

Real Estate

Foreclosure

Rate

2014 HUD rate

Massachusetts: 1 in every 1,624

Suffolk County: 1 in every 3,281

http://www.realtytrac.com/statsandtrends/foreclosuretrends/ma

1.08

Median Home

Value (and

basis for

estimate)

2015 USD$389.8K 2014 median home value in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area

(National Association of Realtors)

1.09

Median Rent

(Cost per

Calendar

Month)

2013

Suffolk County: $2,400

http://www.zillow.com/suffolk-county-ma/home-values/

1.1

Median

Household

Income

2015 USD$83,867 median household income in Massachusetts from 2011-2013 (US Census

Bureau)

1.11

Increase in

Household

Income 2010-

2015

2015 USD

Massachusetts: 3.7% wage gain, 29th highest in USA



1.12Per Capita

Income2015 USD

Massachusetts Per Capita: $35.763

Massachusetts Per Household: $61,992.

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost



1.13

Percent Below

100% Federal

Poverty Level

%

Massachusetts: 20.8%

2009-13


1.14

Drug Abuse /

Sale /

Possession

Statistics (per

UCR program)

Per 100,000

Suffolk County: 909.8 per 100,000

http://wwwn.cdc.gov/CommunityHealth/profile/currentprofile/MA/Suffolk/3100

52

1.15

Top 2 School

Districts

including State

Rank

District & Rank

Top 10 Ranked Public School Systems in Greater Boston:Lexington

Westwood

Westford

Weston

Dover-Sherborn

Brookline

Wayland

Newton

Wellesley

https://k12.niche.com/rankings/public-school-districts/best-overall/m/boston-

metro-area/

Overall Massachusetts ranks #1 for education

http://www.aecf.org/m/databook/aecf-2014kidscountdatabook-embargoed-

2014.pdf

1.16Unemployment

Rate

% & No. of

Persons Affected

3.8% unemployment as of April '15 in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area

(Bureau of labor statistics)

4.6% unemployment in Suffolk County, Dec 14

http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/SandP%202015ratingsreport.p

df

1.17

2010-2015

Increase in

Employment

% / Total Number

of Jobs

Massachusetts gained 220,477 jobs between 2010 and 2015- a 7% increase

http://lmi2.detma.org/lmi/lmi_es_a.asp#IND_LOCATION

1.18

Cost of Living

Index (closest

urban area)

US Census BureauCost of living index of 132.5 as of 2010 in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro area

(US Census Bureau)

1.19

Commercial

real estate

average cost

per foot

2015 USD

$413 sf in Boston

http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Boston-Massachusetts/market-trends/

1.2

County & State:

Standard &

Poor Bond

Rating

Rating

MA rated AA+ by S&P in 2014

Boston rated AAA on 4/1/2014

http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/SandP%202015ratingsreport.p

df

1.21

Business

friendliness

ranking (CNBC

& Forbes)

Rank State ratings: CNBC 2015: 7 | Forbes 2014: 13

1.22

Name and # of

Fortune 1000

companies in

nearest

metropolitan

area

Number 26 total in Massachusetts. See Appendix 1.



1.23

History of

Natural

Disasters (Last10 Years)

Type, date,

damages

Hurricane Sandy 2012

-$67 billion

Hurricane Irene 2011

-$14 billion

Flooding 2010

-$2 billion

Severe Weather and Flooding 2011

-$3 billion

Tornado 2011

-$50.3 millionSnowstorm October 2011

-$3 billion


-$2 billion


-$2.5 billion

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/events

2 Tax Considerations

2.01

Total (all

applicable jurisdictions)

millage rate for

business real

and personal

property

Number

Boston Tax Rate: Residential is $12.11; Commercial is $29.52 per thousand dollar

value

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/bbj_research_alert/2015/01/massach

usetts-property-tax-rates-in-2015-by-town.html

2.02

Assessment

ratio for

business real

and personal

property

% 100% of fair market value

2.03Local Business

TaxYes or No No

2.04Local Personal

Income TaxYes or No No

2.05

Local Sales Tax

Rate (if

applicable)

Yes or No No

2.06State personal

Income TaxIf Yes, % 5.15% flat tax

2.07

State corporate

Income Tax

Rank

Rank Ranked # 24 lowest in 2015 by taxfoundation.org

3 Workforce/Talent

3.01Average Age of

PopulationAge in Years

Metropolitan Boston: 31.7

Massachusetts: 39.4

3.02Population Age

18-45

Percentage of

Workforce79% of workforce is 18+

3.03

Age 18 & Over

Enrolled in

College /

Graduate

School

Percentage11% of Massachusetts’ over-18 population is currently enrolled in college or

graduate school



3.04

Percent of

population with

high school

degree or

higher (Includes

Equivalency)

Percentage of

Workforce

89.4% in Massachusetts


3.05

Percent of

population with

bachelor's

degree orHigher

Percentage of

Workforce

Statewide, 39.4% of 25+ population have a bachelors degree or higher, and

16.4% had an advanced degree as of 2008

Metro Boston: 54% of the 25+ population have a 2- or 4- year degree or greater,and 19% have an advanced degree

3.06

# of accredited

universities

with campuses

in potential city

#

Bay State College

Benjamin Franklin Institute of Technology

Berklee College of Music

Boston Architectural College

Boston College

Boston Conservatory of Music

Boston University

Bunker Hill Community College

Cambridge College

Cambridge School of Culinary Arts

Emerson College

Emmanuel College

Episcopal Divinity School

Fisher College

Harvard University

Laboure College

Lesley College

Longy School of Music

Massachusetts College of Art and Design

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

MCPHS University

New England College of Optometry

New England Conservatory of Music

New England School of LawNew England School of Photography

Northeastern University

School of the Museum of Fine Arts

Simmons College

Suffolk University

Wentworth Institute of Technology

Wheelock College

University of Massachusetts: Boston

32 colleges and universities in Boston & Cambridge.

3.07

Enrollment Size

of University orCollege in

above question

# of Full /PartTime Students 250,000 college students live in Suffolk County, according to Association ofIndependent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts (AICUM)

4 Quality of Life

4.01

No. of Local

Health Systems

Providers (i.e.

Trident,

TriHealth,

Kaiser, etc.)

#

Massachusetts has 15 major hospital systems, 64 acute hospitals, 55 community

health centers, 9 provider networks, and 169 major medical groups (2013 data)

http://bluecrossmafoundation.org/delivery-system-map-archive/

There are 36 federally funded Health Center organizations in MA serving

659,521 patients, 18.7% of whom are uninsured.



http://www.nachc.com/client/documents/research/maps/MA2015.pdf

4.02

Primary Care

Doctor-to-

Population

Ratio

Per 1,000

Residents

31.4 for every 1,000 patients.

4.03

# of ranked

hospitals in the

metro area

#

17 nationally or regionally ranked hospitals in Boston-Cambridge-Newton metro

area

Mass General is ranked #1 and Brigham & Women’s ranked #6 in the most recent

US News & World Report rankings.

http://www.usnews.com/info/blogs/press-room/2015/07/21/us-news-releases-

201516-best-hospitals

4.04

# Specialty

Health Care

Facilities (e.g.

Cancer, NICU)

#29 in metropolitan Boston

4.05Major (Felony)

Crime Rate

Per 100,000

Residents

343.3 per 100,000

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Boston-Massachusetts.html

4.06Average annualhigh

temperature

Degrees in FAverage high 59 degrees based on weather data collected from 1981 to 2010 by


4.07

Average annual

low

temperature

Degrees in FAverage low 44 degrees based on weather data collected from 1981 to 2010 by


4.08Average days

with rainfall#

Average 127 days based on weather data collected from 1971 to 2000 by the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

4.09Gallup

wellbeing score- State rank in 2014 Gallup Wellbeing index: 17

4.1

# of

professional

sports teams

# 5 major league sports teams in urban area

4.11Forbes coolness

rankingRank Ranking: 9

5 Transportation

5.01

Distance to

nearest major

International

Airport

Miles 5 miles to Boston Logan International

5.02

Distance to

additional

airports

(domestic, civil

aviation,

international)

Miles

55 miles to Worcester Regional Airport

32 miles Lawrence Municipal Airport

66 miles to Gardner Municipal Airport

138 miles to Pittsfield Municipal Airport

22 miles to Laurence G. Hanscom Field

92 miles to Westover Metro Airport

5.03

# of direct

flights to

domestic cities

#76 direct domestic cities from Boston Logan International

126,593 domestic flights per year.

5.04Direct flights to

Europe#

Amsterdam

Dublin

Frankfort

Istanbul

Lisbon



London

Madrid

Munich

Paris

Reykjavik

Rome

Shannon

Terceira, Port.

Zurich

14 cities, 7,556 flights per year


Latin America#

Aruba

Barbados

Bermuda

Cancun

Grand Cayman

Mexico City

Nassau

Panama City

Ponta Delgada

Port Au Prince

Providenciales

Puerto Plata, DR

Punta Cana, DR

Santiago, DR

Santo Domingo, DR

St. Lucia

St. Maarten

17 cities, 3,589 flights per year


Asia / Africa #

Toyko

Tel Aviv

Beijing

Shanghai

Hong KongDubai

Doha

7 cities and 2,361 flights per year

5.07

Public

transportation

systems ranking

Rank Ranked # 34 metro area for public transportation by Brookings.com

5.08

Inrix traffic

scorecard

ranking

Rank Ranked # 9 by Inrix

6 Incentives

6.01

Available

incentive

packages

Please describe



Appendix 1: Top Massachusetts companies on

Fortune 1000 Lis

Liberty Mutual Holding Company Inc. David H. Long Boston Massachusetts

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company Roger W. Crandall Springfield Massachusetts

The TJX Companies, Inc. Carol M. Meyrowitz Framingham Massachusetts

Raytheon Company Thomas A. Kennedy Waltham Massachusetts

Staples, Inc. Ronald L. Sargent Framingham Massachusetts

EMC Corporation Joseph M. Tucci Hopkinton Massachusetts

Global Partners LP Eric Slifka Waltham Massachusetts

Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. Marc N. Casper Waltham Massachusetts

Analog Devices, Inc. Vincent T. Roche Norwood Massachusetts

Hologic, Inc. Stephen P. MacMillan Bedford Massachusetts

Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. Sean M. Healey Prides Crossing Massachusetts

PerkinElmer, Inc. Robert F. Friel Waltham Massachusetts

Boston Properties, Inc. Owen D. Thomas Boston Massachusetts

PAREXEL International Corporation Josef H. von

Rickenbach

Waltham Massachusetts

Waters Corporation Douglas A.

Berthiaume

Milford Massachusetts

The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. Frederick H. Eppinger

Jr.

Worcester Massachusetts

LPL Financial Holdings Inc. Mark S. Casady Boston Massachusetts

Clean Harbors, Inc. Alan S. McKim Norwell Massachusetts

Cabot Corporation Patrick M. Prevost Boston Massachusetts

American Tower Corporation James D. Taiclet Jr. Boston Massachusetts



Appendix 1: Top Massachusetts companies on

Fortune 1000 Lis

Alere Inc. Ron Zwanziger Waltham Massachusetts

Iron Mountain Incorporated William L. Meaney Boston Massachusetts

State Street Corporation Joseph L. Hooley Boston Massachusetts

Eversource Thomas J. May Springfield Massachusetts

Boston Scientific Corporation Michael F. Mahoney Natick Massachusetts

Biogen Idec Inc. George A. Scangos Cambridge Massachusetts





Subject: FW: response


Attachments: GE Updates - To Grid docx MJK.docx

Latest version

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 3:17 PM


Subject: RE: response

Mike

.

Ricks




Subject: response

?

Mike KennealyAssistant Secretary for Business Growth




Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

Attorney-Client

Attorney-Client Privilege





Updates

1. What are the “employment tax benefits” through the Mass Life Science Center”? – specifically

a. What is the program?

i. MLSC offers a tax credit program to expand life sciences-related employment

opportunities, promote health-related innovations and stimulate research and

development, manufacturing and commercialization in the life sciences in MA.

GE Healthcare Life Sciences has recently secured an MLSC award of $3.15

million. A new application could be made through GE Healthcare, but may

consider both health division future employment growth and the GE corporate

positions. Upon approval of the MLSC Board, GE would receive a tax credit,

which can be refundable depending upon the particular credit applied for.The

new application would include both health div ision future employment growth

and the GE corporate positions. Upon approval of the MLSC Board, GE would

receive a tax credit. We are open discussing it as a refundable tax credit.

b. What is the statutory authority supporting elig ibility?

i.

The Life Sciences tax credit is authorized under G.L. c. 23I, §5(d), which provides

for a number of different incentives, including refundable tax credits for

companies who commit to create at least 50 net new jobs in Massachusetts. To

be eligible for life sciences tax credits, a company must meet the requirements

set out in G.L. c. 23I, §5(b) and be certified by the Center’s board. Qualifying

companies may receive multiple awards. Taxpayers may use Life Sciences Tax

Credits to offset up to 100% of taxable income under the provisions of G.L. c. 62,

§6 (r) and c. 63, §38CC. If the amount of the credit exceeds taxable income, the

taxpayer may receive up to 90% of the value of the credit as a refund. There is

no specific limit on the amount of an award per net new full-time job created,

which is within the discretion of the Center’s board, but the overall program is

subject to a $25 million annual cap. See, G.L. c. 25I, §5(d), c. 62, §6(r)(4) and c.

63, §38CC(d).

c.

How was the $40m calculated?

i.

The $40m proposal represents the largest award ever to be made from the

program. Its calculation is based on up to 100 GE Health jobs and up to 600

corporate jobs be located in MA over the next five years. The award would be

made for FY’18-FY’20 receipt. The award is not based upon a formula, but is a

“stretch” from other awards that have been made.

2.

What are the State “energy efficiency contributions” – explanation of the program, eligibility

requirements, potential benefits, dollar level of support?

i. The funding for energy efficiency/renewable energy program is available from

the Mass Clean Energy Center (through the Alternative Compliance Payment

Fund) and from the Mass Save program. The maximum benefit to would be

derived, which would be based on a customized package customized for the

property selected. A minimum award of approximately $250,000 to a maximum

that could approach or equal $5m or more is possible.

Formatted: Not Highlight

Formatted: Not Highlight



ii.

For a New publicly owned building (Option A), Mass Save (a program of the

utility companies) would be a key participant. Eversource and the MA

Department of Energy Resources (DOER) have expressed interest in working

with Massport as they do with other large customers to drive the a collaborative

efficiency project. Additionally, a publicly owned building could participate in

DOER’s Leading by Example program (LBE), where ACP (Alternative Compliance

Payment – controlled by the MA Clean Energy Center) funds could be utilized to

support energy efficiency/renewable upgrades, particularly around innovation

and new technology. There are currently not existing initiatives that these

scenarios fit into, but there could be future opportunities. LBE awards are

typically run through an application process. DOER/LBE could provide a grant

directly to Massport through a contract that would need to specify that

Massport would need to follow their DOER procurement and contracting rules

for any projects.

iii.

A new privately developed building or an existing private office building could

also benefit from the same Mass Save program. A private building is not eligible

for DOER’s LBE program, so any grant would need to be competitively procured

and follow state procurement law.

3. Property tax abatement – what is the term and expected percentage?

i. The property tax abatement term is assumed to be ____ years and the

percentage of relief is expected to be _____%. The City is interested in both job

creation and the value of the building to be constructed. The assumption has

been 600 jobs and 150,000 s.f. of building , although the calculation as to value

is dependent on many other variables. Thus, the actual value of the tax

abatement will be dependent on the final project to be built, and whether it is

on private or public land.

4.

What are the issues surround building a parking structure near a privately owned lot, ie is it just

availability of land/permitting?

i.

We are willing to explore this possibility if it furthers GE plans. The major issue

is a general parking restriction that could impact any future offsite parking

proposal. Other issues include Among the issues on a parking structure is the

availability of land, the ability to secure permitting and the mix of public or

private parking that would be included in the structure. The State is willing to

engage in a discussion about a grant for the structure through either the

MassWorks or I-Cubed program. Available funding would be requested through

the normal application process. A typical MassWorks award for parking

structure has been in the would be $5m-$10m range, but that is not a hard

limit. The I-Cubed program could make an award of up to $50m for a garage,

dependent upon job growth numbers that are in excess of 600 (the 600 already

being used to calculate other incentives being offered and thus not available to

leverage this I-Cubed opportunity).

Attorney-Client



New privately developed building Mass Save (as mentioned above) would be a key participant in any

energy efficiency building projects. Any DOER grants would need to be competitively procured and

follow state procurement law (laid out below).

Existing private office building Mass Save (as mentioned above) would be a key participant in any

energy efficiency building projects. Any DOER grants would need to be competitively procured and

follow state procurement law (laid out below).




To: McMorrow, Paul (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Signed GE Headquarters Relocation Term Sheet

Date: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:21:00 PM

Attachments: GE Headquarters Relocation Terms.Jan13.2016.pdf

Paul, please see attached.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 8:09 AM

To: Polito, Karyn (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

<[email protected]>; Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>;

Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn

<[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Buckley,

Timothy (GOV) <[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV) <[email protected]>;

Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; Morse, Elizabeth <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


<[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT) <[email protected]>

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV) <[email protected]>; Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)

<[email protected]>

Subject: Signed GE Headquarters Relocation Term Sheet

For our records.

Attached is a PDF version.

A signed original will also be provided.














To: Brown, Kevin W (DOR) ([email protected])

Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Time for a quick call today?

Date: Thursday, December 03, 2015 9:18:00 AM

Kevin

Ricks


Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:49 PMTo: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Subject: RE: Time for a quick call today?

OK – as long as everyone understands my concern.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:48 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: Re: Time for a quick call today?

That's how I read it, but the question of related entities still seemed to be of interest to the experts,

so I don't want to speak for them.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]> wrote:

This would not be our fact pattern – but this part of the regulation seems to limit the

lessee credit to the fact pattern.

Attorney-Client Privilege



Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:44 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: RE: Time for a quick call today?

I think we’re going to have to run this one past DOR. We did not discuss this scenario

and I would defer to their views.

Ricks






Are you saying this part of the regulation doesn’t apply? How the calculation works,

perhaps with an example, for leased real property would be greatly appreciated.

(b) Lessor. The credit is generally not available to the lessor of eligible property. However, the credit is available to a lessor for eligible property, other than tangible personal property, leased to a lessee

provided the relationship between the lessor and the lessee is:

1. an individual and a corporation if such individual owns, directly or indirectly, 100 percent of the

outstanding stock in the corporation;

2. a corporation and a partnership if the same persons own, directly or indirectly, 100 percent of the

outstanding stock in the corporation and 100 percent of the capital interest or profit interest in the

partnership;

3. a corporation and another corporation if the same persons own, directly or indirectly, 100 percent

of the outstanding stock in each corporation;

4. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and the sole grantor of the trust;

5. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and the fiduciary of another trust if the

same person is the sole grantor of both trusts;



6. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and the sole beneficiary of such property;

7. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and a corporation if the trust, the sole

grantor of the trust, or the sole beneficiary of the trust owns, directly or indirectly, 100 percent of the

outstanding stock in the corporation.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 4:57 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: FW: Time for a quick call today?

Amy

Here is the language and links to other relevant materials. What we are waiting for

from DOR is whether there is another regulation relating to useful life of real property

that might apply here. Our working assumption is that these are the applicable rules,

but they are checking to make sure we have not missed anything.

Ricks

From: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)




Here’s the statutory language:

“A corporation subject to tax under this chapter that participates in a certified project,

as defined in sections 3A and 3F of chapter 23A, may take a credit against the excise

imposed by this chapter to the extent authorized by the economic assistance

coordinating council established by section 3B of said chapter 23A, in an amount not

to exceed 50 per cent of such liability in a taxable year; provided, however, that the 50

per cent limitation shall not apply if the credit is refundable under subsection (b): (i)

for certified expansion projects and certified enhanced expansion projects, as defined



in said sections 3A and 3F of said chapter 23A, an amount up to 10 per cent; (ii) for

certified manufacturing retention projects, as defined in said sections 3A and 3F of said

chapter 23A, an amount up to 40 per cent of the cost of any property that would

qualify for the credit allowed by section 31A if the property were purchased by a

manufacturing corporation or a business corporation engaged primarily in research

and development and is used exclusively in a certified project, as defined in said

sections 3A and 3F of said chapter 23A; and, (iii) for certified job creation projects, as defined in said sections 3A and 3F of said chapter 23A, an amount up to $1,000 per job

created, or up to $5,000 per job created in a gateway municipality as defined by

section 3A of chapter 23A or within a city or town whose average seasonally adjusted

unemployment rate, as reported by the executive office of labor and workforce

development, is higher than the average seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of

the commonwealth; provided, however, that the total award per project shall be no

more than $1,000,000; and further provided that a credit under this clause (iii) shall be

allowed only for the year subsequent to that in which the jobs are created. A lessee

may be eligible for a credit under this subsection for real property leased under an

operating lease.” M.G.L. c. 63, sec. 38N(a) (emphasis added). M.G.L. c. 62, sec. 6(g) has similar language.

The current regulation, 830 CMR 63.38N.1(6)(b), still provides that the credit is not

available for real property, but that has obviously been superseded by statutory

revision in 2009. However, DOR Technical Information Release 10-1 confirms that “the

rules used to calculate the credit for leased real estate will be the same rules used to

calculate the credit for leased tangible personal property set out in Regulation 830

CMR 63.38N.1(6)(b).” Here’s a link to the regulation

http://www.mass.gov/dor/businesses/help-and-resources/legal-library/regulations/63-

00-taxation-of-corporations/830-cmr-6338n1-economic-opportunity-area-credit.html

and to the TIR http://www.mass.gov/dor/businesses/help-and-resources/legal-

library/tirs/tirs-by-years/2010-releases/tir-10-1-economic-development-incentive.html

___________________________________________

Jonathan M. Cosco

Senior Deputy General Counsel


Commonwealth of Massachusetts

One Ashburton Place, 21st Floor

Boston, MA 02114617-788-3628

[email protected]



To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)





Amy

Sorry I disappeared this morning. For some reason cell coverage and even email

disappeared entirely.

We are still tracking down details on the EDIP lease issue, but have confirmed that a

lessee is eligible for EDIP credits, although the schedule for actually taking them may

be an extended one. DOR still owes us an answer on that question, but they would

definitely be available to you as a lessee.

When we hear more we’ll get back to you.

Ricks

From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 9:04 AM




Works for me. Should I send in a call-in number or do you want to call me?

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 9:03 AMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: Re: Time for a quick call today?

Can it be later this morning? Say around 11?

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:53 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


I have two technical questions.



Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



From: [email protected]

To: Mike Kennealy

Subject: Fwd: 4pm call today

Date: Friday, November 27, 2015 4:00:37 PM

Mike Kennealy


From: John Barros < [email protected]>Date: November 27, 2015 at 1:06:28 PM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Milano, Peter (MOBD)" < [email protected]>Subject: Re: 4pm call today

We will use the ML Strategies Conference Call Line; passcode

I believe the following individuals will be on the call:Mo Cowan, ML StrategiesScott Roberti, GEAmy Eisenstadt, GE State Tax CounselOn Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)<[email protected]> wrote:

John can you send us info for 4pm call? Jon and Peter please join if you can - I'll send some thoughts before. John who will be on?

Mike Kennealy

--John BarrosChief of Economic DevelopmentOffice of Mayor Martin J. Walsh6th Floor, Room 603Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201t: 617-635-5729http://www.cityofboston.govSHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.http://imagine.boston.gov/



From: Beaton, Matthew (EEA)

To: ; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: Fwd: Boston Business Journal- GE"s new energy company will create 200 new jobs in Boston

Date: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:14:32 PM

Interesting article confusing everything else that is on the table


From: "Lorenz, Peter (EEA)" <[email protected]>Date: October 7, 2015 at 2:43:11 PM EDTTo: "Beaton, Matthew (EEA)" <[email protected]>, "Judson, Judith (ENE)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Gerwatowski, Ron (EEA)" <[email protected]>, "Sieger, Daniel (EEA)" <[email protected]>, "Bartlett, Ned (EEA)" < [email protected]>, "Cahill, Alexandra (EEA)" <[email protected]>, "Singleton, Stolle (EEA)" <[email protected]>, "Burgess, Dan (ENE)" <[email protected]>Subject: Boston Business Journal- GE's new energy company will create 200 new jobs in Boston

GE's new energy company will create 200 new jobs in BostonBoston Business Journal Connecticut-based GE announced Wednesday that it's spinning out a "first-of-its-kind" energy company that will be headquartered in Greater Boston.

The new energy company, to be called Current, will be headquartered in the Greater Boston area with additional presence in Silicon Valley and will create about 200 new jobs next year.

"Boston was an obvious choice for us for a lot of different reasons," said Deia Campanelli, a spokeswoman for GE (NYSE:GE). "(Boston) is heavily investing in renewable energy, it has great software talent and it gives us close proximity to where many of our customers are in the region."

Current integrates GE's LED, solar, energy storage and electric vehicle businesses with a software that can deliver and identify the most affordable, efficient energy solutions required by customers, according to a release. The technology will help customers save between 10 percent and 20 percent on their energy bills, and help utility partners better manage their distributed load.

Current already has major customers including JPMorgan Chase, Walgreens, Hilton Worldwide and Intel, who are testing the company's software.

GOV Email



The jobs created by Current will be in the areas of software, engineering and product management. Campanelli said plans for the Boston office will be finalized by early 2016. She didn't disclose how many square feet the company would be needing.

Current's CEO will be Maryrose Sylvester , who was formerly president and CEO at GE Lighting, a $3 billion enterprise. She plans to grow Current from annual

revenue of $1 billion to a $5 billion business by 2020, according to a release. The company's revenue stream comes from existing products and technologies that it's selling to customers, Campanelli said.

GE has a market capitalization of $278 billion.

Peter S. Lorenz

Communications Director

Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs

100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900, Boston, MA 02114Office: 617-626-1106 / Mobile: 617-680-6487




To: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV)

Subject: Fwd: Boston means Innovation, Talent, Inspiration

Date: Thursday, December 31, 2015 2:40:27 PM

Fyi.

Sent from my iPhone


From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: December 31, 2015 at 2:38:56 PM ESTTo: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Cc: "Cowan, Mo" <[email protected]>, Daniel Koh <[email protected]>, " [email protected]" < [email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"

< [email protected]>, Tom Glynn <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Boston means Innovation, Talent, Inspiration

Ann:Quick update.We had a good call with Amy (and Scott?) with a focus on the Massport development option. Happy to provide you an update and/or answer any questions.We all will be monitoring email this weekend, so please feel free to reach out with

any questions.As suggested, we are also holding Monday, January 4 at 4:30 pm for a check-in call.We hope that you found the PowerPoint and the concept renderings helpful.Best to you and your team and Happy New Year!SteveSent from my iPhone


Ann,

On behalf of the Governorâ€™s Office and the Mayorâ€™s Office, attached is the presentation that we had mentioned that helps to describe the strengths of the Boston area.

We believe it provides some helpful information.

Please let us know if you have any comments and/or would like any

GOV Email



further information.

We have appreciated the discussions with you and your team.

Please let us know if we may help with any other questions that you may have.

As you had mentioned, the Governor and the Mayor are both interested in talking with the Chairman.

Please let us know when next week or soon thereafter this makes sense to happen.

Very best wishes and Happy New Year!

Steven Kadish and Daniel Koh

<Boston means Innovation Talent Leadership.Dec30.2015.pptx>




To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Subject: Fwd: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday


Sent from my iPhone


From: "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: November 29, 2015 at 12:50:56 PM CSTTo: "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Fw: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

adding Ricks ________________________________________ From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 1:47 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Cc: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Subject: Re: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

If I understand the format of the proposal, I think that there are 3 documents needed:1. Booklet of properties, including site information2. Letter outlining the elements of the City-State proposal3. An appendix type document that outlines the various statutes, application process, how the calculations work. This document could also include the parking discussion and requirements, as well as a possible comparison of key state and local tax features comparing MA, CT and NY. This document could work as a PowerPoint.Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 29, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Attached please find two documents for our call today at 12pm:

- An update memo

- Jay's chart sent on Friday

GOV Email



Looking forward to speaking then.

Mike

________________________________________

From: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)

Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 4:45 PM


Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy,

Jim (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV)


I just sent a calendar invite. Please let me know if there's any issues.

Brianna Wehrs

Executive Assistant to Governor Charlie Baker

Office: 617-725-4048

Cell: 617-483-3397

On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Brianna, Lily or Devon--please send out a calendar invite for a call at noon tomorrow/Sunday for the folks copied on this email.

Elizabeth: please invite Jim D if you would like.

If you have questions about the call, please contact Sec Ash, Mike Kennealy or me.

Thx.

GOV Email



Steve

Sent from my iPhone

<Project Plum memo Nov. 29.docx>

<Project Plum - Chart of Second Offer.docx>




To: Jay Ash

Subject: Fwd: Connecting you

Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 9:29:43 AM

Jay - FYI.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)" < [email protected]>Date: January 11, 2016 at 7:56:33 PM ESTTo: "Buckley, Timothy (GOV)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Connecting you

Thanks. I think we are all good for the moment. We may run the drill on Wednesday but for now I think we can all breathe. We're going to connect with Laura OggeriChief of Communication cell .

On Jan 11, 2016, at 7:53 PM, Buckley, Timothy (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

OK. Thanks.

I have not contacted Mayor Walsh's office. Let me know if you would like us to do that.

________________________________________

From: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) < [email protected]>

Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 7:20 PM

To: Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Connecting you

Tim & Mike---thanks a bunch. I will share with our comms team. The likely contact will be Una Pullizi or could be Seth Martin. One or the other will reach out to you, Tim, at go-time. Jim




From: Buckley, Timothy (GOV) [mailto:[email protected]]


To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

Subject: RE: Connecting you

My cell is




To: Jim McGaugh; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)

Subject: Connecting you

Jim, Tim - connecting you over email. Jim, do you want to call Tim to discuss plan? Let me know if I can do anything else here.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike Kennealy




To: Mike Kennealy

Subject: Fwd: Draft Incentive Letter for Project Plum

Date: Thursday, November 19, 2015 4:45:42 PM

Attachments: Joint Plum Letter - Draft.docx ATT00001.htmPlum Incentive narrative.docx ATT00002.htmI-Cubed Bond Sizing - Project Plum - 400 Empl - 100% Net New.pdf

ATT00003.htm

Mike Kennealy


From: John Barros < [email protected]>Date: November 19, 2015 at 4:44:02 PM EST

To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: Lauren Jones <[email protected]>, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Draft Incentive Letter for Project Plum

Sec. Ash,

Attached, find the draft letter and incentive description for your review and approval. Upon getting your edits and final approval we will format and place it on letterhead for the Governor and Mayor's signatures tomorrow morning.

Thanks.

--John BarrosChief of Economic DevelopmentOffice of Mayor Martin J. Walsh6th Floor, Room 603Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201t: 617-635-5729http://www.cityofboston.gov

SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.http://imagine.boston.gov/



JOINT STATE / CITY LETTERHEAD

DATE

Dear Mr. ____________________,

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the City of Boston are pleased to present a joint proposal to welcome Project Plum to Boston. We strongly believe that Boston,Massachusetts offers the thriving, healthy, and innovative ecosystem that Project Plumis seeking in order to grow and succeed.

Boston is the hub of an expansive transportation infrastructure, including aninternational airport within city limits. Our universities, hospitals, and research centersare global engines of talent and innovation. And Massachusetts offers an unparalleledquality of life for your current and prospective employees, featuring a vibrant culturalscene, a sparkling waterfront, and access to all of New England’s natural and historic

amenities.

In addition to these advantages, we offer Project Plum a uniquely forward-thinkingpartnership of public and private leaders. The enclosed booklet details the attractivelocations and incentives that you need to move your headquarters to Boston and growgreat jobs here. Our proposal offers both state and local incentives, including the state’sInfrastructure Investment Incentive (“I-Cubed”) program, as well as local property taxrelief. Under this proposal, the state can provide up to $50 million in I-Cubed support atthe 400 job level. The amount of I-Cubed support that would benefit Project Plum is sitespecific and dependent on a development project’s infrastructure requirements. I-Cubedsupport can be complemented by local property tax incentives. Similar to I-Cubed, the

exact amount of property tax incentives is dependent on the site selected. Given theemployment levels and the sites under consideration, the City anticipates property taxincentives will range between $8 and $12 million (see the attached detailed summary ofincentives for details).

We are committed to supporting Project Plum’s relocation and expansion plans.Specifically, we will establish a Joint State-City Task Force to provide a single point ofaccess to government services that support every step in the development and



relocation process. Boston’s Concierge Relocation Services will also support youremployees as they transition to their new Massachusetts home.

We want to thank you for the opportunity to present this exciting proposal. We lookforward to working closely with you to support Project Plum’s innovation, growth, and

success in Boston.

Sincerely,





//sea-fp-sea-007/ricks.frazier$/My%20Documents/GE%20Extraction%201/ATT00001.htm[4/20/2016 12:01:44 PM]



DRAFT

Incentives

The State and City propose an incentive package utilizing the I Cubed programsupplemented with additional property tax relief for Project Plum. This combination,which has been used together in previous incentive programs, provides the mostresource to support the project by leveraging the significant number of Plum jobs thatwould be relocated to Boston. Both these incentive programs are dependent on the siteselected and the number of jobs Plum relocates to Boston. Since the exact number of

jobs is not yet known, the incentive amounts will be projected at 400 and 600 jobs forillustration purposes.

I Cubed

I Cubed (Infrastructure Investment Initiative) is an incentive program that leveragesnew state tax revenue generated by real estate projects to provide infrastructuresupport to lower the cost of development. Many potential Project Plum sites have

significant infrastructure requirements that would benefit from I Cubed. I Cubedfunding can remove infrastructure expenses from the total cost of a project. The Cityand State will work directly with the developer to ensure that infrastructure relatedcosts savings flow directly to Plum in the form of reduced occupancy costs.

Based on the projected revenue associated with new jobs and salary informationprovided by Plum, the state can provide up to $50 million in I cubed support, themaximum allowed under the enabling statute, at the 400 job level. The amount ofactual of I cubed support that would benefit Plum is site specific and dependent on adevelopment project’s infrastructure requirements. A more refined estimate of I Cubedsupport can be developed as Plum identifies specific sites that it is interested inpursuing.

Property Tax Incentive

The City offers several property tax incentive programs to help enable the developmentof a space suitable for Plum. The programs most likely to be employed includepayment in lieu of tax programs under Chapters 121A and 121B as well as TaxIncrement Financing (TIF) under the EDIP (Economic Development Incentive Program)program. The choice of incentive is highly dependent on the site selected. Forexample, 2 of the sites under consideration already have a Chapter 121A structure in

place. Other sites located on public land lend themselves to a Chapter 121B basedincentive. If neither of these options is available, a TIF can be employed provided thatthere is new development that can provide a significant tax increment to be discounted.

Similar to I Cubed, the exact amount of the property tax incentive is dependent on thesite selected. Given the employment levels and the sites under consideration, the Cityanticipates that it will be able to offer between $8 and $12 million in property taxincentives.



Alternative Option

The State and City’s preferred approach is this combination of I Cubed and property taxincentives. However, if Plum selects a site that cannot benefit from significantinfrastructure investment assistance provided under I Cubed, the City and State canprovide an alternative approach under the EDIP program. Here, the property taxincentive described above would be delivered in the form of a TIF Agreement. TheState would supplement this assistance with an Investment Tax Credit that can extendup to $[18] million at the 600 employee level.













featuring all the technologies and how they can work together for their

customers to see and experience.

• Massachusetts was chosen for its

outstanding workforce and beat out California and Colorado. They like the

close proximity to universities, as well as our software engineers are more

familiar with products/widgets vs. California where they mostly do web

applications.• Their senior management will be in Boston

in a couple of weeks and it may be a good opportunity to set up a meeting

with the Secretary and/or Governor. Let me know if you would like me to

coordinate.

• They are interested in coordinating with

DOER’s energy efficiency programs and other opportunities to engage with MA

energy policy, including the storage initiative.

• Their storage business is taking off, they

have recently won a couple new contracts with California utilities for storage

projects in the 20 – 30 MW range.

Let me know if you have questions or would like me to work on coordinating a meeting

with GE.

Thanks,

Judith

Judith Judson

Commissioner

Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources

100 Cambridge Street, Suite 1020, Boston, MA 02114

Ph: 617.626.7351 Fax: 617.727.0030

http://www.mass.gov/doer/

Creating a Cleaner Energy Future for the Commonwealth

Follow DOER on Twitter: http://twitter.com/MassDOER

Visit the Energy Smarts blog: www.mass.gov/blog/energy



From: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)


Subject: Fwd: MA NDA

Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:08:33 PM

Attachments: Scanned from a Xerox Multifunction Printer.pdf ATT00001.htm

Signed copy. Have this one signed if you can. Thx!!

Sent from my iPhone


From: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)"

Date: July 21, 2015 at 2:21:26 PM EDT

To: "Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)"

Cc: "Wertz, Tammy (GE, Corporate)"

Subject: MA NDA

Steve - Ann has signed it. We'll await the return from MA once signed.

Thanks,

Karen

Karen Kulish



O:

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828




Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:08 PM

To: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)

Subject: Scanned from a Xerox Multifunction Printer

Please open the attached document. It was scanned and sent to you using a Xerox Multifunction Printer.

Attachment File Type: pdf, Multi-Page

Multifunction Printer Location: E1G101

Device Name: E1G-MFD01

For more information on Xerox products and solutions, please visit http://www.xerox.com















Subject: Fwd: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 6:24:29 PM

Plz respond to her

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------From: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)"Date: 07/21/2015 3:05 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)"Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Jay,

I am writing to reconfirm your meeting with us on Thursday, July 30th from 1:30 – 3:30. The meeting will be held at our GE Guest House, 3135 Easton Turnpike, Fairfield, CT 06828, and upon going through Security and obtaining badges you will be directed to the Guest House and parking. I will be present at the Guest House entry upon the team’s arrival to guide folks to the meeting.Please be sure that you provide to me a list of the names of EVERYONE, including any Security

personnel, who will be on site as I need to clear each individual through GE Security.

I would also ask that the team contact me when they are approx. 10 mins. out. My cell is 203-598-1348.

When we last spoke you indicated the Governor would not participate in the meeting. Of course if that changes please advise. I know you’re working on your attendee list and bios and we look forward to receiving them. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,Karen

Karen KulishExecutive Assistant to Ann Klee


O:

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828




From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 4:50 PMTo: [email protected]: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)


Jay,





















Karen

Karen Kulish



O:

C:





Fairfield, CT 06828





To: Jay Ash

Subject: Fwd: need a 2 minute call with you

Date: Sunday, December 06, 2015 4:41:53 PM

FYI - interesting. Will set something up as early in day as possible.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)"Date: December 6, 2015 at 4:17:29 PM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, " [email protected]" < [email protected]>Subject: need a 2 minute call with you

Let me know what works for you. Tomorrow is fine. We’ve ruined enough weekends.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Susan Saia

Subject: Fwd: Plum: MA Thank you

Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 8:44:58 AM

Hi Susan - Karen's address below, thanks.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)"Date: August 11, 2015 at 5:58:12 PM EDTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)"Subject: Plum: MA Thank you

Hi Mike,I have a hard copy of the letter Ann emailed to Secretary Ash and am writing to ask you to please send the mailing address to me. Sorry for the delay, as I was out of the office for a couple of days and am just back in today.Have a good evening!KarenKaren KulishExecutive Assistant to Ann KleeGlobal Operations - Environment, Health & SafetyO:

C:General Electric Company3135 Easton TurnpikeFairfield, CT 06828GE Imagination at Work





Subject: Fwd: Plum


Attachments: meeting.ics ATT00001.htm

Jay FYI - don't know what this is; I can call her.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)"To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Fwd: Plum

FyiSent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphoneWhen: Dec 22, 2015 1:30:00 PM Where: participant code



Attachment meeting_1.ics (0 Bytes) cannot be converted to PDF format.



//sea-fp-sea-007/ricks.frazier$/My%20Documents/GE%20Extraction%201/ATT00001_3.htm[4/20/2016 12:01:53 PM]





Subject: Fwd: Project Plum -- Site visit

Date: Thursday, August 27, 2015 2:24:32 PM

We'll talk tomorrow about this.


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)"Date: 08/27/2015 1:41 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Project Plum -- Site visit

Jay,

I wanted to follow up on the scheduling of our visit to Boston and surrounding area. At this point,

we’re looking at September 15 and hope that works on your end. Our key point of contact for the

planning and logistics of the visit will be Brent Woodruff from CBRE, who works closely with us on

these kinds of projects.

If you could let me know who your point of contact will be, Brent will reach out to her/him and begin

the planning process, including potential sites that we would want to see and any other agenda

items. The plan is to cover everything in a day.

Many thanks.

Best,

ark

Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

(o)

(m)




To: Jay Ash

Subject: Fwd: Project Plum


Jay, just to be clear on the deliverables Steve mentioned below, if we decide we still need, and we really put on hold after call today:

1. Don't have anything specific yet.2. Have content from Erica on MassWorks and Jen on I-Cubed.3. Some good ideas from MLSC, MOBD and City.

So good starts on 2 and 3. Also, if we decide we need these we can do tomorrow and submit end of day in my view.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: December 6, 2015 at 11:53:37 AM ESTTo: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Project Plum

How fast can we move from questions to facts and tools and their application?Or maybe we are already doing so?We need to have something solid by tomorrow morning. I am hoping to see drafts of the 3 deliverables by sometime this evening:1. What we can do on some proposed Seaport locations2. Examples of what has been done with the tools we are proposing3. What can we offer at the existing Plum sites and for Connect

Let's please stay focused on the deliverables.Thx.SteveSent from my iPhone

On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

From today's call - MassWorks is most flexible, allowing for private expenditures that are in the cause of economic development - thus, utilizing the MassWorks/EDIP option is more flexible and direct than utilizing some form of I-Cubed. I am working up a list of questions/points about the policy issues around utilizing more MassWorks, maybe as much as $70-80m, for the direct subsidy of building a building. Simple and effective. Will share the questions tonight.

________________________________________


Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 8:03 AM






Thanks for the info.

I'll be on the road then, so I'm iffy about joining.

In any case, look forward to an update.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

10am. Just sent info.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:21 AM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Please let me know when today's call is and I will try to join you.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:19 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Discussed in concept on call and just emailed Jim D.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Did you ask massport to help with the marketing materials? They have a marketing department. I asked Jen to make that request.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 5, 2015, at 6:26 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Steve, it was a productive call discussing the various ways I-Cubed/MassWorks could be utilized to their benefit on our sites while maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks and I are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re: MassWorks



and Jen needs to consult outside counsel on some I-Cubed matters. Will reconvene larger group after Jen has what she needs. Goal is to develop very specific scenarios on use of funds on our sites. Jay is back and was on call and may have more to add.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 2:26 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


Not sure that I will be able to make, but I would like an update.

Will you be scheduling a call tomorrow?

I can do after 5 pm.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 5, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Call info

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM EST

To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,

"Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>





access code .


Mike

________________________________



To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)


Subject: Project Plum

I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this weekend and into Monday to advance the Project Plum work. As you know, we presented a proposal to Plum that relies heavily on I-Cubed and Massworks funding, and we also suggested some sites. The good news from today is that we are very much in the game here, and the company will be visiting Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a significant internal meeting in about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what involvement they want from us on Wednesday, possibly none though of course we are pushing).

As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission at this point is to

make this proposed infrastructure funding more tangible for them – how could these dollars be used to the direct benefit of their project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80 MM I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax incentives; they know how to value the $20 MM but are unsure how to value the $80 MM, and we need this proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM, especially in the face of competition offering incentives that are much easier to value.

To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to the company by noon on Monday:

1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and MassWorks projects. I have attached a draft memo from Erica and the language that Jen provided for our letter. What

other examples can we provide, and in what level of detail, specifically ones that are as analogous as possible to their project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be deployed at the MCCA and Massport sites. I have attached information about those sites. No site or building has been ruled out, but initial guidance from Plum’s location advisor was to focus on the sites vs. the buildings.




1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above and develop specific ideas.

2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from your organization that

could help in this effort.


On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the deliverables should look like and discuss specific examples. We can then decide what other needs we may have, and plan the work over Sunday and into Monday.

I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with questions. Please respond as soon as you can with respect to your availability tomorrow at 4:30pm.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762





To: Mike Kennealy


Date: Sunday, December 06, 2015 9:53:13 AM

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: December 6, 2015 at 7:47:18 AM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Project Plum

If you are joining the 10am please use this number instead (previous number can only accommodate limited number of callers)

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:14 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Same number tomorrow please 10am Jay, Mike, Ricks, Erica, others if interested and available. Whole group to reconvene when Jen has


Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:08 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:




access code .


Mike





that relies heavily on I-Cubed and Massworks funding, and we also suggested some sites. The good news from today is






pushing).


mission at this point is to make this proposed infrastructure funding more tangible for them – how could these dollars



















project?


could be deployed at the MCCA and Massport sites.

I have attached information about those sites. No

site or building has been ruled out, but initial guidance from Plum’s location advisor was to focus








discuss.








All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: John Barros


Date: Saturday, December 05, 2015 9:49:01 AM

Here is the dial in for 430.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Project Plum


access code .


Mike


I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this weekend and into

Monday to advance the Project Plum work. As you know, we presented a proposal to

Plum that relies heavily on I-Cubed and Massworks funding, and we also suggested

some sites. The good news from today is that we are very much in the game here, and

the company will be visiting Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a significant

internal meeting in about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what involvement they want

from us on Wednesday, possibly none though of course we are pushing).

As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission at this point is to



make this proposed infrastructure funding more tangible for them – how could these

dollars be used to the direct benefit of their project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM

dollar proposal was $80 MM I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax

incentives; they know how to value the $20 MM but are unsure how to value the $80

MM, and we need this proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM,

especially in the face of competition offering incentives that are much easier to value.

To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to the company by

noon on Monday:

1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and MassWorks projects. I

have attached a draft memo from Erica and the language that Jen provided for

our letter. What other examples can we provide, and in what level of detail,

specifically ones that are as analogous as possible to their project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be deployed at the

MCCA and Massport sites. I have attached information about those sites. No site or building has been ruled out, but initial guidance from Plum’s location

advisor was to focus on the sites vs. the buildings.


1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above and develop specific

ideas.

2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from your organization that

could help in this effort.


On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the deliverables should look

like and discuss specific examples. We can then decide what other needs we may


I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with questions. Please

respond as soon as you can with respect to your availability tomorrow at 4:30pm.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Subject: Fwd: Revised Package


Will call you to discuss response.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)"Date: December 7, 2015 at 6:39:44 PM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)" , "Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)"Subject: Revised Package

I heard from Ann that a revised package would be sent sometime before noon

tomorrow. I am going to suggest we do a call in the morning before it’s officially

approved for submission. This would give you an opportunity for feedback in case

some adjustments would make sense, as well as assist in keeping within the time

constraints we are all working under.

I’m open most of the morning. Please let me know what works for you.

Thanks.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV)

Cc: Daniel Koh

Subject: GE press release

Date: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:00:58 PM

Attachments: Press Release_GE moves HQ to Boston.docx ATT00001.htm

Colleagues!

Attached is the official announcement!A release from the Governor and Mayor will be out shortly.

A moment to celebrate.And yes, there's good work to do ahead.

Nice work team!

Best,Steve and Dan


From: "Martin, Seth (GE Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: January 13, 2016 at 1:00:01 PM ESTTo: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Cc: "Latour, Deirdre A (GE, Corporate)"Subject: press release

Seth Martin

Director, Financial & Corporate Communications

GE

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]



1

PRESS RELEASE

GE MOVES HEADQUARTERS TO BOSTON

FAIRFIELD, Conn. – January 13, 2016 – GE today announced that it has selected Boston for its corporate

headquarters location.

“GE aspires to be the most competitive company in the world,” said GE Chairman and CEO Jeff Immelt.

“Today, GE is a $130 billion high-tech global industrial company, one that is leading the digital transformation

of industry. We want to be at the center of an ecosystem that shares our aspirations. Greater Boston is home

to 55 colleges and universities. Massachusetts spends more on research & development than any other

region in the world, and Boston attracts a diverse, technologically-fluent workforce focused on solvingchallenges for the world. We are excited to bring our headquarters to this dynamic and creative city.”

GE has been considering the composition and location of its headquarters for more than three years. The

Company began its formal review in June 2015, with a list of 40 potential locations. Boston was selected after

a careful evaluation of the business ecosystem, talent, long-term costs, quality of life for employees,

connections with the world and proximity to other important company assets.

There is no material financial impact to GE related to the cost of the move. Working with GE, Massachusetts

and the City of Boston structured a package of incentives that provides benefits to the State and City, while

also helping offset the costs of the relocation to GE. GE will sell its offices in Fairfield and at 30 Rockefeller

Plaza in New York City to further offset the cost of the move.

The content of GE’s headquarters will also change, with more emphasis on innovation. In Boston, GE will have

roughly 800 people; 200 from corporate staff and 600 digital industrial product managers, designers and

developers split between GE Digital, Current, robotics and Life Sciences. A GE Digital Foundry will be created

for co-creation, incubation and product development with customers, startups and partners. The remainder of

administration will be placed in shared service operations throughout the Company.

GE has a significant existing presence in Massachusetts, with nearly 5,000 employees across the state in

businesses including Aviation, Oil & Gas and Energy Management. In 2014, GE moved its Life Sciences

headquarters to Marlborough, and in 2015 GE announced its energy services start-up, Current, would also beheadquartered in Boston.

The headquarters will be located in the Seaport District of Boston. Employees will move to a temporary

location in Boston starting in the summer of 2016, with a full move completed in several steps by 2018. GE

will host a public briefing in Boston with government officials, and business and community leaders, on

February 18, 2016.



2

About GE

GE (NYSE: GE) is the world’s Digital Industrial Company, transforming industry with software-defined machines and

solutions that are connected, responsive and predictive. GE is organized around a global exchange of knowledge, the

"GE Store," through which each business shares and accesses the same technology, markets, structure and intellect.

Each invention further fuels innovation and application across our industrial sectors. With people, services, technology

and scale, GE delivers better outcomes for customers by speaking the language of industry. www.ge.com

Media Contact:

Seth Martin, [email protected]

Investor Contact:

Matt Cribbins, 203.373.2424

[email protected]



//sea-fp-sea-007/ricks.frazier$/My%20Documents/GE%20Extraction%201/ATT00001_4.htm[4/20/2016 12:02:10 PM]



From: John Regan


Subject: GE Statement on CT Taxes v2

Date: Monday, June 01, 2015 2:19:57 PM

Attachments: GE Statement on CT Taxes v2.docx

FYI



GE STATEMENT ON POTENTIAL INCREASE TO CONNECTICUT TAXES

FAIRFIELD, CT – June 1, 2015 –

Reports that Connecticut officials intend to raise taxes by another $750

million dollars are truly discouraging. Retroactively raising taxes again on Connecticut’s residents,

businesses and services makes businesses, including our own, and citizens seriously consider whether it

makes any sense to continue to be located in this state. The Connecticut economy continues to struggle as

other states offer more opportunities and a better environment for business growth. It is essential that

Governor Malloy and legislative leaders find a more prudent and responsible path forward for Connecticut

and its citizens in their current budget negotiations.

###

About GE

GE (NYSE: GE) imagines things others don’t, builds things others can’t and delivers outcomes that make the

world work better. GE brings together the physical and digital worlds in ways no other company can. In itslabs and factories and on the ground with customers, GE is inventing the next industrial era to move,

power, build and cure the world. www.ge.com.

GE Contacts:

Seth Martin

Corporate Communications

P: 203.572.3567

E: [email protected]



From: Steffen, Mark (GOV)

To: Steffen, Mark (GOV)

Subject: Governor"s Office Press Clips 01.07.2016

Date: Thursday, January 07, 2016 8:09:29 AM

MBTA:

Boston Herald: MBTA’s runaway pay: Report reveals T paying workers top dollar

Boston Herald: Mayor: Schools may have to ‘find the money’ for T hike

Boston Globe: Delays on Needham commuter rail line

Boston.com: The difference between fares and passes is the key to the MBTA’s price increases

Fox 25: Bill pushed by head of state's transportation committee could help fund Green Line

expansion [VIDEO]

Fox 25: FOX25 Investigates crime at T stations [VIDEO]

WGBH: Aloisi: It Will Take More Than a Fare Hike To Fix The MBTA

Lynn Item: Editorial: You get what you pay for

Gun Control:

Boston Globe: Officials back bill mandating markings for fake guns

Boston Herald: President Obama seeks Mass. help with firearms agenda

Boston Herald: Peterson: Obama should tackle urban gun crime

DCF:

Boston Globe: Bella Bond’s mother pleads not guilty

Boston.com: Mother of Bella Bond held on $1 million bail in toddler’s death

Worcester T&G: Dianne Williamson: Judgment of Worcester toddler's mother is too hasty

Opioid Addiction:

AP: 40 Mass. Communities To Get Funds For Anti-Overdose Drug



Boston.com: Massachusetts cities and towns will get $700,000 to fight the opioid epidemic

Metro: Forty Massachusetts cities and towns will get $700,000 for Narcan

Springfield Repub: Gov. Baker announces $700,000 in Narcan grants as Massachusetts towns

continue to battle heroin epidemic

Lowell Sun: Lowell, Fitchburg land state grants for naloxone

Worcester T&G: Worcester, Fitchburg, Leominster receive money for overdose drug

Worcester Mag: Governor, state DPH announce $700,000 in naloxone grants

WWLP: More Narcan coming to western Mass. communities [VIDEO]

Western Mass News: Five local cities to receive grants to purchase opioid reversal drug

Fall River Herald: High opioid overdose death rate lands naloxone grant for Fall River

Brockton Enterprise: Gov. Baker announces Narcan grant money for Brockton

WHDH: Several local communities to receive grants for opioid overdose reversal drug

MetroWest Daily: Framingham gets state grant to help it purchase opioid overdose reversal drug

Quincy Patriot-Ledger: Quincy, Weymouth and Plymouth first responders receive Narcan

grants

Wicked Local: Gov. Baker announces $700,000 in Naxolone grants for first responders

Stoughton Journal: Gov. Baker announces Narcan grant money for Brockton

Other:

Boston Globe: Driver’s license law may change

Boston Globe: Regulators approve $1.2b Vermont power line

Boston Herald: Hanscom may house children entering U.S. without parents



North of Boston Media: Editorial: Baker is right on need for fiscal discipline

SHNS: Baker plan would move driver citations into electronic realm

SHNS: Baker joins DeLeo, cabinet members at Boston hospital

Lynn Item: Baker stays in Swampscott for ideas about job creation

MetroWest Daily: Baker says it's a 'no-brainer': Framingham should be a city

News:

Boston Globe:

Editorial: The city’s lawyer needs to stay out of politics

Fear of deportations swirls in state

Mass. police chiefs urge fingerprinting for Uber drivers

Decision expected from GE this month

Mass. lawmakers hear testimony on bike safety proposals

Panel orders police recruit reinstated

Abraham: City Hall not open to all, lawyer’s rise suggests

Garcia: Immigrants deliver the day

Boston apartment rents up nearly 6 percent in 2015

Boston Herald:

Editorial: Sex offender snafu

Sex offenders set to be delisted by court ruling

Walsh: Foes of Olympic Games ‘had a point’

Ex-Walsh aide among three lobbyists for Grand Prix



Handicapped time limit, scofflaws targeted

AP:

Lawmakers approve drug offender driver's license bill

SHNS:

Mass. DPH: Latest data shows more died by suicide than car crashes, homicides combined.

Senate plans pair of special elections on may 10th

IG: Abuse of disability parking placards rampant

Fortune:

Business Gets Schooled: A look into the battle over Common Core

CNHI:

Proposals would stop drivers' cellphone use

WGBH:

Bike Advocates Urge Safety Guards To Prevent Tractor Trailer Deathtraps

WBUR:

Massachusetts Education Again Ranks No. 1 Nationally

Bay State Banner:Foreclosure activists fight to halt law

Fox 25:

Friends, family of victims push for new bike safety laws [VIDEO]

FOX25 Investigates uncovers disturbing allegations against former Swampscott

principal [VIDEO]

State Senator proposes harsher highway protesting fines [VIDEO]

Springfield Repub:

Editorial: Suicide figures among Massachusetts correctional officers paint frightening picture

Department of Homeland Security office in Springfield in disarray, wracked by internal

squabbling, court records show



Salem News:

Moulton confirms he will seek reelection

Lynn Item:

Posse Foundation rescues Lynn students

Lowell Sun:

Report: Ex-Lowell High headmaster left Swampscott post amid online sex-talk allegations

Fitchburg Sentinel:

Devens tour highlights manufacturing potential

New Bedford Standard-Times:

New Bedford mayor continues to push for retail, commercial uses at waterfront

New Bedford-area lawmakers pushing for ex-casino site plans

Cape Cod Times:

Editorial: Should state raise charter cap?

Greenfield Recorder:

Editorial: 5 issues that should be legislative priorities



From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

To: Amy Eisenstadt


Subject: Hypothetical I-Cubed Pricing Summary

Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 3:12:38 PM

Attachments: Commonwealth of MA, (Commonwealth Contract Assistance) - Hypothetical $50 Million New Money Cash Flows 11.24.2015.pdf

Amy,

I asked a banker who has worked on previous I-Cubed transactions to run a simulation of a hypothetical I-Cubed bond issue pricing, had the bonds been offered yesterday. This is a snapshot of yesterday’s market at our current Commonwealth GO bond rating of AA+. I need to caveat that the attached document does not constitute an offer to buy or sell actual securities; it is just an example of how a bond issue might look for 30 year debt on a $50 million project. Different circumstances could produce different results. I hope this is illustrative.

It was a pleasure speaking with you yesterday. If you have any additional questions about the I-Cubed program or any other related matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to working with you. Have a happy Thanksgiving.

Regards,

Jennifer

Jennifer Sullivan

Assistant Secretary for Capital Finance

Executive Office for Administration and FinanceState House Room 373

Boston, Massachusetts 02133P: (617) 727-2040 ext. 35432

[email protected]



Nov 24, 2015 5:29 pm Prepared by J.P. Morgan Securities LLC

TABLE OF CONTENTS


Special Obligation Bonds (Commonwealth Contract Assistance)

**Proposed $50 Million New Money Financing**

Rates as of November 24, 2015.

Report Page

Sources and Uses of Funds .............................. 1

Bond Summary Statistics .............................. 2

Bond Pricing ................................... 3

Bond Debt Service ................................. 5

Disclaimer .................................... 6

Municipal Advisor Rule’s IRMA Exemption ....................... 7



Nov 24, 2015 5:29 pm Prepared by J.P. Morgan Securities LLC Page 1

SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS





Sources:

Bond Proceeds:Par Amount 43,305,000.00

Premium 6,694,287.50

49,999,287.50

Uses:

Project Fund Deposits:

Project Fund 49,476,067.50

Delivery Date Expenses:Cost of Issuance 350,000.00

Underwriter's Discount:

Other Underwriter's Discount 173,220.00

49,999,287.50




BOND SUMMARY STATISTICS





Dated Date 12/09/2015Delivery Date 12/09/2015

Last Maturity 05/01/2045

Arbitrage Yield 2.939125%

True Interest Cost (TIC) 3.792718%

Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.180419%

All-In TIC 3.850785%Average Coupon 4.991672%

Average Life (years) 18.562

Duration of Issue (years) 12.391

Par Amount 43,305,000.00

Bond Proceeds 49,999,287.50Total Interest 40,124,380.56

Net Interest 33,603,313.06

Total Debt Service 83,429,380.56

Maximum Annual Debt Service 2,840,450.00Average Annual Debt Service 2,838,270.36

Underwriter's Fees (per $1000)

Average Takedown Other Fee 4.000000

Total Underwriter's Discount 4.000000

Bid Price 115.058463

Par Average Average PV of 1 bp

Bond Component Value Price Coupon Life change

Serial Bonds Through 2035 21,395,000.00 117.144 4.973% 11.665 16,692.10

Term Bond Maturing in 2040 9,620,000.00 114.153 5.000% 22.492 8,369.40Term Bond Maturing in 2045 12,290,000.00 113.546 5.000% 27.492 10,569.40

43,305,000.00 18.562 35,630.90

All-In Arbitrage

TIC TIC Yield

Par Value 43,305,000.00 43,305,000.00 43,305,000.00 + Accrued Interest

+ Premium (Discount) 6,694,287.50 6,694,287.50 6,694,287.50

- Underwriter's Discount -173,220.00 -173,220.00

- Cost of Issuance Expense -350,000.00

- Other Amounts

Target Value 49,826,067.50 49,476,067.50 49,999,287.50

Target Date 12/09/2015 12/09/2015 12/09/2015

Yield 3.792718% 3.850785% 2.939125%




BOND PRICING





Maturity Yield to Call CBond Component Date Amount Rate Yield Price Maturity Date P

Serial Bonds Through 2035:

05/01/2016 280,000 2.000% 0.200% 100.709

05/01/2017 715,000 3.000% 0.620% 103.298

05/01/2018 740,000 4.000% 0.900% 107.326

05/01/2019 765,000 4.000% 1.100% 109.635 05/01/2020 800,000 5.000% 1.300% 115.752

05/01/2021 840,000 5.000% 1.510% 118.013

05/01/2022 880,000 5.000% 1.710% 119.846

05/01/2023 925,000 5.000% 1.910% 121.212

05/01/2024 970,000 5.000% 2.080% 122.382

05/01/2025 1,020,000 5.000% 2.220% 123.453

05/01/2026 1,070,000 5.000% 2.390% 121.843 C 2.589% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2027 1,125,000 5.000% 2.500% 120.814 C 2.848% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2028 1,180,000 5.000% 2.620% 119.703 C 3.076% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2029 1,240,000 5.000% 2.730% 118.695 C 3.265% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2030 1,300,000 5.000% 2.810% 117.969 C 3.410% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2031 1,365,000 5.000% 2.870% 117.427 C 3.523% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2032 1,435,000 5.000% 2.920% 116.978 C 3.618% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2033 1,505,000 5.000% 2.970% 116.532 C 3.702% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2034 1,580,000 5.000% 3.020% 116.087 C 3.778% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2035 1,660,000 5.000% 3.070% 115.644 C 3.848% 05/01/2025 100.

21,395,000

Term Bond Maturing in 2040:

05/01/2036 1,740,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2037 1,830,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2038 1,920,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2039 2,015,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2040 2,115,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

9,620,000

Term Bond Maturing in 2045:05/01/2041 2,225,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2042 2,335,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2043 2,450,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2044 2,575,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2045 2,705,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

12,290,000

43,305,000




BOND PRICING






First Coupon 05/01/2016

Par Amount 43,305,000.00

Premium 6,694,287.50

Production 49,999,287.50 115.458463%Underwriter's Discount -173,220.00 -0.400000%

Purchase Price 49,826,067.50 115.058463%

Accrued Interest

Net Proceeds 49,826,067.50




BOND DEBT SERVICE





PeriodEnding Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service

05/01/2016 280,000 2.000% 839,180.56 1,119,180.56

05/01/2017 715,000 3.000% 2,121,900.00 2,836,900.00

05/01/2018 740,000 4.000% 2,100,450.00 2,840,450.00

05/01/2019 765,000 4.000% 2,070,850.00 2,835,850.00

05/01/2020 800,000 5.000% 2,040,250.00 2,840,250.0005/01/2021 840,000 5.000% 2,000,250.00 2,840,250.00

05/01/2022 880,000 5.000% 1,958,250.00 2,838,250.00

05/01/2023 925,000 5.000% 1,914,250.00 2,839,250.00

05/01/2024 970,000 5.000% 1,868,000.00 2,838,000.00

05/01/2025 1,020,000 5.000% 1,819,500.00 2,839,500.00

05/01/2026 1,070,000 5.000% 1,768,500.00 2,838,500.00

05/01/2027 1,125,000 5.000% 1,715,000.00 2,840,000.0005/01/2028 1,180,000 5.000% 1,658,750.00 2,838,750.00

05/01/2029 1,240,000 5.000% 1,599,750.00 2,839,750.00

05/01/2030 1,300,000 5.000% 1,537,750.00 2,837,750.00

05/01/2031 1,365,000 5.000% 1,472,750.00 2,837,750.0005/01/2032 1,435,000 5.000% 1,404,500.00 2,839,500.00

05/01/2033 1,505,000 5.000% 1,332,750.00 2,837,750.00

05/01/2034 1,580,000 5.000% 1,257,500.00 2,837,500.00

05/01/2035 1,660,000 5.000% 1,178,500.00 2,838,500.0005/01/2036 1,740,000 5.000% 1,095,500.00 2,835,500.00

05/01/2037 1,830,000 5.000% 1,008,500.00 2,838,500.00

05/01/2038 1,920,000 5.000% 917,000.00 2,837,000.00

05/01/2039 2,015,000 5.000% 821,000.00 2,836,000.00

05/01/2040 2,115,000 5.000% 720,250.00 2,835,250.00

05/01/2041 2,225,000 5.000% 614,500.00 2,839,500.00

05/01/2042 2,335,000 5.000% 503,250.00 2,838,250.0005/01/2043 2,450,000 5.000% 386,500.00 2,836,500.00

05/01/2044 2,575,000 5.000% 264,000.00 2,839,000.00

05/01/2045 2,705,000 5.000% 135,250.00 2,840,250.00

43,305,000 40,124,380.56 83,429,380.56




DISCLAIMER





This presentation was prepared exclusively for the benefit and internal use of the J.P. Morgan client to whom it is directly addressed and delivered (including suchclient's affiliates, the 'Client') in order to assist the Client in evaluating, on a preliminary basis, the feasibility of possible transactions referenced herein. The materials

have been provided to the Client for informational purposes only and may not be relied upon by the Client in evaluating the merits of pursuing transactions describedherein. No assurance can be given that any transaction mentioned herein could in fact be executed.

Information has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable but J.P. Morgan does not warrant its completeness or accuracy. Opinions and estimates constitute

our judgment as of the date of this material and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Any financial products

discussed may fluctuate in price or value. This presentation does not constitute a commitment by any J.P. Morgan entity to underwrite, subscribe for or place anysecurities or to extend or arrange credit or to provide any other services.

J.P. Morgan's presentation is delivered to you for the purpose of being engaged as an underwriter, not as an advisor, (including, without limitation, a Municipal

Advisor (as such term is defined in Section 975(e) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act)). The role of an underwriter and its

relationship to an issuer of debt is not equivalent to the role of an independent financial advisor. The primary role of an underwriter is to purchase, or arrange for the

purchase of, securities in an arm's-length commercial transaction between the issuer and the underwriter.An underwriter has financial and other interests that differ

from those of the issuer. If selected as your underwriter, J.P. Morgan will be acting as a principal and not as your agent or your fiduciary with respect to the offering ofthe securities or the process leading to issuance (whether or not J.P. Morgan or any affiliate has advised or is currently advising the Client on other matters). Any

portion of this presentation which provides information on municipal financial products or the issuance of municipal securities is given in response to your questions

or to demonstrate our experience in the municipal markets and does not constitute 'advice' within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform

and Consumer Protection Act. We encourage you to consult with your own legal and financial advisors to the extent you deem appropriate in connection with theoffering of the securities. If you have any questions concerning our intended role and relationship with you, we would be happy to discuss this with you further.

This communication shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the securities in any state or jurisdiction in

which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.

This material is not a product of the Research Departments of J.P. Morgan Securities LLC ('JPMS') and is not a research report. Unless otherwise specifically stated,

any views or opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors listed, and may differ from the views and opinions expressed by JPMS's Research Departments

or other departments or divisions of JPMS and its affiliates. Research reports and notes produced by the Research Departments of JPMS are available from your

Registered Representative or at http://www.morganmarkets.com. JPMS's policies prohibit employees from offering, directly or indirectly, a favorable research rating

or specific price target, or offering to change a rating or price target, to a subject Client as consideration or inducement for the receipt of business or for compensation.

JPMS also prohibits its research analysts from being compensated for involvement in investment banking transactions except to the extent that such participation isintended to benefit investors.

J.P. Morgan makes no representations as to the legal, tax, credit, or accounting treatment of any transactions mentioned herein, or any other effects such transactions

may have on you and your affiliates or any other parties to such transactions and their respective affiliates. You should consult with your own advisors as to such

matters.

IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates do not provide tax advice. Accordingly, any discussion of U.S. tax matters included herein (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, in connection with the promotion, marketing or recommendation by anyone not

affiliated with JPMorgan Chase & Co. of any of the matters addressed herein or for the purpose of avoiding U.S. tax-related penalties.

This presentation does not carry any right of publication or disclosure, in whole or in part, to any other party, without the prior consent of J.P. Morgan. Additional

information is available upon request.

J.P. Morgan is the marketing name for the investment banking activities of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (member, NYSE), J.P. MorganSecurities plc (authorized by the FSA and member, LSE) and their investment banking affiliates.




MUNICIPAL ADVISOR RULE’S IRMA EXEMPTION





(a) This material is provided to you in reliance on the Independent Registered Municipal Advisor exemption pursuant to Section 15B of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended; (b) J.P. Morgan is not acting as an advisor to you and does not owe a fiduciary duty pursuant to Section 15B of the Securities Exchange Act of

1934, as amended, to you with respect to the information and material contained in this communication; (c) J.P. Morgan is acting for its own interests; (d) You shoulddiscuss any information and material contained in this communication with any and all internal or external advisors and experts that you deem appropriate before

acting on this information or material; and (e) J.P. Morgan seeks to serve as an underwriter on a future transaction and not as a financial advisor or municipal advisor.

The information provided is for discussion purposes only in anticipation of being engaged to serve or in relation to our engagement as an underwriter. The primary

role of an underwriter is to purchase securities with a view to distribute in an arm’s-length commercial transaction. The underwriter has financial and other interests

that differ from yours.




TABLE OF CONTENTS





Report Page

Sources and Uses of Funds .............................. 1

Bond Summary Statistics .............................. 2

Bond Pricing ................................... 3

Bond Debt Service ................................. 5

Disclaimer .................................... 6

Municipal Advisor Rule’s IRMA Exemption ....................... 7




SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS





Sources:

Bond Proceeds:Par Amount 43,305,000.00

Premium 6,694,287.50

49,999,287.50

Uses:

Project Fund Deposits:

Project Fund 49,476,067.50

Delivery Date Expenses:Cost of Issuance 350,000.00

Underwriter's Discount:

Other Underwriter's Discount 173,220.00

49,999,287.50




BOND SUMMARY STATISTICS






Last Maturity 05/01/2045

Arbitrage Yield 2.939125%

True Interest Cost (TIC) 3.792718%

Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.180419%

All-In TIC 3.850785%Average Coupon 4.991672%

Average Life (years) 18.562

Duration of Issue (years) 12.391

Par Amount 43,305,000.00

Bond Proceeds 49,999,287.50Total Interest 40,124,380.56

Net Interest 33,603,313.06

Total Debt Service 83,429,380.56

Maximum Annual Debt Service 2,840,450.00Average Annual Debt Service 2,838,270.36

Underwriter's Fees (per $1000)

Average Takedown Other Fee 4.000000

Total Underwriter's Discount 4.000000

Bid Price 115.058463

Par Average Average PV of 1 bp

Bond Component Value Price Coupon Life change

Serial Bonds Through 2035 21,395,000.00 117.144 4.973% 11.665 16,692.10

Term Bond Maturing in 2040 9,620,000.00 114.153 5.000% 22.492 8,369.40Term Bond Maturing in 2045 12,290,000.00 113.546 5.000% 27.492 10,569.40

43,305,000.00 18.562 35,630.90

All-In Arbitrage

TIC TIC Yield

Par Value 43,305,000.00 43,305,000.00 43,305,000.00 + Accrued Interest

+ Premium (Discount) 6,694,287.50 6,694,287.50 6,694,287.50

- Underwriter's Discount -173,220.00 -173,220.00

- Cost of Issuance Expense -350,000.00

- Other Amounts

Target Value 49,826,067.50 49,476,067.50 49,999,287.50

Target Date 12/09/2015 12/09/2015 12/09/2015

Yield 3.792718% 3.850785% 2.939125%




BOND PRICING





Maturity Yield to Call CBond Component Date Amount Rate Yield Price Maturity Date P

Serial Bonds Through 2035:

05/01/2016 280,000 2.000% 0.200% 100.709

05/01/2017 715,000 3.000% 0.620% 103.298

05/01/2018 740,000 4.000% 0.900% 107.326

05/01/2019 765,000 4.000% 1.100% 109.635 05/01/2020 800,000 5.000% 1.300% 115.752

05/01/2021 840,000 5.000% 1.510% 118.013

05/01/2022 880,000 5.000% 1.710% 119.846

05/01/2023 925,000 5.000% 1.910% 121.212

05/01/2024 970,000 5.000% 2.080% 122.382

05/01/2025 1,020,000 5.000% 2.220% 123.453

05/01/2026 1,070,000 5.000% 2.390% 121.843 C 2.589% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2027 1,125,000 5.000% 2.500% 120.814 C 2.848% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2028 1,180,000 5.000% 2.620% 119.703 C 3.076% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2029 1,240,000 5.000% 2.730% 118.695 C 3.265% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2030 1,300,000 5.000% 2.810% 117.969 C 3.410% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2031 1,365,000 5.000% 2.870% 117.427 C 3.523% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2032 1,435,000 5.000% 2.920% 116.978 C 3.618% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2033 1,505,000 5.000% 2.970% 116.532 C 3.702% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2034 1,580,000 5.000% 3.020% 116.087 C 3.778% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2035 1,660,000 5.000% 3.070% 115.644 C 3.848% 05/01/2025 100.

21,395,000

Term Bond Maturing in 2040:

05/01/2036 1,740,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.05/01/2037 1,830,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2038 1,920,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2039 2,015,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2040 2,115,000 5.000% 3.240% 114.153 C 4.078% 05/01/2025 100.

9,620,000

Term Bond Maturing in 2045:05/01/2041 2,225,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2042 2,335,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2043 2,450,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2044 2,575,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

05/01/2045 2,705,000 5.000% 3.310% 113.546 C 4.194% 05/01/2025 100.

12,290,000

43,305,000




BOND PRICING






First Coupon 05/01/2016

Par Amount 43,305,000.00

Premium 6,694,287.50

Production 49,999,287.50 115.458463%Underwriter's Discount -173,220.00 -0.400000%

Purchase Price 49,826,067.50 115.058463%

Accrued Interest

Net Proceeds 49,826,067.50




BOND DEBT SERVICE





PeriodEnding Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service

05/01/2016 280,000 2.000% 839,180.56 1,119,180.56

05/01/2017 715,000 3.000% 2,121,900.00 2,836,900.00

05/01/2018 740,000 4.000% 2,100,450.00 2,840,450.00

05/01/2019 765,000 4.000% 2,070,850.00 2,835,850.00

05/01/2020 800,000 5.000% 2,040,250.00 2,840,250.0005/01/2021 840,000 5.000% 2,000,250.00 2,840,250.00

05/01/2022 880,000 5.000% 1,958,250.00 2,838,250.00

05/01/2023 925,000 5.000% 1,914,250.00 2,839,250.00

05/01/2024 970,000 5.000% 1,868,000.00 2,838,000.00

05/01/2025 1,020,000 5.000% 1,819,500.00 2,839,500.00

05/01/2026 1,070,000 5.000% 1,768,500.00 2,838,500.00

05/01/2027 1,125,000 5.000% 1,715,000.00 2,840,000.0005/01/2028 1,180,000 5.000% 1,658,750.00 2,838,750.00

05/01/2029 1,240,000 5.000% 1,599,750.00 2,839,750.00

05/01/2030 1,300,000 5.000% 1,537,750.00 2,837,750.00

05/01/2031 1,365,000 5.000% 1,472,750.00 2,837,750.0005/01/2032 1,435,000 5.000% 1,404,500.00 2,839,500.00

05/01/2033 1,505,000 5.000% 1,332,750.00 2,837,750.00

05/01/2034 1,580,000 5.000% 1,257,500.00 2,837,500.00

05/01/2035 1,660,000 5.000% 1,178,500.00 2,838,500.0005/01/2036 1,740,000 5.000% 1,095,500.00 2,835,500.00

05/01/2037 1,830,000 5.000% 1,008,500.00 2,838,500.00

05/01/2038 1,920,000 5.000% 917,000.00 2,837,000.00

05/01/2039 2,015,000 5.000% 821,000.00 2,836,000.00

05/01/2040 2,115,000 5.000% 720,250.00 2,835,250.00

05/01/2041 2,225,000 5.000% 614,500.00 2,839,500.00

05/01/2042 2,335,000 5.000% 503,250.00 2,838,250.0005/01/2043 2,450,000 5.000% 386,500.00 2,836,500.00

05/01/2044 2,575,000 5.000% 264,000.00 2,839,000.00

05/01/2045 2,705,000 5.000% 135,250.00 2,840,250.00

43,305,000 40,124,380.56 83,429,380.56




DISCLAIMER





This presentation was prepared exclusively for the benefit and internal use of the J.P. Morgan client to whom it is directly addressed and delivered (including suchclient's affiliates, the 'Client') in order to assist the Client in evaluating, on a preliminary basis, the feasibility of possible transactions referenced herein. The materials

have been provided to the Client for informational purposes only and may not be relied upon by the Client in evaluating the merits of pursuing transactions describedherein. No assurance can be given that any transaction mentioned herein could in fact be executed.

Information has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable but J.P. Morgan does not warrant its completeness or accuracy. Opinions and estimates constitute

our judgment as of the date of this material and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Any financial products

discussed may fluctuate in price or value. This presentation does not constitute a commitment by any J.P. Morgan entity to underwrite, subscribe for or place anysecurities or to extend or arrange credit or to provide any other services.

J.P. Morgan's presentation is delivered to you for the purpose of being engaged as an underwriter, not as an advisor, (including, without limitation, a Municipal

Advisor (as such term is defined in Section 975(e) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act)). The role of an underwriter and its

relationship to an issuer of debt is not equivalent to the role of an independent financial advisor. The primary role of an underwriter is to purchase, or arrange for the

purchase of, securities in an arm's-length commercial transaction between the issuer and the underwriter.An underwriter has financial and other interests that differ

from those of the issuer. If selected as your underwriter, J.P. Morgan will be acting as a principal and not as your agent or your fiduciary with respect to the offering ofthe securities or the process leading to issuance (whether or not J.P. Morgan or any affiliate has advised or is currently advising the Client on other matters). Any

portion of this presentation which provides information on municipal financial products or the issuance of municipal securities is given in response to your questions

or to demonstrate our experience in the municipal markets and does not constitute 'advice' within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform

and Consumer Protection Act. We encourage you to consult with your own legal and financial advisors to the extent you deem appropriate in connection with theoffering of the securities. If you have any questions concerning our intended role and relationship with you, we would be happy to discuss this with you further.

This communication shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the securities in any state or jurisdiction in

which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.

This material is not a product of the Research Departments of J.P. Morgan Securities LLC ('JPMS') and is not a research report. Unless otherwise specifically stated,

any views or opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors listed, and may differ from the views and opinions expressed by JPMS's Research Departments

or other departments or divisions of JPMS and its affiliates. Research reports and notes produced by the Research Departments of JPMS are available from your

Registered Representative or at http://www.morganmarkets.com. JPMS's policies prohibit employees from offering, directly or indirectly, a favorable research rating

or specific price target, or offering to change a rating or price target, to a subject Client as consideration or inducement for the receipt of business or for compensation.

JPMS also prohibits its research analysts from being compensated for involvement in investment banking transactions except to the extent that such participation isintended to benefit investors.

J.P. Morgan makes no representations as to the legal, tax, credit, or accounting treatment of any transactions mentioned herein, or any other effects such transactions

may have on you and your affiliates or any other parties to such transactions and their respective affiliates. You should consult with your own advisors as to such

matters.

IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates do not provide tax advice. Accordingly, any discussion of U.S. tax matters included herein (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, in connection with the promotion, marketing or recommendation by anyone not

affiliated with JPMorgan Chase & Co. of any of the matters addressed herein or for the purpose of avoiding U.S. tax-related penalties.

This presentation does not carry any right of publication or disclosure, in whole or in part, to any other party, without the prior consent of J.P. Morgan. Additional

information is available upon request.

J.P. Morgan is the marketing name for the investment banking activities of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (member, NYSE), J.P. MorganSecurities plc (authorized by the FSA and member, LSE) and their investment banking affiliates.




MUNICIPAL ADVISOR RULE’S IRMA EXEMPTION





(a) This material is provided to you in reliance on the Independent Registered Municipal Advisor exemption pursuant to Section 15B of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended; (b) J.P. Morgan is not acting as an advisor to you and does not owe a fiduciary duty pursuant to Section 15B of the Securities Exchange Act of

1934, as amended, to you with respect to the information and material contained in this communication; (c) J.P. Morgan is acting for its own interests; (d) You shoulddiscuss any information and material contained in this communication with any and all internal or external advisors and experts that you deem appropriate before

acting on this information or material; and (e) J.P. Morgan seeks to serve as an underwriter on a future transaction and not as a financial advisor or municipal advisor.

The information provided is for discussion purposes only in anticipation of being engaged to serve or in relation to our engagement as an underwriter. The primary

role of an underwriter is to purchase securities with a view to distribute in an arm’s-length commercial transaction. The underwriter has financial and other interests

that differ from yours.



From: Morse, Elizabeth

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James

Subject: Massport Presentation


Attachments: Massport 12 8 15 Deck v2.pdf

Attached please find a draft presentation from Massport. Please email or call with any edits. Thanks, Elizabeth

Elizabeth Morse

Chief of Staff


One Harborside Drive, Suite 200S

East Boston, MA 02128

617-568-1007

[email protected]




December 8, 2015

DRAFT 12/8/15 10 AM



Massport Overview






• Real Estate




2



Massport Real Estate

• Successful History of Massport Developments

• Massport Parcels in Seaport / Innovation District

• Proposed Lease Terms

3



Successful History of Massport Developments

• Massport is a Capable Development Partner

• Long Term Ground Leases

• Creative structure to lease arrangements

• Demonstrated to be financeable

• Ability to Execute

• One-stop shopping

• Demonstrated track record

• Streamlined Permitting

• Massport successfully permitted a master plan for CommonwealthFlats that includes over 7 million square feet of mixed-usedevelopment

• Expedited / coordinated review by the Commonwealth and City ofBoston managed by Massport

4



Successful History of Massport Developments

• Fidelityo Commonwealth Pier / World Trade Center (1996)

o

Seaport Hotel (1998)o East Office Building (2000)

o West Office Building (2002)

• John Hancock U.S. Corporate Headquarters (2003)

• Park Lane Seaport Apartments (2006)

• Boston Waterfront Renaissance Hotel (2008)

• Liberty Wharf Restaurant Row(2011)• Waterside Place Apartments (2014)

5




Boston

FidelityInvestments



Massport Parcels in Seaport/Innovation District

Six Parcels for Consideration:

1. World Trade Center (WTC) Avenue

2. Parcel D-33. Summer Street Parcel

4. Parcel D-2

5. Parcel A-2

6. Parcel H

7



Massport Development Parcels – South Boston

8



9


adjacent to the



design)


development



Rights Garage



Line station

Air Rights

Garage Site Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Parcel

A-2



Parcel D-3

• 2.8 acre parcel


D Streets



650,000 sf



use


BCEC/Westin Hotel


structured parking



11

3 acre parcel

Summer Street

Frontage


sf


structured parking





recommended


Summer Street

Summer Street Parce

Summer Street

Parcel D-3

E

S t r e e t






Center Avenue



development


250 room hotel






design)

Air

Rights

Garage

Site



Parcel A-2

13

• 1.2 acre parcel



Center Avenue



sf, suitable for



WTC Station, with

potential direct





direct pedestrian

connection)

Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Air Rights

Garage Site



Parcel H

14

1.8 acre parcel


Street

Master plan program


sf, suitable for



structured parking


ground)




Way and T Station

Air Rights

Garage Site

Parcel

A-2



Proposed Lease Terms

• Turnkey development

• By Massport directly or through selected private development

entity• Tenant Improvements included

• Construction costs for parking included

• Flexible space lease terms create lower occupancy costs• In concert with Commonwealth / City investments, Massport can

offer lease rates that overall are at a significant discount to market

• Early years at significant discount that gradually move to marketrates or discount applied over lease period

15











16










17
















Massport Air Cargo






20









21




22











Appendix

27



Governing Documents








28







Date: Friday, July 10, 2015 4:51:49 PM

Attachments: Matthew_G_Cribbins.pdf Laurie Bevier bio.docPereira Outside Bio with photo.pdf Cavanaugh bio 2015.doc

May Bio 1-2015.docWills Bio July 2015.docCDrumgoole Bio - GE Chief Operating Officer 04102015tr (2).pdf Klee Bio.docx

Jay,





















Karen

Karen Kulish



O:

C:





Fairfield, CT 06828




Matthew G. Cribbins

Vice President



2014.








January 2011.


CT.



Laurie F. Bevier


GE Corporate

Fairfield, CT




















T:E:W: www.ge.com

















EILEEN M. CAVANAUGH

"EILEEN"

























Fairfield, CT 06431

















intensity.


in 2007.
























About IT at GE






business is done.



Ann R. Klee











From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


Subject: Project Plum Follow up


Jay,

I tried to reach you earlier by phone to follow up on our meeting in Fairfield. Would you give me a

call at your convenience on my cell – . More details to follow, but we would like to

proceed to next phase with you and the MA team, including site visits to Boston and the area of

South of Boston that we discussed.

Thanks.

ark

Ann R. Klee

Vice PresidentGlobal Operations – Environment, Health & Safety

GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

(o)

(m)






Date: Thursday, July 23, 2015 9:56:27 AM

Attachments: CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT(participant).docx

Jay,

A couple of items as we prepare for our meeting next week.

First, if you’re planning to include non-government people (e.g., business leaders) with you next

week to help present for Massachusetts, please make sure that they have signed an NDA. I am

attaching a version that is tailored for non-government individuals. Thanks.

Also please let me know if you have any special AV or IT needs for your presentation.

Finally, we are planning to provide beverages and light refreshments for you and members of your

delegation. We are sensitive that some states have strict policies that govern the provision of food and beverage to government officials, so please let us know how we can best accommodate you.

Thanks again for your attention to the NDA. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Look forward to seeing you next week.

ark

Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

(o)

(m)



CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT

This Confidentiality Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into this ___ day of

_________, 20___, by Participant ____________, (the “Participant”) for the benefit of Project

Plum, with General Electric Company a New York corporation (the “Company”).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, the Participant has been requested to participate in a confidential exchange ofinformation of a non-public nature between [the State], the Company and the Participant and its

agents, employees and representatives in connection with discussions regarding the potential

location of Company’s international headquarters ( the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, in the course of its discussions with the Company relating to the Project, the

Participant may receive certain private and confidential proprietary information provided for

discussion concerning the Project from or about the Company, including but not limited toinvestment information, project plans and requirements, technical and business information

regarding business operations and affairs, financial data, sales and marketing information,

specifications, drawings, sketches, data, documentation, correspondence or any other private or proprietary ideas or information (“Confidential Information”); and

WHEREAS, the Participant has reviewed and acknowledges the Confidentiality Agreement previously entered into between [the State] and the Company and understands that parties desire

to establish additional terms governing the disclosures of Confidential Information that will be

made by the Company to the Participant;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants set forth herein and other good and

valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, andintending to be legally bound, the parties agree as follows:

The Participant shall, with respect to any Confidential Information (a) hold the Confidential

Information in strict confidence using at least the same care and caution it affords its ownconfidential information, but in no case less than a reasonable degree of care; (b) take any and all

steps which may be necessary and reasonable to protect the Confidential Information; (c) use the

Confidential Information only in connection with the Project; (d) reproduce the ConfidentialInformation only to the extent necessary in connection with the Project. The obligations of the

Participant to maintain the confidentiality of the Confidential Information it has received under

this Agreement shall continue for a period of three (3) years from the date of receipt of suchConfidential Information.

The Participant hereby acknowledges and agrees that (a) the term “Confidential Information” as

used herein also includes: (i) the fact that the Confidential Information has been made availableto the Participant; (ii) the fact that the Participant is discussing the Project with the Company;

and (iii) any of the terms, conditions or other facts with respect to the Project or other related

transactions, including the status thereof; and (b) any Confidential Information supplied by the



Company prior to the execution of this Agreement shall be subject to the same treatment as the

Confidential Information made available after the execution of this Agreement.

The obligations with respect to the Confidential Information under this Agreement shall not

apply to any Confidential Information which the Participant can show, by written evidence (a) isin the public domain (provided that such information has not or does not come into the public

domain as the result of a disclosure by the Participant); (b) is received by the Participant on a

non-confidential basis from a source other than the Company (provided that such source is not

bound by a confidentiality agreement with the Company or another party).

The Participant shall not issue any press release or otherwise make any public announcement or

Participant with respect to the transactions contemplated in connection with the Project withoutthe prior written consent of the Company.

The disclosure of Confidential Information shall not be construed to grant to the Participant any

license, ownership or other proprietary interest in the Confidential Information. The Participantagrees that it does not acquire any title, ownership, or other intellectual property right or license

in or to the Confidential Information by virtue of such disclosure, and all Confidential

Information (including tangible copies and computerized or electronic versions and summariesthereof) shall remain the property of the Company.

Within ten (10) days following the receipt of a written request, the Participant shall deliver to theCompany all tangible materials containing or embodying the Confidential Information received

from the Company along with any copies, reproductions, and summaries thereof, together with a

certificate executed by the Participant certifying that all such materials in the Participant’s possession have been delivered to the Company. That portion of the Confidential Information

which has been incorporated into analyses, compilations, comparisons, studies or other

documents prepared by the Participant or its Representatives shall be held by the Participant andkept confidential as provided in this Agreement and shall not be used for any reason other than in

connection with the Project or shall be destroyed.

In the event any legal action is required to enforce this Agreement, each party shall bear itsrepresentative attorney’s fees and costs.

The Participant agrees that its obligations hereunder are necessary and reasonable to protect theCompany and expressly agrees that monetary damages might be inadequate to compensate the

Company for any breach of any covenant or agreement set forth herein. The Participant agrees

and acknowledges that any such violation or threatened violation may cause irreparable injury tothe Company and that, if deemed appropriate by the court presiding over the matter, the

Company (in addition to any other rights and remedies that may be available at law or in equity)

may be entitled to seek injunctive relief against the threatened breach of this Agreement or the

continuation of any such breach.

This Agreement shall be governed and interpreted under the laws of the Participant of New

York, without regard to its choice of law provisions.



Neither party shall assign this Agreement without the prior written approval of the other party.

This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties hereto as to Confidential

Information and merges all prior discussions between them relating thereto. No amendment or

modification of this Agreement shall be valid or binding on the parties unless made in writingand signed on behalf of each of the parties by their respective duly authorized officers or

representatives.

This Agreement may be executed by facsimile signature in any number of counterparts, all ofwhich taken together shall constitute one in the same instrument.

No failure or delay by either party in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shalloperate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or

further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, power or privilege hereunder.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this ConfidentialityAgreement effective as of the date first written above.

______________ General Electric Company

By: _________________________________ By: _________________________________

Name: Name: Ann R. KleeTitle: Title: Vice President, Global Operations –

Environment, Health and Safety





Cc: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)



Attachments: image001.pngProject Plum NDA -- July 2015.docx

Jay,

Following up on our conversation, we would like to invite the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to

come to Fairfield, CT at end of July to engage in a discussion about the potential relocation of the GE

headquarters to the Boston area. As we discussed, I appreciate your including a representative

from the City on your team.

This is a significant decision for GE. While we want to move expeditiously, we also want to be

thoughtful in our process and are considering a number of factors including business and political

climate, impact on our employees, financial incentives, recruitment, quality of life and several other

issues of importance.

Our exploratory team has done some initial due diligence/screening. We are now in our second

phase where we are inviting a small group of States to come in and engage in a more detailed

discussion.

We will be scheduling those discussions for July 28-30 and later this week will send you a list of

issues/questions that we would like you to address, but also want you to feel free to present

whatever information that you think would be relevant to our decision. The meeting will be set for

2 hours. The members of the GE exploratory team will participate in the meeting.

It is very important to us that these discussions, and even the fact that we are engaged in discussions

with New York remain confidential. As is customary, we will ask that you sign an NDA which is

attached. Steve Meyers on our team will be available to discuss any questions related to the NDA.

He can be reached at .

I will be your GE point of contact on the exploratory team. My contact information is ,

. I will send the template of issues that we would like you to address within the

next day and am also available any time to answer any questions you may have. Additionally, Karen

Kulish will be reaching out to schedule the meeting and will assist with logistics. Karen’s contact info

is, . If you would give me your scheduler’s contact

information, Karen can reach out and work through the details.

We appreciate Governor Baker’s interest in having GE relocate to Massachusetts and look forward to

our meeting at the end of July.



Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE3135 Easton Turnpike

Fairfield, CT 06824

(o)

(m)






This Confidentiality Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into this ___ day of

_________, 20___, by the State of ____________, (the “State”) for the benefit of Project Plum,

with General Electric Company a New York corporation (the “Company”).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, the State may receive from the Company information of a non-public nature for use by the State and its agents, employees and representatives (collectively, “Representatives”) in

connection with discussions regarding the potential location of Company’s international

headquarters in the State (the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, in the course of its discussions with the Company relating to the Project, the State

may receive certain private and confidential proprietary information provided for discussion

concerning the Project from or about the Company, including but not limited to investmentinformation, project plans and requirements, technical and business information regarding

business operations and affairs, financial data, sales and marketing information, specifications,

drawings, sketches, data, documentation, correspondence or any other private or proprietary ideasor information (“Confidential Information”); and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to establish terms governing the disclosures of ConfidentialInformation that will be made by the Company to the State;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants set forth herein and other good andvaluable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, and

intending to be legally bound, the parties agree as follows:

The State shall, with respect to any Confidential Information (a) hold the Confidential Information

in strict confidence using at least the same care and caution it affords its own confidential

information, but in no case less than a reasonable degree of care; (b) take any and all steps which

may be necessary and reasonable to protect the Confidential Information; (c) use the ConfidentialInformation only in connection with the Project; (d) reproduce the Confidential Information only

to the extent necessary in connection with the Project; and (e) restrict disclosure of the

Confidential Information only to Representatives whose duties justify the need to know theConfidential Information in connection with the Project and who are advised as to the confidential

and proprietary nature of the Confidential Information and are required to comply with the

provisions of this Agreement. The obligations of the State to maintain the confidentiality of theConfidential Information it has received under this Agreement shall continue for a period of three

(3) years from the date of receipt of such Confidential Information.

The State hereby acknowledges and agrees that (a) the term “Confidential Information” as usedherein also includes: (i) the fact that the Confidential Information has been made available to the

State; (ii) the fact that the State is discussing the Project with the Company; and (iii) any of the

terms, conditions or other facts with respect to the Project or other related transactions, including



the status thereof; and (b) any Confidential Information supplied by the Company prior to the

execution of this Agreement shall be subject to the same treatment as the Confidential Information

made available after the execution of this Agreement.

The State agrees to exempt from disclosure Confidential Information to the extent authorized by

applicable law, including state and federal Freedom of Information Acts, Open Door Law, PublicRecords Law and other related local, state, and federal laws and ordinances that may be applicable.

The obligations with respect to the Confidential Information under this Agreement shall not apply

to any Confidential Information which the State can show, by written evidence (a) is in the publicdomain (provided that such information has not or does not come into the public domain as the

result of a disclosure by the State); (b) is received by the State on a non-confidential basis from a

source other than the Company (provided that such source is not bound by a confidentialityagreement with the Company or another party); or (c) is required to be disclosed by operation of

law, including but not limited to pursuant to the State and Federal Freedom of Information Acts

(provided that, promptly following receipt of a legal request and prior to making such disclosure,

the State has notified the Company of such request so that the Company may take action tosafeguard its interests, and the State shall cooperate with the Company in seeking to preserve the

confidentiality of the Confidential Information).

The State shall not issue any press release or otherwise make any public announcement or

statement with respect to the transactions contemplated in connection with the Project without the

prior written consent of the Company.

The disclosure of Confidential Information shall not be construed to grant to the State any license,

ownership or other proprietary interest in the Confidential Information. The State agrees that itdoes not acquire any title, ownership, or other intellectual property right or license in or to the

Confidential Information by virtue of such disclosure, and all Confidential Information (including

tangible copies and computerized or electronic versions and summaries thereof) shall remain the property of the Company.

Within ten (10) days following the receipt of a written request, the State shall deliver to the

Company all tangible materials containing or embodying the Confidential Information receivedfrom the Company along with any copies, reproductions, and summaries thereof, together with a

certificate executed by the State certifying that all such materials in the State’s possession have

been delivered to the Company. That portion of the Confidential Information which has beenincorporated into analyses, compilations, comparisons, studies or other documents prepared by the

State or its Representatives shall be held by the State and kept confidential as provided in this

Agreement and shall not be used for any reason other than in connection with the Project or shall be destroyed.

In the event any legal action is required to enforce this Agreement, each party shall bear its

representative attorney’s fees and costs.

The State agrees that its obligations hereunder are necessary and reasonable to protect the

Company and expressly agrees that monetary damages might be inadequate to compensate the



Company for any breach of any covenant or agreement set forth herein. The State agrees and

acknowledges that any such violation or threatened violation may cause irreparable injury to the

Company and that, if deemed appropriate by the court presiding over the matter, the Company (inaddition to any other rights and remedies that may be available at law or in equity) may be entitled

to seek injunctive relief against the threatened breach of this Agreement or the continuation of any

such breach.

This Agreement shall be governed and interpreted under the laws of the State of New York,

without regard to its choice of law provisions.


This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties hereto as to ConfidentialInformation and merges all prior discussions between them relating thereto. No amendment or

modification of this Agreement shall be valid or binding on the parties unless made in writing and

signed on behalf of each of the parties by their respective duly authorized officers or

representatives.

This Agreement may be executed by facsimile signature in any number of counterparts, all of

which taken together shall constitute one in the same instrument.

No failure or delay by either party in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shall

operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other orfurther exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, power or privilege hereunder.


State of ______________ General Electric Company

By: _________________________________ By: _________________________________

Name: Name: Ann R. Klee

Title: Title: Vice President, Global Operations –Environment, Health and Safety







Attachments: Scanned from a Xerox Multifunction Printer.pdf

Mike,



Karen Kulish



O:

C:


3135 Easton TurnpikeFairfield, CT 06828







To: Povich, Lon (GOV)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: RE:


Thanks Lon - I am confirming required timing and deliverables with Plum advisors and awaiting something more definitive on EDIP.

From: Povich, Lon (GOV)Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 4:41 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Subject:

Mike,

I'll keep you in the loop on everything I get. I assume that you have the pen on this, but am happy to help as I can.

Lon

P.S. My state iPhone is dead, so if you need me ASAP, call . Thanks.




To: John Barros

Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD)

Subject: RE: 4pm call today

Date: Friday, November 27, 2015 7:52:03 PM

I think that's right John - had a few other things to discuss with you,

but from Peter and Jon we really need help on #1 and #2 - can you guys

help?

________________________________________

From: John Barros [[email protected]]

Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 5:00 PM



Subject: Re: 4pm call today

Mike,

1. Send the statutory wording the gives the administration thediscretion and authority to apply the $9,600 rate per job used to

calculate the $48M for EDIP

2. Send the minutes (pubic record) on vote for the IBM $5k and the

Liberty Mutual $3.7k per job decision if possible.

3. They would like the tax credit to be 100% refundable

4. An MOU would need to be written in regards to an application being

filed after an announcement

5. We need to give them what we have by Monday at 12pm.

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]> wrote:> No. Want to discuss/introduce EDIP and MassWorks, hear their questions,

and then prepare something. We should talk about actual deliverable and

timing after this call.

>

> Mike Kennealy

>

>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 3:23 PM, John Barros <[email protected]>

wrote:

>>

>> Do we have any calculations or schedules we would like to share with

>> them before the call?

>>

>>

>>

>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 3:22 PM, John Barros <[email protected]>

wrote:

>>> Not sure what Scott's title is.

>>> I'lll ask we all do intros on the Call.

>>>

>>>

>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>> <[email protected]> wrote:



>>>> Ok thanks. Who is Scott?

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>

>>>>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 1:06 PM, John Barros <[email protected]>

wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> We will use the ML Strategies Conference Call Line

>>>>>>>>>> ; passcode

>>>>>

>>>>> I believe the following individuals will be on the call:

>>>>>

>>>>> Mo Cowan, ML Strategies

>>>>> Scott Roberti, GE

>>>>> Amy Eisenstadt, GE State Tax Counsel

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>> John can you send us info for 4pm call? Jon and Peter please join

if you can - I'll send some thoughts before. John who will be on?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> John Barros

>>>>> Chief of Economic Development

>>>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

>>>>> 6th Floor, Room 603

>>>>> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

>>>>> t: 617-635-5729>>>>> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>>>>>

>>>>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>>>>> http://imagine.boston.gov/

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> --

>>> John Barros

>>> Chief of Economic Development

>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

>>> 6th Floor, Room 603

>>> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>>>

>>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>>> http://imagine.boston.gov/

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>> John Barros



>> Chief of Economic Development

>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

>> 6th Floor, Room 603

>> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

>> t: 617-635-5729

>> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>>

>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>> http://imagine.boston.gov/

--

John Barros

Chief of Economic Development

Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

6th Floor, Room 603

Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

t: 617-635-5729

http://www.cityofboston.gov

SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

http://imagine.boston.gov/




To: John Barros

Subject: Re: 4pm call today

Date: Saturday, November 28, 2015 10:42:52 AM

I would reach out to him but don't have contact info.

Mike Kennealy

> On Nov 28, 2015, at 9:53 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>

> Any time is good for me - do you want to email Mo and copy me and see

what works for him? Then you and I can talk before.

>

> Mike Kennealy

>

>> On Nov 28, 2015, at 9:49 AM, John Barros <[email protected]>

wrote:

>>>> Mike, I'm available today until 12pm. I can reach out to Mo is you can

>> talk during that time.

>>


>>

>>> On Nov 28, 2015, at 6:32 AM, Kennealy, Michael (SEA)


>>>

>>> John, when can you talk today? And we can discuss but I think you and

I should do a call with Mo today to talk process generally, particularly

around site visits next week.

>>>

>>> ________________________________________ >>> From: John Barros [[email protected]]

>>> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 5:00 PM

>>> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>> Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD)

>>> Subject: Re: 4pm call today

>>>

>>> Mike,

>>>

>>> 1. Send the statutory wording the gives the administration the

>>> discretion and authority to apply the $9,600 rate per job used to

>>> calculate the $48M for EDIP

>>> 2. Send the minutes (pubic record) on vote for the IBM $5k and the

>>> Liberty Mutual $3.7k per job decision if possible.

>>> 3. They would like the tax credit to be 100% refundable

>>> 4. An MOU would need to be written in regards to an application being

>>> filed after an announcement

>>> 5. We need to give them what we have by Monday at 12pm.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>> <[email protected]> wrote:



>>>> No. Want to discuss/introduce EDIP and MassWorks, hear their

questions, and then prepare something. We should talk about actual

deliverable and timing after this call.

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>

>>>>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 3:23 PM, John Barros <[email protected]>

wrote:

>>>>>>>>>> Do we have any calculations or schedules we would like to share with

>>>>> them before the call?

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 3:22 PM, John Barros


>>>>>> Not sure what Scott's title is.

>>>>>> I'lll ask we all do intros on the Call.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>>> Ok thanks. Who is Scott?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On Nov 27, 2015, at 1:06 PM, John Barros <[email protected]>

wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> We will use the ML Strategies Conference Call Line

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> ; passcode

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I believe the following individuals will be on the call:>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Mo Cowan, ML Strategies

>>>>>>>> Scott Roberti, GE

>>>>>>>> Amy Eisenstadt, GE State Tax Counsel

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>>>>> John can you send us info for 4pm call? Jon and Peter please

join if you can - I'll send some thoughts before. John who will be on?

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> --

>>>>>>>> John Barros

>>>>>>>> Chief of Economic Development

>>>>>>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

>>>>>>>> 6th Floor, Room 603

>>>>>>>> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

>>>>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>>>> http://www.cityofboston.gov



>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>>>>>>>> http://imagine.boston.gov/

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> --

>>>>>> John Barros

>>>>>> Chief of Economic Development>>>>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

>>>>>> 6th Floor, Room 603

>>>>>> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

>>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>>>>>>

>>>>>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>>>>>> http://imagine.boston.gov/

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> John Barros





>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>>>>>


>>>>> http://imagine.boston.gov/

>>>

>>>

>>>>>> --

>>> John Barros

>>> Chief of Economic Development

>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

>>> 6th Floor, Room 603

>>> Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>>>

>>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>>> http://imagine.boston.gov/





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Mahoney, Elizabeth K. (GOV); Barrera, Joel (GOV)

Subject: Re: Boston Business Journal- GE"s new energy company will create 200 new jobs in Boston

Date: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:53:24 PM

And just a point of clarification. I meant considering, not confusing. Even though it is a little confusing!

On Oct 7, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes…in many directions…


Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:15 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)Subject: Fwd: Boston Business Journal- GE's new energy company will create 200 new jobs in Boston

Interesting article confusing everything else that is on the table


From: "Lorenz, Peter (EEA)" <[email protected]>Date: October 7, 2015 at 2:43:11 PM EDT

To: "Beaton, Matthew (EEA)"

<[email protected]>, "Judson, Judith (ENE)"

<[email protected]>

Cc: "Gerwatowski, Ron (EEA)"

<[email protected]>, "Sieger, Daniel (EEA)"

<[email protected]>, "Bartlett, Ned (EEA)"

<[email protected]>, "Cahill, Alexandra (EEA)"

<[email protected]>, "Singleton, Stolle (EEA)"

<[email protected]>, "Burgess, Dan (ENE)"

<[email protected]>

Subject: Boston Business Journal- GE's new energy company will create

200 new jobs in Boston

GE's new energy company will create 200 new jobs in

BostonBoston Business Journal

GOV Email

GOV Email



Connecticut-based GE announced Wednesday that it's spinning out a "first-of-its-kind" energy company that will be headquartered in Greater Boston.

The new energy company, to be called Current, will be headquartered in the Greater Boston area with additional presence in Silicon Valley and will create about 200 new jobs next year.

"Boston was an obvious choice for us for a lot of different reasons," said Deia Campanelli, a spokeswoman for GE (NYSE:GE). "(Boston) is heavily investing in renewable energy, it has great software talent and it gives us close proximity to where many of our customers are in the region."

Current integrates GE's LED, solar, energy storage and electric vehicle businesses with a software that can deliver and identify the most affordable, efficient energy solutions required by customers, according to a release. The technology will help customers save between 10 percent and 20 percent on their energy bills, and help utility partners better manage their distributed load.

Current already has major customers including JPMorgan Chase, Walgreens, Hilton Worldwide and Intel, who are testing the company's software.

The jobs created by Current will be in the areas of software, engineering and product management. Campanelli said plans for the Boston office will be finalized by early 2016. She didn't disclose how many square feet the company would be needing.

Current's CEO will be Maryrose Sylvester , who was formerly president and CEO at GE Lighting, a $3 billion enterprise. She plans to grow Current from annual revenue of $1 billion to a $5 billion business by 2020, according to a release. The company's revenue stream comes from existing products and technologies that it's selling to customers, Campanelli said.

GE has a market capitalization of $278 billion.

Peter S. Lorenz

Communications Director

Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs

100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900, Boston, MA 02114

Office: 617-626-1106 / Mobile: 617-680-6487




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); [email protected]; Daniel Koh; JPranckevicius

Subject: RE: Boston Project 4PM Call


Attachments: Options Grid 4 vs 2.docxParcel A-2 summary JPD 12-12- 15.doc

A couple of items for the 4pm call today: 1. Options grid drafted by Jay.2. A2 facts drafted by Jim. Speak with you soon.

From: Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 11:12 AMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); [email protected]; Daniel KohSubject: Boston Project 4PM Call

Hi all-

I have sent out an invite for a 4pm call. The dial in is PIN Please let me

know if there are any issues!



Option Current

Owner

Future

Owner

Incentives Positive Challenges

Massport

Parcels,

including A-2

Massport Massport,

with

Massport

Board vote

required.

$120m in initial

lease

concessions

(MassWorks),

no board vote

required.

Additional

lease

concessions, to

be negotiated

with Massport,

with a value of

$_____.

Offsitestreetscape

improvements

could be

included in

$25m of

additional

State

infrastructure

funding.

Publicownership

allows for

maximum

State energy

efficiency

grant.

City tax relief

of up to $20m

or more

depending on

size of the

property and

employment

commitments.

Publicly owned

requiring no

special legislation

or successful

private

negotiation.

Permitting is

more straight

forward under

cooperative

relationship with

the city, thus

bringing more

time certainty to

thedevelopment.

Building size and

layout can be

right-sized for

the end tenant.

Experienced

developer who

can fully access

other publicsupports.

Especially A-2

can be developed

with only one

tenant; private

vacant parcels

may require

multi-tenants.

New building will

likely allow for

maximum energy

efficiency

installations.

Surrounding

areas still to be

built out.

Existing

Seaport

Private Private Approximately

$50m (MLSC) –

Already

constructed

Higher overall

cost will result to



Building subject to a

board vote.

Offsite

streetscape

improvements

could be

included in

$25m of

additional

State

infrastructure

funding – with

existing

building the

offsite

improvements

may not be asignificant.

building.

Increased

certainty as to

surrounding

build-out.

the company.

Securing the

transaction –

which may

require a

substantial

premium – will

eat into the value

of the $50m.

No lease

concessions are

available for the

company.

City will have less

flexibility on tax

relief on thelease or purchase

of an existing

building.

Length of

negotiation for

purchase may

eclipse time

savings secured

through an

existing building.

Availability of

space in the

existing building

could delay

occupancy

further.

Building size and

layout may not

be right-sized for

the end tenant,

thereby adding

additional cost

and less

functionality.

Additionally

energy efficiency



benefits may be

harder to

achieve.

Availability of

additional

parking may be

inhibited

depending upon

distance from

Massport garage.

Existing

Seaport

Building

Private Massport,

with

Massport

Board vote

required.

Assumptionhere is that

Massport is

able to

acquire the

property.

$120m in initial

lease

concessions

(MassWorks),

no board vote

required.

Additional

lease

concessions, to

be negotiated

with Massport,

with a value of

$_____.

Offsite

streetscape

improvementscould be

included in

$25m of

additional

State

infrastructure

funding – with

existing

building the

offsite

improvements

may not be a

significant.

Already

constructed

building.

Increased

certainty as to

surroundingbuild-out.

Higher overall

cost will result to

the company.

Securing the

transaction –

which mayrequire a

substantial

premium – will

eat into the value

of the $120m, as

well as the ability

for more

favorable lease

concessions for

the company.

City will have less

flexibility on tax

relief on the

purchase of an

existing building.

Length of

negotiation for

purchase may

eclipse time

savings secured

through

purchasing a

building.

Building size and

layout may not

be right-sized for

the end tenant,



thereby adding

additional cost

and less

functionality.

Availability of

space in the

existing building

once acquired

could delay

occupancy

further.

Additionally

energy efficiency

benefits may be

harder to

achieve.

Availability of

additional

parking may be

inhibited

depending upon

distance from

Massport garage.

Vacant

Parcels

For example,

Parcel N is

owned by WS

Development,

called the

most

expensive

land in the

city, and not

currently

permitted for

office.

Parcel P is

designated to

a private

party from

the BRA, thus

Private Private Approximately

$50m (MLSC) –subject to a

board vote.

Offsite

streetscape

improvements

could be

included in

$25m of

additional

State

infrastructure

funding.

City tax relief

of up to $20m

or more

depending on

size of the

May be able to

select a higherdesired location.

Building size and

layout can be

right-sized for

the end tenant.

Increased

certainty as to

surrounding

build-out.

New building will

likely allow for

maximum energy

efficiency

installations.

Availability of

parcels for sale is very uncertain.

Higher overall

cost will result to

the company.

Securing the

transaction –

which may

require a

substantial

premium – will

eat into the value

of the $120m, as

well as the ability

for more

favorable50m;

lease concessions

forare unlikely



is considered

to be under

private

control, in an

area not

currently

permitted for

office.

property and

employment

commitments.

from the

companyprivate

developer.

Length of

negotiation for

purchase may

result.

Permitting

process will not

be any shorter

and will likely be

longer and less

certain, as city

and state zoning

issues may add

mid to long termdelays in

construction.

(with possibility

that some

restrictions will

not be able to be

overcome).

Parcel will likely

be shared with

other users.

Availability of

additional

parking may be

inhibited

depending upon

distance from

Massport garage.

Vacant

Parcels

For example,

Parcel N is

owned by WS

Development,

called the

most

expensive

land in the

Private Massport,

with

Massport

vote

required.

Assumption

here is that

Massport is

able to buy

the property.

$120m in initial

lease

concessions

(MassWorks),

no board vote

required.

Additional

lease

concessions, to

be negotiated

May be able to

select a higher

desired location.

Building size and

layout can be

right-sized for

the end tenant.

Increased

certainty as to

Availability of

parcels for sale is

very uncertain.

Higher overall

cost will result to

the company.

Securing the

transaction –

which may



city, and not

currently

permitted for

office.

Parcel P is

designated to

a private

party from

the BRA, thus

is considered

to be under

private

control, in an

area not

currently

permitted for

office.

A lease of the

property

would

reduce the

ability for

lease

concessions

to be made.

with Massport,

with a value of

$_____.

Offsite

streetscape

improvements

could be

included in

$25m of

additional

State

infrastructure

funding.

Public

ownership

allows formaximum

State energy

efficiency

grant.

City tax relief

of up to $20m

or more

depending on

size of the

property andemployment

commitments.

surrounding

build-out.

New building will

likely allow for

maximum energy

efficiency

installations.

require a

substantial

premium – will

eat into the value

of the $120m, as

well as the ability

for more

favorable lease

concessions for

the company.

Local and state

land use issues

exist and will add

time and

uncertainty to

the process (with

possibility thatsome restrictions

will not be able

to be overcome)..

Length of

negotiation for

purchase may

result.

Availability of

additionalparking may be

inhibited

depending upon

distance from

Massport garage.



TO: Michael Kennealy, Assistant Secretary for Business GrowthExecutive Office of Housing & Economic Development

FROM: James Doolin, Chief Development Officer

SUBJECT: Massport Parcel A-2


Visibility

• Located at the entrance to the Seaport / Innovation District coming from Logan

International Airport and points north.

• Highly visible along the Congress Street corridor coming from downtown Boston.

• Highly visible from the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center.

• Views from the site to Boston Harbor.

Connections

•

Across the street from the World Trade Center MBTA Silver Line Station and Massport’sParking Garage (under design).

• Ability to provide a direct and weather-protected pedestrian connection with Silver Line

Station and Garage.

• Walk along World Trade Center Avenue to Boston Harbor and Seaport World Trade

Center or walk to the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center.

Immediate Neighbors and Amenities

(All within a 5 minute walk on / next to Massport property)

Employers

• Fidelity 2,000 employees on Commonwealth Pier.

• John Hancock 1,500 employees at 601 Congress Street.

• Seaport WTC Campus office tenants include: Cabot Corp., AEW and many others.



2

Restaurants (within 5 minute walk)

• Morton’s Steakhouse

• Legal Harborside

• Legal Test Kitchen

•

Del Frisco’s Steakhouse

• 75 on Liberty Wharf

• Aura Restaurant

• M.C. Spiedo’s

• Rosa Mexicana

• Sebastians

• Salvatores

• Temezcal

• Jerry Remy’s Grille

•

No-Name Restaurant

Hotels

• Seaport Hotel – Fidelity Real Estate investment.

• Renaissance Boston Waterfront - Marriott.

• Westin Boston Waterfront.

Residences

•

Waterside Place (Phase 1) 236 luxury apartments; Phase 2 under design.• Park Lane Seaport Apartments 465 luxury apartments.

Public Open Space

• Massport’s Maritime Park on D Street.

• Fidelity’s Podium Park on WTC Avenue and Eastport Park on D Street.





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: Re: Boston project


Ricks,

Mike Kennealy

> On Dec 12, 2015, at 5:22 PM, Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

>

>

>


> From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 7:40 AM

> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

> Subject: RE: Boston project

>

> Im working on something

> ________________________________________

> From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 7:04 AM

> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

> Subject: Fwd: Boston project

>

> Jay, Ricks - apologies if you get this twice; not sure went through first time.

>> Mike Kennealy

>

> Begin forwarded message:

>

> From: Mike Kennealy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

> Date: December 12, 2015 at 7:02:27 AM EST

> To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

> Subject: Boston project

>

> Jay, Ricks,

>

> Steve called last night and suggested that some thoughts be sent to the group ahead of the 10am call - Jay did you

say you were working on something or should I send? Mostly tied up before 10am (we're up in Kennebunkport)

but could send something high level. Initial thoughts/questions I had on scenarios below:

>

> 1a - say that we're still good for $120 MM, but very different lease since we had to buy the property?

>

> 1b, 1c - no idea what we could do here. We wouldn't own the building, no capex so no EDIP

>

> 2 - I don't know sites N or P - just texted Barros.

>



> 2a - Massport acquiring a parcel through a swap shouldn't change our offer at all. Really need Massport to weigh

in on this, and everything else.

>

> 2b-d - EDIP could be used here, 10% of capex. Reminder on Liberty Mutual deal - $353 MM capex, $22.5 MM

EDIP, 600 jobs.

>

> Other thought - MLSC. By statute can only do $25 MM per year in tax credits. Would we say $5-10 MM per

year for 5 years to plug any holes in a new proposal?

>> Question - how would local incentives play in these various scenarios? Asked Barros but I'm sure Ricks will have

a view.

>

> Could always use MassWorks or I-Cubed particularly for garage.

>

> Tools:

> $120 MM in development (note - assuming $120 MM cap and floor on whatever we do) MassWorks/I-Cubed

EDIP MLSC Local Other?

>

> Mike




To: Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; [email protected]; [email protected]; Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; JPranckevicius

Subject: Re: Call at 4:30pm - Boston Project


Boston project

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 23, 2015, at 11:34 AM, Goodall, Devon (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Mo Cowan’s assistant said that she has the call with GE in his calendar for 4:30pm.

Dial in:

PIN:

Devon Goodall

Office of Governor Charlie Baker

Massachusetts State House – Room 360

O: 617-725-4000

C: 617-483-3399

Email: [email protected]




To: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: RE: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

Date: Sunday, November 29, 2015 11:33:07 AM

Attachments: Project Plum memo Nov. 29.docxProject Plum - Chart of Second Offer.docx

Attached please find two documents for our call today at 12pm:

- An update memo

- Jay's chart sent on Friday

Looking forward to speaking then.

Mike

________________________________________

From: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 4:45 PM


Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);

Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie

(DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn;

Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV)


I just sent a calendar invite. Please let me know if there's any issues.

Brianna Wehrs

Executive Assistant to Governor Charlie Baker

Office: 617-725-4048Cell: 617-483-3397

> On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>

> Brianna, Lily or Devon--please send out a calendar invite for a call at

noon tomorrow/Sunday for the folks copied on this email.

>

> Elizabeth: please invite Jim D if you would like.

>

> If you have questions about the call, please contact Sec Ash, Mike

Kennealy or me.

>

> Thx.

> Steve

>




PROJECT PLUM UPDATE MEMO NOVEMBER 29, 2015

The following is a summary of where we are with the various pieces of the package for Project Plum,

with objectives outlined, decisions to be made, and items for consideration. This is essentially an update

to Jay’s chart sent on Friday, which is also attached for reference. One note – for this purpose

“objectives” means business development objectives or, in other words, what we suggest to put forward

to win the deal; obviously there are other considerations, some of which I will outline here and others

that I expect we’ll discuss on the call. The package, as now contemplated, consists of three parts –

incentives, real estate and other items:

I. INCENTIVES

Objective

Deliver to Plum a package of State and City incentives totaling ~$100 MM.

State incentives

We are contemplating use of the Economic Development Incentive Program (EDIP). The deal we

propose is $42 – 54 million over a 5 year period for 400 – 600 jobs. Those jobs equate to an annualpayroll (at salary levels indicated by Plum) of $112 – 144 million. At the mid-point of the range, this is

$48 million for 500 jobs or $96K per job; this is quite high by historical standards but in line with

historical precedent on a pro forma, per $100K jobs, basis.

We also propose to use MassWorks funding of up to $32 MM for site improvements if a public site is

selected.

City incentives

The City has proposed a local property tax abatement of $20 MM over a 20 year period dependent on

600 jobs.

Questions/issues

1. How much of our EDIP award can be refundable? Plum wants 100%, despite having tax liability in

Massachusetts. Under current statute it appears that we can only do $1 MM total of the ~$48 million

that is refundable as a Job Creation Project. HED counsel considering other ways to maximize the

refundable amount.

2. If we are severely limited in our ability to offer refundable credits, do we say that we will attempt to

amend the statute as part of our economic development bill or propose special legislation?

3. How will the Boston incentive scale up or down based on actual job numbers? Boston considering

and will respond.

4. Boston said last night that they may want to include language allowing them to give a lower incentive

if the site ultimately is in the Seaport; I discouraged them from doing this.

5. Plum wants detail on EDIP and MassWorks statutes to confirm that the EACC has the discretion for an

award of this magnitude and on the refundable vs non-refundable buckets – HED pulling this together.

6. Plum is concerned about PR and wants to see examples of what was in the public record for other

deals (application, meeting minutes, press release, etc.) and want to agree on an MOU before any EACC

meeting notice.

7. How will we use MassWorks if a private site is selected? This is difficult, and argues for encouraging

Plum to select a public site such that we can provide more incentive.



II. REAL ESTATE

Objective

Deliver to Plum a proposal on publicly-owned sites such that we are increasing the economic value of

our offer and maximizing our ability to use MassWorks funding as part of our package. Plum is clearly

now looking for $100 MM in incentives plus value of real estate. Plum may be visiting sites this week.

We now have good profiles/maps of each site.

Sites

There are currently 5 publicly-owned sites under consideration:

State-owned

Massport sites

MCCA sites

DOT District 6

City-owned

Court Street6 Tide Street

For each site we propose to present:

- Value of site – for Massport and MCCA this would be value of land value per building square foot for a

long term lease; for DOT this would be a market level of rent.

- Discount we propose off of market value (land or rent).

- Resulting economic value to Plum.

We are receiving input on value from:

- BRA

- Massport (their estimate of land value per building square foot is $85 - $90 for Massport sites)- CBRE (advisor to Plum)

Questions/issues

1. Do we have a preference for what site Plum selects?

2. What deal are we willing to propose for each site?

III. OTHER ITEMS

Jay’s chart itemizes the other proposed features of our offer, though a few additions and questions:

1. Re: Boston Home Center, there are a variety of MassHousing programs which we will include forhome purchases outside of Boston.

2. On Jay’s last point #14, environmental clean-up, current thinking is to save this for a later point in the

discussion.

3. Do we mention in our next proposal the $25 million in bond authorized Seaport district

transportation improvements?

4. Are there other items that we can propose?



Program Benefit Assumptions/Comments

City property tax relief Up to $20m at $1m per year (20

year benefit)

Assumes a ___,000 s.f. building

State Investment Tax Credit Up to $48m at $9.6m per year (5

year benefit)

Assumes a payroll of $130m

Massworks Infrastructure Grant Up to $32m in 1 year or split into2 (up to a 2 year benefit) Provides for public infrastructurecosts on a reimbursement basis

State Training Fund $1m – the maximum award –

one time

Routine application process

Permitting Ombudsman No cost to GE Combination of City and State

officials to facilitate permitting

Concierge Services No cost to GE City and State partnership to

provide assistance on a range of

employee needs, like RMV

services.

Ferry Service Assistance TBD based upon site selection.

Funding may be secured through

Ferry Boat Discretionary Grant

Program.

Corporate Jet Services To be negotiated with Massport Massport has pledged

assistance, preferring for jets to

be based at Hanscom and

shuttled to Logan Airport, but is

willing to consider all services at

Logan Airport.

Boston Home Center “Live

Where You Work”Program

Provides what? Description

Innovation Center City to provide space at what

cost? Mass Life Science Centeror other to provide capital

funding at approximately $5m.

John determining if

MassChallenge might run thespace. This would be a “outside

the box” benefit to have a fully

fit out innovation space for GE to

operate. MLSC or other grants

could be used for the capital

funding.

Site 1 – Boston’s Court Street –

160k s.f. building in the heart of

downtown.

Free Rent for ___ years MassWorks would be utilized to

offset improvement costs.

Would City charge no property

taxes or is it the City’s intentialto assess the building and issue a

tax bill?

Site 2 – MA DOT District 6 –

adjacent to South Station on

Kneeland Street – 104k s.f. with

sufficient land for additional

space.

___% rent for ___ years MassWorks would be utilized to


Presumably, City would assess

the building and charge property

taxes, but that should be



confirmed.

Site 3 – multiple Convention

Center properties

___% land lease for____ years MassWorks would need to be

confirmed to support

construction of a new building.




confirmed.

Site 4 – multiple Massport sites ___% land lease for____ years MassWorks would need to be






confirmed. Each of the sites has

hundreds of thousands of

additional build-out potential.

Massport may wish to lease anentire site and have the

developer build the GE building,

which could help reduce the cost

of the land lease.

Site 5 – City’s 6 Tide Street – it’s

snow farm.

____% land lease for ___years MassWorks would need to be






confirmed.Site 6 – Private development or

building purchase by GE on a site

they prefer.

A review of how MassWorks

would provide assistance would

be required.

The above could be provided to GE upon filling in all the blanks. John is in charge with Mike to provide

support. John should provide Mike with final draft and Mike be in touch with Steve for the Gov’s

signoff.

Questions/Comments:

1. Blanks should be filled in so that GE has a full picture of the various offers. (John is the

point/Mike provides support)

2. John is updating sites and getting them to GE. GE recognizes a need to narrow down sites, but it

is unrealistic for them to pick one without a significant vetting.

3. What is City’s intention regarding property taxes if a public site is selected, especially if the site

selected is the City’s building on Court Street? Ordinarily, a public site with a private tenant



would be assessed property tax. Would be acceptable either way, taxing or not, and, as noted

below, not taxing it could be a deal closer. (John)

4. Can MassWorks funding be utilized for public building fit-out/renovations? (Mike)

5. How could MassWorks provide financial benefit on private new construction? For example,

could it be used to purchase the land and then lease the land back to the private developer?

(Mike)

6. What are the heliport options for each of the sites? (John)

7. Fill in the blanks on State & Quasi lease expectations and determine what a typical value is for

the full lease so that the benefit of the reduction can be calculated for/by GE. (Steve should ask

the question of Elizabeth at Massport and for the MA DOT building should determine with a

consult with Stephanie, Kristen could be responsible for Mass Convention – provide Mike with

comments so he can communicate with John)

8. John/Mike, you should contact Brent at CBRE to help determine the value of the land, buildings

and benefits. CBRE should be able to provide very good estimates on such matters as the value

of land leases and the cost of office space.

9.

Contact MassChallenge to develop a proposal on the Innovation Center (John). For the benefit

of others, we are thinking of offering up an Innovation Center as a benefit for their use, using

City space and State funding to support it. The success of such a space depends on its

management, so John will have an informal discussion with the MassChallenge people about

doing so.

10. John/Mike, get a tax call with GE to review the benefits.

11. Thoughts on State ITC benefit. No way could we provide entire ITC in one year. Typically it is a

tax credit a company receives on their income. In this case, it could be a “refundable credit”

which means that it would actually be a cash benefit.

12. Thoughts on the State MassWorks benefit. MassWorks need to be spent in the year it is

designated. It is possible, if construction/renovations spans two fiscal years that we would

prefer to make a multi-year award to not eat up all of our funding in one particular year. It is a

reimbursement and has not “refundable credit” option. I am assuming we can use it to repair a

public building, and I believe it can be granted to both a city or a state agency. Not as clear how

we get the benefit to the company if a private entity is building them a building.

13. Check with former Massport exec to figure if there are any agency benefits that might be

brought to the package (Kristen).

14. Deal Closers could include up to $25m in state environmental dollars to help clean-up and put

into productive use GE sites in Lynn or elsewhere, and/or City tax dollars might be totally

forgiven in City or State buildings (and maybe more MassWorks dollars could go into the

building renovations in return).

15. In my absence, Mike is our lead, with Carolyn providing support. I will check in with Mike

directly each morning and in afternoon, connections permitting. Anyone needing me should

communicate need and issues to Mike. Steve should have final say on anything from our end.





Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



Great, thanks.

Mike Kennealy

> On Nov 29, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>

> Let's do this at 7:15 am tomorrow morning. I'll have Brianna set this

up.

>


>

>> On Nov 29, 2015, at 7:05 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]> wrote:>>

>> I was going to email the entire group to suggest that we get on the

phone very early tomorrow morning. I say this because (1) I've been

following the various emails on EDIP and it looks like we are reaching

some sort of conclusion, although not a favorable one; (2) similar with

respect to single sales factor, and how that may or may not differentiate

us; and (3) a better understanding from Mo around the deadlines and

deliverables.

>>

>> On the latter point, Mo said that we should submit by 1pm tomorrow a

summary of the calculations and statutes with regard to the incentives we

propose. HED has prepared a memo which will soon go out to the legal

group that has been focused on these issues today. We will also have, bymid tomorrow morning, the detail they were seeking with regard to

precedent deals. So we will be able to send all of that by 1pm but I

think the group (or some subset of the group) should have a call in the

morning to confirm what we think we are able to offer under EDIP. We next

have a deadline of close of business on Tuesday for a full submission of

the proposal - I think this should be the letter and site detail as

discussed below.

>>

>> I also had an interesting conversation with CBRE who is advising Plum

on sites. He said that they are very focused on the Seaport and as such

(1) thought that Court Street would not be of interest and (2) suspected

that the DOT building would not either. I mentioned the parking issue and

how we thought that should be of value to them; he agreed but said the

team wouldn't really focus on that until they selected a site. He said

that it is good to know that we have that tool in the toolbox and we

should present it. He reiterated that there is a real lack of clarity

internally at Plum with respect to size of site.

>>

>> I think needless to say that collectively State and City are in a very

different place than we thought earlier today based on EDIP restrictions

and inability to offer something sub-market on real estate. I think our

best course of action is to (1) satisfy their deadline for tax incentive



detail tomorrow by 1pm; and (2) present as compelling a package as

possible Tuesday with respect to incentives, other features of our

proposal, and potential sites. We should also discuss whether or not to

proposed the environmental clean-up funds at this stage.

>>

>> Hope that makes sense and please let me know if you think a group call

very early tomorrow makes sense.

>>

>> Mike

>>

>> ________________________________________

>> From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 3:09 PM

>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

>> Subject: RE: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

>>

>> Steve, copying Sec. Lepore here -

>>

>> I think that's right. I spoke with John Barros after our call to let

him know about the EDIP issue and told him that I would call later today

once we had further clarity. On sites, he said he needed to confirm with

the mayor but he thought that they would be offering Court Street

essentially for free rent, but only if we were offering something similar

on our sites. I said that that was unlikely given the constraints we

discussed on the call. He also thought that we may have until Tuesday for

some of these items - I have a call into Mo to discuss. We do know that

Plum's tax people are meeting at 3pm tomorrow; what John and I discussed

was providing detail by that time on (1) our tax offer (which obviously

might be quite different now) and (2) the backup information they were

looking for on EDIP, and then sometime on Tuesday present an entire

package - letter describing all facets of the deal and continuing to sell

the City and State as well as the updated site booklet.

>>

>> Ricks just emailed Lon and Sec. Lepore further information on EDIP -once we have further clarity here (which I understand may not be until

tonight) we can discuss how to proceed. Please let me know if that makes

sense.

>>

>> Mike

>> ________________________________________



>> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>> Cc: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV);

Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT);

Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn;

Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV);Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>> Subject: Re: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

>>

>> If I understand the format of the proposal, I think that there are 3

documents needed:

>>

>> 1. Booklet of properties, including site information

>>

>> 2. Letter outlining the elements of the City-State proposal

>>



>> 3. An appendix type document that outlines the various statutes,

application process, how the calculations work. This document could also

include the parking discussion and requirements, as well as a possible

comparison of key state and local tax features comparing MA, CT and NY.

This document could work as a PowerPoint.

>>


>>

>>> On Nov 29, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>>>

>>> Attached please find two documents for our call today at 12pm:

>>>

>>> - An update memo

>>> - Jay's chart sent on Friday

>>>

>>> Looking forward to speaking then.

>>>

>>> Mike

>>>

>>> ________________________________________

>>> From: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)

>>> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 4:45 PM

>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

>>> Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);

Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie

(DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn;

Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV)

>>> Subject: Re: Call for noon tomorrow/Sunday

>>>

>>> I just sent a calendar invite. Please let me know if there's any

issues.

>>>

>>> Brianna Wehrs>>> Executive Assistant to Governor Charlie Baker

>>> Office: 617-725-4048

>>> Cell: 617-483-3397

>>>

>>>> On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>>>>

>>>> Brianna, Lily or Devon--please send out a calendar invite for a call

at noon tomorrow/Sunday for the folks copied on this email.

>>>>

>>>> Elizabeth: please invite Jim D if you would like.

>>>>

>>>> If you have questions about the call, please contact Sec Ash, MikeKennealy or me.

>>>>

>>>> Thx.

>>>> Steve

>>>>

>>>> Sent from my iPhone

>>> <Project Plum memo Nov. 29.docx>

>>> <Project Plum - Chart of Second Offer.docx>




To: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Goodall, Devon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); ; Polito, Karyn (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Subject: Re: Call for tomorrow/Monday at 7:15 am


Let's use:

Monday; 7:15 am

November 30

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 29, 2015, at 7:48 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>

> Brianna, Lily or Devon: can you please set up this call for 7:15 am tomorrow/Monday?>

> I've added Jennifer Sullivan and Jim Doolin.

>

> Thank you.

> Steve

>


>

>> On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Wehrs, Brianna (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>

>> I just sent a calendar invite. Please let me know if there's any issues.

>>

>> Brianna Wehrs

>> Executive Assistant to Governor Charlie Baker

>> Office: 617-725-4048

>> Cell: 617-483-3397

>>

>>> On Nov 28, 2015, at 4:36 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>

>>> Brianna, Lily or Devon--please send out a calendar invite for a call at noon tomorrow/Sunday for the folks

copied on this email.

>>>

>>> Elizabeth: please invite Jim D if you would like.

>>>

>>> If you have questions about the call, please contact Sec Ash, Mike Kennealy or me.

>>>

>>> Thx.

>>> Steve

>>>

>>> Sent from my iPhone




To: William Cass; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: RE: call me


Ok. Thx. Yes very sweet!


-------- Original message --------From: William CassDate: 01/20/2016 9:53 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: call me

Will do tomorrow. Thanks. You are busy! GE was pretty sweet.

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 20, 2016, at 9:21 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

Call when you can. Not urgent. Another is suggesting that Gov meet with Udit because they are looking at out of state expansion.

Know anything?


-------- Original message --------From: William CassDate: 10/08/2015 12:01 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: RE: call me

Tried you from my office. Now calling from cell


From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 7:16 AM

To: William Cass

Subject: call me

Around noon if you can




From: William Cass

Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 1:58 PM


Subject:




To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Morse, Elizabeth; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Subject: Re: Call to review proposal


Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:56 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


>

> Sure

>


>

>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:48 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>>

>> I will call the Governor and the Senator.

>>

>> Sec Lepore -- do you want to speak to Steve Tocco?

>>



>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 7:47 PM


>> Cc: Morse, Elizabeth; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED);

Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James; Povich, Lon (GOV);

Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>> Subject: Re: Call to review proposal

>>

>> FYI - ML (Gov Weld, Tocco) were on the call. Follow up call to one of

them? If so, by who? Call to Cowan?

>>

>> Mike Kennealy

>>

>>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>>>

>>> Great to read this email chain.

>>>>>> Mike -- are you and the City reaching out to ML?

>>>

>>> All -- is there any other reach out that you recommend?

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: Morse, Elizabeth [mailto:[email protected]]

>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 7:36 PM


>>> Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);



>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert

>>> (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn;

>>> Doolin, James; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>> Subject: Re: Call to review proposal

>>>

>>> Yes, Massport will report back to the group after the CBRE call.

>>> Thanks, Elizabeth

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:31 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]

ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>>>

>>> Recommendation that we all stay in very close touch tomorrow - I

thought frankly that there would be more outstanding items or negotiating

points after the 5pm call but those could very well come tomorrow.

Important that everything is as solid as possible before their meeting end

of day tomorrow. Recommend that Massport report back to group right after

CBRE call - if for some reason they perceive less value in the deal as

currently presented we will need to come up with a contingency and should

get on the phone to discuss. Encouraging call today, but clearly not

done.

>>>

>>> ________________________________

>>> From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>>> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);

>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert

>>> (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn;

>>> Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>> Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

>>>>>> Quick update - this was a good call:

>>>

>>> - A bunch of questions on our proposal, very capably answered by

Massport/Jennifer/Ricks/City, really no issues raised/outstanding.

>>> - Comment from CBRE - "this works"; comment from Plum tax - "exactly

what we were looking for".

>>> - For tomorrow: (1) CBRE/Massport call - more specifics on proposal;

(2) Jennifer to track down information on solar panel grants/programs; and

(3) Plum tax and I to have a call tomorrow at 11am re: MLSC support. Note

- these last two at Plum's request; not interested in discussing specific

incentives for Current.

>>>

>>> Those are all of the outstanding items from the call. I do think theMassport/CBRE call tomorrow is an important one - hoping that will be

early in the day and we will have the ability to react to anything that

comes out of that call given the importance of the Plum presentation to

"senior leadership" end of day tomorrow.

>>>

>>> Mike

>>>

>>> ________________________________





>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

>>> Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks

>>> (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse;

>>> jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


>>>

>>> Here is the info if so

>>>

>>> participant code

>>>

>>> Mike Kennealy

>>> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of

>>> Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One

>>> Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>> Cell: 617-634-4762

>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

>>>

>>> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)



>>> <[email protected]<mailto:Michael.kennealy@MassMai

>>> l.State.MA.US>>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]

>>> ate.MA.US>>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@M

>>> assMail.State.MA.US>>; Ross, Robert (ANF)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected].

>>> MA.US>>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


>>> e.MA.US>>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected].>>> ma.us>>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>> Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>> jdoolin <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Povich,

>>> Lon (GOV)


>>> S>>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>


>>>

>>> It would be good if Jen/A&F can participate on the 5 pm call.

>>> Thanks everyone for the work that you are doing.

>>>

>>> From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:59 PM

>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

>>> Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks

>>> (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse;

>>> jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


>>>

>>> FYI – call scheduled today with GE tax, CBRE, Massport, possibly A&F.

Ann Klee also emailed and said she will be presenting the terms of the

Boston proposal to Plum senior leadership tomorrow end of day. I will



report back to this group after the 5pm. I expect tomorrow may be another

round of discussion/negotiation with them ahead of their presentation

tomorrow.

>>>

>>> Mike Kennealy




>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>>





>>> e.MA.US>>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


>>> ate.MA.US>>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@M

>>> assMail.State.MA.US>>; Ross, Robert (ANF)


>>> MA.US>>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


>>> e.MA.US>>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


>>> ma.us>>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>> 'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>> 'jdoolin' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Povich,

>>> Lon (GOV)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>> S>>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

>>> Subject: FW: Call to review proposal

>>>

>>> Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on

this call and does 5pm today work or tomorrow morning?

>>>

>>> From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)




>>> l.State.MA.US>>

>>> Subject: RE: Call to review proposal>>>

>>> We can be available at 5 today or anytime tomorrow morning.

>>>

>>> I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with

whoever from the State and Massport is best positioned to talk about the

specifics of the structure/lease terms etc.

>>>

>>> Amy Eisenstadt

>>> State Tax Counsel

>>> General Electric Company



>>>

>>>

(cell)

>>>

>>> From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]


>>> To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate);


>>> Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate);

>>> Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)


>>>

>>> Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a

call and I’ll assemble the team here?

>>>

>>> Mike Kennealy




>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>>

>>> From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)




>>> l.State.MA.US>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

>>> Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

>>> ; Roberti, Scott

>>> (GE, Corporate)

>>> Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)

>>>

>>> Subject: Call to review proposal>>>

>>> Mike/John:

>>>

>>> Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As

I’m sure you expected, we do need clarification of a few points.

>>>

>>> Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of

the building development with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this

email as the timing of that discussion will need to be arranged directly

with him.

>>>

>>>

>>>>>> Amy Eisenstadt

>>> State Tax Counsel

>>> General Electric Company

>>>

>>>

(cell)

>>>




To: Morse, Elizabeth; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)



Great to read this email chain.

Mike -- are you and the City reaching out to ML?

All -- is there any other reach out that you recommend?


From: Morse, Elizabeth [mailto:[email protected]]



Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);

Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF);

Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James;

Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


Yes, Massport will report back to the group after the CBRE call. Thanks,

Elizabeth



wrote:

Recommendation that we all stay in very close touch tomorrow - I thought

frankly that there would be more outstanding items or negotiating points

after the 5pm call but those could very well come tomorrow. Important that

everything is as solid as possible before their meeting end of day tomorrow.

Recommend that Massport report back to group right after CBRE call - if for

some reason they perceive less value in the deal as currently presented we

will need to come up with a contingency and should get on the phone to

discuss. Encouraging call today, but clearly not done.

________________________________



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF);

Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth

Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


Quick update - this was a good call:

- A bunch of questions on our proposal, very capably answered by

Massport/Jennifer/Ricks/City, really no issues raised/outstanding.

- Comment from CBRE - "this works"; comment from Plum tax - "exactly what we



were looking for".

- For tomorrow: (1) CBRE/Massport call - more specifics on proposal; (2)

Jennifer to track down information on solar panel grants/programs; and (3)

Plum tax and I to have a call tomorrow at 11am re: MLSC support. Note -

these last two at Plum's request; not interested in discussing specific

incentives for Current.

Those are all of the outstanding items from the call. I do think the

Massport/CBRE call tomorrow is an important one - hoping that will be early

in the day and we will have the ability to react to anything that comes out

of that call given the importance of the Plum presentation to "senior

leadership" end of day tomorrow.

Mike

________________________________



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack,

Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV);

Garrity, Rob (DOT)


Here is the info if so

participant code

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place, Room

2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762






Ash, Jay (EOHED)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Lepore,

Kristen (ANF)


Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;Ross, Robert (ANF)


Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


Tom Glynn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Elizabeth Morse

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; jdoolin

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Povich, Lon (GOV)




Garrity, Rob (DOT)



It would be good if Jen/A&F can participate on the 5 pm call.

Thanks everyone for the work that you are doing.



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack,

Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV);

Garrity, Rob (DOT)


FYI – call scheduled today with GE tax, CBRE, Massport, possibly A&F. Ann

Klee also emailed and said she will be presenting the terms of the Boston

proposal to Plum senior leadership tomorrow end of day. I will report back

to this group after the 5pm. I expect tomorrow may be another round of

discussion/negotiation with them ahead of their presentation tomorrow.

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place, Room

2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762





<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;Ash, Jay (EOHED)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Lepore,

Kristen (ANF)


Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)


Ross, Robert (ANF)


Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


Tom Glynn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 'ElizabethMorse' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 'jdoolin'

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Povich, Lon (GOV)


Garrity, Rob (DOT)



Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on this

call and does 5pm today work or tomorrow morning?



From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)






I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with

whoever from the State and Massport is best positioned to talk about the


Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate);


Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Woodruff,

Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)


Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a call

and I’ll assemble the team here?

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place, Room2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762







Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

; Roberti, Scott (GE,

Corporate) ; Woodruff,Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)


Mike/John:

Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As I’m

sure you expected, we do need clarification of a few points.

Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of the



building development with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email

as the timing of that discussion will need to be arranged directly with him.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)



Thanks for being able to join!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Thanks!



participant code

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael

(EOHED) <[email protected]>




I will leave this meeting to join your call at 5. Is there a dial in? Thanks.




From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:59 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


FYI – call scheduled today with GE tax, CBRE, Massport, possibly A&F. Ann

Klee also emailed and said she will be presenting the terms of the Boston

proposal to Plum senior leadership tomorrow end of day. I will report

back to this group after the 5pm. I expect tomorrow may be another

round of discussion/negotiation with them ahead of their presentation

tomorrow.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:53 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Ash,

Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

<[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

<[email protected]>; Ross, Robert (ANF)


<[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

<[email protected]>; Tom Glynn

<[email protected]>; 'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>;



'jdoolin' < [email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

<[email protected]>


Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on

this call and does 5pm today work or tomorrow morning?




<[email protected]>



I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with whoever from the State and Massport is best positioned to talk about the


Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)


Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a

call and I’ll assemble the team here?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






<[email protected]>; [email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) ; Roberti,

Scott (GE, Corporate) ; Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)


Mike/John:

Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As I’m

sure you expected, we do need clarification of a few points.

Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of

the building development with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email as the timing of that discussion will need to be arranged directly

with him.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV)



participant code

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]>


I will leave this meeting to join your call at 5. Is there a dial in? Thanks.




From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:59 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

FYI – call scheduled today with GE tax, CBRE, Massport, possibly A&F. Ann Klee also

emailed and said she will be presenting the terms of the Boston proposal to Plum

senior leadership tomorrow end of day. I will report back to this group after the 5pm.

I expect tomorrow may be another round of discussion/negotiation with them ahead

of their presentation tomorrow.

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

< [email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)





<[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; 'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>; 'jdoolin' < [email protected]>; Povich, Lon

(GOV) <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

<[email protected]>


Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on this call and

does 5pm today work or tomorrow morning?


Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:46 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>



I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with whoever from the

State and Massport is best positioned to talk about the specifics of the structure/lease

terms etc.



(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:41 PM



To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a call and I’ll

assemble the team here?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) ; Roberti, Scott (GE,

Corporate) ; Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations,

consultant)


Mike/John:

Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As I’m sure you

expected, we do need clarification of a few points.

Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of the building

development with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email as the timing of

that discussion will need to be arranged directly with him.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)







I just emailed Brent

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Also, let me know about a call with Brent and Massport – that discussion is maybe even more

important to understanding how to properly value the offer (assuming the sites work).

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:49 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

Ok let me see about 5pm today, thanks.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640



Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]








Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



team here?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) ; Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)

Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)




Mike/John:






Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)



Brent, can you let me know some times that work?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) ; Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)

; Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)


Mike/John:








(cell)




To: Garrity, Rob (DOT)



No just the emails from Amy asking for a call.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Garrity, Rob (DOT) [mailto:[email protected]]




Hi mike - no attachment?

Rob Garrity

Chief of Staff

MassDOT

857-368-8893 (o)617-356-4981 (c)



Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on this call and

does 5pm today work or tomorrow morning?


Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:46 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>



I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with whoever from the

State and Massport is best positioned to talk about the specifics of the structure/lease

terms etc.



Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)


Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a call and I’ll

assemble the team here?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]

Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) ; Roberti, Scott (GE,

Corporate) ; Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations,

consultant)


Mike/John:

Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As I’m sure you

expected, we do need clarification of a few points.

Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of the building

development with Brent Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email as the timing of

that discussion will need to be arranged directly with him.



Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)





Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Morse, Elizabeth; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT)



Can't see any harm!!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 8, 2015, at 8:07 PM, Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>

>

>


>

>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:56 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>

>> Sure

>>


>>

>>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:48 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>

>>> I will call the Governor and the Senator.

>>>

>>> Sec Lepore -- do you want to speak to Steve Tocco?

>>>





>>> Cc: Morse, Elizabeth; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert

(ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James; Povich, Lon (GOV);

Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>> Subject: Re: Call to review proposal

>>>

>>> FYI - ML (Gov Weld, Tocco) were on the call. Follow up call to one of them? If so, by who? Call to Cowan?

>>>

>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>

>>>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Great to read this email chain.>>>>

>>>> Mike -- are you and the City reaching out to ML?

>>>>

>>>> All -- is there any other reach out that you recommend?

>>>>

>>>> -----Original Message-----

>>>> From: Morse, Elizabeth [mailto:[email protected]]

>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 7:36 PM

>>>> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

>>>> Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);



>>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert

>>>> (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn;

>>>> Doolin, James; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>>> Subject: Re: Call to review proposal

>>>>

>>>> Yes, Massport will report back to the group after the CBRE call.

>>>> Thanks, Elizabeth

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:31 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>>>>

>>>> Recommendation that we all stay in very close touch tomorrow - I thought frankly that there would be more

outstanding items or negotiating points after the 5pm call but those could very well come tomorrow. Important that

everything is as solid as possible before their meeting end of day tomorrow. Recommend that Massport report back

to group right after CBRE call - if for some reason they perceive less value in the deal as currently presented we

will need to come up with a contingency and should get on the phone to discuss. Encouraging call today, but

clearly not done.

>>>>

>>>> ________________________________

>>>> From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>>>> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED);

>>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert

>>>> (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn;

>>>> Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>>> Subject: RE: Call to review proposal

>>>>

>>>> Quick update - this was a good call:

>>>>

>>>> - A bunch of questions on our proposal, very capably answered by Massport/Jennifer/Ricks/City, really no

issues raised/outstanding.

>>>> - Comment from CBRE - "this works"; comment from Plum tax - "exactly what we were looking for".>>>> - For tomorrow: (1) CBRE/Massport call - more specifics on proposal; (2) Jennifer to track down information

on solar panel grants/programs; and (3) Plum tax and I to have a call tomorrow at 11am re: MLSC support. Note -

these last two at Plum's request; not interested in discussing specific incentives for Current.

>>>>

>>>> Those are all of the outstanding items from the call. I do think the Massport/CBRE call tomorrow is an

important one - hoping that will be early in the day and we will have the ability to react to anything that comes out

of that call given the importance of the Plum presentation to "senior leadership" end of day tomorrow.

>>>>

>>>> Mike

>>>>

>>>> ________________________________


>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 4:26 PM>>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

>>>> Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks

>>>> (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse;

>>>> jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


>>>>

>>>> Here is the info if so

>>>>

>>>> participant code

>>>>



>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of

>>>> Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One

>>>> Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

>>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>>> Cell: 617-634-4762

>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

>>>>

>>>> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)



>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:Michael.kennealy@MassMai

>>>> l.State.MA.US>>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]

>>>> ate.MA.US>>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@M

>>>> assMail.State.MA.US>>; Ross, Robert (ANF)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected].

>>>> MA.US>>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


>>>> e.MA.US>>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


>>>> ma.us>>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>>> Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>>> jdoolin <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Povich,

>>>> Lon (GOV)


>>>> S>>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>


>>>>

>>>> It would be good if Jen/A&F can participate on the 5 pm call.>>>> Thanks everyone for the work that you are doing.

>>>>



>>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

>>>> Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks

>>>> (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse;

>>>> jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)


>>>>

>>>> FYI – call scheduled today with GE tax, CBRE, Massport, possibly A&F. Ann Klee also emailed and said

she will be presenting the terms of the Boston proposal to Plum senior leadership tomorrow end of day. I will

report back to this group after the 5pm. I expect tomorrow may be another round of discussion/negotiation with them ahead of their presentation tomorrow.

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy




>>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>>>





>>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>>>> e.MA.US>>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>>> Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


>>>> ate.MA.US>>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@M

>>>> assMail.State.MA.US>>; Ross, Robert (ANF)


>>>> MA.US>>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


>>>> e.MA.US>>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


>>>> ma.us>>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>>> 'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>;

>>>> 'jdoolin' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Povich,

>>>> Lon (GOV)


>>>> S>>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

>>>> Subject: FW: Call to review proposal

>>>>

>>>> Team, please see 2 emails below from GE tax counsel – who should be on this call and does 5pm today work

or tomorrow morning?

>>>>

>>>> From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]




>>>> l.State.MA.US>>

>>>> Subject: RE: Call to review proposal>>>>

>>>> We can be available at 5 today or anytime tomorrow morning.

>>>>

>>>> I’m not sure about Brent, but I think he can do a call separately with whoever from the State and Massport is

best positioned to talk about the specifics of the structure/lease terms etc.

>>>>

>>>> Amy Eisenstadt

>>>> State Tax Counsel

>>>> General Electric Company

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> (cell)

>>>>>>>> From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]


>>>> To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate);


>>>> Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate);

>>>> Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)


>>>>

>>>> Of course Amy. Could you let me know some times that might work for a call and I’ll assemble the team

here?



>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy




>>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>>>

>>>> From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)




>>>> l.State.MA.US>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

>>>> Cc: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

>>>> ; Roberti, Scott

>>>> (GE, Corporate)

>>>> Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)

>>>>

>>>> Subject: Call to review proposal

>>>>

>>>> Mike/John:

>>>>

>>>> Please let me know when you can do a call to review the proposal. As I’m sure you expected, we do need

clarification of a few points.

>>>>

>>>> Also, we need someone from Massport who can discuss the structure of the building development with Brent

Woodruff. I’m copying Brent on this email as the timing of that discussion will need to be arranged directly with

him.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Amy Eisenstadt

>>>> State Tax Counsel>>>> General Electric Company

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> (cell)

>>>>




To: John Barros

Subject: Re: Call w/Boston

Date: Friday, December 04, 2015 1:01:45 PM

Can I call you at 245? Should probably talk ahead of the call.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 4, 2015, at 12:55 PM, John Barros < [email protected]> wrote:

Great. That works for me

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 4, 2015, at 12:43 PM, Kennealy, Michael (SEA) <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks Amy – how about 3pm today?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: [email protected]


Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 9:16 AM


<[email protected]>; [email protected]

Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate) ; Mcgaugh,

James (GE Corporate)

Subject: FW: Call w/Boston

Mike/John

Scott forwarded your request to me since your proposal falls within my

area, although like you and John, we are a team (plus McGaugh, of

course).

It looks like Scott, Jim and I are available between 12 – 4 this afternoon or



from 10:30 – 11:30 and 1:30 – 3 on Monday, if any of those times work

for you.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 9:08 AMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Subject: FW: Call w/Boston

Scott G. RobertiDirector, State Tax Policy



Fairfield, CT 06828

T ; F

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:54 PMTo: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)Cc: john. barrosSubject: Call w/Boston

Hi Scott,

I hope you are well. I wanted to see if you might have some time today or

tomorrow to speak with John and me – we would welcome an

opportunity to hear your thoughts, answer any questions, and reiterate

our strong interest in the project.

We will do our best to work around your schedule if you could suggest a

few times.

Hope we can connect soon.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Subject: RE: Call w/Boston

Date: Friday, December 04, 2015 1:57:00 PM

Thanks!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





absolutely

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 1:52 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)Subject: RE: Call w/Boston

Could you send one please?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640



Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate) ; Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)


Let’s go with it. Do you want me to send a call-in or will you?

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 12:43 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)Subject: RE: Call w/Boston

Thanks Amy – how about 3pm today?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 9:16 AM


[email protected]

Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate) ; Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

Subject: FW: Call w/Boston



Mike/John

Scott forwarded your request to me since your proposal falls within my area, although like you and

John, we are a team (plus McGaugh, of course).

It looks like Scott, Jim and I are available between 12 – 4 this afternoon or from 10:30 – 11:30 and

1:30 – 3 on Monday, if any of those times work for you.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 9:08 AMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Subject: FW: Call w/Boston

Scott G. Roberti

Director, State Tax Policy



Fairfield, CT 06828

T ; F

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:54 PMTo: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)Cc: john. barrosSubject: Call w/Boston

Hi Scott,

I hope you are well. I wanted to see if you might have some time today or tomorrow to speak with

John and me – we would welcome an opportunity to hear your thoughts, answer any questions, and

reiterate our strong interest in the project.

We will do our best to work around your schedule if you could suggest a few times.

Hope we can connect soon.

All the best,

Mike



Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Subject: RE: Call


My earlier response was a joke. No need for a call, as your email

Thanks

Jay

________________________________________


Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 11:21 PM


Subject: Re: Call

Sorry, was at the theater. Tomorrow AM?

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 23, 2015, at 8:31 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)


If you can call me before 11p my time, I would appreciate that.





To: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Cc: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)

Subject: RE: Can we please do a call 9:45 am or 10 am on the Boston project

Date: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:36:20 AM

Key topics for the call:

Plum is interested in low-cost or free temporary space, to permit an early move while building or renovating.

Would like to see this in a revised proposal within the next 24 hours.

Plum also states that it is officially interested in a longer term lease at a MAPT property, despite earlier statements

re preference for 10-year term.

Plum official A. K. is in Boston today.



Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:14 AM

To: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Ash,

Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn;

Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Cc: Wehrs, Brianna (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)

Subject: Can we please do a call 9:45 am or 10 am on the Boston project

Importance: High

There are some follow up items that we need to try to address today.

Brianna or Lily--can you please send out an invitation?

Let's use

Thank you,

Steve





Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Beaton, Matthew (EEA); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Subject: Re: Chart for Updated Offer

Date: Saturday, November 28, 2015 3:08:27 PM

I am happy to help over the weekend and would suggest.

Sent from my iPhone


All:

Just received a message that the folks reviewing our proposal want to see all the

math, statutes, other examples, and understand what the application process is for each item we are proposing.

This suggests to me that we have our legal teams also involved in putting together our response. Who should this be from HED? Lon--who can help this weekend from the Gov's office?

Let's please have a call tomorrow morning. 10 or 11 am?

Thx!Steve

Sent from my iPhone


Sec Pollack (Rob!): we will need some information regarding the District 6 site not later than tomorrow/early. Mike Kenneally can help with what is exactly needed.

Sec Ash/Mike K: please propose what you think makes sense on the land lease and ultimate discount to GE.

Sec Beaton: anything in your world that might be helpful for this project?Energy incentives?

Sec Ash: We are saving other brownfield/remediation $ for other possible sites for a later stage of the negotiations?



Shall we have a call on all of this tomorrow/early, so that we can be on the same page?

Thanks for everyone's time and attention!

Steve

Sent from my iPhone


Steve, here is an update from the call yesterday with GE and discussions with Jay and team last night. Bottom line - I think we are in good shape to present something clear and robust on the tax incentive side and with respect to the other features of our offer, but we need more detail on sites and the deals we are willing to do there. I think it would be best to express these as - value of the site/land lease/rent X discount offered = value to GE. They are clearly now looking for $100 MM in tax incentives + value of real estate. Please call with any questions. We will need to submit everything by early afternoon on Monday and are working towards that goal. Also was surprised to learn on call that they are visiting sites in Boston next week - will get more detail today.

Tax incentives

1. EDIP/TIFa. We said $48 MM EDIP for 500 jobs and $130

MM payroll; City had said $20 MM TIF 600 jobs; GE asked how each offer scales up or down based on actual jobs

i. Discussion with Jay – propose $42 – 54 MM EDIP for 400-600 jobs

ii. Confirm with Boston how their offer scales and whether they are focused on jobs

or square feetb. GE wants all tax credits to be refundable

i. By statute can only do $6 MM refundable per year ($1 MM JCP, $5 MM EEP)

ii. Confirm that we can do $9.6 MM across 3 buckets (JCP, EEP, other)

iii. Discussion with Jay – say that we will attempt to amend statute as part of or economic development bill to offer all refundable

c. GE would like to see (all items to be sent this weekend or on Monday)

i. Statutory language on EDIP to confirm that

the board has discretion to offer an award of this size and also refundable vs. non-refundable buckets

ii. Examples of what was in the public record for Liberty Mutual deal (discussed as an example) – application, meeting minutes, press release, etc.

d. Process – GE wants an MOU agreed upon before any EACC meeting notice; very focused on PR (actually asked if they could get the award without an application – no)



2. MassWorksa. Will send statutory languageb. Question on what if they have private

developer, private site ownership - difficult Sites

3. Site profiles

a. DOT to provide info on District 6 HQb. City has profiles on other sites

4. Deals – for each site we need:a. Dollar value of rent or land lease; timesb. % discount offeredc. = Dollar value to GEd. Discussion with Jay - ask CBRE for their view of

value of various sites/land lease/rente. GE made the point on the call that they are

now assuming discounted rent for the “2 new” City and State sites

Other

5. Additional features of our offer - new letter will include

a. State training fundb. Permitting ombudsmanc. Concierged. Ferrye. Corporate jetf. Housing – Boston Home Center plus

MassHousing programsg. Innovation Centerh. Helipadi. $25 million in bond authorizedSeaport district

transportation improvements

j. Other? 6. Process

a. They have a 3pm discussion on Mondayb. They are visiting sites in Boston next week c. Barros and I to have a call with Cowan today to

discuss process further

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 10:17 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Cc: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Beaton, Matthew (EEA)

Subject: Re: Chart for Updated Offer

Mike -- is there an update from a call today? Thx. Steve

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 27, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

Great and agreed on the bridge.




-------- Original message --------From: "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/27/2015 5:06 PM (GMT-04:00)To: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Beaton, Matthew (EEA)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Chart for Updated Offer

There is $25 million in bond authorized Seaport district transportation improvements we could add. Bridge is too expensive and complicated.

Stephanie


-------- Original message --------From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/27/2015 2:41 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (SEA)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (SEA)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Beaton, Matthew (ENV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Chart for Updated Offer

I was looking to have the State total be more than $80M ($85m?)and therefore the package with the City be more than $100M.

Sent from my iPhone


48mm on edip, 32 massworks for 80 plus city's 20m. Northern Avenue Bridge is off the table (may not have been able to get permitted anyway)


-------- Original message --------From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/27/2015 1:04 PM (GMT-04:00)To: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>,



"Beaton, Matthew (EEA)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Chart for Updated Offer

Hi Steve, A few thoughts/questions: - Per my discussion with Jay this morning, we are looking at the Economic Development

Incentive Program instead of ITC.- On your point #2 - would this be $50 MM each for EDIP and MassWorks for $100 MM total vs. the $80 MM total we have now?- Re: the Northern Ave bridge, if I understood my conversation with Jay correctly this is no longer an option. I'm available on cell phone . I will be on a call with GE tax folks and John Barros at 4pm today. Thanks,Mike


Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 11:20 AMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Beaton, Matthew (EEA)Subject: Fwd: Chart for Updated Offer

Looping in Sec Pollack, Sec Beaton and Mike K.

1. Please include something about the helipad. Could we develop and pay for this as a

common amenity?

2. Bump up the Investment Tax Credit and MassWorks so that they total over $50?

3. Is there any cost of energy or sustainability $ available that may help? Credits for equipment purchase, etc.? Sec Beaton?

4. Please include Northern Ave bridge and other $25M improvements.

5. Sec Pollack -- other ideas?

6. Sec Lepore -- ??

Thx.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone


From: "Ash, Jay (SEA)" < [email protected]>

Date: November 27, 2015 at 7:04:53 AM ESTTo: "[email protected]"



<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Subject: Chart for Updated Offer

Here's a rundown of where we are. In my absence, Mike Kennealy has the ball. Steve if you could inquire with Massport on the percentage off they are willing to let out a land lease (I assume that it will depend on how much of the land is left over for the development of a second building) and determine what our offer is on the District 6 building (75% off would be reasonable, and

we could negotiate that to the 100% they will want) and direct that to Mike, that would be helpful. Gov says 100% off for Convention Center site, Kristen could you confirm that.I'll be in touch with Mike regularly. Lon, please give him a call as well to offer your always appreciated assistance. Thanks.John Barros is coordinating with the GE folks. We are in contact.Cheers,JayMike Kennealy 617-634-4762





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)

Subject: RE: Chart for Updated Offer


I think it will just be you and me Steve given Jay's travel schedule.

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 9:23 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Subject: Re: Chart for Updated Offer

Are we on for 11:45 am tomorrow--the 3 of us on the same line that Brianna sent out?

Sent from my iPhone


You all will need to take the lead here with some options, some comps, and the pros and cons.

I am setting up a call with our full team for noon tomorrow.

Let us use the same line for a prep call at 11:45 am tomorrow.

You all will lead the call.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 28, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve, Jay, feels like, between the info we just received from MassPort, request out to DOT, and MCCA info coming tomorrow, that we will have good info on the various sites. Missing piece is what deal we're willing to do - % discount for rent for DOT 6 and % discount on land lease for MassPort and MCCA. Not clear to me how we arrive at this or what constraints there may be - discuss tomorrow on call or today?

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 3:13 PMTo: Povich, Lon (GOV)Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Beaton, Matthew (EEA); Garrity, Rob (DOT)Subject: Re: Chart for Updated Offer

All -- I will schedule a call for tomorrow morning. Stay tuned.

All -- lets all be cognizant of what's appropriate for email: phone is good.

Lon and Mike K -- please connect.

Sec Lepore will have info on MCCA properties tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 28, 2015, at 3:08 PM, Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

I am happy to help over the weekend and would suggest that.

Sent from my iPhone




All:

Just received a message that the folks reviewing our proposal want to see all the math, statutes, other examples, and understand what the application process is for each item we are proposing.

This suggests to me that we have our legal teams also involved in putting together our response. Who should this be from HED? Lon--who can help this weekend from the Gov's office?

Let's please have a call tomorrow morning. 10 or 11 am?

Thx!Steve

Sent from my iPhone


Sec Pollack (Rob!): we will need some information regarding the District 6 site not later than tomorrow/early. Mike Kenneally can help with what is exactly needed.

Sec Ash/Mike K: please propose what you think makes sense on the land lease and ultimate discount to GE.

Sec Beaton: anything in your world that might be helpful for this project?Energy incentives?

Sec Ash: We are saving other brownfield/remediation $ for other possible sites for a later stage of the negotiations?

Shall we have a call on all of this tomorrow/early, so that we can be on the same page?

Thanks for everyone's time and attention!

Steve

Sent from my iPhone


Steve, here is an update from the call yesterday with GE and discussions with Jay and team last night.Bottom line - I think we are

in good shape to present something clear and robust on the tax incentive side and with respect to the other features of our offer, but we need more detail on sites and the deals we are willing to do there. I think it would be best to express these as - value of the site/land lease/rent X discount offered = value to GE. They are clearly now looking for $100 MM in tax



incentives + value of real estate. Please call with any questions. We will need to submit everything by early afternoon on Monday and are working towards that goal. Also was surprised to learn on call that they are visiting sites in Boston next week - will get more detail

today.

Tax incentives

1. EDIP/TIFa. We

said $48 MM EDIP for 500 jobs and

$130 MM payroll; City had said $20 MM TIF 600 jobs; GE asked how

each offer scales up or down based on actual jobs

i.

Discussion with

Jay – propose $42 – 54 MM EDIP for 400-600



jobs ii.

Confirm with Boston how their offer scales and whether they are focused on jobs or square feet

b. GE wants

all tax credits to be refundable

i. By statute can only do $6 MM refundable

per year ($1 MM JCP, $5 MM EEP)

ii.

Confirm that we can do $9.6 MM across 3 buckets (JCP, EEP, other)

iii.



Discussion with Jay – say that we will

attempt to amend statute as part of or economic development bill to offer all

refundablec. GE

would like to see (all items to be sent this weekend

or on Monday)

i.

Statutory language on EDIP to confirm that the board

has discretion to offer an award of this size and also refundable



vs. non-refundable buckets

ii.

Examples of what was in the public record for Liberty Mutual deal (discussed as an example)

– application, meeting minutes, press release, etc.

d. Process – GE wants an MOU

agreed upon before any EACC meeting notice; very focused on PR (actually asked

if they could get the award without an application – no)



2. MassWorksa. Will

send statutory language

b. Question on

what if they have private developer, private site ownership - difficult

Sites

3. Site profilesa. DOT

to provide info on District 6 HQ

b. City has profiles on other

sites

4. Deals – for each site we need:

a. Dollar value of rent or land lease; times

b. % discount offered

c. = Dollar value to GE

d. Discussion with Jay -



ask CBRE for their view of value of

various sites/land lease/rent

e. GE made the point on the call that they are now

assuming discounted rent for the “2 new” City and State sites

Other

5. Additional features of our offer - new letter will include

a. State training fund

b. Permitting ombudsman

c. Concierge

d.

Ferrye. Corporate jet

f. Housing – Boston Home Center plus MassHousing



programsg.

Innovation Center

h. Helipad

i. $25 million

in bond authorizedSeaport district transportation improvements

j.

Other?

6. Processa. They

have a 3pm

discussion on Monday

b. They are visiting sites in Boston next week

c. Barros and I to have a call with Cowan today to discuss process further

From: Kadish, Steven

(GOV)Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 10:17 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Cc: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Beaton, Matthew



(EEA)Subject: Re: Chart for Updated Offer

Mike -- is there an update from a call today? Thx. Steve

Sent from my iPhone


Great and agreed on the bridge.


-------- Original message --------From: "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]> Date: 11/27/2015 5:06 PM (GMT-04:00)To: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]> Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Beaton, Matthew (EEA)" <[email protected]>



Subject: RE: Chart for Updated Offer

There is $25 million in bond

authorized Seaport district transportation improvements we could add. Bridge is too expensive and complicated.

Stephanie


-------- Original message --------From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/27/2015

2:41 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (SEA)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (SEA)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Pollack,

Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Beaton, Matthew (ENV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Chart for



Updated Offer

I was looking to have the State total be more than

$80M ($85m?)and therefore the package with the City be more than $100M.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 27, 2015,

at 2:27 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

48mm on edip, 32 massworks for 80 plus city's 20m. Northern Avenue Bridge is off the table (may not have been able to get permitted anyway)


---



----- Original message ---

-----

From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Date: 11/27/2015 1:04 PM

(GMT-04:00)

To: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>,

"Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Beaton, Matthew (EEA)" <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Chart

for Updated Offer

Hi Steve, A few thoughts/questions: -



Per my discussion with Jay this morning, we are looking

at the Economic Development Incentive Program instead of ITC.- On your point #2 - would this

be $50 MM each for EDIP and MassWorks for $100 MM total vs. the $80 MM total we

have now?- Re: the Northern Ave bridge, if I understood my conversation with Jay correctly this is

no longer an option. I'm available on cell phone

.I



will be on a call with GE tax folks and

John Barros at 4pm today. Thanks,Mike


Sent:

Friday, November 27, 2015 11:20 AM

To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen

(ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Beaton, Matthew (EEA)

Subject: Fwd: Chart for Updated Offer

Looping in Sec Pollack,



Sec Beaton and Mike K.

1. Please include something

about the helipad. Could we develop and pay for this as a common amenity?

2. Bump

up the Investment Tax Credit and MassWorks so that they total over $50?

3. Is there

any cost of energy or sustainability $ available that may help? Credits for equipment purchase, etc.? Sec

Beaton?

4. Please include Northern Ave bridge and other $25M improvements.

5.



Sec Pollack -- other ideas?

6. Sec Lepore

-- ??

Thx.Steve

Sent from my iPhone


From: "Ash, Jay (SEA)" < [email protected]>

Date: November 27, 2015 at 7:04:53 AM EST

To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

Subject: Chart for Updated Offer

Here's a rundown of where we are. In my absence, Mike Kennealy has



the ball. Steve if you could inquire with Massport on

the percentage off they are willing to let out a land lease (I assume that it will

depend on how much of the land is left over for the development of a second building)

and determine what our offer is on the District 6 building (75% off would be reasonable, and

we could negotiate that to the 100% they will want) and direct that to



Mike, that would be helpful. Gov says 100% off for

Convention Center site, Kristen could you confirm that.

I'll be in touch with Mike regularly. Lon,

please give him a call as well to offer your always appreciated assistance. Thanks.

John Barros

is coordinating with the GE folks. We are in contact.

Cheers,

Jay

Mike Kennealy

617-634-4762




To: Karyn Polito; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: RE: Connecticut -

Date: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 7:48:02 AM

Thanks! We are already on it.


-------- Original message --------From: Karyn Polito <[email protected]>Date: 06/01/2015 9:58 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>

Subject: Connecticut -

There's an article in Hartford Courant about raising taxes- and response from AETNA

Travellers and GE. Would be nice to welcome more insurers to MA!

Capitol Watch



GE, Aetna, Travelers Issue

Statements Against CT Tax

Weather Alert in Windham, Tolland, Hartford, Ne

London, New Haven, Middlesex and Fair counties.

Sign up today and save up to 83% on a

Hartford Courant digital subscri

GOV E-mail





Sent from my iPhone

Karyn Polito





Subject: RE: Connecticut -

Date: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 8:33:21 AM

Of course!

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 7:48 AMTo: Karyn Polito; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV)Subject: RE: Connecticut -

Thanks! We are already on it.


-------- Original message --------From: Karyn Polito <[email protected]>Date: 06/01/2015 9:58 PM (GMT-05:00)To: , "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Connecticut -

Sign up today and save up to 83% on a Hartford Courant digital subscriWeather

Alert in Windham, Tolland, Hartford, New London, New Haven, Middlesex and Fairfield counties.

There's an article in Hartford Courant about raising taxes- and response from AETNA Travellers and GE. Would be nice to welcome more insurers to MA!

Capitol Watch





GE, Aetna, Travelers Issue Statements Against

CT Tax Package In Rare Move

Sent from my iPhoneKaryn Polito





Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: Re: connecting Jen, Lon,Ricks


I am on my cell:

On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:28 AM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Jen’s #

From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:33 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)


Yes, is my cell or home.

On Dec 7, 2015, at 8:27 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


Jen,

Can I call you tonight?

What#?

Thx.

Sent from my iPhone


From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)"

<[email protected]>

Date: December 7, 2015 at 7:53:45 PM ESTTo: "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)"

<[email protected]>

Cc: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay

(EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF)"

<[email protected]>




We just tried you.

What # can we call?

Sent from my iPhone



We need to talk ASAP. Jen got info from bond

counsel that significantly changes things.

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 5:56 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Subject: Re: MassWorks document

And all to be reviewed by City too - Jay calling

Barros to update him.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 7, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Kennealy, Michael

(EOHED)

<[email protected]>

wrote:

Attached please find a memo

from our MassWorks director

describing some of the larger

projects completed. I need to

give this a closer read tonight,

but I think it is at least a good

start. On other items:

- Jennifer is doing a first

draft of the 1 – 1½ page document. I will look at

tonight, made comments

and send back to her; we

are then discussing at

7am tomorrow and will

send to this group ASAP

guessing 8/8:30am.

- Jay and I discussed



sending the 1 – ½ pager

with two attachments

(slightly different game

plan than discussed in the

meeting)

o MassPort site

document – I think I heard

them commit to

getting us

something mid-

morning

tomorrow

o MassWorks

document

attached (with

edits obviously)- Do not propose that we

send either

o A separate site

document from

us – I think

MassPort really

needs to drive

this; obviously

we’ll make

edits/additions

o The MOBD memo

on other benefits

to GE – these

points are really

all captured in

the 1-1/2 pager

now

So a good concise package to

them by [noon?] tomorrow

- Cover letter

- Site document

- MassWorks

Any questions let me know.

Mike



Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary for Business

Growth

The Commonwealth of

Massachusetts



Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

<Updated - Examples of MassWorks Capabilities

20151207.docx MJK.docx>



From: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

To: Buckley, Timothy (GOV)


Subject: Re: Connecting you

Date: Monday, January 11, 2016 7:56:39 PM

Thanks. I think we are all good for the moment. We may run the drill on

Wednesday but for now I think we can all breathe. We're going to connect

with Laura Oggeri

Chief of Communication cell 1 .

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 7:53 PM, Buckley, Timothy (GOV)


>

> OK. Thanks.

>

> I have not contacted Mayor Walsh's office. Let me know if you would like

us to do that.>

> ________________________________________

> From: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) <[email protected]>

> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 7:20 PM

> To: Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

> Subject: RE: Connecting you

>

> Tim & Mike---thanks a bunch. I will share with our comms team. The

likely contact will be Una Pullizi or could be Seth Martin. One or the

other will reach out to you, Tim, at go-time. Jim

>


> From: Buckley, Timothy (GOV)[mailto:[email protected]]


> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

> Subject: RE: Connecting you

>

> My cell is

>

>

>




> To: Jim McGaugh; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)

> Subject: Connecting you

>

> Jim, Tim - connecting you over email. Jim, do you want to call Tim to

discuss plan? Let me know if I can do anything else here.

>

> Thanks,

> Mike

>

> Mike Kennealy





From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Davenport, David S (DOR); Ross, Robert (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: Re: DOR Tax questions


Not unless we can define them as manufacturing.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 29, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

So is there currently any advantage that MA has over CT or NY? It based on the answer below, but just wanted to confirm.

From: Povich, Lon (GOV)Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 4:39 PM

To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Davenport, David S (DOR); Ross, Robert (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Subject: Fw: DOR Tax questions

expanding the group



To: Davenport, David S (DOR)

Cc: Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR); Rybicki, Michael T (DOR); [email protected];

[email protected]; Brown, Kevin W (DOR); Forter, Rebecca H (DOR); Povich, Lon (GOV)

Subject: Re: DOR Tax questions Lon can you please loop in the appropriate people to this email chain?

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 29, 2015, at 4:07 PM, Davenport, David S. <[email protected]> wrote:

I

.



Looping in Kevin Brown and Rebecca Forter.

.

-Dave

From: Nunnelly, Mark E.Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 3:59 PMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Rybicki, Michael T.Cc: Davenport, David S.; '[email protected]'; ' [email protected]'; Brown, Kevin W.Subject: Re: DOR Tax questions

Remember we are proposing the idea of moving to single sales factor in

the modernization proposals. So we have a lot of fresh stuff on this

Mark Nunnelly, Commissioner

Department of Revenue

Special Advisor to the Governor for

Innovation Competitiveness

Tel: (617)626-2201

Fax:(617)626-2299

From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 03:54 PMTo: Rybicki, Michael T.Cc: Nunnelly, Mark E.; Davenport, David S.; Ross, Robert (ANF) <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

< [email protected]>Subject: Re: DOR Tax questions

Jen and Bob,

Please work with Dave to answer the questions about EDIP.

Jen can you please contact Dave with specifics? Bob is driving and will be

available around 6:30.

Thank you everyone.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 29, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Rybicki, Michael T.




Hi Secretary Lepore,

Dave Davenport (copied) will be available to help out with

those topics.

Thank you,

Michael T. Rybicki | Chief of Staff


From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 02:20 PMTo: Nunnelly, Mark E.Cc: Rybicki, Michael T.Subject: DOR Tax questions

Hi Mark,

Who from DOR can work with A&F, HED and Gov legal office

today and early tomorrow morning on some questions we

have ?

Kristen

Kristen Lepore

Secretary

Executive Office for Administration and Finance

State House, Room 373

Boston, MA 02133

(617) 727-2040

**********************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and

intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they

are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify

the system manager at postmaster at dor.state.ma.us.

**********************************************************************




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV)

Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials


Thanks everyone. Good work!

From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:35 PMTo: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV)Subject: Re: Final approval of Plum materials

Great!

On Dec 1, 2015, at 7:32 PM, Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Here’s the revised language.

Ricks

From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:28 PM


Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)

Subject: Re: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike, those are the Bob Ross edits from earlier. Thanks!





Mike Jen is sending you comments now. Specifically about the local tax

incentive section and the EDIP reference.

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:18 PMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike,

Nice job.

My comments are in the attached document.

Let’s get this outta here!

Steve

From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:10 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

I am still reading but the bullets of rankings on page two - some have

periods and some don’t. Please make them all consistent.

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 6:58 PMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Please read this and give any comments. I will do another read right now.

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>;

Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Povich,

Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F.

(ANF) <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks



I have the email with Elizabeth, who also called me with the air people

from her office. I have not heard from Tom but Steve was going to try to

reach him. I suspect Tom meant that they cannot store a helicopter at Logan. We should see if Steve reaches Tom and if not I suggest we do

with what Elizabeth said.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>;

Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>;

Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; Frazier,

Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike did you get resolution on the helicopter matter?

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 6:08 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials



Yes, I have heard that all the other proposals are in.

We need to get ours in.

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 6:06 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Barros and I spoke with Mo who informed us that there is now a meeting

tonight at 7:30pm. I am working on a redraft of the letter now and hope

to have with 30-45 minutes. If you could focus on it as soon as it comes

over that would be appreciated.





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 5:10 PM


Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen

(ANF) <[email protected]>; Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)

([email protected])


<[email protected]>

Subject: Final approval of Plum materials

FYI - per my conversation with Steve a bit earlier, we think this is the

group that should have final sign off on the materials being sent to Plum

tonight. Obviously we’re working as fast as possible to get this done, but

I suspect it will be sometime tonight before it is finished, though

hopefully not too late. The City will want to review the final letter and

Barros will be in a meeting from 6-8pm. My goal is to have everything

finished by 8pm, get final sign off from this group and the City, and then

send to Plum. I will provide updates on how we’re doing against that

timing.



Mike Kennealy




One Ashburton Place, Room 2101Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)




Looks good except take out the extra comma in the first sentence of the second paragraph.

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:33 PMTo: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials


Ricks




Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)



On Dec 1, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]> wrote:

Mike Jen is sending you comments now. Specifically about the local tax incentive

section and the EDIP reference.

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:18 PMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan,



Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike,

Nice job.



Steve


I am still reading but the bullets of rankings on page two - some have periods and some

don’t. Please make them all consistent.



Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven

(GOV) <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)





<[email protected]>


I have the email with Elizabeth, who also called me with the air people from her office.

I have not heard from Tom but Steve was going to try to reach him. I suspect Tom

meant that they cannot store a helicopter at Logan. We should see if Steve reaches

Tom and if not I suggest we do with what Elizabeth said.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




(EOHED) <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)



<[email protected]>







Barros and I spoke with Mo who informed us that there is now a meeting tonight at



7:30pm. I am working on a redraft of the letter now and hope to have with 30-45

minutes. If you could focus on it as soon as it comes over that would be appreciated.

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic DevelopmentOne Ashburton Place, Room 2101

Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>; Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)

([email protected])


<[email protected]>


FYI - per my conversation with Steve a bit earlier, we think this is the group that should

have final sign off on the materials being sent to Plum tonight. Obviously we’re

working as fast as possible to get this done, but I suspect it will be sometime tonight

before it is finished, though hopefully not too late. The City will want to review the final letter and Barros will be in a meeting from 6-8pm. My goal is to have everything

finished by 8pm, get final sign off from this group and the City, and then send to Plum.

I will provide updates on how we’re doing against that timing.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)




.

Ricks




Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)






From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:18 PMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike,

Nice job.



Steve








Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







<[email protected]>Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials





Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]









<[email protected]>










Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





<[email protected]>; Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)

([email protected])




<[email protected]>



have final sign off on the materials being sent to Plum tonight. Obviously we’re

working as fast as possible to get this done, but I suspect it will be sometime tonight before it is finished, though hopefully not too late. The City will want to review the

final letter and Barros will be in a meeting from 6-8pm. My goal is to have everything



Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic DevelopmentOne Ashburton Place, Room 2101

Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)



Got it

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)


<[email protected]>






From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:18 PM

To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike,

Nice job.





Steve






Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







<[email protected]>








Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







<[email protected]>Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials



Yes, I have heard that all the other proposals are in.We need to get ours in.





Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





<[email protected]>; Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)

([email protected])


<[email protected]>



have final sign off on the materials being sent to Plum tonight. Obviously we’re working as fast as possible to get this done, but I suspect it will be sometime tonight

before it is finished, though hopefully not too late. The City will want to review the

final letter and Barros will be in a meeting from 6-8pm. My goal is to have everything



Mike Kennealy




Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)



One other minor thing, where you've created the table of benefits totaling $106m, finance

types expect to see numbers aligned on the right, and $ only for the first number in the column and in the total. It is jarring to see them left justified like text. In my edits from earlier, I redid it correctly.


Jen is sending the suggested language that she and Bob sent earlier to use.

From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:20 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: Re: Final approval of Plum materials

A few comments:

Add page numbers

Bullets should all have periods or none; make consistent

P.4 TIF is incompatible with I-cubed; query whether best to strike where it appearsP.4 TIF would only presumably lower lease cost if lessor is taxable; MCCA and MassPort

don't pay property taxes. I recommend striking this clause.

P.4 I think the "local property tax" section repeats, but with slightly different text.

Combine or delete one.

P.5 don't start a sentence with the number 2014. I sent you a rephrase earlier today.

Looks good! Sorry for being persnickety. No excuse except I'm a lawyer. Thanks.



This includes all recent changes – TIF, helicopters, etc

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]










Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]











reach him. I suspect Tom meant that they cannot store a helicopter at

Logan. We should see if Steve reaches Tom and if not I suggest we do


Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>











Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108



Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






([email protected])


<[email protected]>




tonight. Obviously we’re working as fast as possible to get this done, but I suspect it will be sometime tonight before it is finished, though


Barros will be in a meeting from 6-8pm. My goal is to have everything

finished by 8pm, get final sign off from this group and the City, and then


timing.

Mike Kennealy




Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV)



Sent!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

<[email protected]>

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


<[email protected]>


I’m leaving the office now and will be driving so call me on my cell if you need me.

From: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:35 PMTo: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV)Subject: Re: Final approval of Plum materials

Great!

On Dec 1, 2015, at 7:32 PM, Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:




Ricks




Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)Subject: Re: Final approval of Plum materials




Mike Jen is sending you comments now. Specifically about the local tax

incentive section and the EDIP reference.

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:18 PMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

Mike,

Nice job.



Steve

From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:10 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV);



Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Final approval of Plum materials

I am still reading but the bullets of rankings on page two - some have

periods and some don’t. Please make them all consistent.



Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]











reach him. I suspect Tom meant that they cannot store a helicopter at

Logan. We should see if Steve reaches Tom and if not I suggest we do


Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>











Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]








([email protected])


<[email protected]>




tonight. Obviously we’re working as fast as possible to get this done, but

I suspect it will be sometime tonight before it is finished, though


Barros will be in a meeting from 6-8pm. My goal is to have everything finished by 8pm, get final sign off from this group and the City, and then


timing.

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV)

Cc: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV)

Subject: RE: Following up


My understanding is that there have been multiple conversations going on.

I have forwarded to Robert Kraft, for example, our pitch to them. This

has been helpful and is providing both positive reinforcement to our pitch

and good feedback (which has largely been consistent from the numerous

sources we have been hearing from).

At this point, it would appear that the outstanding question is the direct

value of the package we are offering.

________________________________________


Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 1:15 PM

To: Povich, Lon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Cc: ; Polito, Karyn (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV)

Subject: Re: Following up

Tom Glynn also had some good ideas on this.

Looping in Sec Ash.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 6, 2015, at 12:05 PM, Povich, Lon (GOV)


wrote:

Lon

Lon F. Povich

Governor’s Chief Legal Counsel


Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082



To: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV);

Povich, Lon (GOV)

Subject: Fwd: Following up

We are very much still working this hard.

Conversations with multiple parties yesterday express strong interest in

Boston.

Visit expected this coming Wednesday.

Jeff Immelt may be looking to meet with the Governor then.



Sent from my iPhone




ate.MA.US>>

Date: December 5, 2015 at 10:13:55 AM EST

To: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)"


.US>>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)"

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected].

MA.US>>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,

"Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)"

<[email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@MassM

ail.State.MA.US>>

Subject: RE: Following up

Steve,

- City signed off on materials; sent to Plum last night and forwarded to

our smaller working group as you saw.- Materials just sent to larger group.

- There is a call today at 4:30pm for the working group formed on I-Cubed

and MassWorks deliverables - I will forward you what I sent to the working

group.

- Re: other lines up business - MOBD working on a document, speaking with

MLSC today, and City has been in touch re: Connect and will send over

thoughts.

Mike

________________________________________



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED);Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: Following up

Mike:

Can you please provide us an update on the materials sent yesterday

(please send to the larger group and I hope that the City signed off?)

and the profess on the 3 deliverables we discussed:

1. MassWorks, ICubed examples, including specifics on what the $ was

invested in

2. Work-up examples on 2-3 proposed sites in the Seaport using all of our

ideas, including how the lease terms could work

3. How to use all of our tools for the location of their energy group

Connect, and for all of their existing sites.

Is there a call today, and/or tomorrow?!

Thx.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone




To: John Barros

Subject: RE: FW: Call w/Boston

Date: Friday, December 04, 2015 11:15:00 AM

3pm?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: John Barros [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 10:12 AMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: FW: Call w/Boston

I can make something work after 2:30pm is you wanted to suggest something.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Kennealy, Michael (SEA)


> John, I’m good this afternoon and would like to do the call then if

> possible – what do you think?

>

>

>

> Mike Kennealy>

> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth

>

> The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

>

> Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development

>

> One Ashburton Place, Room 2101

>

> Boston, MA 02108

>

> Office: 617-788-3640

>

> Cell: 617-634-4762

>

> [email protected]

>

>

>

> From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]


> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>;



> [email protected]

> Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>; Mcgaugh,

> James (GE Corporate) <[email protected]>

> Subject: FW: Call w/Boston

>

>

>

> Mike/John

>

>

>

> Scott forwarded your request to me since your proposal falls within my

> area, although like you and John, we are a team (plus McGaugh, of course).

>

>

>

> It looks like Scott, Jim and I are available between 12 – 4 this

> afternoon or from 10:30 – 11:30 and 1:30 – 3 on Monday, if any of

> those times work for you.

>

>

>

> Amy Eisenstadt

>

> State Tax Counsel

>

> General Electric Company

>

>

>

>

>

> (cell)

>>

>

> From: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)


> To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

> Subject: FW: Call w/Boston

>

>

>

>

>

>

>> Scott G. Roberti

>

> Director, State Tax Policy

>


>

> 3135 Easton Turnpike

>

> Fairfield, CT 06828

>



> T (203) 373-3413; F (203) 373-2450

>

> [email protected]

>

>

>

> From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]

> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 12:54 PM

> To: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)

> Cc: john. barros

> Subject: Call w/Boston

>

>

>

> Hi Scott,

>

>

>

> I hope you are well. I wanted to see if you might have some time

> today or tomorrow to speak with John and me – we would welcome an

> opportunity to hear your thoughts, answer any questions, and reiterate

> our strong interest in the project.

>

>

>

> We will do our best to work around your schedule if you could suggest

> a few times.

>

>

>

> Hope we can connect soon.

>

>

>> All the best,

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

>

> Mike Kennealy

>


>

> The Commonwealth of Massachusetts>


>


>

> Boston, MA 02108

>

> Office: 617-788-3640

>

> Cell: 617-634-4762



>

> [email protected]

>

>

--

John Barros



6th Floor, Room 603


t: 617-635-5729






From: Daniel Koh


Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); [email protected]; Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Cowan, Mo

Subject: Re: FW: GE MOU

Date: Thursday, January 21, 2016 4:36:43 PM

thank you

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

FYI.

This was provided to the media as noted below.

Let’s be sure that we all have and share the relevant documents.

From: Pitman, William (GOV)Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 6:51 AMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Cc: Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Guyton, Elizabeth (GOV)Subject: Fwd: GE MOU

This is the email that went to reporters -- items attached.

Billy Pitman

@wfpitman


From: "Pitman, William (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: January 20, 2016 at 4:11:18 PM ESTTo: "Pitman, William (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: GE MOU

All --

On Background:

Attached is the State and City’s MOU with GE as well as a background document providing further explanation on certain sections. This document is



for background purposes only, attributable to state and city officials.

-------------------------------

Billy Pitman

Deputy Communications Director

Office of Governor Charlie Baker

o: (617) 725-4025 ext. 35207

c: (617) 483-3393

[email protected]

--Daniel Arrigg KohChief of Staff City of Boston




To: Povich, Lon (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: RE: GE Letter


Got it, will fully incorporate.

________________________________________



To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: Re: GE Letter

Further revised intro:

________________________________________




Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: RE: GE Letter

with salutation

________________________________________





Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: RE: GE Memo 2 amended



With incorporated. I'll dig up the salutation structure now.

Love (whops, too gushy)

Somewhat sincerely,

Jay

________________________________________





Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: Re: GE Memo 2

Jay,

Please use a more matter of fact tone. It is a little too gushy.

I do like Mike's suggestion about describing what we have done--gathered our legal and financial teams, etc.

I would not use the term 'lease concessions', as we do not know what is accurate, but the language that Massport has

signed off on in the chart.

I would phrase the purchase of existing private property/building, or property swaps as a legal/technical challenge

that we believe would require more time to determine how to possibly overcome.

Please use the same structure of the salutation of the memo that Mike has been using.

Another draft?!

Thx.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 13, 2015, at 5:01 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

>

> Got it - thx

> ________________________________________


> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 4:56 PM

> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)

> Cc: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

> Subject: RE: GE Memo 2>

> Jay, I think this looks great - just a couple of thoughts:

>

> - Typo with "timelessness of your occupancy"; should be "timeliness"?

>

> - Maybe a bit more color on what we did over the last 48 hours - extensive discussions between City and State,

exhausted all alternatives with quasis (Massport, MassDevelopment, BRA), thorough evaluation of bond cap issues,

thorough examination of statutes, etc. Those aren't the right words, but I think it would be great if they concluded

that we did a ton of homework (and we did) on this because (a) it shows respect for their request and strong interest

in the project and (b) at the end of the day it really demonstrates that the Massport parcels are the best options for



them.

>

> Mike

>

> ________________________________________

> From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [[email protected]]


> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier,

Ricks (EOHED)


> Subject: FW: GE Memo 2

>

> Second time with proper email - no change to memo

> ________________________________________

>

> Feedback? Thought I should include a summary of the benefits, but could easily take it out.

>

> Memo would be accompanied by just 3 options - the two involving Massport acquiring public land were

eliminated as you can see in the memo.

>

> Comments by 5 please.

>

> Thx

>

> Jay





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)



I love working with you guys! ________________________________________




Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)


I like both what Jay and Lon have done.

Are we sure about energy $ in the way it is described in the cover letter?

Please share with John Barros and get his sign off before sending.

Sec Ash -- all your from here!!!!

With so much deep affection and aporeciatyon

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 13, 2015, at 6:21 PM, Povich, Lon (GOV)

> <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Further revised intro:

>

>



>

>

>

> ________________________________________

> From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)


> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

> Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV);

> Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

> Subject: RE: GE Letter

>

> with salutation

> ________________________________________

> From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)





> Subject: RE: GE Memo 2 amended

>

> With incorporated. I'll dig up the salutation

> structure now.

>

> Love (whops, too gushy)

>

> Somewhat sincerely,

>> Jay

> ________________________________________



> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED)



> Subject: Re: GE Memo 2

>

> Jay,

>

> Please use a more matter of fact tone. It is a little too gushy.

>> I do like Mike's suggestion about describing what we have done--gathered

> our legal and financial teams, etc.

>

> I would not use the term 'lease concessions', as we do not know what is

> accurate, but the language that Massport has signed off on in the chart.

>

> I would phrase the purchase of existing private property/building, or

> property swaps as a legal/technical challenge that we believe would

> require more time to determine how to possibly overcome.

>



> Please use the same structure of the salutation of the memo that Mike has

> been using.

>

> Another draft?!

>

> Thx.

> Steve

>


>

>> On Dec 13, 2015, at 5:01 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>> <[email protected]> wrote:

>>

>> Got it - thx

>> ________________________________________


>> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 4:56 PM

>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

>> Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

>> Cc: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>> Subject: RE: GE Memo 2

>>

>> Jay, I think this looks great - just a couple of thoughts:

>>

>> - Typo with "timelessness of your occupancy"; should be "timeliness"?

>>

>> - Maybe a bit more color on what we did over the last 48 hours -

>> extensive discussions between City and State, exhausted all alternatives

>> with quasis (Massport, MassDevelopment, BRA), thorough evaluation of bond

>> cap issues, thorough examination of statutes, etc. Those aren't the

>> right words, but I think it would be great if they concluded that we did

>> a ton of homework (and we did) on this because (a) it shows respect for

>> their request and strong interest in the project and (b) at the end of >> the day it really demonstrates that the Massport parcels are the best

>> options for them.

>>

>> Mike

>>

>> ________________________________________

>> From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [[email protected]]

>> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 4:24 PM

>> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen

>> (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

>> Cc: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>> Subject: FW: GE Memo 2

>>>> Second time with proper email - no change to memo

>> ________________________________________

>>

>> Feedback? Thought I should include a summary of the benefits, but could

>> easily take it out.

>>

>> Memo would be accompanied by just 3 options - the two involving Massport

>> acquiring public land were eliminated as you can see in the memo.

>>

>> Comments by 5 please.



>>

>> Thx

>>

>> Jay





Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: RE: GE Memo 2 amended


Attachments: GE Memo 12.13 - 2.docx

With incorporated. I'll dig up the salutation structure now.

Love (whops, too gushy)

Somewhat sincerely,

Jay

________________________________________





Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: Re: GE Memo 2

Jay,

Please use a more matter of fact tone. It is a little too gushy.

I do like Mike's suggestion about describing what we have done--gathered our legal and financial teams, etc.

I would not use the term 'lease concessions', as we do not know what is accurate, but the language that Massport has

signed off on in the chart.

I would phrase the purchase of existing private property/building, or property swaps as a legal/technical challenge that we believe would require more time to determine how to possibly overcome.

Please use the same structure of the salutation of the memo that Mike has been using.

Another draft?!

Thx.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 13, 2015, at 5:01 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:>

> Got it - thx

> ________________________________________



> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)


> Subject: RE: GE Memo 2

>



> Jay, I think this looks great - just a couple of thoughts:

>

> - Typo with "timelessness of your occupancy"; should be "timeliness"?

>

> - Maybe a bit more color on what we did over the last 48 hours - extensive discussions between City and State,

exhausted all alternatives with quasis (Massport, MassDevelopment, BRA), thorough evaluation of bond cap issues,

thorough examination of statutes, etc. Those aren't the right words, but I think it would be great if they concluded

that we did a ton of homework (and we did) on this because (a) it shows respect for their request and strong interest

in the project and (b) at the end of the day it really demonstrates that the Massport parcels are the best options for

them.

>

> Mike

>

> ________________________________________

> From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [[email protected]]


> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier,

Ricks (EOHED)


> Subject: FW: GE Memo 2

>

> Second time with proper email - no change to memo

> ________________________________________

>

> Feedback? Thought I should include a summary of the benefits, but could easily take it out.

>

> Memo would be accompanied by just 3 options - the two involving Massport acquiring public land were

eliminated as you can see in the memo.

>


>

> Thx

>

> Jay



MEMORANDUM

TO: GE Team

FROM: Secretary Jay Ash, Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development


RE: Project Update and Grid

Thank you for continuing our discussion about the exciting possibilities that the City of Boston’s

Innovation District provides for locating your headquarters. Our public partners, including the

Governor of Massachusetts, the Mayor of Boston and their teams, as well as our quasi-public

partners including Massport, continue to examine the range of ways we may best support your

move to the Seaport District.

As I hope you can continue to sense, we are excited about the possibilities and, therefore,

continue to refine our best thinking to provide additional clarity so you may best complete your

own review. In particular, we have spent considerable time over the past forty-eight hours in

extensive discussions between the public partners and their legal and financial teams, have

considered and exhausted extensive alternatives, examined options allow through statutes and

even consulted with bond counsel on potential sources of public supports. We started with five

potential scenarios you suggested on Friday. Three options are developed in the attached

Options Grid, while the discussion on two others has ended without inclusion in the grid. In

these two cases, involving the public acquisition of a building or land that is currently privately

owned, our combined efforts have not been able to identify a path for a city or state entity toovercome the identify legal/technical challenges to do so. While we are willing to explore any

additional ideas you may have regarding those possibilities, a clear path for those options does

not exist presently and, therefore, we cannot model it for timeliness of your occupancy and

overall cost. Regarding the three fully developed options attached, you will see that Option A,

the public option, provides for the maximization of public incentives and, we believe, certainty

of time. In each of the three scenarios, we are presenting to you the likely direct benefits for

the property development; all other previous made pledges, i.e. a $1 million workforce training

grant, remain intact. In Option A, I would also note we believe additional benefits are

achievable in negotiation with Massport once the many variables of the project are known.Again, Massport remains committed to working with you on favorable lease terms over and

above those that accrue as a result of the $120 million initial lease support.

In order to provide additional perspective on Option A, I am also attaching a general description

of the neighborhood, as well as renderings which you may already have.



In short, Option A, the public option, provides for:

• $120 million in direct lease supports;

• Additional lease value opportunities;

•

Up to $20 million or more of City property tax relief;

•

$25 million in State offsite infrastructure and/or public transit improvements;

•

Maximum State energy efficiency contributions, to be determined in conjunction with

project design, and

•

Adjacent public parking availability, thereby reducing the need for on-site parking

constructions and its related cost to the project.

Option B, the existing building option, provides for:

• Up to $40 million in employment tax benefits, in the place of the $120 million in Option

A public lease supports which are not available for private projects;

• No additional publicly supported lease value opportunities;

• A City property tax level which is based only on the improvements then made to the

existing building, thus likely resulting in a significantly reduced benefit;

• Up to $25 million in State support infrastructure, although an existing building may not

be able to maximize this benefit;

• As much State energy efficiency funding as is available and possible for an existing

building, based upon an energy audit, and

• The possibility of making additional parking available should the building be proximate

to the garage Massport is building or if another location can be permitted for anotherpublic parking garage.

Option C, the build on a private property option, provides for:

• Up to $40 million in employment tax benefits, in the place of the $120 million in Option

A public lease supports which are not available for private projects;

• No additional publicly supported lease value opportunities;

• Up to $20 million or more of City property tax relief, as the new construction of the

building will create ample new property tax to then be relieved;

•

$25 million in State offsite infrastructure and/or public transit improvements, whichcould include bringing public utilities to the site and building-out the public sidewalks

around the building;

•

Maximum State energy efficiency contributions, to be determined in conjunction with

project design, and



• The possibility of making additional parking available should the property be proximate

to the garage Massport is building or if another location can be permitted for another

public parking garage.

All members of our team remain available to discuss these matters with you in greater detail.

We look forward to continuing to work with you on this project and the additional aspects of

your company’s interest in Massachusetts.





Subject: RE: GE Memo 2


thx!

________________________________________ From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)



Subject: RE: GE Memo 2

-----Original Message-----From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]


To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen

(ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Subject: FW: GE Memo 2

Second time with proper email - no change to memo

________________________________________

Feedback? Thought I should include a summary of the benefits, but could

easily take it out.

Memo would be accompanied by just 3 options - the two involving Massport

acquiring public land were eliminated as you can see in the memo.

Comments by 5 please.

Thx

Jay




To: Povich, Lon (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); [email protected]

Subject: RE: GE Memo


Great thx!

________________________________________



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer

F. (ANF); [email protected]

Subject: Re: GE Memo

Lon

________________________________________

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>



Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer

F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); [email protected]

Subject: Re: GE Memo

Just reading now!

Will be back to you shortly.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 13, 2015, at 4:23 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)


>

> Feedback? Thought I should include a summary of the benefits, but could

easily take it out.

>

> Memo would be accompanied by just 3 options - the two involving Massport

acquiring public land were eliminated as you can see in the memo.

>


>

> Thx

>

> Jay

> <GE Memo 12.13.docx>




To: Daniel Koh; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV)

Subject: RE: GE press release


Ditto, and more to come!


-------- Original message --------From: Daniel Koh <[email protected]>Date: 01/13/2016 3:04 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay

(EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, Tom Glynn <[email protected]>, Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>, jdoolin <[email protected]>, John Barros <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: GE press release

It's been an honor working with all of you. Truly. Much, much more to come.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)


Congratulations and thanks for your leadership. It has been a privilege to work with this team.

Best,

Jennifer

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:01 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV)Cc: Daniel KohSubject: GE press release



Colleagues!

Attached is the official announcement!

A release from the Governor and Mayor will be out shortly.

A moment to celebrate.

And yes, there's good work to do ahead.

Nice work team!

Best,

Steve and Dan


From: "Martin, Seth (GE Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: January 13, 2016 at 1:00:01 PM ESTTo: "[email protected]"

<[email protected]>Cc: "Latour, Deirdre A (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Subject: press release

Seth Martin Director, Financial & Corporate Communications GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)[email protected]

--Daniel Arrigg Koh



Chief of Staff City of Boston





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV); Daniel Koh

Subject: Re: GE press release


Great work everyone.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 13, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Colleagues!



Nice work team!

Best,Steve and Dan


From: "Martin, Seth (GE Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: January 13, 2016 at 1:00:01 PM ESTTo: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Cc: "Latour, Deirdre A (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Subject: press release

Seth Martin


GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]



<Press Release_GE moves HQ to Boston.docx>




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV)

Cc: Daniel Koh




Best,

Jennifer


Colleagues!





Nice work team!

Best,

Steve and Dan


From: "Martin, Seth (GE Corporate)" <[email protected]>

Date: January 13, 2016 at 1:00:01 PM EST

To: "[email protected]"

<[email protected]>

Cc: "Latour, Deirdre A (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>

Subject: press release

Seth Martin


GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]





From: John Barros


Cc: Daniel Koh; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon (GOV)



Congrats to the team!

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

Ditto, and more to come!


-------- Original message --------

From: Daniel Koh <[email protected]>Date: 01/13/2016 3:04 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, Tom Glynn <[email protected]>, Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>, jdoolin < [email protected]>, John Barros < [email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>



On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]> wrote:


Best,

Jennifer




Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:01 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV)Cc: Daniel KohSubject: GE press release

Colleagues!





Nice work team!

Best,

Steve and Dan



Seth Martin Director, Financial & Corporate Communications GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]



--Daniel Arrigg KohChief of Staff

City of Boston

--John BarrosChief of Economic DevelopmentOffice of Mayor Martin J. Walsh6th Floor, Room 603Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201

t: 617-635-5729http://www.cityofboston.gov

SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.http://imagine.boston.gov/



From: Daniel Koh

To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV)




On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]> wrote:


Best,

Jennifer


Colleagues!





Nice work team!



Best,

Steve and Dan



Seth Martin

Director, Financial & Corporate Communications GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]

--

Daniel Arrigg KohChief of Staff City of Boston




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Daniel Koh



Great team! Great work! Great win!

Thanks to all.

Lon

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 6:44 AMTo: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV); Daniel KohSubject: Re: GE press release

Fantastic teamwork! Great working with all of you.

Mike Kennealy

On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:49 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>

wrote:


Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 13, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


Colleagues!







Nice work team!

Best,

Steve and Dan


From: "Martin, Seth (GE Corporate)" <[email protected]>

Date: January 13, 2016 at 1:00:01 PM EST


<[email protected]>

Cc: "Latour, Deirdre A (GE, Corporate)"

<[email protected]>

Subject: press release

Seth Martin


GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]






Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; John Barros; Povich, Lon (GOV); Daniel Koh



Fantastic teamwork! Great working with all of you.

Mike Kennealy

On Jan 13, 2016, at 10:49 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]> wrote:


Sent from my iPhone


Colleagues!



Nice work team!

Best,Steve and Dan


From: "Martin, Seth (GE Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: January 13, 2016 at 1:00:01 PM EST

To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Cc: "Latour, Deirdre A (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Subject: press release



Seth Martin


GE

646-682-5602

203-572-3567 (mobile)

[email protected]






Cc:

Subject: RE: GE visit?

Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 8:34:28 AM

An update on Wed would be good!

Daily meeting works.Thank you.

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 7:39 AMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED)Cc: Subject: RE: GE visit?

I'll send along the deck we are using. I'm in Minnesota today. GE is Thursday. Just intro meeting.. Happy to provide recap and talk about next sreps at cabinet on Friday, unless you feel like he should hear something on Wed. I will be at Wed daily meeting.


-------- Original message --------From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/28/2015 6:52 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc:

Subject: GE visit?

Sec Ash, I understand from Sec Lepore that you have a visit with GE coming up.Should we do a preview with the Governor? Best, Steve

GOV E-mail





Subject: RE: GE visit?


Ok


-------- Original message --------From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/28/2015 8:34 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc:Subject: RE: GE visit?

An update on Wed would be good!

Daily meeting works.

Thank you.

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 7:39 AMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED)Cc: Subject: RE: GE visit?

I'll send along the deck we are using. I'm in Minnesota today. GE is Thursday. Just intro

meeting.. Happy to provide recap and talk about next sreps at cabinet on Friday, unless you feel like he should hear something on Wed. I will be at Wed daily meeting.


-------- Original message --------From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/28/2015 6:52 AM (GMT-05:00)

To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc:Subject: GE visit?

Sec Ash, I understand from Sec Lepore that you have a visit with GE coming up.Should we do a preview with the Governor? Best,



Steve




To: ; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); [email protected]; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)

Subject: RE: GE


Correct. We're talking on Monday about the programs we have available and what they may or may not derire.


-------- Original message --------From:Date: 11/15/2015 2:53 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Polito, Karyn (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Conroy, Jim (GOV)" <[email protected]>, [email protected], "Buckley, Timothy (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: GE

We won't offer anything to GE that we don't process internally first. Too big and too important.

Sent from my iPhone


No, this is a call between Boston, Mike Kennealy and their staff about the type and availability of incentives.


-------- Original message --------From: "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/15/2015 1:41 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>,

>, "Polito, Karyn (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Conroy, Jim (GOV)" < [email protected]>, [email protected], "Buckley, Timothy (GOV)" <[email protected]>



Subject: Re: GE

What is the tax call about? I assume I should be in that call.

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 15, 2015, at 12:03 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)

< [email protected]> wrote:

Thx. Good discussion with Barros of Boston yesterday. We've got a game plan on sites, are meeting after a Monday call w the GE tax people, and are working towards a Friday submission to them.


-------- Original message --------From: "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/15/2015 10:22 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Polito, Karyn (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Conroy, Jim (GOV)" < [email protected]>, [email protected], "Buckley, Timothy (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>Subject: GE

Lon

Sent from my iPhone





Subject: RE: Info to share on the Boston project?


Attachments: Project Plum Dec 1 MJK2 lfp.docx

Mike

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT);


Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF);

jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)


Updates/thoughts:

Letter - Want to make sure we agree on basics of offer and presentation - 1

offer, no mention of EDIP, appendix to provide an example of I-Cubed. If

we need to discuss we should do so ASAP.

I AGREE

- Question - do we propose anything that would attempt to steer them to

one site or another?

I MADE SOME LIGHT SUGGESTIONS IN THAT DIRECTION, BUT BELIEVE THEY WANT THE

SEAPORT AND WE SHOULD SEE WHAT OPTION THEY LIKE THERE BEST

- Should we say more about how valuable parking is in Seaport?

I THINK A SENTENCE IN THAT DIRECTION IS A GOOD IDEA, and I MADE A

SUGGESTION, BUT FEEL FREE TO REWORK



Site book

- Working with City to find a way to incorporate all the great content

folks have sent on sites.

Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of Massachusetts


Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



<[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)<[email protected]>; Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>;

Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV)


<[email protected]>; jdoolin


<[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)


<[email protected]>


Next draft attached. I will follow with an email shortly with what I

believe are open items/needs and questions.

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]











<[email protected]>; Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>;








<[email protected]>


FYI - draft still in process; will send as soon as I can but not by 1pm.

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 8:29 AM

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>;Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]>













<[email protected]>


I will reach out individually to folks this morning for help/input as

needed on the letter. I will send the next draft to this group by 1pm

today - I hope that will be a draft that is close to final, but that

timing will still allow for an iteration or two before close of business.

If you have specific suggestions on either the letter or site book sent

last night, please email or call me.



________________________________________


Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 10:54 PM


Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT);


Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF);

jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)


Attached please find a draft of a revised letter. This represents edits

to a draft provided by the City earlier tonight; I would characterize this

as still very rough with items in brackets and areas where the writing

needs to be improved. After discussion tomorrow morning, the balance of

the day will be dedicated to finalizing it for submission by close of

business. For our discussion at 7am, I would suggest that we focus not on

specific wording but rather on the key decision points and structural

aspects of the letter; for example, do we:

- Want to submit what amounts to a 3rd proposal (informed by discussionwith Steve earlier tonight), with proposals 1 and 2 presented as

appendices/for reference? And if so, is this the right proposal?

- Want to include the section that "sells" the State and City?

- Like the structure (provided by the City) of "Your HQ, Your Lab, Your

Home"

We should also discuss where we can/should provide more detail - potential

uses of I-Cubed, permitting, etc. - and what those details might be.

Discussion of the next draft can focus more on specific wording.

Speak with you soon.





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]









<[email protected]>; 'Elizabeth Morse'

<[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley, Timothy

(GOV) <[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV)


<[email protected]>; 'jdoolin'






<[email protected]>


Quick update - the City had started a re-draft of the letter and the site

book which I thought I would have received a while ago but am still

awaiting. As soon as it comes in I will make whatever edits I see fit and

send to this group. So expect something later tonight and then we can

discuss on our call tomorrow. We do have until close of business tomorrow

to finalize.

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]









<[email protected]>; 'Elizabeth Morse'

<[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley, Timothy

(GOV) <[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV)

<[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)<[email protected]>; 'jdoolin'




<[email protected]>


Attached please find the final versions of the documents sent today. Now

on to the letter.

Mike Kennealy


Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place,Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



















<[email protected]>


I would like to send my short memo and Rick's memo as soon as each is

ready - doesn't need to be together.

Please let me know ASAP if there are suggested changes to my

memo.

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)<[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)











<[email protected]>

Subject: Re: Info to share on the Boston project?

Mike,

Do we assume that both letters go out together?

Please circulate the final docs.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone



> On Nov 30, 2015, at 1:32 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>

> Steve, all,

>

> Please see the attached documents - I will email again shortly with

further thoughts/detail, and my short memo requires another read, but I

wanted to get these in folks' hands now.

>

> Mike Kennealy

> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of

> Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One

> Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

> Office: 617-788-3640

> Cell: 617-634-4762

> [email protected]

>

>



> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 1:10 PM


> Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

> <[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

> <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

> <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)

> <[email protected]>; Elizabeth Morse

> <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley,

> Timothy (GOV) <[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim

> (GOV) <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

> <[email protected]>; jdoolin

> <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Ross, Robert

> (ANF) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

> <[email protected]>> Subject: Info to share on the Boston project?

>

> Mike:

>

> Can you please circulate the letter/info we were discussing this

morning?

>

> What is the target time for the next set of information later today?

>

> Thank you,

> Steve

> <Project Plum Incentives Memo clean.docx> <Plum memo Nov 30.docx>



December 1, 2015

Ann R. Klee

Vice President




Fairfield, CT 06828

Dear Ms. Klee,

We are pleased to present a proposal that details over $100 million of financial support for your

relocation and growth in Boston.

opportunities that will

directly benefit General Electric and your employees.

We believe that no State and City can match

, your headquarters, your innovation lab, and your home.

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

Our Commonwealth and City are excellent places to:

Work - Record job levels, national and international leadership in high growth sectors, a

culture of innovation and entrepreneurship, strong anchor industries, a highly functioning

ecosystem, and ample connections to the world.

Live - Prospering communities, #1 in K-12 public education, top private high schools and

universities, world class health care, and great culture.



Play - Museums, theatres, history, sports, concerts, beaches, shopping, restaurants, hikingtrails, and festivals.

Massachusetts has the concentration of institutions of higher education in the

United States - 140 colleges and universities, 55 within Greater Boston – and the combination of

education, research and development, and technology transfers drives a vibrant culture of

innovation and entrepreneurship. Currently, among the states, Massachusetts ranks:

#1 on the Milken Institute State Technology and Science Index.

#1 in R&D spending as a percentage of GDP and per capita.

#1 in federal expenditures for academic and non-profit R&D

#1 in funding from the National Institute of Health as percentage of GDP

#1 in life sciences employment per capita

#1 in percentage of workforce in science and engineering occupations

#1 in technology transfers

#2 in venture capital under management.

#2 in technology patents per capita.

#2 in pre-market biopharmaceutical notifications.

#2 highest growth rate in defense manufacturing and instrumentation

#2 largest medical device industry of any state

Massachusetts is a highly educated state, and we pride ourselves on a world class education

system from kindergarten through higher education. Half of all Nobel Prize winners in the

United States were educated in Massachusetts, our 8 th graders rank #2 in the world in science

achievement and, among the states, Massachusetts ranks:

#1 in K-12 achievement by Education Week.

#1 in percentage of adults with bachelor’s degrees at 38.2%.

#1 percentage of over 25 population with advanced degrees at 16.8%, 19% in Boston.

#1 in 4th grade math and reading

#1 in 8th grade math

#1 in 8th grade reading

#2 in 4th grade writing scores.

Moreover, the Commonwealth is a great place to do business. Our tax structure is competitive;

our public sector economic development groups are proactive; and our business community is

represented by exceptional and complementary financial services, technology, life sciences and

professional services firms. Our businesses and all of our citizens benefit from political and

fiscal stability, with leaders committed to bipartisanship,

from across the political spectrum and

engages in regular, open dialogue with legislative and municipal leaders. At the state level, weclosed a combined $2.5 billion FY15 and FY16 budget deficit without raising taxes, and we are



undertaking a comprehensive review of all Executive Department regulations to be completedby March 31, 2016 with the goal of making it easier to conduct business in Massachusetts.

In Massachusetts, leaders from business, higher education, philanthropy, non-profits, and state

and local government work together to advance individual and common aspirations, including

prosperity, innovation, a great quality of life, and meaningful impacts on our country and the

world. We invite you to join us.

YOUR HEADQUARTERS

Financial Support: Drawing on ideas shared with you previously,

proposal that we believe maximizes the

value we can provide. The key components of this new proposal are:

I-Cubed plus MassWorks funding $80 million

Local property tax incentive $20 million

Innovation Center $5 million

Workforce training $1 million

Total $106 million

I-Cubed and MassWorks: We propose a combined total of $80 million from the State’s

Infrastructure Investment Incentive (I-Cubed) and MassWorks programs and are prepared to

commit up to $50 million from either. Combined, the programs can provide funds for economic

development projects that require major public infrastructure investments; they can fund a

variety of commercial infrastructure developments and improvements and various capital

investment projects as well as assist municipalities to advance projects that support job creation

and expansion. We are prepared to discuss a variety of opportunities for the use of these funds

including a parking facility (Appendix 1 to this letter provides an example) or helipad, and we will

structure any program to provide security and convenience for GE as well as a public benefit.

Local property tax in centive: The City offers several property tax incentive programs to help

enable the development of a space suitable for GE. The programs most likely to be employed

include payment in lieu of tax programs under Chapters 121A and 121B or Tax Increment

Financing (TIF) under the EDIP (Economic Development Incentive Program)

program.

For example, two of the sites under consideration already have a Chapter 121A structure in

place. Other sites located on public land lend themselves to a Chapter 121B based

incentive. If neither of these options is available, a TIF can be employed provided that there isnew development that can provide a significant tax increment to be discounted.



be driven by the site youselect. Given the employment levels and sites under consideration, the City anticipates that it

will be able to offer up to $20 million in property tax incentives.

Workforce Training Fund: The State will provide $1 million in employee training funds, the

maximum award allowed per company.

Proposed Available Sites: In addition to lowering the cost to move, we have identified sites

that we believe could be excellent

The accompanying booklet details the following sites, each

representing a shared opportunity to innovate and grow your business:

Site Selection & Permitting Support: To review and make your transition to any of these

buildings easier, the State and the City will appoint a Permitting Ombudsman to assist with any

site selection and permitting needs. The Permitting Ombudsman will work directly with the

Project Plum State-City Joint Task Force to support all project development needs.

YOUR INNOVATION CENTER

The Center: As GE joins Boston’s innovation ecosystem, we propose an exciting partnership to

launch an Innovation Center in Downtown Boston to showcase your technology, especially

healthcare and digital hardware technology. The proposed Life Sciences Innovation Center

would be in partnership with GE, the City of Boston, MassChallenge, and the Massachusetts

Life Sciences Center (MLSC). As part of this partnership, MassChallenge would operate the

Center and MLSC would support up to $5 million to build-out the facility.

The proposed Life Sciences Innovation Center be hosted at 26 Court Street, a

municipally-owned building in close proximity to Government Center and Faneuil Hall, one of

the top tourist attractions in the country. In collaboration with Mass Challenge - the world’s

largest startup - and with up to $5 million in support from MLSC, your engineers will join the

doctors, researchers, and entrepreneurs of our region to test the latest equipment and methods

in pursuit of solving the world’s hardest health problems.

University and Research Partnerships: The Boston area is home to 55 institutions of higher

education, and four of Boston’s top employers are hospitals. 2014 marked the 20th consecutive

year that Boston received the most National Institutes of Health funding of any U.S. city. Forty-

six Boston institutions received 3,521 NIH awards for more than $1.7 billion in funding.

We will facilitate opportunities to leverage this existing network of academia and research to

support GE’s innovation in Boston.

YOUR HOME

Commented [LFP1]:



Attracting and retaining talent is even easier when people want to call your city home. Boston is America’s Walking City; our beautiful neighborhoods and the communities that surround us are

diverse, dynamic, and historic.

Concierge Team: To help you access all that the Commonwealth has to offer, we will assign a

concierge team for transitioning your employees to our city, helping them with anything from

finding homes to enrolling in schools to networking with area cultural groups.

Transportation Assistance: We will make it easier for your employees to get to work. We will

partner with you to make corporate jet service, helipads, and - where relevant - ferry service a

possibility. Recognizing that 400 – 600 or more Project Plum vehicles and 500 or more general

public vehicles have the potential of further congesting already challenged roadways and

commutes, the State and City are combining to offer as much as another $125 million in

currently not planned for public improvements in the Seaport District. These improvements,

while benefitting the entire district, will be tailored to directly improve the commute in and out of

the Innovation Block, home to Project Plum employees and visitors.

We also plan to embark on the following transportation infrastructure improvements:

● The City is committed to a significant undertaking to replace the Northern Avenue

Bridge. Closed for nearly two decades, the bridge will require as much as $100 million in

planning, design, and construction funding. This investment will significantly improve

transportation in the Seaport District.

● The State will coordinate with the City and GE to undertake $25 million in local street

improvements and/or public transportation enhancements. These infrastructure

improvements will target various modes of transportation and should make the district an

even more appealing center of commerce and livability.

As you know, our State and our City are synonymous with innovation. Generation after

generation - for the entire history of our country - this region has been on the forefront, and the

world’s toughest challenges are tackled here. From the American to Industrial revolutions, from

the rise of the information age to the birth of personalized medicine, Massachusetts has led the

way. is our heritage and our future, and that is why we believe

that Boston should be home.

Sincerely,







Appendix 1- Ori ginal I-Cubed proposal , November 21, 2015

The State and City propose building a $50 million combined corporate and public parkinggarage with 800 - 1,000 spaces, funded through the State’s Infrastructure Investment Incentive(I-Cubed) program. This will relieve GE from the cost of constructing or operating a parkingfacility while providing a potentially free and convenient service for your workforce and visitors,and the foundation for a high rise above the garage, if desired.

The garage, to be constructed in full coordination and perhaps by GE’s contractor, will alsoprovide a substantial public benefit - the creation of additional public parking in the SeaportDistrict. In doing so, it also provides the following benefits to GE, the ranges for which can benarrowed as site selection and further imagination is put to work:

● It relieves GE from the responsibility of the cost of constructing its own parking facility

(estimated savings of $12 million to $30 million);

●

It spares GE the cost of interest associated with paying the debt on the permanentfinancing of a parking garage (estimated savings of $4 million to $12 million);

● It allows GE to mitigate property tax expenses, operating and maintenance expenses,

and future capital improvements expenses to satisfy i ts parking needs (estimated

savings of $15 million to $30 million);

● It creates an opportunity for GE to offer a great amenity by providing employees and

visitors with substantially reduced parking costs (estimated savings of $20 million to 35

million); and

● It allows for the public financing of the foundation work necessary to support a high rise

office building (estimated savings of $5 million to $15 million).

In total, the $50 million state I-Cubed grant provides GE with an estimated $56 million - $122million of benefits. The market rate charges for the public parking would likely support all thecarrying costs for the future operation of the garage. The garage could have at its base aground floor for innovation for GE and potentially others drawn from the City’s vast array of

innovators and entrepreneurs. As a critical public project, fully constructed with public dollarsand maintained with operating revenues, the public benefit created allows for and justifies theprivate benefit GE would receive.

The garage serves as the building foundation, and air-rights for a vertical building. It is possiblethat the garage generates income necessary to write down the cost of those air-rights. It is alsopossible, and fully dependent on compatibility with and approval of GE, that the garage hasfloors of additional office or hospitality upon it as well. The additional office, not initially occupiedby GE, would allow flex-space for future GE expansion. The possibility of a hotel could enhanceGE’s convenience as an amenity, providing additional on-site meeting space, restaurants,lounges, and, of course, lodging. Both would impact the bottom line as another incomegenerator. Whether with or without a hotel, the air-rights savings would be influenced by the sizeof the garage and its ability to reduce the cost of what would likely be a long-term lease. Thatlease, depending upon GE’s siting decision, might be on private or public land, which would alsoinfluence the cost to GE. Especially enhancing our opportunity to maximize our support to GEwould be your selection of a publicly owned parcel. No savings is therefore assigned to thesecuring of air-rights, but the parties look forward to exploring the possibilities once a site hasbeen selected.




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)



Ricks





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon

(GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF);

jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Article mentioned on one our calls - how about as an appendix to our letter?

Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing &

Economic Development One Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






<[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) <[email protected]>;

Garrity, Rob (DOT) <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>;

Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)


Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; jdoolin <[email protected]>;

Ross, Robert (ANF) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>


Updates/thoughts:

Letter

- Have a number of great wording suggestions from Jennifer Sullivan which I will incorporate into next draft, along

with I-Cubed examples

- City sending edits as well

- Want to make sure we agree on basics of offer and presentation - 1 offer, no mention of EDIP, appendix to provide

an example of I-Cubed. If we need to discuss we should do so ASAP.

- Question - do we propose anything that would attempt to steer them to one site or another?



- Should we say more about how valuable parking is in Seaport?

Site book

- Working with City to find a way to incorporate all the great content folks have sent on sites.

Mike Kennealy



Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]














Next draft attached. I will follow with an email shortly with what I believe are open items/needs and questions.

Mike Kennealy



Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]









<[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV) <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; jdoolin <[email protected]>;




FYI - draft still in process; will send as soon as I can but not by 1pm.

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven (GOV)

<[email protected]>










I will reach out individually to folks this morning for help/input as needed on the letter. I will send the next draft to

this group by 1pm today - I hope that will be a draft that is close to final, but that timing will still allow for an

iteration or two before close of business. If you have specific suggestions on either the letter or site book sent last

night, please email or call me.

________________________________________




Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon

(GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF);

jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Attached please find a draft of a revised letter. This represents edits to a draft provided by the City earlier tonight; I

would characterize this as still very rough with items in brackets and areas where the writing needs to be improved.

After discussion tomorrow morning, the balance of the day will be dedicated to finalizing it for submission by close

of business. For our discussion at 7am, I would suggest that we focus not on specific wording but rather on the key

decision points and structural aspects of the letter; for example, do we:

- Want to submit what amounts to a 3rd proposal (informed by discussion with Steve earlier tonight), with proposals

1 and 2 presented as appendices/for reference? And if so, is this the right proposal?

- Want to include the section that "sells" the State and City?

- Like the structure (provided by the City) of "Your HQ, Your Lab, Your Home"

We should also discuss where we can/should provide more detail - potential uses of I-Cubed, permitting, etc. - and

what those details might be. Discussion of the next draft can focus more on specific wording.

Speak with you soon.

Mike Kennealy



Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]










'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)


Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; 'jdoolin' <[email protected]>;




Quick update - the City had started a re-draft of the letter and the site book which I thought I would have received a

while ago but am still awaiting. As soon as it comes in I will make whatever edits I see fit and send to this group.

So expect something later tonight and then we can discuss on our call tomorrow. We do have until close of

business tomorrow to finalize.

Mike Kennealy



Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) <[email protected]>;


'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley, Timothy (GOV)


Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) <[email protected]>; 'jdoolin' <[email protected]>;




Attached please find the final versions of the documents sent today. Now on to the letter.

Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]
















I would like to send my short memo and Rick's memo as soon as each is ready - doesn't need to be together.

Please let me know ASAP if there are suggested changes to my memo.

Mike Kennealy



Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]













Subject: Re: Info to share on the Boston project?

Mike,

Do we assume that both letters go out together?

Please circulate the final docs.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 1:32 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

wrote:

>> Steve, all,

>

> Please see the attached documents - I will email again shortly with further thoughts/detail, and my short memo

requires another read, but I wanted to get these in folks' hands now.

>

> Mike Kennealy




> Office: 617-788-3640



> Cell: 617-634-4762

> [email protected]

>

>



> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 1:10 PM


> Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

> <[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

> <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

> <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)

> <[email protected]>; Elizabeth Morse

> <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Buckley,

> Timothy (GOV) <[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim

> (GOV) <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

> <[email protected]>; jdoolin

> <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>; Ross, Robert

> (ANF) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

> <[email protected]>

> Subject: Info to share on the Boston project?

>

> Mike:

>

> Can you please circulate the letter/info we were discussing this morning?

>

> What is the target time for the next set of information later today?

>

> Thank you,

> Steve

> <Project Plum Incentives Memo clean.docx> <Plum memo Nov 30.docx>



From: Polito, Karyn (GOV)


Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); D"Arbeloff, Mindy (GOV)

Subject: Re: Invitation to State of the Commonwealth

Date: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 4:43:52 PM

Terrific!

Sent from my iPhone


I would love to join you.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 19, 2016, at 1:49 PM, wrote:

Great!

Sent from my iPhone


Fyi.Ann Klee will be joining us from GE.

Sent from my iPhone


From: "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: January 19, 2016 at 12:56:08 PM ESTTo: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)"

<[email protected]>Cc: "Serpa, Dean (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Conway, Scott (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "D'Arbeloff, Mindy (GOV)" <[email protected]>, "Zarrella, Lily (GOV)" <[email protected]>

GOV E-mail



Subject: Re: Invitation to State of the Commonwealth

Ann,We would be delighted to welcome you!Please send our best to Jeff and Jeff.

Best and look forward to seeing you soon,SteveSent from my iPhone

On Jan 19, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve,

Just heard back from Jeff and Jeff. Unfortunately, Friday is our earnings call, so they won't be able to make the Governor's State of the State. They send their regrets; both wish they could have been there.

I'd be delighted to accept your very kind invitation, though.

Many thanks to you and the Governor.

Best,

ark

Sent from my iPhone




Ann,

We hope that you all can come on Thursday for Governor Baker's

State of the Commonwealth.

When you are able, please let us know who will be able to attend and we can then help with the logistics.

Best and look

forward to seeing you soon,

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 14, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>

wrote:

Steve,

Thank you and the



Governor very much for the invitations. What an

honor. I'll check with Jeff and Jeff and get back to you

as soon as possible.

ark

-----Original

Message-----

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent:

Thursday, January 14, 2016 6:39 PM

To: Klee, Ann



(GE, Corporate)

Cc: Serpa, Dean

(GOV); Conway, Scott (GOV); D'Arbeloff, Mindy (GOV)

Subject: Invitation

to State of the Commonwealth

Ann,

The Governor

would like to invite Chairman Immelt, Jeff Bornstein and you to the State

of the Commonwealth on this Thursday evening, 6:30 pm, January 21, 2016.



A formal invitation would follow.

Can you let us know if this can work or if you have

any questions?

Best,

Steve

Sent from

my iPhone





Subject: RE: Joint Draft Incentives Letter for Project Plum


.

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2015 6:07 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV)

Subject: Fwd: Joint Draft Incentives Letter for Project Plum

I have not reviewed this draft as I am just receiving it as well. If one is doing any work off of anything I would suggest it be off this draft. I just got off a conference call with Boston and the project people from GE if you would like an update let me know.


-------- Original message --------From: John Barros < [email protected]>Date: 11/22/2015 6:04 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Joint Draft Incentives Letter for Project Plum

With attachment

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:02 PM, John Barros < [email protected]> wrote:> Jay and Steve,

>

> Here is the latest taking all the edits in consideration

>

>

> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)

> < [email protected]> wrote:

>> Sorry, here are the two docs referenced.

>> ________________________________________

>> From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)




>> To: John Barros; [email protected]

>> Subject: RE: Joint Draft Incentives Letter for Project Plum

>>

>> John, here is a redraft based upon Steve's comments. I've attached the document as a clean draft and a

comparison document.

>

>

>

> --

> John Barros





> t: 617-635-5729

> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>


> http://imagine.boston.gov/

--

John Barros



6th Floor, Room 603


t: 617-635-5729







To: Cowan, Mo; Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

Cc: [email protected]; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Klee Call: Project Plum


Thanks very much. Can we ask you to get a call scheduled with the tax people for Friday?


-------- Original message --------From: "Cowan, Mo" <[email protected]>Date: 11/25/2015 3:10 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected], "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Klee Call: Project Plum

We can use this number for the 4pm call:

; passcode

Thanks.

Mo Cowan

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]> wrote:

>

> Mo will be joining me and will send around a call in number. Look forward to hearing your update.

>> ark

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: John Barros [mailto:[email protected]]

> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 02:52 PM

> To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

> Subject: Re: Klee Call: Project Plum

>

> Great. 4pm works.

>

> I will conference Jay and call you directly.

>

> Is 203.373.3198 the right number?

>

>

> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


>> John,

>>

>> I could do a quick call at 4.

>>>> ark

>>

>>> On 11/25/15, 2:12 PM, "John Barros" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>

>>> Ann,

>>>

>>> Jay and I have an update for you and need 15mins of your time to give

>>> you a quick update. We're excited about where we are and can use your

>>> feedback before moving forward.

>>>

>>> Please let us know if that would be possible for today. Thank you.

>>>

>>> Best,

>>> John

>>>

>>>

>>>


>>>

>>>> On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:39 AM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:>>>>

>>>> Great. Thanks.

>>>>


>>>>

>>>>> On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:16 AM, John Barros <[email protected]>

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> Good morning Ann,

>>>>>

>>>>> Jay Ash will be joining us on a conference call at 4:30PM if you have

>>>>> no objections.

>>>>>

>>>>> The following conference call line is available to us:

>>>>>

>>>>> Dial-in Number:

>>>>> Meeting ID:



>>>>>

>>>>> Best,

>>>>> John

>>>>>

>>>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Kulish, Karen (GE Corporate)

>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>> The best number to reach Ann on tomorrow would be her office #, which

>>>>>> is

>>>>>> 203.373.3198.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Thank you!

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Karen Kulish

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Executive Assistant to Ann Klee

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Global Operations Environment, Health & Safety

>>>>>>

>>>>>> O: 203 373-2575

>>>>>> C: 203 598-1348

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> General Electric Company

>>>>>>

>>>>>> 3135 Easton Turnpike

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Fairfield, CT 06828

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> GE Imagination at Work

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> From: John Barros [mailto:[email protected]]

>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 6:14 PM

>>>>>> To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

>>>>>> Subject: Re: Project Plum

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Ann,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Tomorrow at 4:30pm would work for me. If that works, I will call you.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 6:03 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

>>>>>> <[email protected]>

>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>

>>>>>> John,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I¹d be happy to talk. Would tomorrow afternoon after 3:30 work for

>>>>>> you?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Thanks.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> ark

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>



>>>>>> To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)>>>>>> Subject: Project Plum

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Ann,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I hope this email finds you well. I know this is a very busy time.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I would like to have a quick conversation in regards to our letter to

>>>>>> GE.

>>>>>> Please let me know the best time to talk. Thank you.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>



>>>>>> Best,

>>>>>> John

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> --

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John Barros

>>>>>> Chief of Economic Development

>>>>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh



>>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.go

>>>>>> v&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFU

>>>>>> b2LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=P95Ib1kdeYIc

>>>>>> B3DQo946Lr-wmpxyA26vVN3DrJKUlfo&e=

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_

>>>>>> &d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb

>>>>>> 2LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=QY3F_vR9BMCnX

>>>>>> 1JvooBK2gwKJBqIfgKo-2OVWoKVo3I&e=

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> John Barros


>>>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh>>>>> 6th Floor, Room 603


>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>

>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov

>>>>> &d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2

>>>>> LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=P95Ib1kdeYIcB3D

>>>>> Qo946Lr-wmpxyA26vVN3DrJKUlfo&e=

>>>>>


>>>>>

>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&

>>>>> d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2L

>>>>> fGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=QY3F_vR9BMCnX1Jv

>>>>> ooBK2gwKJBqIfgKo-2OVWoKVo3I&e=

>

>

>

> --

> John Barros

> Chief of Economic Development> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh



> t: 617-635-5729

> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-

3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2LfGqJlIg&m=WXORJY0X_Xn66NLZ5PPubmuQFCJTz7eLyDvgcY-

tO08&s=kyLIuWixnIWLzdTrvZyIqRRi5T3f4j1lpiC75MLe0TI&e=

>



3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2LfGqJlIg&m=WXORJY0X_Xn66NLZ5PPubmuQFCJTz7eLyDvgcY-

tO08&s=dGDcvl3eNTodCLGzDkCsL-CfbL025T4R6Uvg6lsvdu8&e=



From: Cowan, Mo



Subject: Re: Klee Call: Project Plum


Given holiday travel plans I have asked the company's tax team to be

available tonight. They can speak at 830pm if you're available. If so,

please use the dial in number from earlier today.

Mo Cowan

Sent from my iPhone



Thanks very much. Can we ask you to get a call scheduled with the tax people

for Friday?



From: "Cowan, Mo" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Date: 11/25/2015 3:10 PM (GMT-05:00)

To: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay

(EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>



; passcode

Thanks.

Mo Cowan

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


>

> Mo will be joining me and will send around a call in number. Look forward

> to hearing your update.

>

> ark

>






>

> Great. 4pm works.

>


>


>

>

> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


>> John,

>>


>>

>> ark

>>

>>> On 11/25/15, 2:12 PM, "John Barros"

>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>>>

>>> Ann,

>>>

>>> Jay and I have an update for you and need 15mins of your time to give



>>>


>>>

>>> Best,

>>> John

>>>

>>>

>>>


>>>


>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>>>>



>>>> Great. Thanks.

>>>>


>>>>

>>>>> On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:16 AM, John Barros

>>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>


>>>>>

>>>>> Jay Ash will be joining us on a conference call at 4:30PM if you have


>>>>>

>>>>> The following conference call line is available to us:>>>>>


>>>>> Meeting ID:

>>>>>

>>>>> Best,

>>>>> John

>>>>>


>>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>>>>>> The best number to reach Ann on tomorrow would be her office #, which

>>>>>> is

>>>>>> 203.373.3198.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Thank you!

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Karen Kulish

>>>>>>


>>>>>>>>>>>> Global Operations Environment, Health & Safety

>>>>>>

>>>>>> O: 203 373-2575

>>>>>> C: 203 598-1348

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>


>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> GE Imagination at Work

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 6:14 PM>>>>>> To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Ann,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Tomorrow at 4:30pm would work for me. If that works, I will call you.

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>


>>>>>> you?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Thanks.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> ark

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>






>>>>>> Subject: Project Plum

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Ann,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>> I would like to have a quick conversation in regards to our letter to

>>>>>> GE.

>>>>>> Please let me know the best time to talk. Thank you.>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Best,

>>>>>> John

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> --

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John Barros





>>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>>

>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.go

>>>>>> v&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFU

>>>>>> b2LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=P95Ib1kdeYIc

>>>>>> B3DQo946Lr-wmpxyA26vVN3DrJKUlfo&e=>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_

>>>>>> &d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb

>>>>>> 2LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=QY3F_vR9BMCnX


>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> John Barros





>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov

>>>>> &d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2

>>>>> LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=P95Ib1kdeYIcB3D


>>>>>


>>>>>

>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&

>>>>> d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2L

>>>>> fGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=QY3F_vR9BMCnX1Jv


>

>

>

> --

> John Barros





> t: 617-635-5729> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-

3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2LfGqJlIg&m=WXORJY0X_Xn66NLZ5PPubmuQFCJTz7eLyDvgcY-

tO08&s=kyLIuWixnIWLzdTrvZyIqRRi5T3f4j1lpiC75MLe0TI&e=

>



3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2LfGqJlIg&m=WXORJY0X_Xn66NLZ5PPubmuQFCJTz7eLyDvgcY-

tO08&s=dGDcvl3eNTodCLGzDkCsL-CfbL025T4R6Uvg6lsvdu8&e=




To: Cowan, Mo

Cc: [email protected]

Subject: RE: Klee Call: Project Plum

Date: Thursday, November 26, 2015 9:08:45 PM

Sorry, didn't see this last night.

Mike will be available for a call on Friday or Monday with them.

Thx!

________________________________________

From: Cowan, Mo [[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 5:53 PM




Given holiday travel plans I have asked the company's tax team to be

available tonight. They can speak at 830pm if you're available. If so, please use the dial in number from earlier today.

Mo Cowan

Sent from my iPhone



Thanks very much. Can we ask you to get a call scheduled with the tax

people for Friday?



From: "Cowan, Mo"


Date: 11/25/2015 3:10 PM (GMT-05:00)

To: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay

(EOHED)"




passcode

Thanks.

Mo Cowan

Sent from my iPhone



> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


>

> Mo will be joining me and will send around a call in number. Look

forward to hearing your update.

>

> ark

>






>

> Great. 4pm works.

>


>


>

>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)


>> John,

>>


>>

>> ark

>>

>>> On 11/25/15, 2:12 PM, "John Barros"


>>>

>>> Ann,

>>>>>> Jay and I have an update for you and need 15mins of your time to give



>>>


>>>

>>> Best,

>>> John

>>>

>>>

>>>


>>>


>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Great. Thanks.

>>>>


>>>>

>>>>> On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:16 AM, John Barros




>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>


>>>>>

>>>>> Jay Ash will be joining us on a conference call at 4:30PM if you

have


>>>>>

>>>>> The following conference call line is available to us:

>>>>>


>>>>> Meeting ID:

>>>>>

>>>>> Best,

>>>>> John

>>>>>


>>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>>>>>> The best number to reach Ann on tomorrow would be her office #,

which

>>>>>> is

>>>>>> 203.373.3198.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Thank you!

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Karen Kulish

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>> Global Operations Environment, Health & Safety

>>>>>>

>>>>>> O: 203 373-2575>>>>>> C: 203 598-1348

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>


>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> GE Imagination at Work >>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>





>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>



>>>>>> Ann,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Tomorrow at 4:30pm would work for me. If that works, I will call

you.

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>> John,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>> you?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Thanks.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> ark

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>



>>>>>> To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)>>>>>> Subject: Project Plum

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Ann,

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>> I would like to have a quick conversation in regards to our letter

to

>>>>>> GE.>>>>>> Please let me know the best time to talk. Thank you.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Best,

>>>>>> John

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> --



>>>>>>

>>>>>> John Barros





>>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.go

>>>>>>

v&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFU

>>>>>>

b2LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=P95Ib1kdeYIc

>>>>>> B3DQo946Lr-wmpxyA26vVN3DrJKUlfo&e=

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>


>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_

>>>>>>

&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb

>>>>>>

2LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=QY3F_vR9BMCnX


>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> --

>>>>> John Barros

>>>>> Chief of Economic Development>>>>> Office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh



>>>>> t: 617-635-5729

>>>>>

>>>>>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov

>>>>>

&d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2

>>>>>

LfGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=P95Ib1kdeYIcB3D


>>>>>>>>>> SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.

>>>>>

>>>>>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&

>>>>>

d=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2L

>>>>>

fGqJlIg&m=9TwuY_q8LnotSC3U7o4XjaGnzMEmr7-z7aXEAKUaS7k&s=QY3F_vR9BMCnX1Jv


>



>

>

> --

> John Barros





> t: 617-635-5729

>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d

=CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2LfGq

JlIg&m=WXORJY0X_Xn66NLZ5PPubmuQFCJTz7eLyDvgcY-tO08&s=kyLIuWixnIWLzdTrvZyIq

RRi5T3f4j1lpiC75MLe0TI&e=

>


>

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=

CwIFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=8FupxIcsSIFUb2LfGqJ

lIg&m=WXORJY0X_Xn66NLZ5PPubmuQFCJTz7eLyDvgcY-tO08&s=dGDcvl3eNTodCLGzDkCsL-

CfbL025T4R6Uvg6lsvdu8&e=




To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Povich, Lon (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: RE: Land

Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 7:42:00 AM

Yes

I’m in charge of rounding up state opportunities, including authorities. Boston, is in charge of their

lands and private developers.

From:

Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 7:40 AM

To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Povich, Lon

(GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)

Subject: RE: Land

Jay – are these some of the sites you guys are discussing with the city of Boston concerning GE?

Charlie

From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 7:32 PMTo: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Povich, Lon (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Kadish, Steven (GOV)Subject: Land

I was right. The MCCA has 30 undeveloped acres. See attached map.

Of this, about 17 acres could be developed now:

10 acres - The south parking lot behind BCEC site.

6.8 acres – Across the street where it says remaining land

10 more acres will be available when MassDot moves its testing lab and maintenance facility (land at

the bottom part of the “L”). I need to check with MassDot on the timing of this.

The remaining 2.7 acres is the lawn on D and I want to keep this.

Kristen Lepore

Secretary

Executive Office for Administration and Finance




Boston, MA 02133

(617) 727-2040




To: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James

Subject: RE: Massport Presentation


Attachments: Massport 12 8 15 Deck Final.pdf

Here is the final version. Thanks, Elizabeth

From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 12:53 PMTo: Morse, Elizabeth; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Glynn, Tom; Doolin, JamesSubject: RE: Massport Presentation

Excellent – esp the marketing piece.

From: Morse, Elizabeth [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 10:32 AMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, JamesSubject: Massport Presentation

Attached please find a draft presentation from Massport. Please email or call with any edits. Thanks,

Elizabeth

Elizabeth Morse

Chief of Staff




617-568-1007

[email protected]




December 8, 2015

DRAFT 12/8/15 12:45 pm



Massport Overview






• Real Estate




2









3














4













5




Boston

FidelityInvestments

6





2. Parcel D-3


4. Parcel D-2


7



8





9


adjacent to the



design)


development



Rights Garage



Line station

Air Rights

Garage Site Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Parcel

A-2



Parcel D-3

• 2.8 acre parcel


D Streets



650,000 sf



use


BCEC/Westin Hotel


structured parking



11

3 acre parcel

Summer Street

Frontage


sf


structured parking





recommended


Summer Street

Summer Street Parce

Summer Street

Parcel D-3

E

S t r e e t






Center Avenue



development


250 room hotel






design)

Air

Rights

Garage

Site



Parcel A-2

13

• 1.2-acre parcel



Center Avenue



sf, suitable for



WTC Station, with

potential direct





direct pedestrian

connection)

Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Air Rights

Garage Site



Parcel H

14

1.8 acre parcel


Street

Master plan program


sf, suitable for



structured parking


ground)




Way and T Station

Air Rights

Garage Site

Parcel

A-2











15










16











17
















Massport Air Cargo






20









21




22



23



24



25





Appendix

27



Governing Documents








28




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Tom Glynn; Doolin, James

Subject: RE: Massport Presentation


Attachments: Massport 12 8 15 Deck v3.pdf

Here is the revised version of the Massport presentation for your review. Please let me know if you have any edits. Thanks, Elizabeth

From: Morse, ElizabethSent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 10:32 AMTo: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) <[email protected]> ([email protected]); 'Ash, Jay (EOHED)'; 'Kadish, Steven (GOV)'; 'Lepore, Kristen (ANF)'; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF) ([email protected]); Ross, Robert (ANF) ([email protected]); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) ([email protected]); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) ([email protected]); Povich, Lon (GOV) ([email protected]); Rob Garrity ([email protected]); Glynn, Tom; Doolin, JamesSubject: Massport Presentation

Attached please find a draft presentation from Massport. Please email or call with any edits. Thanks,

Elizabeth

Elizabeth Morse

Chief of Staff




617-568-1007

[email protected]




December 8, 2015

DRAFT 12/8/15 12:00 pm



Massport Overview






• Real Estate




2









3














4













5




Boston

FidelityInvestments

6





2. Parcel D-3


4. Parcel D-2


7



8





9


adjacent to the



design)


development



Rights Garage



Line station

Air Rights

Garage Site Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Parcel

A-2



Parcel D-3

• 2.8 acre parcel


D Streets



650,000 sf



use


BCEC/Westin Hotel


structured parking



11

3 acre parcel

Summer Street

Frontage


sf


structured parking





recommended


Summer Street

Summer Street Parce

Summer Street

Parcel D-3

E

S t r e e t






Center Avenue



development


250 room hotel






design)

Air

Rights

Garage

Site



Parcel A-2

13

• 1.2-acre parcel



Center Avenue



sf, suitable for



WTC Station, with

potential direct





direct pedestrian

connection)

Parcel

D-2

ParcelD-3

Parcel H

Air Rights

Garage Site



Parcel H

14

1.8 acre parcel


Street

Master plan program


sf, suitable for



structured parking


ground)




Way and T Station

Air Rights

Garage Site

Parcel

A-2











15










16











17
















Massport Air Cargo






20









21




22



23



24



25





Appendix

27



Governing Documents








28



From: Mike Kennealy

To: Ash, Jay (SEA)

Cc: Ash, Jay (SEA)

Subject: Re: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Date: Sunday, July 19, 2015 8:23:49 AM

Sec. Lepore? Timely given budget, FAS 109, etc.

Mike Kennealy

On Jul 18, 2015, at 8:49 AM, "Ash, Jay (SEA)" < [email protected]> wrote:

I certainly have one. How about the two of you?

Should we think of the diversity of our team or is three men ok?

Should we bring a legislator?


-------- Original message --------From: Mike Kennealy <[email protected]>Date: 07/18/2015 7:14 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

On it



To: Mike Kennealy





Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Hi Jay, I know it’s Friday afternoon but I just wanted to touch base with a nudge re bios for attendees.



I just wanted to be sure was on your radar screen for next week … many thanks and have a good weekend! Karen

Karen Kulish

Executive Assistant to Ann KleeGlobal Operations – Environment, Health & Safety

O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828


From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 4:50 PMTo: [email protected]: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Subject: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Jay,

I am writing to confirm your meeting at our GE offices in Fairfield, CT on July 30 at 1:30

– 3:30. We look forward to seeing you then.











The meeting will be held at our GE Guest House, Conference Room “B”, and upon going

through Security and obtaining badges you will be directed to Guest House parking.

If there are any changes, please be sure that you provide to me the names of

EVERYONE who will attend the meeting as I need to clear each individual through GE

Security. Please confirm whether the Governor will attend and, if so, whether you will



be sending a security detail in advance of the visit. We are a secure facility, however,

we do understand that you may want to do this.



Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828





To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Maria and I will meet up in Waltham. See you in CT. Drive safety.


-------- Original message --------From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/30/2015 7:57 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR)"

<[email protected]>, "Pham, Nam (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Distefano, Maria (MOBD)" <[email protected]>, "Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

I think we have 4 cars going down, based on individual plans for travel/calls/work: - Jay/Carolyn/Adrian- Nam/Maria- Mike- Mark Also please see the most recent version of the deck attached - a few edits will happen this morning but this is very close. Re: speaking

roles, expect everyone to be involved/engaged especially in Q&A, but with respect to specific slides here is what Jay and I discussed, by slide number: 1-12 Jay13-15 Mark 16 Carolyn17-18 Mike19-27 Jay28-29 Mike30-32 Carolyn33-34 Jay Please call with questions and I expect we'll have some discussion by phone on the drive down. Mike

From: Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 8:58 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)Subject: Re: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Perhaps we should gather at 1 Ashburton by 10am.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 29, 2015, at 7:02 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:



Everybody travelling to Connecticut tomorrow - please see two emails below with

information about our meeting. I have also attached bios for the GE folks as well as

the bios on us that we sent over.

Could folks let me know how they are getting there tomorrow? They wanted to have

some idea of number of cars. Any questions please call my cell phone number below.

See you tomorrow.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Jay,


I would also ask that the team contact me when they are approx. 10 mins. out. My cell is

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,Karen

Karen Kulish





O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828







Jay,












The meeting will be held at our GE Guest House, Conference Room “B”, and upon going

through Security and obtaining badges you will be directed to Guest House parking.



Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:





Fairfield, CT 06828


<Matthew_G_Cribbins.pdf>

<Laurie Bevier bio.doc>

<Pereira Outside Bio with photo.pdf>

<Cavanaugh bio 2015.doc>

<May Bio 1-2015.doc>

<Wills Bio July 2015.doc>

<CDrumgoole Bio - GE Chief Operating Officer 04102015tr (2).pdf>

<Klee Bio.docx>

<Commonwealth of Massachusetts bios.pdf>




To: Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)




Attachments: Project Project.pptx

I think we have 4 cars going down, based on individual plans for travel/calls/work: - Jay/Carolyn/Adrian- Nam/Maria- Mike- Mark Also please see the most recent version of the deck attached - a few edits will happen this morning but this is very close. Re: speaking roles, expect everyone to be involved/engaged especially in Q&A, but with respect to specific slides here is what Jay and I discussed, by slide number: 1-12 Jay13-15 Mark 16 Carolyn17-18 Mike19-27 Jay28-29 Mike

30-32 Carolyn33-34 Jay Please call with questions and I expect we'll have some discussion by phone on the drive down. Mike



Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 29, 2015, at 7:02 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Everybody travelling to Connecticut tomorrow - please see two emails below with

information about our meeting. I have also attached bios for the GE folks as well as

the bios on us that we sent over.

Could folks let me know how they are getting there tomorrow? They wanted to have

some idea of number of cars. Any questions please call my cell phone number below.

See you tomorrow.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Jay,


I would also ask that the team contact me when they are approx. 10 mins. out. My cell is 2


Thank you,Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828









Jay,












The meeting will be held at our GE Guest House, Conference Room “B”, and upon going through Security and obtaining badges you will be directed to Guest House parking.



Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575C:



Fairfield, CT 06828


<Matthew_G_Cribbins.pdf>

<Laurie Bevier bio.doc>

<Pereira Outside Bio with photo.pdf>

<Cavanaugh bio 2015.doc>

<May Bio 1-2015.doc>

<Wills Bio July 2015.doc>

<CDrumgoole Bio - GE Chief Operating Officer 04102015tr (2).pdf>

<Klee Bio.docx>

<Commonwealth of Massachusetts bios.pdf>



0


0



1

Massachusetts - A great place to:

Work - Record job levels, national and international

leadership in high growth sectors, a culture of innovation &

entrepreneurship, strong anchor industries, a highlyfunctioning ecosystem, and ample connections to the world.

Live - Prospering communities, #1 in K-12 public education,

top private high schools and universities, world class health

care, and great culture.

Play - Museums, theatres, history, sports, concerts, beaches,

shopping, restaurants, hiking trails, and festivals & fairs.



2

The Massachusetts “Story”

“Establish two great education institutions and wait 200 years!” – Governor Baker.

Jokes aside, Harvard & MIT, and BC, BU, NU, WPI, Holy Cross, Amherst, Williams,

Brandeis, Clark, Bentley, UMASS and the 140 colleges and universities have resulted

in Massachusetts being a highly educated state.

Education, R&D, and technology transfers have enhanced a culture of innovation

and entrepreneurship.

Strong existing companies, with great leadership and local commitment, have been

bolstered by emerging and high growth sectors, often in a big city/small town way.

Technology and Life Sciences have driven Boston and Cambridge economies to be

arguably the most successful and innovative communities.

Success attracts success, and companies, new and old, and residents, are feeding

off of each other and fueling even greater success.

Business, higher ed, institutions, philanthropy, non-profits, residents and

government are collaborating and advancing individual and common aspirations

and achievements.

The political climate is supportive of and helping to lead the state’s continuing

prosperity.



3

About Massachusetts

History

Culture

Politics

Business Climate

Population Demographics

Communities

Stability & Growth



4

Political Environment

US Presidents & Recent

Contenders

4 presidents from MA.

Since 1990, the average

Governor’s term has been

5.5 years.

Since 1950, the average

Boston Mayoral term hasbeen 12.8 years.

Great working relationship

between the big three, and

with the Mayor of Boston.

Democratic state with a

history of republican

governors.

Consensus: extended

honeymoon a result of the

triumph of people over

personalities, and policy

over politics.



5

About the Governor

Governor Charlie Baker has extensive public

and private sector experience.

• Cabinet secretary 1992 – 1998.

• Overhauled the state social service system.

• Closed a $1 billion deficit while cutting taxes

• Helped implement sweeping education reform.

• CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care 1999 – 2009.

• Transformed a troubled firm in state receivership

into a national leader.

• Values the role of the business community and the

private sector in driving the Commonwealth forward.

• Supported by Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito, a former five-term

state legislator who leads the administration’s

community engagement efforts.



6

Political Stability

Governor Baker is committed to bipartisanship, political

cooperation, and problem-solving.

Assembled a cabinet from across the political spectrum.

Engages in regular, open dialogue with legislative leadership.

Secured a transit agency control board, and significant cost-

cutting concessions, from the Democrat-controlled Legislature.

Results-oriented leadership has yielded a 69/10 statewide

favorable/unfavorable rating. Governor is focused on Massachusetts “I am never running for

president.”



7

Fiscal Stability

Closed a $1.8 billion FY16 budget deficit without raising taxes or

fees and, for the first time in four years, without drawing down

the state’s rainy day fund.

The Governor’s budget ensures state spending will grow slower

than tax collections.

The Governor and legislative leadership are committed to

holding the line on taxes.

Rainy day fund balance currently exceeds $1.1 billion.

Most recent general obligation bond ratings:

• Fitch: AA+

• Moody’s: Aa1

• S&P: AA+



8

Executive Office of

Housing and Economic Development

Led by Secretary Jay Ash, who led the city

Chelsea to record economic and job grow

Directs housing, community and businessdevelopment, job creation, consumer

affairs, banking, insurance, and business

regulation efforts in the Commonwealth.

Administers the Commonwealth’s econom

incentive programs.

Oversees quasi-public agencies and otheinitiatives that support business

development efforts in technology, life

sciences, manufacturing, financial service

tourism, and defense.



9

Broad Economic Competitiveness Agenda

The Baker-Polito Administration is advancing a multi-facetted

approach to developing regions and communities by:

• Creating strong, vibrant, and capable communities.

• Promoting a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship.

• Enhancing workforce development and talent retention

efforts.

• Supporting key sectors and clusters.

• Creating a pro-growth regulatory and business environment.

• Delivering housing policies that support economic growth.



10

MA is the Most Dynamic,

Innovative State

#1 in science & engineering

articles per capita.

#1 in life sciences employment per

capita, and in % of workforce inscience and engineering

occupations.

#1 in technology transfers.

#1 most economically evolved

state, according to the

Information Technology and

Innovation Foundation.

#1 in funding from the National

Institute of Health as % of GDP.

#1 on the Milken Institute State

Technology and Science Index.

#1 in life sciences, according to G

magazine ratings.

#1 in federal expenditures for

academic & non-profit R&D leve

and growth among leading

technology states.

#1 state for overall competitiven

according to the Beacon Hill

Institute at Suffolk University.

#1 in R&D spending as % of GDP

per capita.



11

MA is the Most Dynamic,

Innovative State

2nd in venture capital under

management.

2nd in technology patents percapita.

2nd in pre-market

biopharmaceutical

notifications.

4th

in new drug approvals.

2nd highest growth in defens

manufacturing and

instrumentation. Greater Boston ranks 2nd in

technology employment

among major US markets.

Massachusetts medical devi

industry is 2nd largest in the

US.



12

Educated Workforce

Bachelor ’s Degree

Attainment

Massachusetts 38.2%

Colorado 35.9%

Maryland 35.7%

Connecticut 35.6%

New Jersey 34.5%

More than 140 colleges and universitie

and the highest concentration of highe

education institutions in the US.

• 10 in top 100.

Half of all Nobel Prize winners in the

United States were educated in

Massachusetts.

#1 in bachelor’s degrees, at 39.4% of

people over 25. #1 state in advanced degrees, at 16.8%

the over 25 population, and 19% of

metro-Boston.

40% of workforce in innovation sector



13

A Clearer Code: Regulatory Review

Governor’s Vision

Promote an ideal regulatory

climate in Massachusetts.

Ensure that there is a clearly

identified need for

governmental intervention.

Ensure the costs of the

regulation do not exceedthe benefits.

Create an efficient,

coherent, and consistent

regulatory framework.

We’ve Done it Before

First-ever comprehensive

regulatory review took placein 1996, led by then-

Secretary Baker of A&F.

Nearly 20% of the

regulations were rescinded

outright, and only 27%

remained unchanged.

3 out of every 4 pages of

regulations were amended

or rescinded.



14

Massachusetts Connecticut New York New Jersey

Highest

Business Tax

Climate Index

27 9 2 1

State-Local Tax

Burden as a

Share of State

ncome

10.30% 11.90% 12.60% 12.30%

ersonal

ncome tax rate5.15% 6.70% 8.82% 8.97%

usinessncome tax rate 8% 9% 7.10% 9%

Capital Gains

ax5.20% 6.70% 8.80% 9%

Average

ombined

tate/local sales

ax rate

6.25% 6.35% 8.48% 6.97%

Taxes by the Numbers



15

Taxation: Stable and Business-Friendly

Current Programs

• Personal income tax rate reduction tied to economic growth.

• Department of Revenue is accessible and engaged with the taxpayer community.

• Favorable combined reporting rules for in-state businesses.

• Recent enactment of “market-based” sourcing of all sales (for purposes of income

apportionment) favors in-state businesses.

• Stabilization fund available.

Going Forward

• Recent FAS 109 agreement; looking for solutions that work.

• Reevaluation of the non-income measure and other regulations that maydiscourage investment.

• DOR investments in technology and people focused on improving customer servic

and information access.

• Income tax rate is scheduled to drop to 5.1% in January 2016.



16

Incentives & Programs

Economic Development Incentive Program (EDIP)

• Since 2010, EDIP has provided tax credits for 251 expansion and growth projects.

These plan to create 17,716 jobs, retain 47,883 jobs and secure $6.2b in private

investments. EDIP provides for both state and local tax relief.

Research & Development Tax Credit

• Massachusetts offers a tax incentive for research and development investment for

both manufacturers and R&D companies.

Workforce Training Fund

• The Workforce Training Fund is a state fund financed by Massachusetts employers provide applicants with the resources to improve employee skills.

Single Sales Factor

• While many states use a three-factor apportionment formula to determine a

manufacturer’s net income, creating a greater burden for businesses, Massachuset

only uses a single sales factor apportionment formula.



17

Other Headquarters

26 Fortune 1000 companies in MA, 24 within 40 miles of Boston

Financial Medical Devices Life Sciences IT/ Communications Other



18

GE in MA (miles from Boston)

Marlborough (31 miles)

North American HQ for life sciences

Westborough (37 miles)

Life Sciences manufacturing

Lynn (11 miles)

Aerospace manufacturing

BostonHealthcare IT solutions

Watertown (9 miles)

Water division

Burlington (16 miles)

Transportation

Billerica (21 miles)

World HQ for Oil & Gas measurement control



19

Key Locations

Boston:

• New England’s economic engine, with areas like the Seaport,

Back Bay, and the Financial District.• Quick airport access and robust public transit infrastructure.

• Home to Liberty Mutual, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Arnold

Advertising, LogMeIn, Putnam Investments, Bain Capital,

Wellington Management, Massachusetts General Hospital.



20

Key Locations

Kendall Square, Cambridge:

• The most innovative square mile in the world.

• Home to MIT, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Twitter, Genzyme,

Biogen, Novartis, the Broad Institute, and HubSpot.

• Current commercial development pipeline exceeds 5 millionsquare feet. Strong and development-ready REIT ownership.

• MIT has announced plans to invest $1.2b, and create nearly 1

million square feet, 740 apartments for a mix of students and

non-students, and increased retail space.



21

Key Locations, continued

North Point, Cambridge:

• Emerging mixed-use neighborhood along the Charles River, minutes from Kendall

Square and downtown Boston.

• Located along the new Green Line light rail expansion.• Home to EF Education’s headquarters campus. Fully permitted for up to 2 million

square feet of build-to-suit commercial development.

• Located near North Station, TD Garden, and the Museum of Science.

Alewife, Cambridge:

• Emerging mixed-use

neighborhood with MBTA rail

access, located midwaybetween Kendall Square and

the Route 128 belt.

• Strong and development-read

REIT ownership.



22


Assembly Square, Somerville

• Region’s fastest growing neighborhood along the Mystic River.

• 45-acre master-developed project will ultimately encompass 2.8 million square fee

office, 630,000 square feet of retail, and 1,800 apartments.

• Direct MBTA rail and highway access, five minutes from Downtown Boston.

• Future home to Partners Healthcare’s headquarters campus.

• Available commercial space and development-ready pads.

• Future home of Partner’s Health Care administrative offices.

SouthField

• Emerging mixed-use master-

planned community of 1,400 a30 minutes south of Boston.

• Direct commuter rail access, a

close highway access.

• Currently zoned for 2 million

square feet of commercial spa



23


Worcester

• Home to companies including Hanover Insurance and

Siemens.

• Holds UMass Medical School campus, WorcesterPolytechnic Institute and 13 other area colleges.

• Less than an hour drive to Boston. MBTA and regional

public transportation access.

• Commercial development pads available in the ongoing

downtown transformation.

Springfield• Home to MassMutual, Baystate Health, and the TechSpring ehealth incubator, as well a

5 colleges.

• Future home to MGM Springfield casino and CNR Changchun railway vehicles.

• Half-hour drive to Hartford, 90-minute drive to Boston.

• Affordable development sites.



24

Boston Logan - Domestic

Boston Logan serves 73 domestic non-stop destinations, including 60 minute flights to

NYC, and 90 minute flights to Washington, DC.



25

Boston Logan - International

Boston Logan serves 46 international, non-stop destinations,

including the shortest US flights to Europe.



26

Public Transportation

MBTA:

• Stations in 90 cities and

towns across 7 counties.

• Tied for most rail lines in

the US.

• 7th highest ridership per

mile in the US.

• Governor Baker sought

and received authority

for increased controlwhich will lead to

substantial upgrades.



27

Transportation Assets

11 Airports (in green).

5 Heliports within 20 miles

of Boston (in purple).

Amtrak lines to 10 states

and DC.

Boston ranked #3 most

walkable large city.

#4 most bicycle friendlystate.

139 Hubway bicycle share

stations in Boston/

Cambridge.



28

#1 K-8 Education

#1 state in 4th grade math and reading, and #2 in 4th grade

writing scores.

#1 state in 8th grademath, #1 in 8th

grade reading, and

#3 in 8th grade

writing scores.

Ranked #1 state in

K-12 achievementby Education Week.

MA 8th graders rank #2 in world in science achievement.



29

Best High Schools

10 public high

schools (in blue) in

the top 1.5% of US.

7 prep schools (in

green) in the top

20 in US.

3 of the top 10

schools for Ivy

Leagueacceptance.

All within 30 miles

of Boston.



30

Culture

Arts

• Home to the Boston

Symphony Orchestra- one of

the premier American

orchestras.

• Museums in Boston and

Worcester house works from

ancient Egypt to Gaugain andPicasso.

Sports:

• Boston sports teams have won

nine championships since 2000.

• Nation’s oldest marathon and

world’s largest regatta.

• Emerging Culture:• Houses 10 breweries & 7

distilleries.

• Lawn on D: an interactive

experimental outdoor space.



31

Recreation

55 boating clubs.

400 golf courses, including 4

PGA top 100.

Vacation destinations include

the Cape and Islands, the Nor

Shore, and the Berkshires.

1500+ miles of coastline –

including 1 national seashore

• Cape Cod beaches consistently rated

among nation’s best.

Parks:

• 29 State parks.

• 78 State forests.

• 4 wildlife management areas.

• 1 national park.



32

Quality of Life

Forbes ranked

Massachusetts #1 in Quality

of Life in 2014. Best online job market,

according to Georgetown.

Health care

• 2 of the top 6 and hospitals in

the U.S. are in Boston.

• 17 nationally ranked hospitals

in MA.

• Home to the top 5 NIH funded

research hospitals in the US.

Boston ranked the

healthiest city in the US by

NerdWallet and 9th

coolestcity by Forbes.

Fast Company named

Boston one of the top cities

of “Tomorrowland” for

technology innovation in

the Seaport.

Massachusetts ranked the

safest place to live by

WalletHub.



33

Closing

Excellent – #1 in the economy, education, and more.

Prosperous – record job, sector, and investment growth.

Stable – in leadership, the economy, and in quality of life.

Happening – established and transforming live & play spaces.

Revolutionary – no place has a higher functioning ecosystem.

Connected – planes, trains, cars, bikes, boats, and feet.

Desirable – influx of investment and people say it all.

Good Will – bipartisan, no hostility, and bonding.

Collaborative – partnerships and networks abound.

Leadership – old and new have track records of success.



34

Testimonials

“The Massachusetts economy has become the envy of the nation in large part because

the unique collaborative relationship that exists among employers, the Baker

Administration and the Legislature. These groups don’t agree on every issue, but share

fundamental understanding that a healthy and predictable business climate enables t

private sector to create economic opportunities for the citizens of Massachusetts.” – RLord, Associated Industries of Massachusetts

“No games. No politics. No drama. Just governing, leadership, and getting things don

– JD Chesloff, Massachusetts Business Roundtable

“We know from experience how fortunate the Commonwealth is to have Charlie Bake

its Governor. Charlie has the experience, talent and proven leadership skills to work

effectively with job creators and the Legislature to expand the state’s economy by

championing policies that build on our strengths and address our competitive challenghead on.” – Christopher Anderson, Massachusetts High Tech Council

“Massachusetts is a great place to do business, and one of the primary reasons is the

collaborative relationship between state leaders and our business community. We wo

together on issues, we respond to challenges quickly, and we’re always looking for wa

to promote more growth and more opportunity.” – Jim Rooney, Greater Boston Cham

of Commerce




To: Distefano, Maria (MOBD)

Cc: Pham, Nam (EOHED)



Thanks Maria. I copied Nam here - could I suggest that you guys ride together? I know that Jay, Carolyn, and Adrian are in one car, you would be another, I am driving on my own as I have a ton of calls to catch up on, and I assume Mark is driving too - that would make 4

cars going down. Is that OK?

From: Distefano, Maria (MOBD)Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:44 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Hi Mike, coming from Rockport, so I need to come south anyway. I’ll meet you all at Ashburton in the morning as I heard you all are carpooling.

Thank you for including me—with my being so new, I know this will be a great learning opportunity for me.

Work cell 617-591-9380Personal cell

Maria

Maria Nigro Di StefanoNortheast Regional Director Massachusetts Office of Business Development121 Loring Avenue, Suite 110Salem, MA 01970

[email protected]/mobd

This communication and any communication incorporated herein, including attachments, may be

subject to public disclosure as a “public record,” as defined by M. G. L. c. 4, § 7, and subject to public

inspection, examination and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10. Any communication with this

agency whether in response to this communication or otherwise may itself be subject to public

inspection and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10, unless protected by statutory exemption.



To: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR) <[email protected]>;

Pham, Nam (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Distefano, Maria (MOBD)

<[email protected]>; Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



<[email protected]>




Could folks let me know how they are getting there tomorrow? They wanted to have some idea of number of cars. Any questions please call my cell phone number below. See you tomorrow.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

-------- Original message --------From: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/21/2015 3:05 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Cc: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>


Jay,


I would also ask that the team contact me when they are approx. 10 mins. out. My cell is 203-598-1348.


Thank you,Karen

Karen Kulish





O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828







Jay,
















Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:





Fairfield, CT 06828





To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED); Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



I'll be driving


-------- Original message --------From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/29/2015 7:02 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR)" <[email protected]>, "Pham, Nam (EOHED)"

<[email protected]>, "Distefano, Maria (MOBD)" <[email protected]>, "Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: FW: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts



Could folks let me know how they are getting there tomorrow? They wanted to have some idea of

number of cars. Any questions please call my cell phone number below. See you tomorrow.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




Jay,


I would also ask that the team contact me when they are approx. 10 mins. out. My cell is


Thank you,Karen

Karen Kulish


Global Operations – Environment, Health & SafetyO: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828







Jay,


















Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828





To: Mike Kennealy; Ash, Jay (EOHED)


Date: Saturday, July 18, 2015 8:49:35 AM

I certainly have one. How about the two of you?

Should we think of the diversity of our team or is three men ok?

Should we bring a legislator?


-------- Original message --------From: Mike Kennealy <[email protected]>

Date: 07/18/2015 7:14 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

On it



To: Mike Kennealy






Hi Jay,

I know it’s Friday afternoon but I just wanted to touch base with a nudge re bios for attendees.I just wanted to be sure was on your radar screen for next week … many thanks and have a good weekend! Karen

Karen Kulish





O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828


From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 4:50 PMTo: [email protected]: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Subject: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

Jay,










Chris Pereira Chief, Securities & Finance CounselSarah Wills Executive Director, Strategy






the Governor will attend and, if so, whether you will be sending a security detail in advance of the visit. We are a secure facility, however, we do understand that you may want to do this.



Karen

Karen Kulish





O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828





To: "Mike Kennealy"



We’ll talk. In terms of the presentation, you should coordinate with Nam’s assistance, on this one.

From: Mike Kennealy [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 7:49 AM



Let me think about that Jay – maybe other secretariats? Gov’s office? I guess it depends on agenda

and what their big issues are – have they sent an agenda for the meeting? And is Nam or someone

from MOBD working on a presentation? I’ll get this going if not.



To: Mike Kennealy


You’re the one coordinating this. You, me and Nam – anyone else?






Jay,


















attend the meeting as I need to clear each individual through GE Security. Please confirm whether the Governor will attend and, if so, whether you will be sending a security detail in advance of the




Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828





To: "Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)"



Awesome!

Joining me so far will be

Mike Kennealy Assistant Secretary for Business Growth

Nam Pham Assistant Secretary for Business Development






Jay,






Matt Cribbins VP, Investor CommunicationsChris Drumgoole CFO, IT
















Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828





To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); John Barros; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Memo on incentives


Thanks, Mike. Got here in just enough time for me to read it before I needed to describe it.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 2:56 PMTo: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); John Barros; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: Memo on incentives

Scott, Amy,

Please see attached – looking forward to discussing further.

Best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: RE: MLSC


We can do a multi-year award. Not open now is their/our decision – they have the appropriation.

I’m more troubled by a huge award that would break precedent, especially when ~80% of the jobs

are not directly life sciences, but obviously we’ll proceed on this if we have to.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Ash, Jay (EOHED)

<[email protected]>

Subject: RE: MLSC

Ricks



To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Subject: MLSC

Please see attached – only 2 companies with awards over $15 MM, only 4 over $5 MM, only 18 over

$2 MM.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762



[email protected]






Subject: RE: need a 2 minute call with you

Date: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:26:00 AM

I have a 9:30 -11am meeting – how about 9:15am? Or 11am.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






I have an 8:30 that may run a little longer than ½ hour – can we do 9:30 to be safe?

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax CounselGeneral Electric Company

(cell)

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:22 AMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]: RE: need a 2 minute call with you

Amy how about 9am?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640



Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




[email protected]

Subject: need a 2 minute call with you

Let me know what works for you. Tomorrow is fine. We’ve ruined enough weekends.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: John Barros



Sure - I can email her now.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: John Barros [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:21 AM


Subject: Re: need a 2 minute call with you

Let's suggest a 9am?

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Kennealy, Michael (SEA)


> I'm tied up 9:30 -11am but otherwise free - I can email her now and find

> out.

>

> Mike Kennealy

> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of > Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One


> Office: 617-788-3640

> Cell: 617-634-4762

> [email protected]

>



> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:05 AM

> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

> Subject: Re: need a 2 minute call with you

>

> Mike,

>

> I can be flexible this morning. What works for you?

>

> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


>> Let me know what works for you. Tomorrow is fine. We’ve ruined

>> enough weekends.

>>

>>



>>

>> Amy Eisenstadt

>>

>> State Tax Counsel

>>

>> General Electric Company

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> (cell)

>>

>>

>

>

>

> --

> John Barros





> t: 617-635-5729

> http://www.cityofboston.gov

>


> http://imagine.boston.gov/

--

John Barros

Chief of Economic DevelopmentOffice of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

6th Floor, Room 603


t: 617-635-5729







To: John Barros; Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)



We're on now

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: John Barros [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 9:24 AM

To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: need a 2 minute call with you

I have been on the call but assume we will be trying the 11AM time.

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


> Let’s go with that and hope with the best with 11 as the back up.

>

>

>> Amy Eisenstadt

>

> State Tax Counsel

>


>

>

>

> 561 784 0332

>

> 203 232 1496 (cell)

>

>

>



> To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

>

> Cc: [email protected]

> Subject: RE: need a 2 minute call with you

>

>



>

> I have a 9:30 -11am meeting – how about 9:15am? Or 11am.

>

>

>

> Mike Kennealy

>


>


>


>


>

> Boston, MA 02108

>

> Office: 617-788-3640

>

> Cell: 617-634-4762

>

> [email protected]

>

>

>




> Cc: [email protected]


>

>

>

> I have an 8:30 that may run a little longer than ½ hour – can we do> 9:30 to be safe?

>

>

>

> Amy Eisenstadt

>

> State Tax Counsel

>


>

>

>

>>

> (cell)

>

>

>



> To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); [email protected]


>



>

>

> Amy how about 9am?

>

>

>

> Mike Kennealy

>


>


>


>


>

> Boston, MA 02108

>

> Office: 617-788-3640

>

> Cell: 617-634-4762

>

> [email protected]

>

>

>




> [email protected]

> Subject: need a 2 minute call with you

>

>

>> Let me know what works for you. Tomorrow is fine. We’ve ruined

> enough weekends.

>

>

>

> Amy Eisenstadt

>

> State Tax Counsel

>


>

>

>>

>

> (cell)

>

>

--

John Barros





6th Floor, Room 603


t: 617-635-5729






From: Kersten, Annamarie (MOBD)

To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Cc: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Plum question


Attachments: Calculating the EDIPC for Leased Real Estate.docNEES Cheer Pack EDIP CEP Application - Supplemental - Determination of EDIPC for Operating Lease.xls

There is a way you can value the lease payments to be used as additional private investment. It has

only been done once in the past (because the consultant is the former MOBD Executive Director

and knew about it) and I have one coming to this meeting (same consultant). I am attaching the

unpublished start of a DOR TIR. It has not been completed for some unknown reason. I am

including the Cheerpak spreadsheet where it was used before. The consultant and I worked with

DOR to ensure we were doing it correctly. Ignore the orange highlight in the template. The

consultant was trying to influence what percentage we used. It’s up to EACC not him to decide the

percentage.

AnnamarieKersten

EDIP DirectorMassachusetts Office of Business Development

10 Park Plaza, Suite 3730

Boston, MA 02116

Phone: 617-973-8534

Fax: 617-973-8554

[email protected]


subject to public disclosure as a “public record,” as defined by M. G. L. c. 4, § 7, and subject to public inspection, examination and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10. Any communication with this





To: Kersten, Annamarie (MOBD)


Subject: Plum questionImportance: High

Annamarie – Plum is asking about how the credit works if Plum creates the jobs at a location where

the building is constructed by an unrelated third party and then leased by Plum.



___________________________________________

Jonathan M. Cosco





Boston, MA 02114

617-788-3628

[email protected]



Calculating the EDIPC for Leased Real Estate

(Draft For Discussion Only)

Sections 21 to 24, inclusive, of chapter 166 of the Acts of 2009 made significant changes to the tax credit

provided in G.L. c. 62, § 6 and G.L. c. 63, § 38N, the economic development incentive program credit,EDIPC (formerly referred to as EOAC, economic opportunity area credit).

The EDIPC provisions were amended to make the credit, to the extent awarded by EACC, available to alessee for qualifying real property leased pursuant to an operating lease. St. 2009, c. 166, §§ 21, 23.Eligibility of the credit for leased real estate applies to projects certified on or after January 1, 2010.

The method used to calculate the credit for leased real estate will be the method set out in Regulation830 CMR 63.38N.1(6) which provides:

(b) Computation of the Credit for lessee. The lessee’s credit for tangiblepersonal property shall be five percent of the lessor’s adjusted basis for federaltax purposes at the beginning o f the taxable year, multiplied by a fraction, the

numerator of which is the number of days of the taxable year during which thelessee leases the tangible personal property and the denominator of which is thenumber of days remaining in the useful lif e of such property at thebeginning of the taxable year. Such useful life is the same as that used by thelessor for depreciation purposes when computing federal income tax liability.The maximum cumulative credit shall not exceed five percent of the lessor’sadjusted basis for federal tax purposes at the beginning of the lease term. Thelessee calculates and claims the credit annually during the term of the lease.

Id. The example below illustrates application of 830 CMR 63.38N.1(6) to leased real property.

Example:

A manufacturing applicant in a Gateway community is proposing a jobs growth project and will lease realproperty for 180 days this year. The landlord’s adjusted basis for federal tax purposes at the beginning ofthe taxable year is $3 million. The building has been depreciated for 29 out of 39 years so there are only10 years of useful life remaining at the beginning of the taxable year.

Assumptions:• The lessor has not previously claimed either an EOAC (EDIPC) or ITC on the property; and• Straight line depreciation method is used.

Adjusted basis at the beginning of the taxable year: $3 millionPeriod leased during current tax year: 180 daysUseful life remaining at the beginning of the taxable year: 3652 daysPotential EDIP-ITC: 10%[1]

($3 million x 10%) x (180 / 3652) = $14,736

The applicant can take a $14,736 EDIPC during the first year of the project.

Calculation for second and third years of the project, respectively (if so awarded by EACC)

[1] Under the amendments to G.L. c. 63, § 38N, the EACC may award a taxpayer of credit from 1% upto 40% of the cost of qualifying property.



($2700000 x 10%) x (365/3285) = $30,000

($2400000 x 10%) x (365/2920) = $30,000

Note: The lessor’s adjusted basis at the beginning of the taxable year and the number of days remainingin the useful life of the property at the beginning of the taxable decreases each subsequent year.



Pack North America - Determination of EDIPC Credit for Operating Lease of Real Estate

ning Book Value (BV) of the Building and Land (Acquired 2/10/2012) * $7,847,770

ning Book Value (BV) of the Building Only (Acquired 2/10/2012) ** $5,203,072 $5,072,401 $4,898,965 $4,725,529 $4,552,094 $4,378,658 $4,205,222 $4,031,786 $3,858,351 $3,684,915 $3,511,479 $3,338,043 $3,164,608 $2,991,172 $2,817,736

ted Book Value of Leased Portion of Bui lding (BV x 187,500/315,000) $3,097,066 $3,019,286 $2,916,051 $2,812,815 $2,709,580 $2,606,344 $2,503,108 $2,399,873 $2,296,637 $2,193,402 $2,090,166 $1,986,931 $1,883,695 $1,780,460 $1,677,224

s Leasing Building Each Year *** 275 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365

s Remaining in Depreciable Life of Building Assuming 30 Year Life 10,950 10,675 10,310 9,945 9,580 9,215 8,850 8,485 8,120 7,755 7,390 7,025 6,660 6,295 5,930

ting Lease Tax Credit Basis **** $77,780 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $103,236 $1,5

ting Lease Tax Credit @ 6% $4,667 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $6,194 $9

uisition Price of $7,600,000 plus financing and acquisition costs of $247,770. The building was purchased on 2/10/2012 by One United LLC, who will be using the $7,847,770 number as the book value basis for their federal tax returns.

sed on the same percentage breakdown of land (33.7%) and building (66.3%) as the current assessment

perating Lease in year one (2012) begins 4/1/2012. Therefore, there are only 275 days of building lease in year one. All remaining years have a full year (365 days) of building lease.

(Pro-Rated Beginning Book Value of Leased Portion of Building) x (# Days Leasing Building Each Year) / (# Days Remaining in Depreciable Life of Building)





Subject: RE: Plum: MA Thank you


Hi Karen, here is the address:



Boston, MA 02108

Please be in touch at any time if our team can provide additional

information or answer any questions.

Thanks!

Mike

________________________________________

From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 5:58 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


Subject: Plum: MA Thank you

Hi Mike,

I have a hard copy of the letter Ann emailed to Secretary Ash and am

writing to ask you to please send the mailing address to me. Sorry for

the delay, as I was out of the office for a couple of days and am just

back in today.

Have a good evening!

Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828





To: Crystal Torman; John Barros

Subject: Re: Plum


John, Crystal FYI - Jennifer Sullivan from A&F will join us on the call.

Mike Kennealy

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 2:30 PM, Crystal Torman <[email protected]>

wrote:

>

> Hi all,

>

> Please find conference call information below:

>

> Dial-in Number:

>

> Meeting ID:

>>

> Thanks,

> Crystal

>

>

> Crystal Torman

> Senior Advisor to the Chief

> Mayor's Office of Economic Development

> One City Hall Square, 603

> Boston, MA. 02201

> O: (617) 635-5708

>

>>

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


>> Will you guys call me or send a call in number? Otherwise I can do it

tonight or tomorrow am.

>>


>>

>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 12:11 PM, John Barros


>>

>> Amy,

>>

>> Michael and I can make ourselves available tomorrow morning before

10:30AM.

>>

>> Does 9:30AM work for you? If not please suggest a time. Thanks.

>>

>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


>> Tuesday morning. Name a time other than 11.

>>



>> Sent from my iPad

>>

>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:24 AM, John Barros

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:john.barros@

boston.gov<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:

>>

>> Amy,

>>

>> Michael and I are glad to figure out some time that would work for a

call. Do you mean a call today when you write "tomorrow morning?"

>>

>> Johh

>>

>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:amy.eisenstadt

@ge.com<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:

>> Thanks for the submission last night. I have reviewed it and the

regulations for the bond program. I have a number of technical questions

about the program and the proposal. Can we do a call tomorrow morning to

discuss?

>>

>> Sent from my iPad

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>> John Barros





>> t: 617-635-5729<tel:617-635-5729>

>>

http://www.cityofboston.gov<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=htt p-3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrL

rDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHClD6TJ9Utqq8My

3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=Yp8Q2FkaDt5VOCPwk7VwK0U6s0RF3AnrXGGa6yjQyZM&e=

><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cityofboston.gov

&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-N

RciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=yeZwLS-2ZvzF_yUvvwNYojMtP8veZ9qUaI_ookgDCKI&

s=cN_PGwsTRHc0I3bRzjbl8vq7xcQF6Aun_D0tRlsohXI&e=>

>>


>>

http://imagine.boston.gov/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http

-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrD

QYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHClD6TJ9Utqq8My3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=P8mngFNGSQ-ikKcF-ksivLmgchQU2UQ_UGwN65Ddnh4&e=><

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=

CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRci

ouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=yeZwLS-2ZvzF_yUvvwNYojMtP8veZ9qUaI_ookgDCKI&s=D

EmswgJBMCfMzTbh8Bm7W3VEnXvZMRclqCoEmU7WvjI&e=>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>



>> --

>> John Barros





>> t: 617-635-5729

>>

http://www.cityofboston.gov<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=htt

p-3A__www.cityofboston.gov&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrL

rDQYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHClD6TJ9Utqq8My

3GV6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=Yp8Q2FkaDt5VOCPwk7VwK0U6s0RF3AnrXGGa6yjQyZM&e=

>

>>


>>

http://imagine.boston.gov/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http

-3A__imagine.boston.gov_&d=CwMFaQ&c=IV_clAzoPDE253xZdHuilRgztyh_RiV3wUrLrD

QYWSI&r=H5UBAcrNVbw8cC-NRciouCFogbdFsBHQaW8Swp0XhoM&m=1uZHClD6TJ9Utqq8My3G

V6rB3HzaVOzBqpzvC34tpjo&s=P8mngFNGSQ-ikKcF-ksivLmgchQU2UQ_UGwN65Ddnh4&e=>

>>

>>





Cc: Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)

Subject: Re: Presentation on why Boston!


Michael--I just left on your chair some edits from Jen Sullivan. Let's shoot to get this out to

GE tomorrow! Thx. Steve

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 23, 2015, at 4:25 PM, Kelleher, Michael (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks, Steve.

I will work on these initial additions/suggestions this evening.

Michael

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 3:55 PMTo: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)Subject: FW: Presentation on why Boston!



Thx!

Steve

___________________________

p.13: please add Boston University. I think that they are ranked about the same as

Northeastern.

Yes, will do. BU is #41

p.18: drop the chart at the bottom as the stats presented could be interpreted in a

number of ways.

Will do.


Will need to double check sources.

p.20: is slide about who has moved here recently or expanded? That’s how I think it

should be titled. I would add Novartis and its enormous new campus in Cambridge,

the new Vertex facilities in the Seaport along with others who have moved to the

Seaport, Siemens has a major expansion in Walpole, BASF has a major

facility/expansion in Worcester. (Mike Kennealy, Jay Ash, Carolyn – can you please



help out here?)

Will work with Secretary Ash, Mike and Carol


Done

p.23: Please include Lincoln Labs and add a slide that has some of the centers at

Northeastern, BU, Tufts…especially NU. This may be an additional slide?Will make additional slide and add those organizations

p.26: This is interesting! What do you mean when you indicate GE under the

innovations?

Ok, wasn’t sure this would be a good slide. I tried to tie academic breakthroughs, so I

linked the invention or emerging technology with what line of business then would

have impacted – this is an indirect connection. I can tighten up, if you like the concept.


Yes, will do.p.28: Please do the same for the innovation centers you mentioned internationally?

Are there any direct flights to South America???

Yes, will do. I confirmed there are no direct flights from Boston to South America.

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 3:28 PMTo: ; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Peyser, Jim (EOE); Reale, Ann (EOE); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Conroy, Jim (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV)

Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: Presentation on why Boston!


Attached is terrific presentation on Why Boston/The War for Talent as it relates to the

Boston project.


And I want to especially thank our newest member of the Cabinet Relations team –

Michael Keller, along with support from Lily and Adam – to put this presentation

together.

Comments, edits, further additions welcome.

Please share your thoughts with Michael, Adam, Lily and me.


Best,

Steve



From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:47 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: RE: draft for your review

Steve,

Please see attached for your review a draft slide deck for discussions with GE. You will

find herein 30 slides (25 or so with real content). I am not 100% sure the length of

time that is available but these are the slides I would present as the most compelling

for “why Boston?”



Thanks,

Michael


Impressive!


More ideas:

1. Please take a look at the GE website

and other sources to see about themes, and other info that may be relevant. I

am hearing on their ads that GE is your industrial and tech company. For

example, the health group and the energy group (Current) are or will be

locating here. What are the other parts of GE that would find the MA

ecosystem attractive?

2. I am hearing that Massachusetts is a

leader in robotics and industrial design. Can you find out more and present

how this would be attractive to GE?

3. There are some more War on Talent

slides that Adam would have.

4. Can you check on where the top firms

go for their recruitment?

5. Please develop a list of the various

institutes on health, tech, innovation, engineering, etc. Please check the

university websites. Broad, MIT’s Center for the Brain, etc.



Good stuff!

I will provide more feedback, but please keep going.

From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:49 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials? Steve,

Attached are some slides Lily and I put together in the last day or so for your review

and comment. I will look into your questions below re: total # of engineers and

scientist going to school in the Boston area. The slides attached do not have that data

but I will dig up tomorrow.


Michael






Total # of engineers and scientists going to school in the Boston metro area and

how many graduate each year and what % that may be of the total in the US

More to come!


Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:00 PMTo: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)



Great!!

Sent from my iPhone





Steve,

Thanks for the additional guidance for the war on talent materials. Lily

and I were able to add a few slides based on previous direction you and

Adam provided. We are going to plow through the list of additional items

(as outlined below, assigned to Lily or myself) and will send you a revised

PPT later this evening/first thing tomorrow for your review and additional

edits.






• # of international students going to school in Boston, what

specialties - mk


• List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of

how many of their leaders went to school here – mk

• # of international patients traveling to Boston AMCs to receive care –

mk

• Insert language from innovation one pager that HED put together -

Lily

• List of all the bio tech, IT, pharma, etc firms that have determined to

locate, grow here in the last few years. (Vertex, Shire, Novartis, Pfizer,

Siemens...and all the small firms) - HED

• Locations of all the company's national and international locations

with a map showing flights from Logan - Massport

Thanks,

Michael


From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 2:53 PM





Ok for you to add more slides on the war on talent idea. I am



remembering a pretty rich set of them that we cut back on in later

versions. More to review/include is better now.


Top 10 engineering schools?

Top schools for innovation?Top schools or departments for the sciences?

# of international students going to school in Boston, and if possible in

what specialties? I remember lists that would show this.



List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of how

many of their leaders went to school here?


Sent from my iPhone



>

> Great!

> I added a few slides overnight and brought Michael into the loop this

morning.

> He will keep building and send us something revised this afternoon. He

is also able to help and edit over the weekend.

>

>

>






>

> Not a problem!


> Please think if this is something to assign to Michael. It may be good to

see what he can do with something like this!!

>




>



>>


>>

>> I know this is an important assignment and I feel guilty responding with an excuse. I'm usually all over these kinds of assignments, but we are

driving to North Carolina on Saturday/Sunday for a week with the family.

>> I can find a couple more hours to work on it Friday but I just don't think

I can do any major work by Monday.

>>

>> I will review the info from Sec Ash to see what I can incorporate and I'll

try to add a couple more slides to fill-in the story.

>>


>> -Adam>>

>>






>>

>> Wow!


>>

>> We just got the word that rather than making a decision this week,

that they will not make a decision until mid-January.


>>


>>






>>




>>

>>



>>

>>





>> Subject: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?>>

>> Thx.

>>






Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)



On slide 20 would also add:

IBM digital healthShireGE Health (if this fits thematically for a presentation to them)

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 23, 2015, at 4:25 PM, Kelleher, Michael (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks, Steve.


Michael

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 3:55 PMTo: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)Subject: FW: Presentation on why Boston!



Thx!

Steve

___________________________

p.13: please add Boston University. I think that they are ranked about the same as

Northeastern.



Will do.



p.20: is slide about who has moved here recently or expanded? That’s how I think it

should be titled. I would add Novartis and its enormous new campus in Cambridge,

the new Vertex facilities in the Seaport along with others who have moved to the



Seaport, Siemens has a major expansion in Walpole, BASF has a major

facility/expansion in Worcester. (Mike Kennealy, Jay Ash, Carolyn – can you please

help out here?)



Donep.23: Please include Lincoln Labs and add a slide that has some of the centers at

Northeastern, BU, Tufts…especially NU. This may be an additional slide?

Will make additional slide and add those organizations

p.26: This is interesting! What do you mean when you indicate GE under the

innovations?

Ok, wasn’t sure this would be a good slide. I tried to tie academic breakthroughs, so I

linked the invention or emerging technology with what line of business then would

have impacted – this is an indirect connection. I can tighten up, if you like the concept.


Yes, will do.

p.28: Please do the same for the innovation centers you mentioned internationally?

Are there any direct flights to South America???

Yes, will do. I confirmed there are no direct flights from Boston to South America.

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 3:28 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan,

Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Peyser, Jim (EOE); Reale, Ann (EOE); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Conroy, Jim (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV)Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: Presentation on why Boston!


Attached is terrific presentation on Why Boston/The War for Talent as it relates to the

Boston project.


And I want to especially thank our newest member of the Cabinet Relations team –

Michael Keller, along with support from Lily and Adam – to put this presentation

together.






Best,

Steve

From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:47 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

Subject: RE: draft for your review Steve,

Please see attached for your review a draft slide deck for discussions with GE. You will

find herein 30 slides (25 or so with real content). I am not 100% sure the length of

time that is available but these are the slides I would present as the most compelling

for “why Boston?”



Thanks,

Michael


Impressive!


More ideas:

1. Please take a look at the GE website

and other sources to see about themes, and other info that may be relevant. I

am hearing on their ads that GE is your industrial and tech company. For

example, the health group and the energy group (Current) are or will be

locating here. What are the other parts of GE that would find the MA

ecosystem attractive?

2. I am hearing that Massachusetts is a

leader in robotics and industrial design. Can you find out more and present

how this would be attractive to GE?

3. There are some more War on Talent

slides that Adam would have.

4. Can you check on where the top firms

go for their recruitment?

5. Please develop a list of the various

institutes on health, tech, innovation, engineering, etc. Please check the



university websites. Broad, MIT’s Center for the Brain, etc.

Good stuff!


From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)

Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:49 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Steve,

Attached are some slides Lily and I put together in the last day or so for your review

and comment. I will look into your questions below re: total # of engineers and

scientist going to school in the Boston area. The slides attached do not have that data

but I will dig up tomorrow.


Michael




-work in the area and a comparative % of the total in the US, World, or whatever

makes sense


Total # of engineers and scientists going to school in the Boston metro area and

how many graduate each year and what % that may be of the total in the US

More to come!






Great!!



Sent from my iPhone



Steve,




(as outlined below, assigned to Lily or myself) and will send you a revised

PPT later this evening/first thing tomorrow for your review and additional

edits.







specialties - mk




• # of international patients traveling to Boston AMCs to receive care –

mk


Lily

• List of all the bio tech, IT, pharma, etc firms that have determined to

locate, grow here in the last few years. (Vertex, Shire, Novartis, Pfizer,

Siemens...and all the small firms) - HED

• Locations of all the company's national and international locations

with a map showing flights from Logan - Massport

Thanks,

Michael










Ok for you to add more slides on the war on talent idea. I am





Top schools for innovation?









Sent from my iPhone



>

> Great!


morning.



>

>

>






>

> Not a problem!


> Please think if this is something to assign to Michael. It may be good to

see what he can do with something like this!!



>


>



>>

>> Thanks Steve. Good to hear we have a little more time.>>

>> I know this is an important assignment and I feel guilty responding with

an excuse. I'm usually all over these kinds of assignments, but we are

driving to North Carolina on Saturday/Sunday for a week with the family.

>> I can find a couple more hours to work on it Friday but I just don't think

I can do any major work by Monday.

>>

>> I will review the info from Sec Ash to see what I can incorporate and I'll

try to add a couple more slides to fill-in the story.

>>>> I hope this isn't a huge problem.

>> -Adam

>>

>>






>>

>> Wow!


>>

>> We just got the word that rather than making a decision this week,



>>


>>






>>






>>

>>

>>

>>



>> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 3:38 PM>> To: Weikel, Adam (GOV)

>> Subject: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>>

>> Thx.

>>





To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Presentation on why Boston!


AstraZeneca

In continuing to build on our commitment to collaborate through meaningful partnerships to drive scientific progress forward, AstraZeneca was joined by Massachusetts officials last week (early this past fall) to officially launch the Gatehouse Park BioHub in Waltham, MA. The Gatehouse Park BioHub will be one of the largest and most dynamic life-science research biohubs in the region, with more than 700 scientists and research and development (R&D) experts on-site by the end of 2015. Six companies are sharing the facilities, with two more expected to join before the end of the year. Mike will send more. Siemens has committed but not be finalized (could comment that there is a

commitment for a 700 person, $325m expansion just south of Boston in the life sciences.)








Thx!

Steve

___________________________

p.13: please add Boston University. I think that they are ranked about the same as Northeastern.



p.20: is slide about who has moved here recently or expanded? That’s how I think it should be

titled. I would add Novartis and its enormous new campus in Cambridge, the new Vertex facilities in

the Seaport along with others who have moved to the Seaport, Siemens has a major expansion in

Walpole, BASF has a major facility/expansion in Worcester. (Mike Kennealy, Jay Ash, Carolyn – can

you please help out here?)




p.23: Please include Lincoln Labs and add a slide that has some of the centers at Northeastern, BU,

Tufts…especially NU. This may be an additional slide?

p.26: This is interesting! What do you mean when you indicate GE under the innovations?


p.28: Please do the same for the innovation centers you mentioned internationally? Are there any

direct flights to South America???

From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 3:28 PMTo: ; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Peyser, Jim (EOE); Reale, Ann (EOE); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Conroy, Jim (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV)Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: Presentation on why Boston!


Attached is terrific presentation on Why Boston/The War for Talent as it relates to the Boston

project.


And I want to especially thank our newest member of the Cabinet Relations team – Michael Keller,

along with support from Lily and Adam – to put this presentation together.




Best,

Steve

From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:47 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: RE: draft for your review

Steve,

Please see attached for your review a draft slide deck for discussions with GE. You will find herein 30

slides (25 or so with real content). I am not 100% sure the length of time that is available but these

are the slides I would present as the most compelling for “why Boston?”





Thanks,

Michael


Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 11:18 AMTo: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: FW: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Impressive!


More ideas:

1. Please take a look at the GE website and other sources to see about themes, and other info

that may be relevant. I am hearing on their ads that GE is your industrial and tech

company. For example, the health group and the energy group (Current) are or will be

locating here. What are the other parts of GE that would find the MA ecosystem attractive?2. I am hearing that Massachusetts is a leader in robotics and industrial design. Can you find

out more and present how this would be attractive to GE?

3. There are some more War on Talent slides that Adam would have.


5. Please develop a list of the various institutes on health, tech, innovation, engineering, etc.

Please check the university websites. Broad, MIT’s Center for the Brain, etc.

Good stuff!


From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:49 PMTo: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Steve,

Attached are some slides Lily and I put together in the last day or so for your review and comment. I

will look into your questions below re: total # of engineers and scientist going to school in the

Boston area. The slides attached do not have that data but I will dig up tomorrow.


Michael








Total # of engineers and scientists going to school in the Boston metro area and how many

graduate each year and what % that may be of the total in the US

More to come!






Great!!

Sent from my iPhone



Steve,

Thanks for the additional guidance for the war on talent materials. Lily and I were able

to add a few slides based on previous direction you and Adam provided. We are going

to plow through the list of additional items (as outlined below, assigned to Lily or

myself) and will send you a revised PPT later this evening/first thing tomorrow for your

review and additional edits.






• # of international students going to school in Boston, what specialties - mk

• Top academic medical centers -mk

• List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of how many of

their leaders went to school here – mk

• # of international patients traveling to Boston AMCs to receive care – mk

• Insert language from innovation one pager that HED put together - Lily



• List of all the bio tech, IT, pharma, etc firms that have determined to locate, grow

here in the last few years. (Vertex, Shire, Novartis, Pfizer, Siemens...and all the small

firms) - HED

• Locations of all the company's national and international locations with a map

showing flights from Logan - Massport

Thanks,Michael








Ok for you to add more slides on the war on talent idea. I am remembering a pretty

rich set of them that we cut back on in later versions. More to review/include is better

now.



Top schools for innovation?


# of international students going to school in Boston, and if possible in what

specialties? I remember lists that would show this.



List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of how many of their

leaders went to school here?


Sent from my iPhone



>

> Great!



> I added a few slides overnight and brought Michael into the loop this morning.

> He will keep building and send us something revised this afternoon. He is also able to

help and edit over the weekend.

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)




>

> Not a problem!


> Please think if this is something to assign to Michael. It may be good to see what he

can do with something like this!!


>



>>


>>

>> I know this is an important assignment and I feel guilty responding with an excuse.

I'm usually all over these kinds of assignments, but we are driving to North Carolina on

Saturday/Sunday for a week with the family.

>> I can find a couple more hours to work on it Friday but I just don't think I can do any

major work by Monday.

>>

>> I will review the info from Sec Ash to see what I can incorporate and I'll try to add a

couple more slides to fill-in the story.

>>


>> -Adam

>>

>>






>>

>> Wow!




>>

>> We just got the word that rather than making a decision this week, that they will not

make a decision until mid-January.


>>







>>




>>>>

>>

>>






>>

>> Thx.

>>




From:


Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Peyser, Jim (EOE); Reale, Ann (EOE); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Conroy, Jim (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)



This is a great piece of work. Needs a highlight page or two up front -

tons of really great facts imbedded in the whole thing.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 23, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


>

> Governor, Lt. Governor and colleagues:

>

> Attached is terrific presentation on Why Boston/The War for Talent as it

relates to the Boston project.> I want to thank those that have provided the source information.

> And I want to especially thank our newest member of the Cabinet

Relations team – Michael Keller, along with support from Lily and Adam –

to put this presentation together.

>

> Comments, edits, further additions welcome.

> Please share your thoughts with Michael, Adam, Lily and me.

>

> I will share this now with the folks from the City.

>

> Best,

> Steve

>

> From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)

> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:47 PM


> Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

> Subject: RE: draft for your review

>

> Steve,

>

> Please see attached for your review a draft slide deck for discussions

with GE. You will find herein 30 slides (25 or so with real content). I

am not 100% sure the length of time that is available but these are the

slides I would present as the most compelling for “why Boston?”

>

> I am around all day if you want to discuss further or have specific

edits/suggestions.

>

> Look forward to your feedback.

>

> Thanks,

> Michael

>


GOV Email




> To: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

> Subject: FW: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>

> Impressive!

> And very much on the right track.

>

> More ideas:

>

> 1. Please take a look at the GE website and other sources to see

about themes, and other info that may be relevant. I am hearing on their

ads that GE is your industrial and tech company. For example, the health

group and the energy group (Current) are or will be locating here. What

are the other parts of GE that would find the MA ecosystem attractive?

>

> 2. I am hearing that Massachusetts is a leader in robotics and

industrial design. Can you find out more and present how this would be

attractive to GE?

>

> 3. There are some more War on Talent slides that Adam would have.

>

> 4. Can you check on where the top firms go for their recruitment?

>

> 5. Please develop a list of the various institutes on health,

tech, innovation, engineering, etc. Please check the university websites.

Broad, MIT’s Center for the Brain, etc.

>

> Good stuff!

> I will provide more feedback, but please keep going.

>

> From: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)

> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:49 PM


> Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)> Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>

> Steve,

>

> Attached are some slides Lily and I put together in the last day or so

for your review and comment. I will look into your questions below re:

total # of engineers and scientist going to school in the Boston area.

The slides attached do not have that data but I will dig up tomorrow.

>

> Look forward to your review and guidance,

> Michael

>

> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 6:28 PM

> To: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)



>

>

> If you aren't already, please look at US News and World Report.

>

>

>



> Can you also research the # of scientists, engineers who:

>

> -work in the area and a comparative % of the total in the US, World, or

whatever makes sense

>

> -were educated in the area

>

>

>

> Total # of engineers and scientists going to school in the Boston metro

area and how many graduate each year and what % that may be of the total

in the US

>

>

>

> More to come!

>

> ________________________________


> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:00 PM

> To: Kelleher, Michael (GOV)



>

> Great!!

>


>

> On Dec 18, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Kelleher, Michael (GOV)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

> Steve,

>

> Thanks for the additional guidance for the war on talent materials.Lily and I were able to add a few slides based on previous direction you

and Adam provided. We are going to plow through the list of additional

items (as outlined below, assigned to Lily or myself) and will send you a

revised PPT later this evening/first thing tomorrow for your review and

additional edits.

>

> • list of universities in the top 50 - mk

> • list of the top colleges - mk

> • Top 10 engineering schools - mk

> • Top Schools for Innovation in the United States- mk

> • Top schools or departments for the sciences - mk

> • # of international students going to school in Boston, what

specialties - mk > • Top academic medical centers - mk

> • List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication

of how many of their leaders went to school here – mk

> • # of international patients traveling to Boston AMCs to receive

care – mk

> • Insert language from innovation one pager that HED put together

- Lily

> • List of all the bio tech, IT, pharma, etc firms that have

determined to locate, grow here in the last few years. (Vertex, Shire,

Novartis, Pfizer, Siemens...and all the small firms) - HED



> • Locations of all the company's national and international

locations with a map showing flights from Logan - Massport

>

> Thanks,

> Michael

>



> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 2:53 PM


> Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)


>

> Adam, Michael, Lily,

>

> Ok for you to add more slides on the war on talent idea. I am



>

> Include a list of universities in the top 50? Also a list of the top

colleges?

>

> Top 10 engineering schools?

> Top schools for innovation?

> Top schools or departments for the sciences?

> # of international students going to school in Boston, and if possible

in what specialties? I remember lists that would show this.

>

> Top academic medical centers?

>

> Include information where the top firms go to recruit talent?

>

> List of GE locations around the country/world and an indication of how

many of their leaders went to school here?>

> ...you get the idea!!

>


>

>> On Dec 18, 2015, at 8:29 AM, Weikel, Adam (GOV)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

> wrote:

>>

>> Great!

>> I added a few slides overnight and brought Michael into the loop this

morning.

>> He will keep building and send us something revised this afternoon. Heis also able to help and edit over the weekend.

>>

>>

>>



>> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 6:46 AM


>> Subject: Re: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>>



>> Not a problem!

>> We may have more time and I will let you know.

>> Please think if this is something to assign to Michael. It may be good

to see what he can do with something like this!!

>>


>>

>>> On Dec 17, 2015, at 9:55 PM, Weikel, Adam (GOV)


> wrote:

>>>

>>> Thanks Steve. Good to hear we have a little more time.

>>>

>>> I know this is an important assignment and I feel guilty responding

with an excuse. I'm usually all over these kinds of assignments, but we

are driving to North Carolina on Saturday/Sunday for a week with the

family.

>>> I can find a couple more hours to work on it Friday but I just don't

think I can do any major work by Monday.

>>>

>>> I will review the info from Sec Ash to see what I can incorporate and

I'll try to add a couple more slides to fill-in the story.

>>>

>>> I hope this isn't a huge problem.

>>> -Adam

>>>

>>>



>>> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 6:19 PM

>>> To: Weikel, Adam (GOV)

>>> Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>>>

>>> Wow!>>> This is terrific!

>>>

>>> We just got the word that rather than making a decision this week,


>>> So both the good and bad news is that we have more time.

>>>

>>> With this in mind, what further would you do by Monday?

>>>


>>> From: Weikel, Adam (GOV)



>>> Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?>>>

>>> I'm sorry it is so late.

>>> We only had a 20 min break midday and 10 minutes in the afternoon.

>>> Attached is what I came up with

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>






>>> To: Weikel, Adam (GOV)

>>> Subject: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

>>>

>>> Thx.

>>>


>

> <MA talent_slides draft1.pptx>




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kelleher, Michael (GOV)

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Presentation on why Boston!


IBM a biggie - good catch!

________________________________________




Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Ash,

Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)


On slide 20 would also add:

IBM digital health

Shire

GE Health (if this fits thematically for a presentation to them)

Mike Kennealy



ate.MA.US>> wrote:

Thanks, Steve.


Michael








Thx!

Steve

___________________________

p.13: please add Boston University. I think that they are ranked about

the same as Northeastern.


p.18: drop the chart at the bottom as the stats presented could be

interpreted in a number of ways.

Will do.





p.20: is slide about who has moved here recently or expanded? That’s how

I think it should be titled. I would add Novartis and its enormous new

campus in Cambridge, the new Vertex facilities in the Seaport along with

others who have moved to the Seaport, Siemens has a major expansion in

Walpole, BASF has a major facility/expansion in Worcester. (Mike

Kennealy, Jay Ash, Carolyn – can you please help out here?)



Done

p.23: Please include Lincoln Labs and add a slide that has some of the

centers at Northeastern, BU, Tufts…especially NU. This may be an

additional slide?

Will make additional slide and add those organizations

p.26: This is interesting! What do you mean when you indicate GE under

the innovations?

Ok, wasn’t sure this would be a good slide. I tried to tie academic

breakthroughs, so I linked the invention or emerging technology with what

line of business then would have impacted – this is an indirect

connection. I can tighten up, if you like the concept.

p.27: Can you provide a statement about destinations to key GE locations

in the US

Yes, will do.

p.28: Please do the same for the innovation centers you mentioned

internationally? Are there any direct flights to South America???

Yes, will do. I confirmed there are no direct flights from Boston to

South America.



To: ; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED);

Peyser, Jim (EOE); Reale, Ann (EOE); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth;

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Conroy, Jim (GOV);

Buckley, Timothy (GOV)

Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

Subject: Presentation on why Boston!


Attached is terrific presentation on Why Boston/The War for Talent as it

relates to the Boston project.


And I want to especially thank our newest member of the Cabinet Relationsteam – Michael Keller, along with support from Lily and Adam – to put this

presentation together.




Best,

Steve

GOV Email







Subject: RE: draft for your review

Steve,

Please see attached for your review a draft slide deck for discussions

with GE. You will find herein 30 slides (25 or so with real content). I

am not 100% sure the length of time that is available but these are the

slides I would present as the most compelling for “why Boston?”

I am around all day if you want to discuss further or have specific

edits/suggestions.


Thanks,

Michael



To: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Weikel, Adam (GOV)

Subject: FW: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Impressive!


More ideas:

1. Please take a look at the GE website and other sources to see

about themes, and other info that may be relevant. I am hearing on their ads that GE is your industrial and tech company. For example, the health

group and the energy group (Current) are or will be locating here. What

are the other parts of GE that would find the MA ecosystem attractive?

2. I am hearing that Massachusetts is a leader in robotics and

industrial design. Can you find out more and present how this would be

attractive to GE?

3. There are some more War on Talent slides that Adam would have.


5. Please develop a list of the various institutes on health, tech,innovation, engineering, etc. Please check the university websites.

Broad, MIT’s Center for the Brain, etc.

Good stuff!



Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:49 PM





Subject: RE: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?

Steve,

Attached are some slides Lily and I put together in the last day or so for

your review and comment. I will look into your questions below re: total

# of engineers and scientist going to school in the Boston area. The

slides attached do not have that data but I will dig up tomorrow.


Michael








-work in the area and a comparative % of the total in the US, World, or

whatever makes sense


Total # of engineers and scientists going to school in the Boston metro

area and how many graduate each year and what % that may be of the totalin the US

More to come!

________________________________






Great!!

Sent from my iPhone



ate.MA.US>> wrote:

Steve,






(as outlined below, assigned to Lily or myself) and will send you a

revised PPT later this evening/first thing tomorrow for your review and

additional edits.







specialties - mk




• # of international patients traveling to Boston AMCs to receive

care – mk


Lily

• List of all the bio tech, IT, pharma, etc firms that have

determined to locate, grow here in the last few years. (Vertex, Shire,

Novartis, Pfizer, Siemens...and all the small firms) - HED

• Locations of all the company's national and international

locations with a map showing flights from Logan - Massport

Thanks,

Michael





Cc: Kelleher, Michael (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Subject: Re: Any idea of timing for War on Talent materials?


Ok for you to add more slides on the war on talent idea. I am remembering

a pretty rich set of them that we cut back on in later versions. More to

review/include is better now.

Include a list of universities in the top 50? Also a list of the top

colleges?


Top schools for innovation?Top schools or departments for the sciences?










Sent from my iPhone



> wrote:

>

> Great!


morning.



>

>

>






>

> Not a problem!


> Please think if this is something to assign to Michael. It may be good

to see what he can do with something like this!!

>


>



> wrote:

>>>> Thanks Steve. Good to hear we have a little more time.

>>

>> I know this is an important assignment and I feel guilty responding

with an excuse. I'm usually all over these kinds of assignments, but we

are driving to North Carolina on Saturday/Sunday for a week with the

family.

>> I can find a couple more hours to work on it Friday but I just don't

think I can do any major work by Monday.

>>

>> I will review the info from Sec Ash to see what I can incorporate and

I'll try to add a couple more slides to fill-in the story.

>>

>> I hope this isn't a huge problem.>> -Adam

>>

>>






>>

>> Wow!




>>

>> We just got the word that rather than making a decision this week, that

they will not make a decision until mid-January.


>>


>>






>>




>>

>>

>>

>>






>>

>> Thx.

>>





To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV); [email protected]

Subject: RE: Private Grid 1


Good thx. I'll review tomorrow. What's your availability Tuesday? Merry Merry. 60

degrees and the sun just came out here!


-------- Original message --------From: "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: 12/24/2015 10:47 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kadish, Steven (GOV)" <[email protected]>, Daniel Koh <[email protected]>, John

Barros <[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>, [email protected]: RE: Private Grid 1

Jay

Ricks




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF);

Povich, Lon (GOV); [email protected]

Subject: Private Grid 1

Folks, this is really tedious, with so many potential variations on each scenario. Nonetheless, here is a first draft

responding to the three basics of the scenarios. I think it encompasses everything, but need to sleep on it now. Feel

free to pick it apart!

Shared with a limited circulation. Chiefs should decided if they want to expand the loop now, or wait until the

smaller group has had at it.

Should we do a call at 8 to discuss what we are saying to them at 9?







Ricks,

Please give me a quick call. Cell ) or office, below, until noon.

Thanks.

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082


From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 10:48 AM

To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon

(GOV); [email protected]


Jay

Ricks










Shared with a limited circulation. Chiefs should decided if they want to expand the loop now, or wait until the

smaller group has had at it.





To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); [email protected]



Question to the team:

Thanks.

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082



Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 10:48 AMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon

(GOV); [email protected]


Jay

Ricks










Shared with a limited circulation. Chiefs should decided if they want to expand the loop now, or wait until the smaller group has had at it.








Ok thanks.

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133

(617) 725-4082

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:27 AMTo: Povich, Lon (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED)Subject: RE: Private Grid 1

Yes. Don't see a call 8n number yet for that. The 9 is w GE.


-------- Original message --------From: "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 12/24/2015 6:42 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: Re: Private Grid 1

Is there a call at 9 too?

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 24, 2015, at 6:33 AM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

830 it is. Steve or John, can you send around a call in number?





From: "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 12/24/2015 6:10 AM (GMT-05:00)To: John Barros < [email protected]>Cc: "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, Daniel Koh <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Kadish, Steven (GOV)"

<[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Private Grid 1

Steve and Jen and I have another call at 8. Could we do 830?

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 24, 2015, at 5:55 AM, John Barros < [email protected]> wrote:

8am is good.

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:Fine

Sent from my iPhone


Works for me too

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 23, 2015, at 11:42 PM, Daniel Koh <[email protected]> wrote:

8 AM works for me. On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:Folks, this is really tedious, with so many

potential variations on each scenario. Nonetheless, here is a first draft responding to the three basics of the scenarios. I think it encompasses everything, but need to sleep on it now. Feel free to pick it apart!

Shared with a limited circulation. Chiefs should decided if they want to expand the loop now, or wait until the smaller group has had at it.




--

Daniel Arrigg KohChief of Staff City of Boston

--John BarrosChief of Economic DevelopmentOffice of Mayor Martin J. Walsh

6th Floor, Room 603Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201t: 617-635-5729http://www.cityofboston.gov SHARE YOUR VISION. SHAPE OUR CITY.




From: John Barros

To: Gaquin, Daniel

Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Eugene O"Flaherty; Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Daniel Koh; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Cowan, Mo; Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Englander, John (DOT); Fichter, Katherine (DOT)

Subject: Re: Private Grid 1


From the City we will have the following individuals join us:

Renee LaFevre, BRA General Counsel

Heather Campisano, BRA Chief of Staff

Jose Gonzalez, Senior Assistant Corporation Counsel

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 28, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Gaquin, Daniel <[email protected]> wrote:

>

> Time and location is as follows:

>

> 11 am - 1 pm tomorrow, 12/29 at ML, One Financial, 38th Floor.

>

> Dial in is 877-434-2303;6173481874#

>


> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV) [mailto:[email protected]]

> Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 2:26 PM

> To: Eugene O'Flaherty

> Cc: Gaquin, Daniel; Povich, Lon (GOV); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Daniel Koh; John Barros;

Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Cowan, Mo; Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; Pollack,

Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Englander, John (DOT); Fichter, Katherine (DOT)

> Subject: Re: Private Grid 1

>

> Can we be sure that Rene or someone else from the BRA is there?

>

> Also Massport--is it Katie?

>

> Also at MassDOT -- could this be Kate F or John or someone else?

>

> Lon or Jay -- can you please confirm the time and location and call-in?

>

> Thx.

>


>>> On Dec 28, 2015, at 1:38 PM, Eugene O'Flaherty <[email protected]> wrote:

>>

>> The City will have an Attorney available.

>>

>> Gene

>>


>>

>>> On Dec 28, 2015, at 1:37 PM, Gaquin, Daniel <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>



>>> Anytime between 10 and 2 tomorrow is best for me and I can make other times work if needed.

>>>

>>> I'll suggest 11.

>>>

>>> Daniel O. Gaquin | Member

>>> Co-Chair, Real Estate Department

>>> Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

>>> One Financial Center | Boston, MA 02111

>>> Direct: +1.617.348.1874 | Fax: +1.617.542.2241

>>> E-mail: [email protected]

>>> Web: www.mintz.com

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>


>>> From: Povich, Lon (GOV) [mailto:[email protected]]

>>> Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 1:18 PM

>>> To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Eugene L. O'Flaherty

>>> Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros;

>>> Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); [email protected]; Gaquin,

>>> Daniel; Cowan, Mo

>>> Subject: Re: Private Grid 1

>>>

>>>

>>> All,

>>>

>>> It would be great, if the appropriate lawyers from the city and state could join with Dan at Mintz tomorrow to

discuss the approvals necessary for the current plan. As I understand it, Jen and Jay are available and Ricks can join

by phone. It will be great if we could identify the most knowledgeable lawyers for the city and set a time.

Unfortunately, I am on vacation in California and may be able to join by phone, depending on the time, but will not

be there in person.

>>>

>>> Just to get the ball rolling, Dan when would be a good time for you,>>> and let's see if the others can meet then. Thanks

>>>

>>> Lon


>>>

>>>> On Dec 24, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Jay

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Ricks

>>>>


>>>> From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 11:40 PM

>>>> To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Daniel Koh; John Barros; Frazier, Ricks

>>>> (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Povich, Lon (GOV);

>>>> [email protected]



>>>> Subject: Private Grid 1

>>>>

>>>> Folks, this is really tedious, with so many potential variations on each scenario. Nonetheless, here is a first

draft responding to the three basics of the scenarios. I think it encompasses everything, but need to sleep on it now.

Feel free to pick it apart!

>>>>

>>>> Shared with a limited circulation. Chiefs should decided if they want to expand the loop now, or wait until

the smaller group has had at it.

>>>>

>>>> Should we do a call at 8 to discuss what we are saying to them at 9?

>>>> <Private Options Grid.docx>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:

>>> The information contained in this electronic message and any

>>> attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the

>>> addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information.

>>> If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for

>>> delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, be advised you have

>>> received this message in error and that any use, dissemination,

>>> forwarding, printing, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please

>>> notify Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo immediately at

>>> either (617) 542-6000 or at [email protected], and destroy all

>>> copies of this message and any attachments. You will be reimbursed

>>> for reasonable costs incurred in notifying us.



From: Gaquin, Daniel

To: Povich, Lon (GOV); Henry Luthin; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: Daniel Koh; Eugene O"Flaherty; Jose Gonzalez; Porter, Jeff



11 am – 1 pm tomorrow, 12/29 at ML, 38 th Floor.

Dial in is

Please let me know who will be attending in person for the security list.

Thanks,

Dan

Daniel O. Gaquin | Member

Co-Chair, Real Estate Department

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

One Financial Center | Boston, MA 02111

Direct: +1.617.348.1874 | Fax: +1.617.542.2241E-mail: [email protected]

Web: www.mintz.com

From: Povich, Lon (GOV) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 2:05 PMTo: Henry Luthin; Ash, Jay (EOHED); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Gaquin, DanielCc: Daniel Koh; Eugene O'Flaherty; Jose GonzalezSubject: Re: Private Grid 1

Dan will host. Dan please let folks know the location and dial in. Thanks all

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 28, 2015, at 11:00 AM, Henry Luthin <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello Lon, Senior Assistant Corporation Counsel Jose Gonzalez will attend the meeting tomorrow. Could you forward him and me the particulars?

Many thanks. Henry

Henry C. LuthinFirst Assistant Corporation CounselCity of Boston Law DepartmentCity Hall, Room 615Boston, MA 02201



617.635.4024 (o)617.594.1645 (c)

STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:The information contained in this electronic message and any attachmentsto this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s)and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are notthe intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering thee-mail to the intended recipient, be advised you have received thismessage in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing,or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify Mintz, Levin, Cohn,Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo immediately at either (617) 542-6000 or [email protected], and destroy all copies of this message and anyattachments. You will be reimbursed for reasonable costs incurred innotifying us.





Subject: RE: Project Plum - MA


Emailed her yesterday to say she’d have bios today – I now have all that I needed and will send.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:37 AM


Subject: FW: Project Plum - MA


Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:32 AM



Subject: Project Plum - MA

Good morning,

Thanks for this info. Of course I will need all names (and bios) ahead of time to clear through our GE

Security so all can enter the campus. The request is for bios by COB today please.

Regarding AV, I asked our AV support to provide me some information regarding our system. He

writes:

The systems in the Guest House are of older technology. They have been modified to allow

for newer computer equipment to display on the room projector. There is a room PC

connected to an overhead LCD projector. The room PC will allow the insertion of thumb

drives if content is delivered that way. However, the system will not allow you to save from

a GE computer. There are three (3) VGA computer input connections with audio in the

table. We can provide a display port to VGA adapter to connect to laptops to accommodate

higher resolution digital outputs. The AV system will scale resolutions down to



accommodate the ability to project. There are table top audio teleconference phone pods

that supply telephony. There is also cable TV.

Also, we will one of our AV people available in the conference room at the start of the meeting for

any assistance that is required.

Please let me know if you have additional questions.

Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:

From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:25 AMTo: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Subject: FW: Project Plum

fyi

From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:16 AMTo: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Ash, Jay (SEA)Subject: RE: Project Plum

Thx Ann. Only state govt officials. We'll be bringing a deck and would be pleased to have

AV available for its projection. Light refreshments are fine. Under $50 is our threshold. I'd say 5 people at this point.


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/23/2015 9:56 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: Project Plum

Jay,









delegation. We are sensitive that some states have strict policies that govern the provision of food

and beverage to government officials, so please let us know how we can best accommodate you.



ark

Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

203-373-3198 (o)

(m)





Subject: RE: Project Plum - MA

Date: Thursday, July 23, 2015 4:31:00 PM

Hi Karen, please see our bios below. I am also going to try to reach you shortly with a question or

two about the meeting – thanks.



Secretary Jay Ash


Massachusetts. Secretary Ash is responsible for directing and executing Governor Charlie Baker’s

agenda on housing and community development, job creation, business development, consumer

affairs, and business regulation. He previously served as the city manager in his native Chelsea, a

position he held from 2000 to 2014. In Chelsea, Secretary Ash’s leadership produced both economic

expansion and fiscal stability. He grew the city’s housing stock by over ten percent, expanded its commercial base with two dozen major projects, led all Gateway Cities with a 15% increase in new

employment, developed 10 new parks, secured five credit rating increases, and won two All-

America City designations for Chelsea. Secretary Ash has led statewide initiatives on health

insurance, youth violence, transportation infrastructure and expanded gaming in Massachusetts.

He previously served as co-founder and vice-chair of the Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, as past

president of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, as a board member of the public policy think

tank MassINC, the staff director to the Massachusetts House Majority Leader, and as an elected

trustee of his alma mater, Clark University.

Deputy Secretary Carolyn KirkCarolyn A. Kirk joined the Baker-Polito Administration in January of 2015 and serves as the Deputy

Secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development. In this position, Kirk leads

operational management and shares policy responsibility for the Executive Office of Housing and




International Trade and Investment. In addition, Kirk is responsible for economic planning and

growth in the Maritime economic sector, oversees the MassWorks grant program, and provides

direct support to the Lieutenant Governor’s office on a number of initiatives. Prior to her

appointment with the Baker/Polito administration, in 2007 Kirk was the first woman popularly

elected as Mayor of the City of Gloucester. Kirk went on to win three subsequent general municipal

elections, never lost a ward or a precinct in any of her contests, and served as Mayor for seven

years. Kirk’s administration invested over $100 million in infrastructure thus laying the groundwork

for future economic growth. The first-ever business class hotel is under construction in the city in a

long sought after waterfront location adjacent to downtown. A new $40 million elementary school,

the first one to be built since World War II and which Kirk led the effort on for seven years, is also

under construction in the city. Mayor Kirk’s professional career spans over 25 years. She is a long-

time management consultant and her clients have included many of the Top 20 banks in the US,



along with Fortune 500 companies. She and her husband Bill Kirk have two children, Sam, 17 and

Baylee, 14. Both are enrolled in Gloucester Public Schools. A graduate of the Boston College class

of 1984, Mayor Kirk was born and raised in Clinton, NY and moved to Massachusetts to attend

college. She moved to Gloucester in 1988 where she still resides, and was drawn to the diversity

and beauty of the city.

Assistant Secretary Mike KennealyMike Kennealy is the Assistant Secretary for Business Growth for the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts in the Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development. Mike joined the Baker-

Polito Administration in March 2015 and brings two decades of experience working with the

management teams of growing companies. He joined Spectrum Equity in 1997 and was a Managing

Director of the firm until early 2013. Founded in 1994 with offices in Boston and San Francisco,

Spectrum is a leading growth private equity firm that provides capital and strategic support to its

portfolio companies. During Mike’s more than 15 years at the firm, Spectrum grew from $360

million in assets under management to $4.7 billion and invested in nearly 100 high growth

information services, digital media, software, and Internet companies. After retiring from

Spectrum, he spent two years as Special Advisor to the Receiver at Lawrence Public Schools. There he worked with the state-appointed superintendent/receiver on strategic and financial initiatives to

support the turnaround plan and developed and managed relationships with non-profit partners,

philanthropic funders, and the municipal government. Earlier in his career, Mike was an Associate at

TA Associates, a Boston-based private equity firm. Mike, his wife, and three children live in

Lexington, where he has served on the Town’s finance committee and a variety of non-profit

boards. He has been a member of the Board of Trustees of St. John’s Prep in Danvers, MA since

2009 and is Vice Chairman of the Board. Mike received an AB magna cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa,

with High Honors in Government from Dartmouth College and an MBA from Harvard Business

School.


Nam recently joined the Baker-Polito Administration as the Assistant Secretary of Business

Development which oversees the Mass. Office of Business Development, Mass. Office of Travel and

Tourism, Mass. Film Office and Mass. Office of International Trade & Investment. Previously Nam

was the CEO of Vietnamese American Initiative for Development (VietAID). Nam has been a

commercial banker for more than 20 years in both lending and credit for premier community banks

and large commercial banks. From 1994 to 2000 Nam served as Commissioner of Massachusetts

Office for Refugees and Immigrants, and Deputy Director of the Massachusetts Office of

International Trade & Investment. Nam earned his BS degree in Business Administration from the

University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Management, and MPA in Political Economy from

Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.



Director for the Massachusetts Office of Business Development (MOBD). MOBD is the state’s one-

stop source for businesses seeking to relocate to Massachusetts or to expand their current

operations here. It provides businesses with information on site locations, workforce availability,

funding and financing and tax incentives. Prior to joining the Administration, she worked for Boston



Main Streets as a Neighborhood Business Manager where she oversaw the development and

implementation of business strategies and provided technical assistance to local Main Streets

managers and volunteers. She graduated cum laude from Salem State College and earned a BA in

Political Science & Sociology, and she lives with her husband and two children in Rockport.





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:32 AM



Subject: Project Plum - MA

Good morning,

Thanks for this info. Of course I will need all names (and bios) ahead of time to clear through our GE

Security so all can enter the campus. The request is for bios by COB today please.

Regarding AV, I asked our AV support to provide me some information regarding our system. He

writes:

The systems in the Guest House are of older technology. They have been modified to allow

for newer computer equipment to display on the room projector. There is a room PC

connected to an overhead LCD projector. The room PC will allow the insertion of thumb

drives if content is delivered that way. However, the system will not allow you to save from

a GE computer. There are three (3) VGA computer input connections with audio in the

table. We can provide a display port to VGA adapter to connect to laptops to accommodate

higher resolution digital outputs. The AV system will scale resolutions down to

accommodate the ability to project. There are table top audio teleconference phone pods

that supply telephony. There is also cable TV.

Also, we will one of our AV people available in the conference room at the start of the meeting for

any assistance that is required.

Please let me know if you have additional questions.



Karen

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:

From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:25 AMTo: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate)Subject: FW: Project Plum

fyi

From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:16 AMTo: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Ash, Jay (SEA)Subject: RE: Project Plum

Thx Ann. Only state govt officials. We'll be bringing a deck and would be pleased to have AV available for its projection. Light refreshments are fine. Under $50 is our threshold. I'd say 5 people at this point.



From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/23/2015 9:56 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: Project Plum

Jay,







delegation. We are sensitive that some states have strict policies that govern the provision of food

and beverage to government officials, so please let us know how we can best accommodate you.





ark

Ann R. KleeVice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

203-373-3198 (o)

(m)




To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Project Plum -- Site visit


Looking forward to it. Be back in morning with our logistics contact.


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 08/27/2015 1:41 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Project Plum -- Site visit

Jay,






the planning process, including potential sites that we would want to see and any other agenda

items. The plan is to cover everything in a day.

Many thanks.

Best,

ark

Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

203-373-3198 (o)

(m)





Cc: Pham, Nam (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Project Plum -- Site visit

Date: Monday, August 31, 2015 9:44:56 PM

Good. I spoke with Nam (copied here) about this today and he agreed Peter was the right guy.

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Monday, August 31, 2015 7:10 PMTo: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD)Subject: RE: Project Plum -- Site visit

Hi, Ann. Our top guy will be on the case, Peter Milano. Email is above. Others copied will also

participate in getting ready.

Peter Milano

Senior Regional Director

Massachusetts Office of Business Development(978) 970-1193

360 Merrimack Street

Building 5

Lawrence, MA 01843

-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 08/27/2015 1:41 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: Project Plum -- Site visit

Jay,






the planning process, including potential sites that we would want to see and any other agenda items. The plan is to cover everything in a day.

Many thanks.

Best,

ark



Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824203-373-3198 (o)

(m)





Subject: RE: Project Plum Boston Office Locations Booklet - Extended_v1_r1.pdf


Mike

I just had a couple of thoughts from the call this AM.

I’ll be driving for a chunk of the day, but Jonathan and Erica should be able to answer MassWorks

questions. If you do need me, my cell is 617 872 8017 and I’ll check e-mail regularly when I’m not

actually on the highway. I should be back by mid-afternoon.

Ricks



To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity,

Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Elizabeth Morse; Tom Glynn; Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim

(GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); jdoolin; Ross, Robert (ANF); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier,

Ricks (EOHED)

Subject: FW: Project Plum Boston Office Locations Booklet - Extended_v1_r1.pdf

Please see the link below to access the document that the City has prepared for sites. This is an

update to the package sent last week. It is currently missing one of the Massport sites and the

Convention Center sites which can be added tomorrow. I have a few other edits to this which I will

pass along and please let me know of others. Letter to follow later tonight (still have not received

from City).

Mike Kennealy




Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: John Barros (via Google Drive) [mailto:[email protected]]






Subject: Project Plum Boston Office Locations Booklet - Extended_v1_r1.pdf

John Barros has shared the following PDF:

Project Plum Boston Office Locations Booklet - Extended_v1_r1.pdf

Please confirm when you receive this.Open

This email grants access to this item. Only forward it to people you trust.

Google Drive: Have all your files within reach from any device.




To: Doolin, James



Sorry – I think ~15-20 years but want to keep as operating not capital lease so not go out too far, but

I assume with an option after that.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Sorry, I wasn’t asking about the ground lease. I wanted to know how many years they are committed

to as a tenant in a building??

James P. Doolin

Chief Development OfficerMassachusetts Port Authority

O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:52 PMTo: Doolin, JamesSubject: RE: Project Plum

Until recently, they have only said “long term” but I did hear 99 years today on a call with their tax folks. I thought at least for now the language you sent was very helpful, but are there parameters

or restrictions on term with Massport that we should be aware of?

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Doolin, James [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:29 PM



Importance: High

Mike – was is the length of lease term that Plum is expecting / willing to commit to?

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:05 PMTo: Doolin, JamesCc: Morse, Elizabeth; McDonald, Catherine; DeTour, MicheleSubject: RE: Project Plum

Thanks!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]










statement. Jim

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 10:25 AMTo: Doolin, JamesSubject: Re: Project Plum


Mike Kennealy



James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953




Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







Mike – yes we do have folks that can do some graphic layout type production. We can look at once we have the pieces to see if possible (I assume its close of business

Monday?) Jim

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953




Mike Kennealy



<[email protected]>








<[email protected]>









Mike Kennealy



It looks like we have folks available for a call at 4:30pm today.

Please use this number:

access code .


Mike

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PMTo: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)

([email protected]); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Subject: Project Plum











pushing).



















provided for our letter. What other examples can we provide, and in what level of detail, specifically


project?













discuss.








All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)



How fast can we move from questions to facts and tools and their

application?

Or maybe we are already doing so?

We need to have something solid by tomorrow morning. I am hoping to see

drafts of the 3 deliverables by sometime this evening:

1. What we can do on some proposed Seaport locations

2. Examples of what has been done with the tools we are proposing

3. What can we offer at the existing Plum sites and for Connect

Let's please stay focused on the deliverables.

Thx.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)<[email protected]> wrote:

>

> From today's call - MassWorks is most flexible, allowing for private

expenditures that are in the cause of economic development - thus,

utilizing the MassWorks/EDIP option is more flexible and direct than

utilizing some form of I-Cubed. I am working up a list of

questions/points about the policy issues around utilizing more MassWorks,

maybe as much as $70-80m, for the direct subsidy of building a building.

Simple and effective. Will share the questions tonight.

> ________________________________________


> Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 8:03 AM

> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)> Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

> Subject: Re: Project Plum

>

> Thanks for the info.

> I'll be on the road then, so I'm iffy about joining.

> In any case, look forward to an update.

>


>

> On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>

> 10am. Just sent info.

>

> Mike Kennealy

>

> On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:21 AM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


.US>> wrote:

>

> Please let me know when today's call is and I will try to join you.



>


>

> On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:19 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>

> Discussed in concept on call and just emailed Jim D.

>> Mike Kennealy

>

> On Dec 5, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


MA.US>> wrote:

>

> Did you ask massport to help with the marketing materials? They have a

marketing department. I asked Jen to make that request.

>


>



ate.ma.us>> wrote:

>

> Steve, it was a productive call discussing the various ways

I-Cubed/MassWorks could be utilized to their benefit on our sites while

maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks and

I are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re: MassWorks and Jen needs to

consult outside counsel on some I-Cubed matters. Will reconvene larger

group after Jen has what she needs. Goal is to develop very specific

scenarios on use of funds on our sites. Jay is back and was on call and

may have more to add.

>

> Mike Kennealy>

> On Dec 5, 2015, at 2:26 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


.US>> wrote:

>

> Not sure that I will be able to make, but I would like an update.

>

> Will you be scheduling a call tomorrow?

> I can do after 5 pm.

>


>

> On Dec 5, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]

ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>

> Call info

>

> Mike Kennealy

>

> Begin forwarded message:

>

> From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"




ate.MA.US>>

> Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM EST

> To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"


ate.MA.US>>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)"


ail.State.MA.US>>, "Doolin, James"

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,

"Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)"


.US>>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)"


.US>>

> Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"


"Lepore, Kristen (ANF)"


MA.US>>

> Subject: RE: Project Plum

>

> It looks like we have folks available for a call at 4:30pm today.


>

> access code .

>

> Looking forward to speaking then and discussing ideas from the group.

>

> Mike

>

> ________________________________


> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PM> To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)

([email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@MassM

ail.State.MA.US>); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)

> Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

> Subject: Project Plum

>

> I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this

weekend and into Monday to advance the Project Plum work. As you know, we

presented a proposal to Plum that relies heavily on I-Cubed and Massworks

funding, and we also suggested some sites. The good news from today is

that we are very much in the game here, and the company will be visiting

Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a significant internal meetingin about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what involvement they want from

us on Wednesday, possibly none though of course we are pushing).

>

> As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission at

this point is to make this proposed infrastructure funding more tangible

for them – how could these dollars be used to the direct benefit of their

project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80 MM

I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax incentives; they know how

to value the $20 MM but are unsure how to value the $80 MM, and we need

this proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM, especially in



the face of competition offering incentives that are much easier to value.

>

> To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to

the company by noon on Monday:

>

>

> 1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and

MassWorks projects. I have attached a draft memo from Erica and the

language that Jen provided for our letter. What other examples can we provide, and in what level of detail, specifically ones that are as

analogous as possible to their project?

>

>

> 2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be

deployed at the MCCA and Massport sites. I have attached information

about those sites. No site or building has been ruled out, but initial

guidance from Plum’s location advisor was to focus on the sites vs. the

buildings.

>

> Could I ask the following:

>

>

> 1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above and

develop specific ideas.

>

>

> 2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from your

organization that could help in this effort.

>

>

> 3. Can we all get on a call tomorrow at 4:30pm to discuss.

>

> On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the

deliverables should look like and discuss specific examples. We can thendecide what other needs we may have, and plan the work over Sunday and

into Monday.

>

> I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with

questions. Please respond as soon as you can with respect to your

availability tomorrow at 4:30pm.

>

> All the best,

> Mike

>

> Mike Kennealy


> The Commonwealth of Massachusetts> Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development


> Boston, MA 02108

> Office: 617-788-3640

> Cell: 617-634-4762

> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

>

>



From: Doolin, James

To: Kennealy, Michael (SEA)

Cc: Morse, Elizabeth; McDonald, Catherine; DeTour, Michele



Attachments: Ground Lease Process Memo JPD updates 12 7 15.doc


statement. Jim

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 10:25 AMTo: Doolin, JamesSubject: Re: Project Plum


Mike Kennealy



James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 8:19 AM

To: Doolin, JamesSubject: RE: Project Plum



Mike Kennealy







Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







Monday?) Jim

James P. DoolinChief Development Officer


O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953




Mike Kennealy



<[email protected]>








<[email protected]>









Mike Kennealy




access code .

Looking forward to speaking then and discussing ideas from the

group.

Mike











Wednesday, possibly none though of course we are pushing).














To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to the company by noon on Monday:







project?













discuss.








All the best,



Mike

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




TO: Elizabeth Morse, Chief of Staff

FROM: James Doolin, Chief Development Officer, Catherine McDonald, Acting Chief

Legal Counsel and Michele DeTour, Deputy Chief Legal Counsel

SUBJECT: Massport’s Ground Lease Process Regarding Massport Parcels A-2, H, D-2 and

D-3 and WTC Avenue Parcel


Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) Ground Lease

As part of its mission to be an economic engine for the Commonwealth and New England and to

further a shared civic vision of creating a new and vibrant part of the City of Boston, the

Massport property within the South Boston Waterfront has been developed to include a mix of

commercial, residential and maritime related uses. Massport has made significant investments in

roadways, utilities infrastructure and public open space.

Within the commercial / residential area clustered around Seaport Boulevard, Congress Street,

Summer Street and D Street, Fidelity, John Hancock and a host of other major companies have

made major investments and have a strong corporate employment presence. In addition, two firstclass apartment buildings have been built with additional units on the near term horizon. Two 4-

star hotels are immediately available in the Seaport Hotel and the Boston Waterfront

Renaissance Hotel. There is also a destination restaurant cluster centered around Liberty Wharf.

These projects which are all on Massport land and many others in the South Boston Waterfront

have established the area nationally as a highly desirable location for real estate investment.

On Massport property projects have been undertaken by private third party developers / investors

under long term ground leases. Long term ground leases present the opportunity to be creative in

how the ground rent terms for rent are structured over time. In order to stimulate project

execution and based upon the asset type and the realities of the market conditions, Massport has previously structured rent payments for certain projects that delay or reduce payments in the

early years of the lease while still achieving fair market value for land through a combination of

fixed rent and participating rent. For Project Plum, Massport would expect to work closely and

creatively with the development entity to establish terms that facilitate project execution while

meeting fair market value for the long term ground lease.



2

In response to a request from Michael Kennealy to prepare a memorandum similar to

MassDOT’s District Six Headquarters Memo dated November 30, 2015, we have prepared thefollowing summary of pertinent issues related to Massport’s ground leasing process for internal

discussion (and if desired to form the basis of the memorandum to Michael Kennealy).

• Massport’s long-standing practice, as a public agency, is to solicit bids for thedevelopment and direct long term lease of its property, although not specifically required

by statute to engage in a competitive bid process. (When Massport did not engage in a

competitive bid process for a Seaport development parcel, the State Auditor stated in a2002 Independent State Auditors Report that “there are no circumstances that we can

envision where a public agency such as Massport, could justify awarding a no-bid real

estate development contract”.)

• At a minimum, Massport would, in accordance with its Trust Agreement (furtherdescribed below) and its public mission, determine the property’s fair market value. A

fair market value determination may not relieve Massport of a competitive bid obligationin the eyes of independent state oversight agencies and/or other interested parties. (A fairmarket value determination did not persuade the State Auditor in 2002.)

• Massport’s Enabling Act, Chapter 456 of the Acts of 1956, as amended, provides that

Massport may lease its Port Properties (Parcels A-2, H, D-2 and D-3 and WTC Avenue

Parcel are considered Port Properties under the Enabling Act) if Massport’s Board

determines that the property is no longer needed for its original maritime/industrial use.

• Massport’s Trust Agreement dated as of August 1, 1978, as supplemented and amended, between the Authority and U.S. Bank, National Association, as trustee, governs

Massport’s relationship with its bondholders and generally provides that Massport willnot enter into any contract or take any action that might impair or diminish the rights ofthe trustee or the bondholders. This section may need to be further reviewed based on the

specific terms of the proposed transaction, however, evidence of fair market value is

generally sufficient to satisfy this constraint.

• In order to comply with the grant assurances included in each federal grant agreement

under the Airport Improvement Program, Massport requires its tenants to limit the height

of structures constructed on Massportproperty so as not to constitute an obstruction to airnavigation under 14 CFR Part 77. (See Grant Assurance No. 21 – Compatible Land Use.)

•

Any long term lease is subject to the approval of Massport’s board.




To: Doolin, James



Ok thanks

Mike Kennealy




Monday?) Jim

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953




Mike Kennealy



<[email protected]>



<[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James"




<[email protected]>









Mike Kennealy




access code .


Mike



team this weekend and into Monday to advance the Project Plum work. As you know, we presented a proposal to Plum








pushing).






















project?












discuss.








All the best,

Mike



Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]







Next steps and needs.

________________________________________ From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



Cc: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


More what?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 6, 2015, at 9:34 PM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)


>> Yes, Steve and I talked. More soon.

> ________________________________________

> From: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



> Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>

> Did you connect?

>


>

>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 12:50 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)<[email protected]> wrote:

>>

>> Should/can we do a call tonight?

>> Thx.

>>


>>

>>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:53 AM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


>>>

>>> We need to get the tax exempt question answered.

>>>


>>>

>>>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)


>>>>

>>>> From today's call - MassWorks is most flexible, allowing for private



utilizing some form of I-Cubed. I am working up a list of

questions/points about the policy issues around utilizing more MassWorks,





>>>> ________________________________________

>>>> From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)

>>>> Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 8:03 AM


>>>> Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>>>> Subject: Re: Project Plum

>>>>>>>> Thanks for the info.

>>>> I'll be on the road then, so I'm iffy about joining.

>>>> In any case, look forward to an update.

>>>>


>>>>

>>>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> 10am. Just sent info.

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>

>>>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:21 AM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


.US>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Please let me know when today's call is and I will try to join you.

>>>>


>>>>



ate.MA.US>> wrote:>>>>

>>>> Discussed in concept on call and just emailed Jim D.

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>

>>>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


MA.US>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Did you ask massport to help with the marketing materials? They have

a marketing department. I asked Jen to make that request.

>>>>

>>>> Sent from my iPhone>>>>



ate.ma.us>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Steve, it was a productive call discussing the various ways


maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks and

I are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re: MassWorks and Jen needs to







>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>

>>>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 2:26 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


.US>> wrote:>>>>

>>>> Not sure that I will be able to make, but I would like an update.

>>>>

>>>> Will you be scheduling a call tomorrow?

>>>> I can do after 5 pm.

>>>>


>>>>

>>>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Call info

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>>

>>>> Begin forwarded message:

>>>>

>>>> From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"


ate.MA.US>>

>>>> Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM EST

>>>> To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"


ate.MA.US>>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)"<[email protected]<mailto:Jennifer.F.Sullivan@MassM


<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)"






.US>>

>>>> Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"




>>>> Subject: RE: Project Plum

>>>>

>>>> It looks like we have folks available for a call at 4:30pm today.


>>>>

>>>> access code .

>>>>

>>>> Looking forward to speaking then and discussing ideas from the group.

>>>>



>>>> Mike

>>>>

>>>> ________________________________


>>>> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PM

>>>> To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)



(EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)>>>> Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

>>>> Subject: Project Plum

>>>>

>>>> I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this





Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a significant internal meeting

in about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what involvement they want from


>>>>

>>>> As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission

at this point is to make this proposed infrastructure funding more

tangible for them – how could these dollars be used to the direct benefit

of their project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80

MM I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax incentives; they know

how to value the $20 MM but are unsure how to value the $80 MM, and we

need this proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM, especially

in the face of competition offering incentives that are much easier to

value.

>>>>

>>>> To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to


>>>>>>>>

>>>> 1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and


language that Jen provided for our letter. What other examples can we

provide, and in what level of detail, specifically ones that are as


>>>>

>>>>

>>>> 2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be




buildings.>>>>

>>>> Could I ask the following:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> 1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above

and develop specific ideas.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> 2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from

your organization that could help in this effort.



>>>>

>>>>

>>>> 3. Can we all get on a call tomorrow at 4:30pm to discuss.

>>>>

>>>> On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the

deliverables should look like and discuss specific examples. We can then

decide what other needs we may have, and plan the work over Sunday and

into Monday.

>>>>>>>> I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with



>>>>

>>>> All the best,

>>>> Mike

>>>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy

>>>> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth

>>>> The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

>>>> Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development

>>>> One Ashburton Place, Room 2101

>>>> Boston, MA 02108

>>>> Office: 617-788-3640

>>>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>>>

>>>>








Thanks for the info.I'll be on the road then, so I'm iffy about joining.In any case, look forward to an update.

Sent from my iPhone



Mike Kennealy



Sent from my iPhone



Mike Kennealy



Sent from my iPhone


Steve, it was a productive call



discussing the various ways I-Cubed/MassWorks could be utilized to their benefit on our sites while maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks and I are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re:

MassWorks and Jen needs to consult outside counsel on some I-Cubed matters. Will reconvene larger group after Jen has what she needs. Goal is to develop very specific scenarios on use of funds on our sites. Jay is back and was on call and may have more to add.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 2:26 PM,

Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:


Will you be scheduling a call tomorrow?I can do after 5 pm.

Sent from my iPhone


Call info

Mike Kennealy


From:



"Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Date: December

5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM EST

To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>,

"Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)"

<[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Ash,

Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>

Subject:



RE: Project

Plum

It looks

like we have folks available

for a call at 4:30pm today.


.

Looking forward to speaking then and discussing ideas

from the group.

Mike


Sent:

Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PM

To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)



([email protected]); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks




I

am

emailing

a

group

of

people

that

I hope

can

work

as

a

team

this

weekend

and

into

Monday

to

advance

the

Project

Plum

work.

As



you

know,

we

presented

a

proposal

to Plum

that

relies

heavily

on

I-

Cubed

and

Massworks

funding,

and we

also

suggested

some

sites.

The

good

news

from

today

is

that

we

are

very

much

in

the

game

here,

and the

company

will

be

visiting

Boston

on

Wednesday



to

look

at

sites,

with

a

significant internal

meeting

in

about

10

days.

(Note

–

not

clear

yet what

involvement

they

want

from

us

on

Wednesday,

possibly

none

though

of

course

we

are

pushing).

As

Steve

and

Sec. Lepore

and

I

just

discussed,

we

think

our



mission

at

this

point

is

to

make this

proposed

infrastructure

funding

more

tangible

for

them

–

how

could these

dollars

be

used

to

the

direct

benefit

of

their

project?

Said

differently,

our

~$100

MM

dollar

proposal

was

$80

MM I-

Cubed/MassWorks

and

$20

MM

local

property

tax



incentives;

they

know

how

to

value

the $20

MM

but

are

unsure

how

to

value

the

$80

MM, and

we

need

this

proposal

to

look

a

lot

closer

to

$100

MM

than

$20

MM,

especially

in

the

face

of competition

offering

incentives

that

are

much

easier

to



value.

To

that

end,

there

are two

deliverables

that

we

would

like

to

send

to

the

company by

noon

on

Monday:

1.

A

list/discussion

of

historical examples

of

I-

Cubed

and

MassWorks

projects.

I

have

attached

a

draft

memo

from

Erica

and

the

language



that

Jen

provided

for

our

letter.

What other

examples

can

we

provide,

and

in

what

level

of

detail, specifically

ones

that

are

as

analogous

as

possible

to

their

project?

2.

Specific

examples

of

how

I-

Cubed

and

MassWorks

could

be

deployed

at

the

MCCA

and



Massport

sites.

I

have

attached

information

about those

sites.

No

site

or

building

has

been

ruled

out,

but initial

guidance

from

Plum’s

location

advisor

was

to

focus

on

the

sites

vs.

the

buildings.

Could

I

ask

the

following:

1.

Could

folks

start

giving

consideration



to

#1

and

#2

above

and

develop specific

ideas.

2.

Could

you

please

also

suggest

(if applicable)

others

from

your

organization

that

could

help

in

this

effort.

3.

Can

we

all

get

on

a

call

tomorrow at

4:30pm

to

discuss.

On

the

call



tomorrow,

I

would

like

to

review

what we

think

the

deliverables

should

look

like

and

discuss

specific

examples.We

can

then

decide

what

other

needs

we

may

have,

and

plan

the

work

over

Sunday

and

into

Monday.

I hope

all

of

that

makes

sense

and,

as



always,

please

call

with

questions.

Please

respond as

soon

as

you

can

with

respect

to

your

availability

tomorrow at

4:30pm.

All

the

best,

Mike

Mike

Kennealy

Assistant

Secretary

for

Business

Growth

The

Commonwealth

of

Massachusetts

Executive

Office of

Housing

&

Economic

Development

One

Ashburton

Place,



Room

2101

Boston,

MA

02108

Office:

617-788-

3640

Cell:

617-

634-

4762

[email protected]









Mike Kennealy



Sent from my iPhone




Mike Kennealy



Sent from my iPhone


Steve, it was a productive call discussing the various ways I-Cubed/MassWorks could be utilized to their benefit on our sites while maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks and I are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re: MassWorks and Jen needs to consult outside counsel on some I-Cubed matters. Will reconvene larger group after Jen has what she needs. Goal is to develop very



specific scenarios on use of funds on our sites. Jay is back and was on call and may have more to add.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 2:26 PM, Kadish, Steven

(GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:


Will you be scheduling a call tomorrow?

I can do after 5 pm.

Sent from my iPhone


Call info

Mike Kennealy


From:

"Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Date:

December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM ESTTo:



"Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F.

(ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks

(EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Cc:

"Ash, Jay (EOHED)"

< [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>

Subject:

RE: Project

Plum




.

Looking forward to

speaking then and discussing ideas from the group.

Mike

From:

Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PMTo: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected]); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica

(EOHED)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Subject: Project



Plum

I am

emailing

a

group

of

people

that I

hope

can

work

as a

team

this

weekend

and

into Monday

to

advance

the

Project

Plum

work.

As you

know,

we presented

a

proposal

to

Plum

that

relies

heavily

on I-

Cubed and

Massworks

funding,

and we

also

suggested

some

sites.



The

good

news

from

today

is that

we are very

much

in the

game

here,

and

the

company

will be

visiting Boston

on

Wednesday

to look

at

sites,

with a

significant

internal

meeting

in

about

10

days.

(Note

– not

clear

yet

what

involvement

they

want

from

us on

Wednesday,

possibly

none

though



of

course

we are

pushing).

As

Steve and

Sec.

Lepore

and I

just

discussed,

we

think

our

mission at this

point is

to

make

this

proposed

infrastructure

funding

more

tangible

for

them –

how

could

these

dollars

be

used

to the

direct

benefit

of their

project?

Said

differently,

our

~$100

MM



dollar

proposal

was

$80

MM I-

Cubed/MassWorks

and $20

MM

local

property

tax

incentives;

they

know

how to

value the

$20

MM

but are

unsure

how to

value

the

$80

MM,

and we

need

this

proposal

to look

a lot

closer

to

$100

MM

than

$20

MM,

especially

in the

face of

competition

offering



incentives

that

are

much

easier

to

value.

To that

end,

there

are

two

deliverables

that

we

would like to

send

to the

company

by

noon

on

Monday:

1.

A

list/discussion

of

historical

examples

of

I-

Cubed

and

MassWorks projects.

I

have

attached

a

draft

memo

from



Erica

and

the

language

that

Jen

provided for

our

letter.

What

other

examples

can

we

provide,

and in

what

level

of

detail,

specifically

ones

that

are

as

analogous

as

possible

to

their

project?

2.

Specific

examples of

how

I-

Cubed

and

MassWorks

could

be



deployed

at

the

MCCA

and

Massport

sites.I

have

attached

information

about

those

sites.

No

site

or building

has

been

ruled

out,

but

initial

guidance

from

Plum’s

location

advisor

was

to

focus

on

the

sites

vs.

the

buildings.

Could I

ask the

following:

1.

Could



folks

start

giving

consideration

to

#1

and #2

above

and

develop

specific

ideas.

2.

Could

you please

also

suggest

(if

applicable)

others

from

your

organization

that could

help

in

this

effort.

3.

Can

we

all

get

on

a

call

tomorrow

at

4:30pm



to

discuss.

On the

call

tomorrow,

I would like to

review

what

we

think

the

deliverables

should

look

like and

discuss

specific

examples.

We

can

then

decide

what

other

needs

we

may

have,

and

plan

the

work

over

Sunday

and

into

Monday.

I hope

all of

that

makes



sense

and, as

always,

please

call

with

questions.Please

respond

as

soon

as you

can

with

respect

to your

availability tomorrow

at

4:30pm.

All the

best,

Mike

Mike

Kennealy

Assistant

Secretary

for

Business

Growth

The

Commonwealth

of

Massachusetts

Executive

Office

of

Housing

&

Economic

Development

One

Ashburton



Place,

Room

2101

Boston,

MA

02108

Office:617-

788-

3640

Cell:

617-

634-

4762

[email protected]




To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)




Steve and I will talk, and then we'll figure out if we need a phone call.

________________________________________




Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


Should/can we do a call tonight?

Thx.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:53 AM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)<[email protected]> wrote:

>

> We need to get the tax exempt question answered.

>


>

>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 11:45 AM, Ash, Jay (EOHED)


>>

>> From today's call - MassWorks is most flexible, allowing for private



utilizing some form of I-Cubed. I am working up a list of questions/points about the policy issues around utilizing more MassWorks,



>> ________________________________________


>> Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 8:03 AM


>> Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>> Subject: Re: Project Plum

>>

>> Thanks for the info.

>> I'll be on the road then, so I'm iffy about joining.

>> In any case, look forward to an update.

>>


>>

>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>>

>> 10am. Just sent info.

>>



>> Mike Kennealy

>>

>> On Dec 6, 2015, at 7:21 AM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


.US>> wrote:

>>

>> Please let me know when today's call is and I will try to join you.

>>

>> Sent from my iPhone>>

>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:19 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>>

>> Discussed in concept on call and just emailed Jim D.

>>

>> Mike Kennealy

>>

>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


MA.US>> wrote:

>>

>> Did you ask massport to help with the marketing materials? They have a

marketing department. I asked Jen to make that request.

>>


>>

>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 6:26 PM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


ate.ma.us>> wrote:

>>

>> Steve, it was a productive call discussing the various ways


maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks andI are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re: MassWorks and Jen needs to





>>

>> Mike Kennealy

>>

>> On Dec 5, 2015, at 2:26 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV)


.US>> wrote:

>>

>> Not sure that I will be able to make, but I would like an update.>>

>> Will you be scheduling a call tomorrow?

>> I can do after 5 pm.

>>


>>



ate.MA.US>> wrote:

>>



>> Call info

>>

>> Mike Kennealy

>>

>> Begin forwarded message:

>>

>> From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"


ate.MA.US>>>> Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM EST

>> To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)"


ate.MA.US>>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)"



<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)"






.US>>

>> Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"




MA.US>>

>> Subject: RE: Project Plum

>>

>> It looks like we have folks available for a call at 4:30pm today.


>>

>> access code

>>>> Looking forward to speaking then and discussing ideas from the group.

>>

>> Mike

>>

>> ________________________________


>> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PM

>> To: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF)




>> Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

>> Subject: Project Plum>>

>> I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this





Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a significant internal meeting

in about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what involvement they want from


>>



>> As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission at

this point is to make this proposed infrastructure funding more tangible

for them – how could these dollars be used to the direct benefit of their

project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80 MM

I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax incentives; they know how

to value the $20 MM but are unsure how to value the $80 MM, and we need

this proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM, especially in

the face of competition offering incentives that are much easier to value.

>>>> To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to


>>

>>

>> 1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and


language that Jen provided for our letter. What other examples can we

provide, and in what level of detail, specifically ones that are as


>>

>>

>> 2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be




buildings.

>>

>> Could I ask the following:

>>

>>

>> 1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above and


>>

>>

>> 2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from your organization that could help in this effort.

>>

>>

>> 3. Can we all get on a call tomorrow at 4:30pm to discuss.

>>

>> On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the


decide what other needs we may have, and plan the work over Sunday and

into Monday.

>>

>> I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with


availability tomorrow at 4:30pm.>>

>> All the best,

>> Mike

>>

>> Mike Kennealy

>> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth

>> The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

>> Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development

>> One Ashburton Place, Room 2101

>> Boston, MA 02108



>> Office: 617-788-3640

>> Cell: 617-634-4762

>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

>>

>>




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Doolin, James; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)

Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Kadish, Steven (GOV)



If you are joining the 10am please use this number instead (previous number can only accommodate limited number of callers)

Mike Kennealy


Same number tomorrow please 10am Jay, Mike, Ricks, Erica, others if interested and available. Whole group to reconvene when Jen has feedback from outside counsel.

Mike Kennealy



access code .


Mike

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PMTo: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected]); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)


I am emailing a group of people that I hope can work as a team this

weekend and into Monday to advance the Project Plum work. As you

know, we presented a proposal to Plum that relies heavily on I-Cubed and

Massworks funding, and we also suggested some sites. The good news

from today is that we are very much in the game here, and the company

will be visiting Boston on Wednesday to look at sites, with a significant

internal meeting in about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what



involvement they want from us on Wednesday, possibly none though of

course we are pushing).

As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed, we think our mission at this

point is to make this proposed infrastructure funding more tangible for

them – how could these dollars be used to the direct benefit of their

project? Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal was $80 MM I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20 MM local property tax incentives; they know

how to value the $20 MM but are unsure how to value the $80 MM, and

we need this proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than $20 MM,

especially in the face of competition offering incentives that are much

easier to value.

To that end, there are two deliverables that we would like to send to the

company by noon on Monday:

1. A list/discussion of historical examples of I-Cubed and MassWorks projects. I have attached a draft memo from Erica and the

language that Jen provided for our letter. What other examples

can we provide, and in what level of detail, specifically ones that

are as analogous as possible to their project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be

deployed at the MCCA and Massport sites. I have attached

information about those sites. No site or building has been ruled

out, but initial guidance from Plum’s location advisor was to focus



1. Could folks start giving consideration to #1 and #2 above and


2. Could you please also suggest (if applicable) others from your

organization that could help in this effort.


On the call tomorrow, I would like to review what we think the


decide what other needs we may have, and plan the work over Sunday

and into Monday.

I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with questions.

Please respond as soon as you can with respect to your availability



tomorrow at 4:30pm.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy




Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]









Sent from my iPhone



Mike Kennealy




Sent from my iPhone


Steve, it was a productive call discussing the various ways I-Cubed/MassWorks could be utilized to their benefit on our sites while maintaining public benefit and other statute requirements. Jay, Ricks and I are speaking tomorrow AM in more detail re: MassWorks and Jen needs to consult outside counsel on some I-Cubed matters. Will reconvene larger group after Jen has what she needs. Goal is to develop very specific scenarios on use of funds on our sites. Jay is back and was on call and may have more to add.

Mike Kennealy






Sent from my iPhone



Call info

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>,

"Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>,

"Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)"



<[email protected]>

Subject: RE:

Project Plum



Mike


I am emailing a

group of people that

I hope can work as a

team this weekend

and into Monday to

advance the Project

Plum work. As you

know, we presented

a proposal to Plum

that relies heavily

on I-Cubed and

Massworks funding,

and we also

suggested some



sites. The good

news from today is

that we are very

much in the game

here, and the

company will be

visiting Boston on Wednesday to look

at sites, with a

significant internal

meeting in about 10

days. (Note – not

clear yet what

involvement they

want from us on

Wednesday,

possibly none though of course we

are pushing).

As Steve and Sec.

Lepore and I just

discussed, we think

our mission at this

point is to make this

proposed

infrastructure

funding more

tangible for them –

how could these

dollars be used to

the direct benefit of

their project? Said

differently, our

~$100 MM dollar

proposal was $80

MM I-

Cubed/MassWorks

and $20 MM local

property tax

incentives; they

know how to value

the $20 MM but are

unsure how to value

the $80 MM, and



we need this

proposal to look a

lot closer to $100

MM than $20 MM,

especially in the

face of competition

offering incentives that are much easier

to value.

To that end, there

are two deliverables

that we would like

to send to the

company by noon

on Monday:

1. A

list/discussion

of historical

examples of

I-Cubed and

MassWorks

projects. I

have

attached a

draft memo

from Erica

and the

language

that Jen

provided for

our letter.

What other

examples

can we

provide, and

in what level

of detail,

specifically

ones that

are as

analogous

as possible

to their



project?

2. Specific

examples of

how I-Cubed

and

MassWorks could be

deployed at

the MCCA

and

Massport

sites. I have

attached

information

about those

sites. No site or

building has

been ruled

out, but

initial

guidance

from Plum’s

location

advisor was

to focus on

the sites vs.

the

buildings.

Could I ask the

following:

1. Could folks

start giving

consideration

to #1 and #2

above and

develop

specific

ideas.

2. Could you

please also



suggest (if

applicable)

others from

your

organization

that could

help in this effort.

3. Can we all

get on a call

tomorrow at

4:30pm to

discuss.

On the call

tomorrow, I would like to review what

we think the

deliverables should

look like and discuss

specific examples.

We can then decide

what other needs

we may have, and

plan the work over

Sunday and into

Monday.

I hope all of that

makes sense and, as

always, please call

with questions.

Please respond as

soon as you can

with respect to your

availability

tomorrow at

4:30pm.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy

Assistant Secretary



for Business Growth

The Commonwealth

of Massachusetts

Executive Office of

Housing & Economic

Development


Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-

3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]










To: Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)

Cc: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)



Thanks! Nothing needed in advance.

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:23 PM, Kreuter, Erica (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes. I will be on the call tomorrow. Sorry I missed today's call, let me know if there is anything you need from me in advance of tomorrow's call.

Thanks

Erica Kreuter

Director, MassWorks Infrastructure Program


One Ashburton Place, Suite 2101 | Boston, MA 02108

Office: (617)788-3631 | Email:[email protected]

www.mass.gov/mpro | @massworks

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:21 PM, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]> wrote:

No problem. Can you join 10am tomorrow

Mike Kennealy

On Dec 5, 2015, at 5:02 PM, Kreuter, Erica (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Mike,

I tried joining the conference line, but I was not able to

join because the line had been maxed out.

Thanks,

Erica

Erica Kreuter

Director, MassWorks Infrastructure Program




One Ashburton Place, Suite 2101 | Boston, MA 02108

Office: (617)788-3631 | Email:[email protected]

www.mass.gov/mpro | @massworks

On Dec 5, 2015, at 8:08 AM, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]> wrote:


access code .


Mike


I am emailing a group of people that I hope can

work as a team this weekend and into Monday

to advance the Project Plum work. As you

know, we presented a proposal to Plum that relies heavily on I-Cubed and Massworks

funding, and we also suggested some sites.

The good news from today is that we are very

much in the game here, and the company will

be visiting Boston on Wednesday to look at

sites, with a significant internal meeting in

about 10 days. (Note – not clear yet what

involvement they want from us on

Wednesday, possibly none though of course

we are pushing).

As Steve and Sec. Lepore and I just discussed,

we think our mission at this point is to make

this proposed infrastructure funding more

tangible for them – how could these dollars be

used to the direct benefit of their project?

Said differently, our ~$100 MM dollar proposal

was $80 MM I-Cubed/MassWorks and $20



MM local property tax incentives; they know

how to value the $20 MM but are unsure how

to value the $80 MM, and we need this

proposal to look a lot closer to $100 MM than

$20 MM, especially in the face of competition

offering incentives that are much easier to

value.

To that end, there are two deliverables that we

would like to send to the company by noon on

Monday:

1. A list/discussion of historical examples

of I-Cubed and MassWorks projects. I

have attached a draft memo from

Erica and the language that Jen

provided for our letter. What other examples can we provide, and in what

level of detail, specifically ones that are

as analogous as possible to their

project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and

MassWorks could be deployed at the

MCCA and Massport sites. I have

attached information about those

sites. No site or building has been

ruled out, but initial guidance from

Plum’s location advisor was to focus on

the sites vs. the buildings.


1. Could folks start giving consideration

to #1 and #2 above and develop

specific ideas.

2. Could you please also suggest (if

applicable) others from your

organization that could help in this

effort.

3. Can we all get on a call tomorrow at

4:30pm to discuss.



On the call tomorrow, I would like to review

what we think the deliverables should look like

and discuss specific examples. We can then

decide what other needs we may have, and

plan the work over Sunday and into Monday.

I hope all of that makes sense and, as always, please call with questions. Please respond as

soon as you can with respect to your


All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy


The Commonwealth of MassachusettsExecutive Office of Housing & Economic

Development


Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ross, Robert (ANF)

Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



Sure

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Ross, Robert (ANF) <[email protected]>

Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)


<[email protected]>


Can we get on a call now?

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 1:03 PMTo: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ross, Robert (ANF)Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Subject: RE: Project Plum

We are increasing the MassWorks number to $40 million.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762





To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Ross, Robert (ANF)

<[email protected]>


<[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF) <[email protected]>


•

Tax credits under the Economic Development Incentive Program (“EDIP”) up to

ten percent of the qualifying investment in a certified project [orapproximately

$20-30million], to be available over a period of five years. [where does the 5 year

limit come from?]

• Up to $32M in grants under the MassWorks program. [Is this $32M an estimate

of how much qualifying infrastructure they would need? Could it be increased if

expended over a period of years, if cap were available to do so?]

• A local tax incentive with a value of $20M over multiple years.

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 10:59 AMTo: Ross, Robert (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Subject: Project Plum

Bob and Jennifer

Thank you for your assistance.

Ricks




To: Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Ross, Robert (ANF)

Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



Attachments: Plum memo Nov 30.docx

FYI – this is the format I suggest using for the cover memo. We would therefore be submitting 3

items today:

-

This memo, with language from the City and language from DEP inserted when available; I

am adding MassWorks language now. Awaiting guidance from BRA now on construction

cost/sf; this will drive the calculation of the likely EDIP award which I will then express on a

per job basis too.

- Ricks’ memo

- Application materials and other info on IBM and Liberty Mutual

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Ross, Robert (ANF)

<[email protected]>


<[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


<[email protected]>


Thanks, I am reviewing now.

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 10:59 AMTo: Ross, Robert (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)Cc: Povich, Lon (GOV); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)Subject: Project Plum

Bob and Jennifer



Thank you for your assistance.

Ricks



MEMORANDUM

TO: Amy Eisenstadt, State Tax Counsel, General Electric Company

FROM: Mike Kennealy, Assistant Secretary for Business Growth, Commonwealth of

Massachusetts

John Barros, Chief of Economic Development, City of Boston

DATE: November 30, 2015

RE: Project Plum State and City tax incentives

Amy, we are pleased to provide to you today the following:

-

Summary of anticipated incentives (below)

- Memo summarizing statutory authority, application process, and other information with

respect to State incentive programs.

- Application materials, minutes, and resolutions for the IBM and Liberty Mutual EDIP

awards.

We will make a full submission of our proposal to Ann Klee tomorrow including suggested sites

and other benefits. As currently contemplated, our incentive package would include the

following:

Economic Development Incentive Program (EDIP) tax incentives

MassWorks funding

Local property tax abatement

Environmental remediation funds



I-Cubed

The State and City are still prepared to invest $50 million through the State’s Infrastructure

Investment Incentive (I-Cubed) program for construction of a parking facility and the

foundation for a high rise above the garage as detailed in our proposal dated November 21.

Note – based on statutory restrictions we would utilize either I-Cubed or a combination of EDIP

and MassWorks.

The total incentive package we are proposing therefore is $ ___ to $ ___




To: Pham, Nam (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)




Nam,

- We don’t need the budget

- We really need the information on Liberty Mutual and IBM ASAP

- Whatever can be refundable will be refundable; there will be no special legislation

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>;

Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>

Cc: Pham, Nam (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED) <[email protected]>


I have asked Anamarie to review our existing projections of EDIP awards to determine what we may have available. In the past, there was one year that the Secretary gave more than the cap. So if needs be, there is precedent.

In short, we can do it, just not much refundable.

A special legislation would make more possible.


-------- Original message --------From: "Cosco, Jonathan (SEA)" < [email protected]>Date: 11/29/2015 5:04 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Pham, Nam (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Project Plum

Thanks Ricks. I assume you will send this to Lon and whomever else needs to see it this evening? Or if you want

me to forward it please let me know.

Jon ________________________________________



To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Cc: '[email protected]'


Jon

Ricks





To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Cc: '[email protected]'; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)


Here is a first draft.

Haven’t even had a chance to read

through yet for typos.

___________________________________________

Jonathan M. Cosco





Boston, MA 02114

617-788-3628



Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 11:38 AM

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD)



___________________________________________

Jonathan M. Cosco





Boston, MA 02114

617-788-3628




To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Forgot to attach document - here it is.

________________________________



To: Milano, Peter (MOBD); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION

Mike -- I

Ricks

From: Milano, Peter (MOBD)


To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Hi all,

Mike, you have summed the call up well. I may be simply rephrasing a few items, but they asked additionally:



* Can Massworks be used for building renovations to publically owned building?

* What if they choose a privately owned building? How will this affect incentive offer?

* Co. seeking a MOU prior to application process for EDIP and Massworks.

* We need to provide the Liberty Mutual and IBM deals for their review. (I do believe the EDIP team can provide this info Monday morning.) I will be sure to

gather this info.

Regards,

Peter

Peter Milano

Senior Director, Business Development

Massachusetts Office of Business Development

(978) 970-1193


Building 5

Lawrence, MA 01843

www.mass.gov/mobd<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-

3A__www.mass.gov_mobd&d=BQMFAw&c=wgu6hzw1MOrcVMSMqu8IcS59mhBvl1Fc7tKn_Em0PVg&r=Yuk4lmTMoPibjekLWCuQqezcVefoEgXmdWWA-

8DeSYI&m=9CSSqQXeHq44CDtozlaS0Pt2WwgJnIfyjxb0VjkL04c&s=FGuVe0QV5bTJjIF2NWtcMHweGkIa7C1iL0SY8rGege8&e=>

This communication and any communication incorporated herein, including attachments, may be subject to public disclosure as a “public record,” as defined by

M. G. L. c. 4, § 7, and subject to public inspection, examination and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10. Any communication with this agency whether in

response to this communication or otherwise may itself be subject to public inspection and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10, unless protected by statutory

exemption.



To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Milano, Peter (MOBD)

< [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Folks,

As Jon and Peter know from our call yesterday, we are facing an urgent and close deadline on Project Plum. We will need to pull all materials together for our

offer by 12pm on Monday. There are a number of components of the offer, but the items most relevant for the folks on this email relate to EDIP and MassWorks.

Specifically what we need are:

1. The language of the statute of each program or a summary thereof (Ricks, Jon).

u

- Confirmation of what portion of the award can be refundable. My understanding is that we could by statute do $1 MM of a JCP and $5 MM of EEP, and then for

an award of $9.6 MM per year for 5 years, this would mean $3.6 MM would not be refundable.

- Confirmation that we can do the up to $32 MM in MassWorks that we are offering, and

- Application process and requirements for each of EDIP and MassWorks This is all available on the MOBD and MW websites.

- For MassWorks, and this will likely be in the statute,

2. What was in the public record for the Liberty Mutual deal which we discussed as an example. I think we should provide:

- Press releases - Peter has sent me Boston's but we need anything from HED (Adrian)

- Application (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)

- EACC minutes (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)

- Anything else in the public domain (Adrian)



With respect to the “public record”, most of the documentation related to these projects are “public records” whether previously released or not. The question will

be what you can find in the time available as opposed to what is “public”.

Jon and Peter - please let me know if I have overlooked anything from our call yesterday.

If folks could let me know very soon when all of this could be ready that would be much appreciated - I

have a call with the Governor's office and various Secretaries tomorrow at noon; I have said that we would be responsible for this info and would like to be able to

provide an update then.

Thanks,

Mike




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)



I'm on

________________________________________



To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Can we dial back in here at 1:45pm?

access code

________________________________________


Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 1:27 PMTo: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


Can we round up again quickly?





Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: Re: Project Plum

Ok

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 29, 2015, at 10:46 AM, Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


>

> Number below

> PIN

>

> This is with Kadish, Cabinet.

>

> ________________________________________

> From: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 11:44 AM



>

> Yes, same call-in info or a different line?

>



>



> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 11:36 AM

> To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


>

> Guys, can one or both of you join the 12pm call?

>> PIN

>

> ________________________________________

> From: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)




>

> Mike, I have been out of town but back this evening. I'll be coming

into the office tomorrow AM

>

> Jon

> ________________________________________



> To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Milano, Peter

(MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)


>

> Folks,

>

> As Jon and Peter know from our call yesterday, we are facing an urgentand close deadline on Project Plum. We will need to pull all materials

together for our offer by 12pm on Monday. There are a number of

components of the offer, but the items most relevant for the folks on this

email relate to EDIP and MassWorks. Specifically what we need are:

>

> 1. The language of the statute of each program or a summary thereof

(Ricks, Jon).

> - Confirmation of what portion of the award can be refundable. My

understanding is that we could by statute do $1 MM of a JCP and $5 MM of EEP, and then for an award of $9.6 MM per year for 5 years, this would

mean $3.6 MM would not be refundable.

> - Confirmation that we can do the up to $32 MM in MassWorks that we are

offering, and .

> - Application process and requirements for each of EDIP and MassWorks

> - For MassWorks, and this will likely be in the statute,

>



>

> 2. What was in the public record for the Liberty Mutual deal which we

discussed as an example. I think we should provide:

> - Press releases - Peter has sent me Boston's but we need anything fromHED (Adrian)

> - Application (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this

early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)

> - EACC minutes (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do

this early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)

> - Anything else in the public domain (Adrian)

>

> Jon and Peter - please let me know if I have overlooked anything from

our call yesterday.

If folks could let me know very soon when all of this could be

ready that would be much appreciated - I have a call with the Governor's

office and various Secretaries tomorrow at noon; I have said that we would

be responsible for this info and would like to be able to provide an

update then.

>

> Thanks,

> Mike





Cc: Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



Yes but not sure when yet. Will send you update later.

Mike Kennealy




Sent from my iPhone


Call info

Mike Kennealy


From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Date: December 5, 2015 at 8:07:26 AM ESTTo: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)" <[email protected]>, "Doolin, James" <[email protected]>, "Garrity, Rob (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>, "Lepore, Kristen (ANF)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Project Plum




access code .


Mike



team this weekend and into Monday to advance the Project Plum work. As you know, we presented a proposal to Plum








pushing).






















project?












discuss.








All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]









Number below

PIN

This is with Kadish, Cabinet.

________________________________________



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)


Yes, same call-in info or a different line?

-----Original Message-----From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)




Guys, can one or both of you join the 12pm call?

PIN

________________________________________



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Project Plum

Mike, I have been out of town but back this evening. I'll be coming into

the office tomorrow AM

Jon

________________________________________



To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD);

Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)


Folks,

As Jon and Peter know from our call yesterday, we are facing an urgent and

close deadline on Project Plum. We will need to pull all materials

together for our offer by 12pm on Monday. There are a number of

components of the offer, but the items most relevant for the folks on this



email relate to EDIP and MassWorks. Specifically what we need are:

1. The language of the statute of each program or a summary thereof

(Ricks, Jon).

- Confirmation of what portion of the award can be refundable. Myunderstanding is that we could by statute do $1 MM of a JCP and $5 MM of

EEP, and then for an award of $9.6 MM per year for 5 years, this would

mean $3.6 MM would not be refundable.

- Confirmation that we can do the up to $32 MM in MassWorks that we are

offering, and .

- Application process and requirements for each of EDIP and MassWorks


2. What was in the public record for the Liberty Mutual deal which we

discussed as an example. I think we should provide:

- Press releases - Peter has sent me Boston's but we need anything from

HED (Adrian)

- Application (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this

early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)

- EACC minutes (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this

early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)- Anything else in the public domain (Adrian)

Jon and Peter - please let me know if I have overlooked anything from our

call yesterday.

If folks could let me know very soon when all of this could be

ready that would be much appreciated - I have a call with the Governor's

office and various Secretaries tomorrow at noon; I have said that we would

be responsible for this info and would like to be able to provide an

update then.

Thanks,

Mike





Cc: "[email protected]"



Attachments: Project Plum - Chart of Second Offer.docx

Forgot to attach document - here it is.

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 7:53 PMTo: Milano, Peter (MOBD); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)Cc: '[email protected]'Subject: RE: Project Plum


Ricks



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Servetnick, Adrian

(EOHED)Cc: '[email protected]'


Hi all,

Mike, you have summed the call up well. I may be simply rephrasing a few items, but

they asked additionally:

Can Massworks be used for building renovations to publically owned building?

What if they choose a privately owned building? How will this affect incentive

offer?



Co. seeking a MOU prior to application process for EDIP and Massworks.

We need to provide the Liberty Mutual and IBM deals for their review. (I do

believe the EDIP team can provide this info Monday morning.) I will be sure to

gather this info.

Regards,

Peter

Peter MilanoSenior Director, Business Development


(978) 970-1193


Building 5

Lawrence, MA 01843

www.mass.gov/mobd

This communication and any communication incorporated herein, including attachments, may be subject to public

disclosure as a “public record,” as defined by M. G. L. c. 4, § 7, and subject to public inspection, examination and

copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10. Any communication with this agency whether in response to this

communication or otherwise may itself be subject to public inspection and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10,

unless protected by statutory exemption.



To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Milano, Peter (MOBD)


<[email protected]>Subject: Project Plum

Folks,

As Jon and Peter know from our call yesterday, we are facing an urgent and close deadline on Project Plum. We will need to pull all materials together for our offer by 12pm on Monday. There are a number of components of the offer, but the items most relevant for the folks on this email relate to EDIP and MassWorks. Specifically what we need are:

1. The language of the statute of each program or a summary thereof (Ricks, Jon).



- Confirmation of what portion of the award can be refundable. My understanding is that we could by statute do $1 MM of a JCP and $5 MM of EEP, and then for an award of $9.6 MM per year for 5 years,

this would mean $3.6 MM would not be refundable.

, - Confirmation that we can do the up to $32 MM in MassWorks that we are offering, and



2. What was in the public record for the Liberty Mutual deal which we discussed as an example. I think we should provide:- Press releases - Peter has sent me Boston's but we need anything from HED (Adrian)- Application (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)- EACC minutes (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this early enough on Monday?Can anybody reach her this weekend?)



If folks could let me know very soon when all of this could be ready that would be much appreciated - I have a call with the Governor's office and various Secretaries tomorrow at noon; I have said that we would be responsible for this info and would like to be able to provide an update then.

Thanks,Mike



Program Benefit Assumptions/Comments

City property tax relief Up to $20m at $1m per year (20

year benefit)

Assumes a ___,000 s.f. building

State Investment Tax Credit Up to $48m at $9.6m per year

(5 year benefit)

Assumes a payroll of $130m

Massworks Infrastructure Grant Up to $32m in 1 year or splitinto 2 (up to a 2 year benefit) Provides for publicinfrastructure costs on a

reimbursement basis

State Training Fund $1m – the maximum award –

one time

Routine application process

Permitting Ombudsman No cost to GE Combination of City and State

officials to facilitate permitting

Concierge Services No cost to GE City and State partnership to

provide assistance on a range of

employee needs, like RMV

services.

Ferry Service Assistance TBD based upon site selection.

Funding may be secured

through Ferry Boat Discretionary

Grant Program.

Corporate Jet Services To be negotiated with Massport Massport has pledged

assistance, preferring for jets to

be based at Hanscom and

shuttled to Logan Airport, but is

willing to consider all services at

Logan Airport.

Boston Home Center “Live

Where You Work”Program

Provides what? Description

Innovation Center City to provide space at whatcost? Mass Life Science Center

or other to provide capital

funding at approximately $5m.

John determining ifMassChallenge might run the

space. This would be a “outside

the box” benefit to have a fully

fit out innovation space for GE

to operate. MLSC or other

grants could be used for the

capital funding.

Site 1 – Boston’s Court Street –

160k s.f. building in the heart of

downtown.

Free Rent for ___ years MassWorks would be utilized to


Would City charge no propertytaxes or is it the City’s intential

to assess the building and issue

a tax bill?

Site 2 – MA DOT District 6 –

adjacent to South Station on

Kneeland Street – 104k s.f. with

___% rent for ___ years MassWorks would be utilized to



the building and charge



sufficient land for additional

space.

property taxes, but that should

be confirmed.

Site 3 – multiple Convention

Center properties

___% land lease for____ years MassWorks would need to be






be confirmed.

Site 4 – multiple Massport sites ___% land lease for____ years MassWorks would need to be






be confirmed. Each of the sites

has hundreds of thousands of

additional build-out potential.Massport may wish to lease an

entire site and have the

developer build the GE building,

which could help reduce the

cost of the land lease.

Site 5 – City’s 6 Tide Street – it’s

snow farm.

____% land lease for ___years MassWorks would need to be





property taxes, but that shouldbe confirmed.

Site 6 – Private development or

building purchase by GE on a

site they prefer.

A review of how MassWorks

would provide assistance would

be required.

The above could be provided to GE upon filling in all the blanks. John is in charge with Mike to provide

support. John should provide Mike with final draft and Mike be in touch with Steve for the Gov’s

signoff.

Questions/Comments:

1. Blanks should be filled in so that GE has a full picture of the various offers. (John is the

point/Mike provides support)

2. John is updating sites and getting them to GE. GE recognizes a need to narrow down sites, but it

is unrealistic for them to pick one without a significant vetting.



3. What is City’s intention regarding property taxes if a public site is selected, especially if the site

selected is the City’s building on Court Street? Ordinarily, a public site with a private tenant

would be assessed property tax. Would be acceptable either way, taxing or not, and, as noted

below, not taxing it could be a deal closer. (John)

4. Can MassWorks funding be utilized for public building fit-out/renovations? (Mike)

5.

How could MassWorks provide financial benefit on private new construction? For example,

could it be used to purchase the land and then lease the land back to the private developer?

(Mike)

6.

What are the heliport options for each of the sites? (John)

7.

Fill in the blanks on State & Quasi lease expectations and determine what a typical value is for

the full lease so that the benefit of the reduction can be calculated for/by GE. (Steve should

ask the question of Elizabeth at Massport and for the MA DOT building should determine with

a consult with Stephanie, Kristen could be responsible for Mass Convention – provide Mike

with comments so he can communicate with John)

8.

John/Mike, you should contact Brent at CBRE to help determine the value of the land,

buildings and benefits. CBRE should be able to provide very good estimates on such matters

as the value of land leases and the cost of office space.

9. Contact MassChallenge to develop a proposal on the Innovation Center (John). For the benefit

of others, we are thinking of offering up an Innovation Center as a benefit for their use, using

City space and State funding to support it. The success of such a space depends on its

management, so John will have an informal discussion with the MassChallenge people about

doing so.

10. John/Mike, get a tax call with GE to review the benefits.

11. Thoughts on State ITC benefit. No way could we provide entire ITC in one year. Typically it is a

tax credit a company receives on their income. In this case, it could be a “refundable credit”

which means that it would actually be a cash benefit.

12. Thoughts on the State MassWorks benefit. MassWorks need to be spent in the year it is

designated. It is possible, if construction/renovations spans two fiscal years that we would

prefer to make a multi-year award to not eat up all of our funding in one particular year. It is a

reimbursement and has not “refundable credit” option. I am assuming we can use it to repair a

public building, and I believe it can be granted to both a city or a state agency. Not as clear how

we get the benefit to the company if a private entity is building them a building.

13. Check with former Massport exec to figure if there are any agency benefits that might be

brought to the package (Kristen).

14. Deal Closers could include up to $25m in state environmental dollars to help clean-up and put

into productive use GE sites in Lynn or elsewhere, and/or City tax dollars might be totally

forgiven in City or State buildings (and maybe more MassWorks dollars could go into the

building renovations in return).

15. In my absence, Mike is our lead, with Carolyn providing support. I will check in with Mike

directly each morning and in afternoon, connections permitting. Anyone needing me should

communicate need and issues to Mike. Steve should have final say on anything from our end.






Date: Saturday, October 31, 2015 10:13:48 AM

Since neither the Pats nor the Redskins are playing tomorrow, how about 2?

From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2015 09:54 AMTo: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)Subject: RE: Project Plum

Pick the time.


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 10/31/2015 9:14 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Project Plum

That would be great. Could you do something tomorrow afternoon any time?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 8:33 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA) <[email protected]> wrote:

>

> Want to do something over this weekend?

> ________________________________________

> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]

> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 3:23 PM



>

> Jay – Would you have time for a quick call? Thanks.

>

> ark

>

> Ann R. Klee

> Vice President

> Global Operations – Environment, Health & Safety

>

> GE



> 203-373-3198 (o)

> 2 (m)

>








Let's use this for a 10am call - access code and I have attached a memo from Jay that summarizes what we are thinking;

based on that, if work can start before 10am all the better. At this point, I am very concerned about refundable vs. non-refundable per my comment below. Speak with you all at 10am, and thank you for your attention to this important project. Mike


Mike --

Ricks



To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Hi all,

Mike, you have summed the call up well. I may be simply rephrasing a few items, but

they asked additionally:

Can Massworks be used for building renovations to publically owned building?

What if they choose a privately owned building? How will this affect incentive

offer?



Co. seeking a MOU prior to application process for EDIP and Massworks.

We need to provide the Liberty Mutual and IBM deals for their review. (I do

believe the EDIP team can provide this info Monday morning.) I will be sure to

gather this info.

Regards,

Peter

Peter Milano

Senior Director, Business Development


(978) 970-1193


Building 5

Lawrence, MA 01843

www.mass.gov/mobd







Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 5:30 PMTo: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

<[email protected]>; Milano, Peter (MOBD)


<[email protected]>


Folks,



As Jon and Peter know from our call yesterday, we are facing an urgent and close deadline on Project Plum. We will need to pull all materials together for our offer by 12pm on Monday. There are a number of components of the offer, but the items most relevant for the folks on this email relate to EDIP and MassWorks. Specifically what we need are: 1. The language of the statute of each program or a summary thereof (Ricks, Jon).

-

- Confirmation of what portion of the award can be refundable. My understanding is that we could by statute do $1 MM of a JCP and $5 MM of EEP, and then for an award of $9.6 MM per year for 5 years, this would mean $3.6 MM would not be refundable.

- Confirmation that we can do the up to $32 MM in MassWorks that we are offering, and


- For MassWorks, and this will likely be in the statute, what is considered public infrastructure.

2. What was in the public record for the Liberty Mutual deal which we discussed as an example. I think

we should provide:- Press releases - Peter has sent me Boston's but we need anything from HED (Adrian)- Application (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this early enough on Monday? Can anybody reach her this weekend?)- EACC minutes (Jon has already asked Ann Marie to pull - can she do this early enough on Monday?Can anybody reach her this weekend?)





If folks could let me know very soon when all of this could be ready that would be much appreciated - I have a call with the Governor's office and various Secretaries tomorrow at noon; I

have said that we would be responsible for this info and would like to be able to provide an update then. Thanks,Mike




To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)



Heard you are looking at sites this week in Boston. (Kind of) Sorry I won't see you, I'm getting on a cruise ship now. I've been and will attempt to stay in contact with Mike Kennealy

from my office on our re-stated proposal. I'm excited about it and appreciative of the opportunity to share it. In particular, I'm excited about the Boston School Department on Court Street. I'll look forward to hearing what you think. Cheers from the Caribbean!


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 11/01/2015 12:44 PM (GMT-04:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>


Can we move to 3 by any chance? What's best # to reach you? Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 31, 2015, at 12:11 PM, Ash, Jay (SEA) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Lol and confirmed



From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Date: 10/31/2015 10:57 AM (GMT-05:00)

To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>


I'd say don't count your chickens, but I fear you may be right . . . Talk to you tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>

> Great - looking forward to it.

>

> Yes, too bad there's no Pats game tomorrow - it makes the wait for 8-0 all that much longer ;)!

> ________________________________________

> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]

> Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2015 10:13 AM



>



> Since neither the Pats nor the Redskins are playing tomorrow, how about 2?

>

> From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]




>

> Pick the time.

>

>

>

> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

>

>

> -------- Original message --------

> From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

> Date: 10/31/2015 9:14 AM (GMT-05:00)

> To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>


>

> That would be great. Could you do something tomorrow afternoon any time?

>


>

>> On Oct 31, 2015, at 8:33 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>>

>> Want to do something over this weekend?

>> ________________________________________

>> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]

>> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 3:23 PM

>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>> Subject: Project Plum

>>

>> Jay – Would you have time for a quick call? Thanks.>>

>> ark

>>

>> Ann R. Klee

>> Vice President

>> Global Operations – Environment, Health & Safety

>>

>> GE

>> 3135 Easton Turnpike

>> Fairfield, CT 06824

>> 203-373-3198 (o)

>> (m)

>>






Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 11:22:25 AM

Hi Amy, best times for me there are 12 - 3pm on 11/16 or before 11:30am on 11/18. And of course if you'd like to speak this week just let me know, thanks.

Mike

From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 3:37 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Subject: FW: Project Plum

Any of the times listed for John work for you?

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Crystal Torman [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 3:33 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: John Barros; Lauren Jones; [email protected]: Re: Project Plum

Hi Amy,

John is happy to make himself available any time on the 16th, 17th, and the morning of the 18th. Though he'll be traveling the afternoon of the 18th-20th. A call during that time may be a bit more difficult to coordinate, but not impossible. Glad to be as flexible as possible.

Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Warmly,Crystal






Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 2:24:00 PM

Hi Amy, how would tomorrow work for a call? Please let me know some times if that works. Joint

call is fine if that’s what you’d prefer. Looking forward to speaking!

Best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Hi, Mike. Ann Klee gave me your name to contact for a preliminary discussion of project parameters. Do you have any time the next couple of days for a call?

Also, I am going to reach out to the City of Boston contact. Would you be OK with doing a joint

State/City call?

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)







yes

________________________________________

From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]




Can we move to 3 by any chance? What's best # to reach you? Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 31, 2015, at 12:11 PM, Ash, Jay (SEA)


Lol and confirmed



From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)"


Date: 10/31/2015 10:57 AM (GMT-05:00)

To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>


I'd say don't count your chickens, but I fear you may be right . . . Talk

to you tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA)


>


>

> Yes, too bad there's no Pats game tomorrow - it makes the wait for 8-0

all that much longer ;)!

> ________________________________________

> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

[[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]




>



> Since neither the Pats nor the Redskins are playing tomorrow, how about

2?

>





>

> Pick the time.

>

>

>

> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

>

>


> From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)"


> Date: 10/31/2015 9:14 AM (GMT-05:00)

> To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)"



>


>


>

>> On Oct 31, 2015, at 8:33 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA)


>>


>> ________________________________________

>> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

[[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]>> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 3:23 PM

>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED)

>> Subject: Project Plum

>>

>> Jay – Would you have time for a quick call? Thanks.

>>

>> ark

>>

>> Ann R. Klee

>> Vice President


>>

>> GE>> 3135 Easton Turnpike


>> 203-373-3198 (o)

>> (m)

>>






Date: Saturday, October 31, 2015 12:11:42 PM

Lol and confirmed


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 10/31/2015 10:57 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Project Plum

I'd say don't count your chickens, but I fear you may be right . . . Talk to you tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA) <[email protected]> wrote:

>


>

> Yes, too bad there's no Pats game tomorrow - it makes the wait for 8-0 all that much longer ;)!

> ________________________________________

> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]



> Subject: Re: Project Plum>

> Since neither the Pats nor the Redskins are playing tomorrow, how about 2?

>





>

> Pick the time.

>

>

>

> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone>

>


> From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>

> Date: 10/31/2015 9:14 AM (GMT-05:00)

> To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>


>


>




>

>> On Oct 31, 2015, at 8:33 AM, Ash, Jay (SEA) <[email protected]> wrote:

>>


>> ________________________________________

>> From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]

>> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 3:23 PM

>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED)>> Subject: Project Plum

>>

>> Jay – Would you have time for a quick call? Thanks.

>>

>> ark

>>

>> Ann R. Klee

>> Vice President


>>

>> GE

>> 3135 Easton Turnpike


>> 203-373-3198 (o)

>> (m)

>>




To: Milano, Peter (MOBD)


Date: Friday, September 25, 2015 2:26:00 PM

Great news – thanks Peter!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 9:07 AM

To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); '[email protected]'; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


Jay, and all,

I just got off the phone with Jim McGaugh. Here is what he had to tell me regarding

Project Plum:

• Joe Tucci met with Jeffrey Immelt a day or two after our meeting with the

project team. Immelt said that going into their tour their largest concern was

housing costs, but that concern was completely covered by us on our tour.

This issue is completely addressed.

•

The Committee has tours planned for Chicago and Atlanta, but there will not

be the type of engagement there was in Boston. In fact, they are actually

pulling in local executives from those areas to attend the tours.

•

We have “won the emotional battle” … now we need to discuss price in the

next month or so.

•

As for packaging of the potential incentives, Project Plum has not accepted

their MLSC award. As such, two things may be able to happen here.

o

1st, these ~500 jobs can be used with any potential Project Plum award

o 2nd, any potential award may actually include MLSC award (s)

• Project executives would like to meet with us regarding MLSC. They are not

happy with a) the award they received from MLSC and b) their treatment from

MLSC

• Apparently the Wall Street Journal published an article yesterday that was not

very good for Chicago. Jim said this was not a coincidence.



I told Jim we would work to schedule a meeting in the next couple weeks with him and the Marlborough based executive regarding the MLSC issue.

Regards,

Peter

Peter Milano

Senior Regional Director


(978) 970-1193


Building 5

Lawrence, MA 01843

www.mass.gov/mobd






Exe mp ti

Exemption GExemption GExemption G




To: "Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)"



Attachments: State4 NDA Final.docxState4 NDA Redline.docx

Steve

Attached is a clean copy and a redline against the prior draft. I'll work on signatures on my end tomorrow.

Ricks


From: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]




Great. All set. If you email me clean, execution copy I will get it signed and back to you. Thanks!!

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 20, 2015, at 4:53 PM, Frazier, Ricks (SEA) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

wrote:

Steve

We can agree to your proposed language. Anything else?

Ricks

From: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 10:17 AM



How about:

The Agencies shall reasonably coordinate with the Company, on the decision to issue any and the timing and

content of any press release or public announcement or statement with respect to the transactions contemplated in

connection with the Project, and shall not make such press release or public announcement without undertaking

such coordination and considering the Company’s comments, if any, on the decision to issue a press release, the

text of such press release or announcement.

From: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)

Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 8:24 AM

To: 'Frazier, Ricks (SEA)'


Great. Question regarding press releases: can we include some language that gives us a bit more comfort that you

will not issue press releases without our consent? It is key to our process that we maintain confidential the

discussions as they are progressing, which is why we include not only the “no press release w/o consent provision”

but also the provision that indicates that the fact of our discussions is itself considered confidential info. Thanks for



your thoughts.

The Agencies shall reasonably coordinate with the Company, on both the timing and content, of any press release or

public announcement or statement with respect to the transactions contemplated in connection with the Project, and

shall not make such press release or public announcement without undertaking such coordination and considering

the Company’s comments, if any, on the text of such press release or announcement

From: Frazier, Ricks (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]


To: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)


I agree that it reads that way. As a practical matter, if you apply for benefits, a different exemption would apply that

covers the deliberative process up to the point where a decision is made regarding the application.

Ricks





Thanks. The way it reads to me is that only at such time as we formally apply for benefits does the info that we

submit (and info that we previously submitted with respect to the project) become subject to the Public Records

Law (i.e. not exempt). Correct?


Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 2:19 PM



The exemption to the Public Records Law that authorizes MA agencies to enter NDAs has an exception to the effect

that any documents submitted as part if an application for state benefits are not exempt. So we are drawing a

distinction between this discussion and any application that may follow.

The second part, referring to info that may be required in the future, comes from monitoring obligations related to

certain types of our incentive tax credits.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 18, 2015, at 10:39 AM, "Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)"


First glance looks fine, with a question regarding the following provision. Is there a legal requirement that drives it?

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if the Company desires to apply for benefits from the

Commonwealth in connection with the Project, the Company understands it will be required to submit additional information pertaining to the Project, and if it receives such tax credits or other benefits, the Company may be

required to report information pertaining to the construction and operation of the Project. Notwithstanding any

other provision of this Agreement, information provided by the Company in connection with such an application

and reporting, even if previously constituting Confidential Information under this Agreement, shall not be subject to

this Agreement.







Steve

Here are our thoughts on the document. I’ll be around all next week, so hopefully we can finalize it and get on to

substantive discussions.

Ricks





Good speaking with you Ricks. I am attaching the draft/form NDA as we discussed. Thanks in advance for your

comments.




Cc: Frazier, Ricks (SEA)


Yes, sorry, was in and out last week on a quasi-vacation!

I’ve attached Ricks Frazier to this email. Ricks is our general counsel and will work with you on this. He’ll follow

up soon.

Thanks,

Jay





Hello Jay, just following up to see if there is a good time for us to discuss the NDA and begin the process.



To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>Cc: Meyers, Steven (GE, Corporate)


Jay,

Following up on our conversation, we would like to invite the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to come to

Fairfield, CT at end of July to engage in a discussion about the potential relocation of the GE headquarters to the

Boston area. As we discussed, I appreciate your including a representative from the City on your team.

This is a significant decision for GE. While we want to move expeditiously, we also want to be thoughtful in our



process and are considering a number of factors including business and political climate, impact on our employees,

financial incentives, recruitment, quality of life and several other issues of importance.

Our exploratory team has done some initial due diligence/screening. We are now in our second phase where we are

inviting a small group of States to come in and engage in a more detailed discussion.

We will be scheduling those discussions for July 28-30 and later this week will send you a list of issues/questions

that we would like you to address, but also want you to feel free to present whatever information that you think

would be relevant to our decision. The meeting will be set for 2 hours. The members of the GE exploratory team

will participate in the meeting.

It is very important to us that these discussions, and even the fact that we are engaged in discussions with New York

remain confidential. As is customary, we will ask that you sign an NDA which is attached. Steve Meyers on our

team will be available to discuss any questions related to the NDA. He can be reached at

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; 203-373-3030.

I will be your GE point of contact on the exploratory team. My contact information is 203-373-3198,

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. I will send the template of issues that we would like you to address

within the next day and am also available any time to answer any questions you may have. Additionally, Karen

Kulish will be reaching out to schedule the meeting and will assist with logistics. Karen’s contact info is,

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> and 203-373-2575. If you would give me your scheduler’s

contact information, Karen can reach out and work through the details.

We appreciate Governor Baker’s interest in having GE relocate to Massachusetts and look forward to our meeting at

the end of July.

<image001.png>

Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE3135 Easton Turnpike

Fairfield, CT 06824

203-373-3198 (o)

(m)Exemption




This Confidentiality Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into this ___ day of July,

2015, by the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development and the Office of

Business Development (the “Agencies”), both instrumentalities of the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts (the “Commonwealth”) for the benefit of Project Plum, with General Electric

Company a New York corporation (the “Company”).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, the Company may voluntarily provide information of a non-public nature for use by

the Agencies and their agents, employees and representatives (collectively, “Representatives”) inconnection with discussions regarding the potential location of Company’s international


WHEREAS, in the course of its discussions with the Company relating to the Project, theAgencies may receive certain private and confidential proprietary information provided for

discussion concerning the Project from or about the Company, including but not limited to

investment information, project plans and requirements, technical and business informationregarding business operations and affairs, financial data, sales and marketing information,

specifications, drawings, sketches, data, documentation, correspondence or any other private or

proprietary ideas or information (“Confidential Information”); and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to establish terms governing the disclosures of Confidential

Information that will be made by the Company to the Agencies;



The Agencies shall, with respect to any Confidential Information (a) hold the Confidential



Confidential Information only in connection with the Project; (d) reproduce the ConfidentialInformation only to the extent necessary in connection with the Project; and (e) restrict

disclosure of the Confidential Information only to Representatives whose duties justify the need

to know the Confidential Information in connection with the Project and who are advised as tothe confidential and proprietary nature of the Confidential Information and are required to

comply with the provisions of this Agreement. The obligations of the Agencies to maintain the

confidentiality of the Confidential Information it has received under this Agreement shall

continue for a period of one (1) year from the date of receipt of such Confidential Information.

The Agencies hereby acknowledge and agree that (a) the term “Confidential Information” as

used herein also includes: (i) the fact that the Confidential Information has been made available



to the Agencies; (ii) the fact that the Agencies are discussing the Project with the Company; and

(iii) any of the terms, conditions or other facts with respect to the Project or other related

transactions, including the status thereof; and (b) any Confidential Information supplied by theCompany prior to the execution of this Agreement shall be subject to the same treatment as the


The Agencies acknowledge that the Company agrees to provide the Confidential Information

voluntarily upon the Agencies’ promise to maintain its confidentiality and status as exempt from

disclosure to the extent authorized by applicable law, as determined by the Agencies in their sole

discretion, including state and federal Freedom of Information Acts, Open Door Law, PublicRecords Law and other related local, state, and federal laws and ordinances that may be

applicable.


apply to any Confidential Information which (a) is in the public domain (provided that such

information has not or does not come into the public domain as the result of a disclosure by the

Agencies); (b) is received by the Agencies on a non-confidential basis from a source other thanthe Company (provided that such source is not bound by a confidentiality agreement with the

Company or another party); or (c) is required to be disclosed by operation of law, including but

not limited to pursuant to the State and Federal Freedom of Information Acts (provided that, promptly following receipt of a legal request and prior to making such disclosure, the Agencies

have notified the Company of such request so that the Company may take action to safeguard its

interests, and seek to preserve the confidentiality of the Confidential Information). The Agenciesshall reasonably cooperate with such efforts by the Company but shall retain discretion to

determine the scope and applicability of any exemption under the Public Records Law or other

applicable law requiring the disclosure or Confidential Information.

The Agencies shall reasonably coordinate with the Company, on the decision to issue, timing and

content, of any press release or public announcement or statement with respect to thetransactions contemplated in connection with the Project, and shall not make such press release

or public announcement without undertaking such coordination and considering the Company’s

comments, if any, on the decision to issue a press release or announcement and the text of such

press release or announcement.

The disclosure of Confidential Information shall not be construed to grant to the Agencies any

license, ownership or other proprietary interest in the Confidential Information. The Agenciesagree that they do not acquire any title, ownership, or other intellectual property right or license



Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if the Company desires to apply for

benefits from the Commonwealth in connection with the Project, the Company understands itwill be required to submit additional information pertaining to the Project, and if it receives such

tax credits or other benefits, the Company may be required to report information pertaining to the

construction and operation of the Project. Notwithstanding any other provision of this



Agreement, information provided by the Company in connection with such an application and

reporting, even if previously constituting Confidential Information under this Agreement, shall

not be subject to this Agreement.

Nothing in this Agreement will impose any obligation upon any Party to enter into any

discussions or negotiations with respect to the Project, or to take any other action not expresslyagreed to herein.

Within ten (10) days following the receipt of a written request, the Agencies shall deliver to the

Company all tangible materials containing or embodying the Confidential Information receivedfrom the Company along with any copies, reproductions, and summaries thereof, together with a

certificate executed by the Agencies certifying that all such materials in the Agencies’ possession

that are not public records have been delivered to the Company. That portion of the ConfidentialInformation which has been incorporated into analyses, compilations, comparisons, studies or

other documents prepared by the Agencies or their Representatives shall be held by the Agencies

and kept confidential as provided in this Agreement and shall not be used for any reason other

than in connection with the Project or shall be destroyed.

In the event any legal action is required to enforce this Agreement, each party shall bear its

representative attorney’s fees and costs.

The Agencies agree that their obligations hereunder are necessary and reasonable to protect the

Company and expressly agrees that monetary damages might be inadequate to compensate theCompany for any breach of any covenant or agreement set forth herein. The Agencies agree and

acknowledge that any such violation or threatened violation may cause irreparable injury to the

Company and that, if deemed appropriate by the court presiding over the matter, the Company(in addition to any other rights and remedies that may be available at law or in equity) may be

entitled to seek injunctive relief against the threatened breach of this Agreement or the

continuation of any such breach.

This Agreement shall be governed and interpreted under the laws of the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts, without regard to its choice of law provisions.


This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties hereto as to ConfidentialInformation and merges all prior discussions between them relating thereto. No amendment or

modification of this Agreement shall be valid or binding on the parties unless made in writing

and signed on behalf of each of the parties by their respective duly authorized officers orrepresentatives.

This Agreement may be executed by facsimile signature in any number of counterparts, all of

which taken together shall constitute one in the same instrument.


operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or





Executive Office of Housing and EconomicDevelopment General Electric Company

By: _________________________________

By: _________________________________


Title:

Office of Business Development

By: _________________________________ Name:

Title:

Title: Vice President, Global Operations –

Environment, Health and Safety




This Confidentiality Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into this ___ day of July,

_________, 2015___ , by the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development and the

Office of Business Development (the “Agencies”), both instrumentalities of the Commonwealthof Massachusetts (the “Commonwealth”) for the benefit of Project Plum, with General Electric

Company a New York corporation (the “Company”).

RECITALS

WHEREAS, the Company may voluntarily provide information of a non-public nature for use by

the Agencies and their agents, employees and representatives (collectively, “Representatives”) inconnection with discussions regarding the potential location of Company’s international


WHEREAS, in the course of its discussions with the Company relating to the Project, theAgencies may receive certain private and confidential proprietary information provided for

discussion concerning the Project from or about the Company, including but not limited to

investment information, project plans and requirements, technical and business informationregarding business operations and affairs, financial data, sales and marketing information,

specifications, drawings, sketches, data, documentation, correspondence or any other private or

proprietary ideas or information (“Confidential Information”); and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to establish terms governing the disclosures of Confidential

Information that will be made by the Company to the Agencies;



The Agencies shall, with respect to any Confidential Information (a) hold the Confidential



Confidential Information only in connection with the Project; (d) reproduce the ConfidentialInformation only to the extent necessary in connection with the Project; and (e) restrict

disclosure of the Confidential Information only to Representatives whose duties justify the need

to know the Confidential Information in connection with the Project and who are advised as tothe confidential and proprietary nature of the Confidential Information and are required to

comply with the provisions of this Agreement. The obligations of the Agencies to maintain the

confidentiality of the Confidential Information it has received under this Agreement shall

continue for a period of one (1) year from the date of receipt of such Confidential Information.

The Agencies hereby acknowledge and agree that (a) the term “Confidential Information” as

used herein also includes: (i) the fact that the Confidential Information has been made available



to the Agencies; (ii) the fact that the Agencies are discussing the Project with the Company; and

(iii) any of the terms, conditions or other facts with respect to the Project or other related

transactions, including the status thereof; and (b) any Confidential Information supplied by theCompany prior to the execution of this Agreement shall be subject to the same treatment as the


The Agencies acknowledge that the Company agrees to provide the Confidential Information

voluntarily upon the Agencies’ promise to maintain its confidentiality and status as exempt from

disclosure to the extent authorized by applicable law, as determined by the Agencies in their sole

discretion, including state and federal Freedom of Information Acts, Open Door Law, PublicRecords Law and other related local, state, and federal laws and ordinances that may be

applicable.


apply to any Confidential Information which (a) is in the public domain (provided that such

information has not or does not come into the public domain as the result of a disclosure by the

Agencies); (b) is received by the Agencies on a non-confidential basis from a source other thanthe Company (provided that such source is not bound by a confidentiality agreement with the

Company or another party); or (c) is required to be disclosed by operation of law, including but

not limited to pursuant to the State and Federal Freedom of Information Acts (provided that, promptly following receipt of a legal request and prior to making such disclosure, the Agencies

have notified the Company of such request so that the Company may take action to safeguard its

interests, and seek to preserve the confidentiality of the Confidential Information). The Agenciesshall reasonably cooperate with such efforts by the Company but shall retain discretion to

determine the scope and applicability of any exemption under the Public Records Law or other

applicable law requiring the disclosure or Confidential Information.

The Agencies shall reasonably coordinate with the Company, on both the decision to issue,

timing and content, of any press release or public announcement or statement with respect to thetransactions contemplated in connection with the Project, and shall not make such press release

or public announcement without undertaking such coordination and considering the Company’s

comments, if any, on the decision to issue a press release or announcement and the text of such

press release or announcement.

The disclosure of Confidential Information shall not be construed to grant to the Agencies any

license, ownership or other proprietary interest in the Confidential Information. The Agenciesagree that they do not acquire any title, ownership, or other intellectual property right or license



Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if the Company desires to apply for

benefits from the Commonwealth in connection with the Project, the Company understands itwill be required to submit additional information pertaining to the Project, and if it receives such

tax credits or other benefits, the Company may be required to report information pertaining to the

construction and operation of the Project. Notwithstanding any other provision of this



Agreement, information provided by the Company in connection with such an application and

reporting, even if previously constituting Confidential Information under this Agreement, shall

not be subject to this Agreement.

Nothing in this Agreement will impose any obligation upon any Party to enter into any

discussions or negotiations with respect to the Project, or to take any other action not expresslyagreed to herein.

Within ten (10) days following the receipt of a written request, the Agencies shall deliver to theCompany all tangible materials containing or embodying the Confidential Information received

from the Company along with any copies, reproductions, and summaries thereof, together with a

certificate executed by the Agencies certifying that all such materials in the Agencies’ possessionthat are not public records have been delivered to the Company. That portion of the Confidential

Information which has been incorporated into analyses, compilations, comparisons, studies or

other documents prepared by the Agencies or their Representatives shall be held by the Agencies

and kept confidential as provided in this Agreement and shall not be used for any reason otherthan in connection with the Project or shall be destroyed.

In the event any legal action is required to enforce this Agreement, each party shall bear itsrepresentative attorney’s fees and costs.

The Agencies agree that their obligations hereunder are necessary and reasonable to protect theCompany and expressly agrees that monetary damages might be inadequate to compensate the

Company for any breach of any covenant or agreement set forth herein. The Agencies agree and

acknowledge that any such violation or threatened violation may cause irreparable injury to theCompany and that, if deemed appropriate by the court presiding over the matter, the Company

(in addition to any other rights and remedies that may be available at law or in equity) may be

entitled to seek injunctive relief against the threatened breach of this Agreement or thecontinuation of any such breach.

This Agreement shall be governed and interpreted under the laws of the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts, without regard to its choice of law provisions.


This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties hereto as to Confidential

Information and merges all prior discussions between them relating thereto. No amendment or

modification of this Agreement shall be valid or binding on the parties unless made in writingand signed on behalf of each of the parties by their respective duly authorized officers or

representatives.

This Agreement may be executed by facsimile signature in any number of counterparts, all ofwhich taken together shall constitute one in the same instrument.




operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this Confidentiality

Agreement effective as of the date first written above.

Executive Office of Housing and Economic

Development


By: _________________________________By: _________________________________


Title:

Office of Business Development

By: _________________________________

Name:

Title:

Title: Vice President, Global Operations –Environment, Health and Safety




To: Nunnelly, Mark E.

Subject: RE: Project Plum: MA Thank you

Date: Monday, September 14, 2015 12:10:00 PM

And yes, it is exciting! Big tour with them tomorrow. Good lineup for

dinner including appearance by the Gov and Mayor and others.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 12:10 PM

To: 'Nunnelly, Mark E.'


6:30pm at Tresca in North End 233 Hanover St.

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: Nunnelly, Mark E. [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 11:34 PM


Subject: Re: Project Plum: MA Thank you

Terrific news that this is progressing!

I unfortunately have a dinner tomorrow night already schedule...I'm going

to see in the morning how difficult to change.

Assume in back bay 6pish?

Exciting

Mark





Tel: (617)626-2201



Fax:(617)626-2299

----- Original Message -----


[mailto:[email protected]]




Hi Mark, the Project Plum folks are coming to Boston next week - would you

be interested in joining us for dinner on Monday?

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED);

Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Go get em!


From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA)

[mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 2:36 PM

To: Ash, Jay (SEA); Kirk, Carolyn (SEA); Nunnelly, Mark E.; Pham, Nam

(SEA); Distefano, Maria G (SEA); Servetnick, Adrian (SEA)

Cc: McMorrow, Paul (SEA)





Best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]








Mike,



Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828


**********************************************************************



are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the

system manager at postmaster at dor.state.ma.us.

**********************************************************************







Hi Karen, here are the email addresses for our team - thanks!

Jay Ash - [email protected]

Carolyn Kirk - [email protected]

Mark Nunnelly - [email protected]

Mike Kennealy - [email protected]

Nam Pham - [email protected]

Maria DiStefano - [email protected]

Adrian Servetnick - [email protected]

________________________________________

From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]




Sure then I'll have it for another time. Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 7, 2015, at 2:27 PM, Kennealy, Michael (SEA)


>

> Thank you Karen! I will forward to others, though please let me know

if, per your email earlier yesterday, you would still like everybody's

email address.

>

> All the best,

> Mike>

>

> Mike Kennealy





> Boston, MA 02108

> Office: 617-788-3640

> Cell: 617-634-4762

> [email protected]

>


> From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]

> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 4:12 PM

> To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

> Subject: Project Plum: MA Thank you

>

> Mike,

>

> Please find attached a thank you letter from Ann Klee to the team.

Thank you for your assistance in forwarding to the others.



>

>

> Karen Kulish

> Executive Assistant to Ann Klee

> Global Operations - Environment, Health & Safety

> O: 203 373-2575

> C:

>




>

> GE Imagination at Work

>

>







Thank you Karen! I will forward to others, though please let me know if,

per your email earlier yesterday, you would still like everybody's emailaddress.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






Mike,



Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828







Date: Monday, September 14, 2015 2:02:00 PM

Will do - thanks!

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 1:40 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)


Mike

I tried to rearrange, but does look like it will work.

Good luck. This would be a home run.

Let me know if there is anything else I can do.

men




Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 12:11 PM



And yes, it is exciting! Big tour with them tomorrow. Good lineup for

dinner including appearance by the Gov and Mayor and others.

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 12:10 PM



To: 'Nunnelly, Mark E.'


6:30pm at Tresca in North End 233 Hanover St.

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 11:34 PM



Terrific news that this is progressing!

I unfortunately have a dinner tomorrow night already schedule...I'm going

to see in the morning how difficult to change.

Assume in back bay 6pish?

Exciting

Mark





Tel: (617)626-2201Fax:(617)626-2299

----- Original Message -----






Hi Mark, the Project Plum folks are coming to Boston next week - would you

be interested in joining us for dinner on Monday?





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED);

Pham, Nam (EOHED); Distefano, Maria (MOBD); Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)



Go get em!


From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA)



To: Ash, Jay (SEA); Kirk, Carolyn (SEA); Nunnelly, Mark E.; Pham, Nam

(SEA); Distefano, Maria G (SEA); Servetnick, Adrian (SEA)

Cc: McMorrow, Paul (SEA)





Best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy




Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: Kulish, Karen (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 4:12 PM



Mike,



Karen Kulish


Global Operations - Environment, Health & SafetyO: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828




**********************************************************************



are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the

system manager at postmaster at dor.state.ma.us.

**********************************************************************




To: Doolin, James

Cc: Morse, Elizabeth; McDonald, Catherine; DeTour, Michele



Anything in here that we shouldn’t send to the company? The thought is to forward this on when it

is ready.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]








statement. Jim

James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 10:25 AM

To: Doolin, JamesSubject: Re: Project Plum


Mike Kennealy





James P. Doolin



O 617-568-3102C 617-594-5953








Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Doolin, James [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 9:44 AM





Monday?) Jim

James P. Doolin

Chief Development OfficerMassachusetts Port Authority

O 617-568-3102

C 617-594-5953

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2015 8:17 PMTo: Doolin, James






Mike Kennealy



<[email protected]>








<[email protected]>







Mike Kennealy




access code


Mike

From: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 6:23 PMTo: Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected]); Doolin, James; Garrity, Rob (DOT); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Kreuter, Erica (EOHED)Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF)














pushing).




















project?

2. Specific examples of how I-Cubed and MassWorks could be deployed at the MCCA and Massport sites.




















All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





To: Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant); Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Cowan, Mo

Cc: John Barros; Woodruff, Brent @ Atlanta Peachtree; Morse, Elizabeth; jdoolin; Jennifer F. Sullivan (ANF) ([email protected]); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Proposal from Boston


Great, let’s do 5pm today. I have copied some of my colleagues from the state who will join and John (and I believe someone else) from the City will join too. Just please let us know the dial in

number. Looking forward to speaking, thanks.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant) [mailto:[email protected]]


To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>; Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)

<[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>;

Cowan, Mo <[email protected]>

Cc: John Barros <[email protected]>; Woodruff, Brent @ Atlanta Peachtree

([email protected]) <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Proposal from Boston

I am good for a call at 5 pm.

Brent Woodruff

404.504.5962



To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>; Kennealy, Michael (SEA) <[email protected]>; Cowan, Mo <[email protected]>

Cc: John Barros < [email protected]>; Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)

<[email protected]>


Yes – for the general questions, let’s keep trying for 5 tonight.

A call with Brent will be fine. I know his schedule is quite tight so I am leaving it to him.



Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:24 PMTo: Kennealy, Michael (SEA); Cowan, MoCc: John Barros; Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate); Woodruff, Brent (GE Global Operations, consultant)Subject: RE: Proposal from Boston

I’ll defer to Amy and Brent on the time; I’m assuming a call will be fine. Thanks Mike.


Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:23 PMTo: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Cowan, MoCc: John Barros; Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Subject: RE: Proposal from Boston

Thank you Ann –what would be a good time to meet?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]


To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Cowan, Mo

<[email protected]>

Cc: John Barros < [email protected]>; Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>


Thanks Mike. Our team has been reviewing the revised package and I know they will reach out to

your team if they haven’t done so already (which knowing them, I suspect they have). In the

meantime, it would be very helpful if we could set up a meeting as soon as possible between your

team (especially the Massport folks) and our CBRE partner, Brent Consultant, so that we can better

understand the Massport development piece. That’s obviously critical to the value of the overall



package and we need to be able to present the terms of the Boston proposal to our senior

leadership tomorrow COB.

Thanks for your help in making that happen.

ark

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 1:27 PMTo: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Cowan, MoCc: John BarrosSubject: RE: Proposal from Boston

Apologies – small typo corrected now (“hangar”). Please see attached.

Mike Kennealy




Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



To: Ann R. Klee ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; 'Cowan, Mo' <[email protected]>

Cc: 'John Barros' < [email protected]>

Subject: Proposal from Boston

Ann, Mo,

Please see the attached documents – we look forward to discussing.

All the best,

Mike

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108



Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Subject: RE: Re: GE / Jobs Plan


Info is consistent with what I am hearing. Yes, contacts would be helpful.

MTC is exactly the right place. We’ve been using them to do so and developing out the agenda and

relationship (need to talk about proposed 9C cuts to MTC which would greatly reduce their ability to

do so – I have a meeting request into Kristen Lepore for this purpose).

From:


To: Kadish, Steven (GOV); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Subject: Re: GE / Jobs Plan

Steve & Jay --

GE...

I had conversation last week with Israel Ruiz, who is the Provost at MIT. He said he could call Susan Hochberg - former President of MIT and Board member at GE - if that would be helpful to us. I said it would be, so he did. His thoughts coming out of that phone call are as follows... Key General Points Boston, MA is very much part of the finalist list per board meeting two weeks ago. Decision will be made very soon. List not disclosedThe decision is not going to be just financial. Logistics and innovation ecosystem very important.Gov. Cuomo is throwing everything on the table to sweeten the dealJeff’s style much closer to Governor Baker Key suggestion: Gov. Baker needs to engage very soon (ideally in person) with

Jeff

Key messages to be delivered

An exciting vision for Boston and the Commonwealth that is distinctive and beyond just life sciences that everybody knows. A future where bold ideas and disruptive technologies are invented.

- GE should not only be part of this future, but help us shape it together - GE’s transformation as a company (industrial internet) wants to be where things happen and the future is invented and they can shape it.- GE is no longer a financial company (no point being located in NY). A few GE



divisions have already declared MA to be their place.- Ask Jeff directly, what it would take for GE to be part of this exciting future? Sharing key data with Jeff

When people go around and meet top scientific or engineering people in the US and

around the world, more than 50% are from Boston and more than 2/3 have been educated in the greater Boston area (had no source for this).

-

Share the list of current direct international destinations from Logan, especially to South America and the East. List any upcoming ones.

------------------ He then suggested to me that I put the above into a powerpoint or a letter, and visit with Jeff Immelt sometime in early / mid - January.

In response to this, I called Bob White at Bain and asked him if he had data / a pitch deck / analytics in his shop on all of the above. Bob said he would check - but also said if we hadn't reached out to the folks at Harvard Business School to talk about their partnership in Allston with the Harvard Engineering School - and potentially MIT - we should, because he thinks that build out could be very interesting to GE. I agreed - and plan to reach out to the Dean of HBS today. I also reached out to Larry Renfro, the CEO of Optum ($80 billion division of United Healthcare), who lives in MA and has put a lot of money into building out their footprint here. He will get us whatever we need on why they are investing so heavily here, and told me they work very closely with GE on a number of projects.

Steve - I am going to have you serve as project manager for this briefing document, and will be connecting you with Bob and Larry. Let's try to have a draft of this ready by 1/4/16. Jobs Plan...

Here are my thoughts on the Jobs Plan: 1 - the regional clusters notion is less about what's in the actual bill, and more about how we would choose to use it if / when the legislature passes it. I think we should treat the what we put where question as an administrative decision, explain that what we are asking the legislature for are the tools to build out regional clusters, and not try to tie that idea directly into the legislation. 2 - the elements of this should be broad & flexible enough that they can be used strategically, and not necessarily targeted to a narrowly defined vertical. Who knows which one(s) will emerge over time as the ones we should make shared investments in.



3 – I would suggest the themes should be all about public / private partnerships and capacity building - sector building or human capital building. That said, I would line it up like this...

Skill Building -- Matching Capital Equipment Grants for Career & Technical Schools ($50-100 MM)

-- The Authority for these schools to create pathways to associate degrees and maybe apprenticeship programs. Community Building -- MassWorks ($350-500 MM)-- Site Assembly / State Land ($50-70 MM)-- TDI / Gateway Cities ($50-70 MM) – in my mind, this should all be public / private

partnerships and separated in some way from the other 3 categories-- Brownfields ($30-50 MM) Sector Development -- Mass. Tech Collaborative ($100 MM)-- Life Sciences Center ($100 MM)-- NNMI ($75-100 MM) Past that - let the legislature add the nooks and crannies that they like to add. Keep our proposal clean and simple, and let it rip. We can include Cyber, Robotics and

Advanced Manufacturing as potential sectors for development in the MTC stuff, and digital health and medical devices and big data can all be part of either the life sciences stuff or the MTC stuff. I do not think we should create another quasi - and would ask you Jay if MTC - vs. some other vehicle - is the right place to process innovative ideas we could partner with others on in the cyber, digital health, robotics and other stuff.

All for now. Charlie




To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD)

Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Giovino, Joey (MOBD)

Subject: RE: Requested Materials


See below.

AnnamarieKersten

EDIP Director


10 Park Plaza, Suite 3730

Boston, MA 02116

Phone: 617-973-8534

Fax: 617-973-8554

[email protected]








To: Kersten, Annamarie (MOBD); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Milano, Peter (MOBD)Cc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

Subject: RE: Requested Materials



Thank you!

___________________________________________Jonathan M. Cosco





Boston, MA 02114

617-788-3628

[email protected]



To: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Pham, Nam (EOHED); Milano, Peter

(MOBD)

Subject: Requested Materials

Joey is searching the files too. So far, we’ve found the following.

AnnamarieKersten

EDIP Director


10 Park Plaza, Suite 3730Boston, MA 02116

Phone: 617-973-8534

Fax: 617-973-8554

[email protected]




agency whether in response to this communication or otherwise may itself be subject to public inspection and copying pursuant to M. G. L. c. 66, § 10, unless protected by statutory exemption.





Subject: RE: Revised letter, Steve"s edits at 12:10 pm


Attachments: Project Plum Dec 8.sk.noon.docx MJK.docx

With the following edits attached - .

Barros signed off. Waiting for Jen's edits and final Massport deck.

Propose to send letter and deck to Ann and Mo then forward to group.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Subject: RE: Revised letter, Steve's edits at 12:10 pm

Steve, this looks great - a few edits I propose to make:

- I checked in with Lon

- Innovation Center - just a few words to refer back to 12/1 proposal- paragraph 5 - should it be "staff in the office of the . . . "

I will make whatever edits Jen has to your version and send back.

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]





Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)







<[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>;

Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>; jdoolin <[email protected]>;

Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

<[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Revised letter, Steve's edits at 12:10 pm

Please take a look at the attached.

Mike -- please send to John Barros.

All comments back to Mike Kennealy not later than 12:30 pm.

Thx.




To: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kadish, Steven (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF);

Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Ross, Robert (ANF); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED);

Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Elizabeth Morse; jdoolin; Povich, Lon

(GOV); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Subject: RE: Revised letter

New letter attached

Mike Kennealy





Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven (GOV)




<[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)<[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>; 'jdoolin' <[email protected]>;

Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

<[email protected]>


Thoughts on letter and process:

- Section 1 will change based on which scenario we are pursuing.



- Other sections remain the same regardless of scenario, though MLSC (and

Current) might move up.

- Need City to review; question is when. "Massport as partner" needs to

be approved by them (still have City-owned sites in the mix).

- Propose we send this with the Massport presentation. Question now on

whether to include MassWorks memo (attached) regardless of which scenario

we are pursuing.

- Specific information needs/questions:

1. Have we described Massport/role appropriately 2. Is the helipad

public 3. Need language on TMA 4. What we can do with Current 5.

Regardless of scenario, do we throw in some MLSC money.

Mike Kennealy





Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




To: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven (GOV)







Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>; jdoolin <[email protected]>;

Povich, Lon (GOV) <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)<[email protected]>

Subject: Revised letter

Please see attached. Working on scenarios #2 and #3. Information needs

are highlighted. Please send me edits directly or call vs. marking up

document given number of parties reviewing. The writing still a little

rough - working on that too.

Mike Kennealy





Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]



1

December 8, 2015

Ann R. Klee

Vice President




Fairfield, CT 06828

Dear Ms. Klee,

We are pleased to provide some additional thoughts on a partnership between General Electric,

the Commonwealth and the City. We again have endeavored to listen to your feedback and

accordingly have strengthened our proposal and added some additional elements:

1. Public support for your headquarters through a partnership with Massport: Our

December 1 proposal contemplated up to $80 million in public infrastructure improvements

financed by the state. We now propose that Massport be your development partner,

construct a building on a Massport site and, by discounting the construction cost by $80M,

arrive at substantial lease savings for GE. Massport also proposes to build a parkingstructure nearby, allowing GE the benefit of proximate parking. Further, Massport has

previously structured lease payments for certain projects that delay or reduce payments in

the early years of the lease while still achieving fair market value overall, and they expect to

work closely and creatively with you.

Massport has a mission to promote economic development and a record of success in

developing its extensive real estate portfolio (including in the Seaport District). Massport

has great experience working with City and state officials, federal regulators and private

parties and in dealing with security and public safety concerns. Attached please see the

specific sites and other information related to this Massport opportunity.

2. Corporate Jets and Helicopters: We understand the importance of immediate access to

your corporate fleet. We now propose:

Parking of one executive jet and one helicopter at Logan Airport for 24/7 access.

A hanger for executive aircraft at Hanscom Airport, with on-call service to Logan.

State financed construction of a new public helipad in Boston (one-site has FAA

approval; other site options can be reviewed.



2

3. Innovation Center – a premier talent pipeline: As presented on December 1, we propose

a $5M investment to launch an Innovation Center in your building or another location with

MassChallenge, an internationally renowned start-up accelerator. To advance this potential,

we propose to invite participation from Harvard, MIT, Northeastern, the UMass schools and

others, bringing together the best of our public and private universities and research

institutions. This partnership would allow you to collaborate with, and recruit, the world’smost talented students, engineers, scientists, programmers, MDs, and entrepreneurs.

4. Local property tax incentive: Same $20M as proposed before.

5. Coordinated Permi tting: Coordinated and streamlined permitting process by City and state

authorities and a permitting Ombudsman to assist in addressing any permitting issues. We

will dedicate staff in the office of the Secretary of Administration and Finance, supported by

the Governor’s Office. A similar dedication of staff will be provided by the Boston

Redevelopment Authority, supported by the Mayor’s Office.

6. GE’s Current: We are prepared to support the launch of your Current business here in

Boston with a grant of $5-10M over two years.

7. Improvements to Local Transportation:

Investment of public funds to purchase new vehicles and provide additional service to

the GE headquarters site as part of the Seaport Transportation Management Association

Up to $50 million of improvements through our I-Cubed program, including streetscapes,

water taxi, parking, utilities, public safety features and other public infrastructure

Up to $125 million in City and state financed improvements to streets, transit, bridges

and bikeways.

8. Workforce Training Fund: Same $1M as proposed before.

9. Concierge and housing service: As discussed in our December 1 proposal, a Concierge

team will be dedicated to easing the transition for GE and your employees, including home

buying assistance with Boston Home Center and Mass Housing.

We believe we are presenting to you the premier ecosystem to grow your business, an

exceptional place to live, substantial public investment in your project, and other amenities that

will make it as easy as possible for GE and your employees to move to and live in Boston. We

look forward to your response.

Sincerely,









Great thanks

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]


From: Povich, Lon (GOV)Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 12:43 PM


Subject: Re: Revised letter

Sent from my iPhone



>

>

>

> Mike Kennealy




> Office: 617-788-3640

> Cell: 617-634-4762

> [email protected]

>

>


> From: Povich, Lon (GOV)

> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 12:07 PM


> Subject: Re: Revised letter

>

>

>


>





>>

>>

. Steve making some edits and hopefully final

product going out by 12:30pm.

>>

>> Mike Kennealy

>> Assistant Secretary for Business Growth The Commonwealth of

>> Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development One

>> Ashburton Place, Room 2101 Boston, MA 02108

>> Office: 617-788-3640

>> Cell: 617-634-4762

>> [email protected]

>>

>>



>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 10:59 AM

>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven

>> (GOV) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)

>> <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF)

>> <[email protected]>; Ross, Robert (ANF)

>> <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

>> <[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

>> <[email protected]>; Tom Glynn <[email protected]>;

>> 'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>; 'jdoolin'

>> <[email protected]>; Povich, Lon (GOV)

>> <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>> <[email protected]>

>> Subject: RE: Revised letter

>>

>> New letter attached

>>

>>

>>>> Mike Kennealy




>> Office: 617-788-3640

>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>

>>




>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven>> (GOV) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



>> <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)

>> <[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


>> 'Elizabeth Morse' <[email protected]>; 'jdoolin'


>> <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob (DOT)

>> <[email protected]>



>> Subject: RE: Revised letter

>>

>> Thoughts on letter and process:

>>

>> - Section 1 will change based on which scenario we are pursuing.

>> - Other sections remain the same regardless of scenario, though MLSC

(and Current) might move up.

>> - Need City to review; question is when. "Massport as partner" needs

to be approved by them (still have City-owned sites in the mix).

>> - Propose we send this with the Massport presentation. Question now on

whether to include MassWorks memo (attached) regardless of which scenario

we are pursuing.

>> - Specific information needs/questions:

>>

>> 1. Have we described Massport/role appropriately 2. Is the helipad

public 3. Need language on TMA 4. What we can do with Current 5.

Regardless of scenario, do we throw in some MLSC money.

>>

>> Mike Kennealy




>> Office: 617-788-3640

>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>




>> To: Ash, Jay (EOHED) <[email protected]>; Kadish, Steven

>> (GOV) <[email protected]>; Lepore, Kristen (ANF)



>> <[email protected]>; Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)>> <[email protected]>; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


>> Elizabeth Morse <[email protected]>; jdoolin


>> <[email protected]>; Garrity, Rob

>> (DOT) <[email protected]>

>> Subject: Revised letter

>>

>> Please see attached. Working on scenarios #2 and #3. Information

needs are highlighted. Please send me edits directly or call vs. marking

up document given number of parties reviewing. The writing still a little

rough - working on that too.

>>>> Mike Kennealy




>> Office: 617-788-3640

>> Cell: 617-634-4762


>>

>>

>>



>> <Project Plum Dec 8 2.docx>




To: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

Subject: RE: Revised Package


Yes, thanks.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]

From: Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate) [mailto:[email protected]]




Mike, thanks. As I’m sure you heard yesterday, time is of the essence. Thanks for your help. Jim

From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 7:56 AMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)


Hi Amy, we are going to send over some additional thoughts by noon or 1pm. If time permits, I will

call you to discuss. I hope that works, thanks.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]






Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>; Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

< [email protected]>

Subject: Revised Package

I heard from Ann that a revised package would be sent sometime before noon tomorrow. I am

going to suggest we do a call in the morning before it’s officially approved for submission. This

would give you an opportunity for feedback in case some adjustments would make sense, as well as assist in keeping within the time constraints we are all working under.


Thanks.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)







I’d do the call with her. There is enough back and forth with a number of reps in our State House

meeting today that the generalities of the proposal is known by them anyway.




Subject: Fwd: Revised Package

Will call you to discuss response.

Mike Kennealy


From: "Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>


To: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Cc: "Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>, "Mcgaugh, James (GE

Corporate)" < [email protected]>


I heard from Ann that a revised package would be sent sometime before noon

tomorrow. I am going to suggest we do a call in the morning before it’s officially approved for submission. This would give you an opportunity for feedback in case

some adjustments would make sense, as well as assist in keeping within the time

constraints we are all working under.


Thanks.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)





Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate); Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)



Amy, just tried to reach you – could you call me?

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




Cc: Roberti, Scott (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]>; Mcgaugh, James (GE Corporate)

<[email protected]>


I heard from Ann that a revised package would be sent sometime before noon tomorrow. I am

going to suggest we do a call in the morning before it’s officially approved for submission. This

would give you an opportunity for feedback in case some adjustments would make sense, as well as assist in keeping within the time constraints we are all working under.


Thanks.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate); Ash, Jay (EOHED)

Bcc: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)

Subject: RE: schools

Date: Friday, January 15, 2016 7:07:14 AM

Good morning! We're happy out. In our internal discussions, Mintz agreed in offered to be the

point on this. Or do you want to have Matt do so. On my end, Mike will be the guy. Also, feel free to call on anything. If you have a list of things, let me know if you want to speak. I'd like to do that type of work over the phone for now.


-------- Original message --------From: "Klee, Ann (GE, Corporate)" <[email protected]>Date: 01/14/2016 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: schools

Jay – Now that the decision has been made, some of our senior executives are starting to look at

private schools for their kids. Is there someone in the State who can help with introductions to the

private schools in the area? Matt Cribbins (who you’ll remember was on the exploratory team and

was a HUGE Boston advocate) is heading up next week. Would be great to get some help, a point of

contact, etc. to get his kids into school in the fall. Thanks.

ark

Ann R. Klee

Vice President


GE


Fairfield, CT 06824

203-373-3198 (o)

(m)



From:


Cc: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

Subject: Re: Southfield

Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 10:03:51 AM

Great - the Ledger said something about a road project?

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 13, 2015, at 10:00 AM, Ash, Jay (EOHED) < [email protected]> wrote:

We are all in on this project. We have been very aggressive. I have spent considerable time as has staff on it. We included Southfield in our discussion with GE, for example. Stephanie is being very helpful on the infrastructure side. The developer, the house majority leader, and the towns are all pleased with our efforts.


-------- Original message --------From:Date: 08/13/2015 9:57 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>

Subject: Southfield

Got asked about this project when I was at the Quincy Patriot Ledger yesterday. Any thoughts or

updates?

Sent from my iPhone

GOV E-mail



From:

To: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)


Subject: Re: Southfield

Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 10:10:29 AM

Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 13, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) <[email protected]> wrote:

The “road” is an extension of an East West Parkway that the previous Administration

started to connect Route 3 on the east side of the base and Route 18 on the west side.

It does not currently connect to Route 18 because DOT was doing work on Route 18

that precluded that work. Route 18 is now done and we are working with the new

developer to finish the east-west connection by extending an existing road, Trotter Road, to make a full east-west connection. Money was included in our FY16 capital

budget for this project. Only hangup is the developer wants to do it as a design-build

project and we were not planning to use that methodology, which is usually only for

bigger/more expensive project (there is a statutory minimum on project cost for DOT

authority to use design-build and this project as a stand alone is below it). At the

request of the new developer, legal is now looking at whether we can amend the

contract for the East West Parkway project (which was design-build) to tag this piece

on.

Stephanie

From: Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 10:04 AMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Cc: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)Subject: Re: Southfield


Sent from my iPhone


We are all in on this project. We have been very aggressive. I have spent considerable time as has staff on it. We included Southfield in our discussion with GE, for example. Stephanie is being very helpful on the infrastructure side. The developer, the house majority leader, and the towns are all pleased with our efforts.

GOV EmailGOV Email




-------- Original message --------From:Date: 08/13/2015 9:57 AM (GMT-05:00)

To: "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: Southfield

Got asked about this project when I was at the Quincy Patriot Ledger yesterday. Any

thoughts or updates?

Sent from my iPhone

GOV E-mail



From: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)

To: Ash, Jay (SEA)

Subject: RE: Southfield


I will look into it but we weren’t carrying $5 million, we were only carrying about $2 million.

Stephanie

From: Ash, Jay (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 9:13 AMTo: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)Subject: RE: Southfield

I spoke with the developer about the roadway coming in at $9.8m (if I have the right number). He

suspects that included utility work, which is not required by them and will be located elsewhere on

site. He says the 25% drawings carried with it a $5.2m price tag, which was consistent with the

original estimate of $5m plus $1m in contingency. Is it possible that he is right and if we peel back

the utilities from your bid we get back down to the $5m range?

From: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 10:10 AM


Subject: RE: Southfield

The “road” is an extension of an East West Parkway that the previous Administration started to

connect Route 3 on the east side of the base and Route 18 on the west side. It does not currently

connect to Route 18 because DOT was doing work on Route 18 that precluded that work. Route 18

is now done and we are working with the new developer to finish the east-west connection by extending an existing road, Trotter Road, to make a full east-west connection. Money was included

in our FY16 capital budget for this project. Only hangup is the developer wants to do it as a design-

build project and we were not planning to use that methodology, which is usually only for

bigger/more expensive project (there is a statutory minimum on project cost for DOT authority to

use design-build and this project as a stand alone is below it). At the request of the new developer,

legal is now looking at whether we can amend the contract for the East West Parkway project

(which was design-build) to tag this piece on.

Stephanie

From: Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 10:04 AMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Cc: Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)Subject: Re: Southfield


Sent from my iPhone

GOV Email

GOV Email




We are all in on this project. We have been very aggressive. I have spent considerable time as has staff on it. We included Southfield in our discussion with GE, for example. Stephanie is being very helpful on the infrastructure side.

The developer, the house majority leader, and the towns are all pleased with our efforts.


-------- Original message --------From:Date: 08/13/2015 9:57 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Pollack, Stephanie (DOT)" <[email protected]>, "Ash, Jay

(EOHED)" < [email protected]>Subject: Southfield

Got asked about this project when I was at the Quincy Patriot Ledger yesterday. Any thoughts or

updates?

Sent from my iPhone

GOV E-mail







___________________________________________

Jonathan M. Cosco







Boston, MA 02114

617-788-3628

[email protected]






Amy

Sorry I disappeared this morning. For some reason cell coverage and even email disappeared

entirely.

We are still tracking down details on the EDIP lease issue, but have confirmed that a lessee is eligible

for EDIP credits, although the schedule for actually taking them may be an extended one. DOR still

owes us an answer on that question, but they would definitely be available to you as a lessee.


Ricks







Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)





Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:53 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]> wrote:




(cell)








Thanks – could you please provide citations to the authority for the lease payments being qualified

expenditures as well as how the credit is calculated and taken?

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 4:11 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: RE: Time for a quick call today?

Amy

Sorry I disappeared this morning. For some reason cell coverage and even email disappeared

entirely.

We are still tracking down details on the EDIP lease issue, but have confirmed that a lessee is eligible

for EDIP credits, although the schedule for actually taking them may be an extended one. DOR still

owes us an answer on that question, but they would definitely be available to you as a lessee.


Ricks







Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel




(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 9:03 AMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Subject: Re: Time for a quick call today?


Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:53 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]> wrote:


Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)




To: "Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)"




Amy

I discussed further with DOR and here is how the lessor credit would work in the fact pattern you

inquired about.

EDIP under G.L. c. 63, s. 38N, would be available to a lessee of real property, as specified in that

statute, in a certified project. The regulations are out of date with respect to real property lessees,

but the statutory change was recognized in Technical Information Release 10-1 (See section III F of

that TIR.) The TIR spells out that the calculation of the credit in the case of a real estate lease would

use the same methodology as previously existed for tangible personal property. So by virtue of the

TIR, the methodology in 830 CMR 63.38N.1(6)(b) would apply to a real estate lease as well as to a

lease of tangible property. The practical effect of this would be to make the credit available to the lessee over the term of the lease, prorated based on the useful life of the property and the lessor’s

cost or other basis in the property.

The EDIP is not available to a lessor of real or tangible property by virtue of the express language in

G.L. c. 63, s. 31A(b). This provision is in the ITC statute, on which the EDIP is based.

The section of the EDIP regulation that you inquired about is a regulatory provision that provided

some relief from the 31A(b) statutory preclusion of leasing structures in the particular case of real

estate leases between commonly owned entities. It is, of course, common for a business to own

real property in one legal entity which leases the property to an affiliated operating company.

Given the common ownership, the frequent use of the structure for non-tax purposes, and the fact

that prior law did not allow a lessee of real property to take a credit, the regulation exercised

administrative discretion by disregarding such leases and allowing the acquiring entity/owner to

take the EDIP credit, notwithstanding the lease to an affiliate. This provision would still be valid to

the extent that it applies to the facts of any particular project. But our understanding is that the

project now under discussion would involve a lease between unrelated parties, which would make

the provision inapplicable.

While I hope this answers your question, I would add that collectively we can only think of one

instance where an applicant for EDIP credits used this provision, so it’s not something that we’ve

had a lot of opportunities to work with and analyze different scenarios.

Obviously, if you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to ask.

Ricks


Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 8:36 AM






Any update?



(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:48 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)

Subject: Re: Time for a quick call today?

That's how I read it, but the question of related entities still seemed to be of interest to the experts,

so I don't want to speak for them.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) <[email protected]> wrote:

This would not be our fact pattern – but this part of the regulation seems to limit the

lessee credit to the fact pattern.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)

From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 7:44 PM

To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: RE: Time for a quick call today?

I think we’re going to have to run this one past DOR. We did not discuss this scenario

and I would defer to their views.

Ricks








Are you saying this part of the regulation doesn’t apply? How the calculation works, perhaps with an example, for leased real property would be greatly appreciated.

(b) Lessor. The credit is generally not available to the lessor of eligible property. However, the credit

is available to a lessor for eligible property, other than tangible personal property, leased to a lessee

provided the relationship between the lessor and the lessee is:

1. an individual and a corporation if such individual owns, directly or indirectly, 100 percent of the

outstanding stock in the corporation;

2. a corporation and a partnership if the same persons own, directly or indirectly, 100 percent of the

outstanding stock in the corporation and 100 percent of the capital interest or profit interest in the

partnership;

3. a corporation and another corporation if the same persons own, directly or indirectly, 100 percent

of the outstanding stock in each corporation;

4. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and the sole grantor of the trust;

5. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and the fiduciary of another trust if the

same person is the sole grantor of both trusts;

6. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and the sole beneficiary of such property;

7. the fiduciary of the trust that holds the leased property and a corporation if the trust, the sole

grantor of the trust, or the sole beneficiary of the trust owns, directly or indirectly, 100 percent of the

outstanding stock in the corporation.

Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



From: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED) [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 4:57 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)Cc: Cosco, Jonathan (EOHED)Subject: FW: Time for a quick call today?

Amy

Here is the language and links to other relevant materials. What we are waiting for

from DOR is whether there is another regulation relating to useful life of real property

that might apply here. Our working assumption is that these are the applicable rules,

but they are checking to make sure we have not missed anything.

Ricks



To: Frazier, Ricks (EOHED)Subject: RE: Time for a quick call today?

Here’s the statutory language:

“A corporation subject to tax under this chapter that participates in a certified project,

as defined in sections 3A and 3F of chapter 23A, may take a credit against the excise

imposed by this chapter to the extent authorized by the economic assistance

coordinating council established by section 3B of said chapter 23A, in an amount not

to exceed 50 per cent of such liability in a taxable year; provided, however, that the 50

per cent limitation shall not apply if the credit is refundable under subsection (b): (i)

for certified expansion projects and certified enhanced expansion projects, as defined

in said sections 3A and 3F of said chapter 23A, an amount up to 10 per cent; (ii) for

certified manufacturing retention projects, as defined in said sections 3A and 3F of said

chapter 23A, an amount up to 40 per cent of the cost of any property that would

qualify for the credit allowed by section 31A if the property were purchased by a

manufacturing corporation or a business corporation engaged primarily in research

and development and is used exclusively in a certified project, as defined in said

sections 3A and 3F of said chapter 23A; and, (iii) for certified job creation projects, as

defined in said sections 3A and 3F of said chapter 23A, an amount up to $1,000 per job

created, or up to $5,000 per job created in a gateway municipality as defined by

section 3A of chapter 23A or within a city or town whose average seasonally adjusted

unemployment rate, as reported by the executive office of labor and workforce

development, is higher than the average seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of

the commonwealth; provided, however, that the total award per project shall be no

more than $1,000,000; and further provided that a credit under this clause (iii) shall be

allowed only for the year subsequent to that in which the jobs are created. A lessee

may be eligible for a credit under this subsection for real property leased under an



operating lease.”

M.G.L. c. 63, sec. 38N(a) (emphasis added). M.G.L. c. 62, sec. 6(g) has similar language.

The current regulation, 830 CMR 63.38N.1(6)(b), still provides that the credit is not

available for real property, but that has obviously been superseded by statutory

revision in 2009. However, DOR Technical Information Release 10-1 confirms that “the

rules used to calculate the credit for leased real estate will be the same rules used to calculate the credit for leased tangible personal property set out in Regulation 830

CMR 63.38N.1(6)(b).” Here’s a link to the regulation

http://www.mass.gov/dor/businesses/help-and-resources/legal-library/regulations/63-

00-taxation-of-corporations/830-cmr-6338n1-economic-opportunity-area-credit.html

and to the TIR http://www.mass.gov/dor/businesses/help-and-resources/legal-

library/tirs/tirs-by-years/2010-releases/tir-10-1-economic-development-incentive.html

___________________________________________

Jonathan M. Cosco





Boston, MA 02114

617-788-3628

[email protected]


Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 4:11 PMTo: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)



Amy

Sorry I disappeared this morning. For some reason cell coverage and even email

disappeared entirely.

We are still tracking down details on the EDIP lease issue, but have confirmed that a

lessee is eligible for EDIP credits, although the schedule for actually taking them may

be an extended one. DOR still owes us an answer on that question, but they would

definitely be available to you as a lessee.


Ricks









Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)



Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:53 AM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)



Amy Eisenstadt

State Tax Counsel


(cell)





Subject: Re: Tomorrow


Great, thanks.

Mike Kennealy

> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:16 PM, Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)


>

> Ok. I'll set up a number so Jim can join

>


>

>> On Dec 8, 2015, at 7:06 PM, Kennealy, Michael (SEA)


>>

>> How about 11am?>>

>> ________________________________________

>> From: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate) [[email protected]]



>> Subject: RE: Tomorrow

>>

>> Let's do it sometime after your 10:30. McGaugh and I both show open

until 3.

>>

>> Amy Eisenstadt

>> State Tax Counsel

>> General Electric Company>>

>>

>> (cell)

>>


>> From: Kennealy, Michael (SEA) [mailto:[email protected]]


>> To: Eisenstadt, Amy (GE, Corporate)

>> Subject: Tomorrow

>>

>> Amy, I have an 830 - 1030am meeting so either before or after that

best, or if need be I could step out of meeting.

>>

>> Mike Kennealy





Subject: RE: Tomorrow"s Visit


Sure! I will let our team know.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640

Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




Subject: Tomorrow's Visit

For tomorrow’s visit, may I ask your team to call my cell phone when they are 10 or 15 mins. out?Many thanks … Karen

(* We get funky cell service from time to time but I do check the phone frequently for missed calls or voicemail so if I do not answer please leave a brief voicemail)

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:



Fairfield, CT 06828






Subject: RE: Tomorrow"s Visit


Attachments: Commonwealth of Massachusetts bios.pdf

Karen, one other item – attached are the bios again in one document. Content is exactly the same,

but thought it might be more convenient to have in one document. Very much looking forward to our visit tomorrow, and you have my cell phone number below if you need to reach me for any

reason.

Mike Kennealy





Boston, MA 02108

Office: 617-788-3640Cell: 617-634-4762

[email protected]




Subject: Tomorrow's Visit

For tomorrow’s visit, may I ask your team to call my cell phone when they are 10 or 15 mins. out?Many thanks … Karen

(* We get funky cell service from time to time but I do check the phone frequently for missed calls or voicemail so if I do not answer please leave a brief voicemail)

Karen Kulish



O: 203 373-2575

C:


3135 Easton TurnpikeFairfield, CT 06828




COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS


Secretary Jay Ash


Massachusetts. Secretary Ash is responsible for directing and executing Governor Charlie Baker’s agenda

on housing and community development, job creation, business development, consumer affairs, and

business regulation. He previously served as the city manager in his native Chelsea, a position he held

from 2000 to 2014. In Chelsea, Secretary Ash’s leadership produced both economic expansion and fiscal

stability. He grew the city’s housing stock by over ten percent, expanded its commercial base with twodozen major projects, led all Gateway Cities with a 15% increase in new employment, developed 10 new

parks, secured five credit rating increases, and won two All-America City designations for Chelsea.

Secretary Ash has led statewide initiatives on health insurance, youth violence, transportation

infrastructure and expanded gaming in Massachusetts. He previously served as co-founder and vice-

chair of the Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, as past president of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council,

as a board member of the public policy think tank MassINC, the staff director to the Massachusetts

House Majority Leader, and as an elected trustee of his alma mater, Clark University.

Deputy Secretary Carolyn Kirk

Carolyn A. Kirk joined the Baker-Polito Administration in January of 2015 and serves as the Deputy

Secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development. In this position, Kirk leadsoperational management and shares policy responsibility for the Executive Office of Housing and




International Trade and Investment. In addition, Kirk is responsible for economic planning and growth in

the Maritime economic sector, oversees the MassWorks grant program, and provides direct support to

the Lieutenant Governor’s office on a number of initiatives. Prior to her appointment with the

Baker/Polito administration, in 2007 Kirk was the first woman popularly elected as Mayor of the City of

Gloucester. Kirk went on to win three subsequent general municipal elections, never lost a ward or a

precinct in any of her contests, and served as Mayor for seven years. Kirk’s administration invested

over $100 million in infrastructure thus laying the groundwork for future economic growth. The first-

ever business class hotel is under construction in the city in a long sought after waterfront location

adjacent to downtown. A new $40 million elementary school, the first one to be built since World War

II and which Kirk led the effort on for seven years, is also under construction in the city. Mayor Kirk’s

professional career spans over 25 years. She is a long-time management consultant and her clients have

included many of the Top 20 banks in the US, along with Fortune 500 companies. She and her husband

Bill Kirk have two children, Sam, 17 and Baylee, 14. Both are enrolled in Gloucester Public Schools. A

graduate of the Boston College class of 1984, Mayor Kirk was born and raised in Clinton, NY and moved



to Massachusetts to attend college. She moved to Gloucester in 1988 where she still resides, and was

drawn to the diversity and beauty of the city.

Assistant Secretary Mike Kennealy

Mike Kennealy is the Assistant Secretary for Business Growth for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

in the Executive Office of Housing & Economic Development. Mike joined the Baker-Polito

Administration in March 2015 and brings two decades of experience working with the management

teams of growing companies. He joined Spectrum Equity in 1997 and was a Managing Director of the

firm until early 2013. Founded in 1994 with offices in Boston and San Francisco, Spectrum is a leading

growth private equity firm that provides capital and strategic support to its portfolio companies. During

Mike’s more than 15 years at the firm, Spectrum grew from $360 million in assets under management to

$4.7 billion and invested in nearly 100 high growth information services, digital media, software, and

Internet companies. After retiring from Spectrum, he spent two years as Special Advisor to the Receiver

at Lawrence Public Schools. There he worked with the state-appointed superintendent/receiver on

strategic and financial initiatives to support the turnaround plan and developed and managed

relationships with non-profit partners, philanthropic funders, and the municipal government. Earlier in

his career, Mike was an Associate at TA Associates, a Boston-based private equity firm. Mike, his wife,

and three children live in Lexington, where he has served on the Town’s finance committee and a varietyof non-profit boards. He has been a member of the Board of Trustees of St. John’s Prep in Danvers, MA

since 2009 and is Vice Chairman of the Board. Mike received an AB magna cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa,

with High Honors in Government from Dartmouth College and an MBA from Harvard Business School.


Nam recently joined the Baker-Polito Administration as the Assistant Secretary of Business Development

which oversees the Mass. Office of Business Development, Mass. Office of Travel and Tourism, Mass.

Film Office and Mass. Office of International Trade & Investment. Previously Nam was the CEO of

Vietnamese American Initiative for Development (VietAID). Nam has been a commercial banker for

more than 20 years in both lending and credit for premier community banks and large commercial

banks. From 1994 to 2000 Nam served as Commissioner of Massachusetts Office for Refugees andImmigrants, and Deputy Director of the Massachusetts Office of International Trade & Investment. Nam

earned his BS degree in Business Administration from the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of

Management, and MPA in Political Economy from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.



Director for the Massachusetts Office of Business Development (MOBD). MOBD is the state’s one-stop

source for businesses seeking to relocate to Massachusetts or to expand their current operations

here. It provides businesses with information on site locations, workforce availability, funding and

financing and tax incentives. Prior to joining the Administration, she worked for Boston Main Streets as

a Neighborhood Business Manager where she oversaw the development and implementation of

business strategies and provided technical assistance to local Main Streets managers and

volunteers. She graduated cum laude from Salem State College and earned a BA in Political Science &

Sociology, and she lives with her husband and two children in Rockport.

Program and Communications Coordinator Adrian Servetnick

Adrian Servetnick serves as the Program and Communications Coordinator for the Executive Office of

Housing and Economic Development. He is responsible for data analysis and research, as well as

receiving and responding to press inquiries across EOHED. Adrian received a Bachelor of Arts degree in



Political Science from the University of Washington, Seattle, and previously worked as an intern with

Representative Derek Kilmer (D-WA), and with the House Armed Services Committee.

Massachusetts Department of Revenue

Commissioner Mark Nunnelly

Mark Nunnelly serves as Commissioner of the Department of Revenue. He is responsible for overseeing

nearly 2,000 DOR employees in offices across the state who work in tax administration, child support

enforcement and local services for cities and towns. He was appointed on March 30, 2015.

Commissioner Nunnelly, who also serves as Special Advisor to Governor Baker for Technology and

Innovation Competitiveness, brings a track record of building organizations and growing companies in

Massachusetts and across the country. Commissioner Nunnelly joined Bain Capital, one of the world’s

foremost private investment firms, in 1989 as a Managing Director. He held a number of leadership roles

as part of the firm’s growth and global expansion and worked extensively in the business services and

technology industries. Prior to joining Bain Capital, the Commissioner was a Partner at the consulting

firm Bain & Company, working in the US, Asian and European strategy practices. Previously, he worked

at Procter & Gamble in product management. Additionally, Commissioner Nunnelly founded, and had

operating responsibility for, several entrepreneurial ventures. He has been deeply involved in a numberof Massachusetts and national philanthropic efforts, with a particular focus on children and national

service. Commissioner Nunnelly received an MBA with Distinction from Harvard Business School and an

AB from Centre College.






Subject: RE: Update on further questions


Jay

I

Ricks



To: [email protected]; Kadish, Steven (GOV)


Subject: Update on further questions



Circulating their questions and the working draft of a response. John and I have talked. John will

review all and propose changes where necessary.

Updates

1. What are the “employment tax benefits” through the Mass Life Science Center”? – specifically

a. What is the program? i. MLSC offers a tax credit program to expand life sciences-related

employment opportunities, promote health-related innovations and stimulate research and development, manufacturing and commercialization in the life sciences in MA. GE Health has recently secured a MLSC award.The new application would include both health division future employment

growth and the GE corporate positions. Upon approval of the MLSC Board, GE would receive a tax credit. We are open discussing it as a refundable tax credit.

b. What is the statutory authority supporting eligibility?c. How was the $40m calculated?

i. The $40m proposal represents the largest award ever to be made from the program. Its calculation is based on up to 100 GE Health jobs and up to

600 corporate jobs be located in MA over the next five years. The award would be made for FY’18-FY’20 receipt.2. What are the State “energy efficiency contributions” – explanation of the program, eligibility

requirements, potential benefits, dollar level of support?3. Property tax abatement – what is the term and expected percentage?

i. The property tax abatement term is assumed to be ____ years and the percentage of relief is expected to be _____%. The City is interested in both job creation and the value of the building to be constructed. The assumption has been 600 jobs and 150,000 s.f. of building, although the calculation as to value is dependent on many other variables. Thus, the actual value of the tax abatement will be dependent on the final project to be built, and whether it is on private or public land.

4. What are the issues surround building a parking structure near a privately owned lot, ie is it just availability of land/permitting?

i. Among the issues on a parking structure is the availability of land, the ability to secure permitting and the mix of public or private parking that would be included in the structure. The State is willing to engage in a discussion about a grant for the structure through either the MassWorks or I-Cubed program. Available funding would be requested through the normal application process. A typical MassWorks award for parking structure would be $5m-$10m. The I-Cubed program could make an award of up to $50m for a garage, dependent upon job growth numbers that are in excess of 600 (the 600 already being used to calculate other incentives being offered and thus not available to leverage this I-Cubed opportunity).

Jay Ash, Secretary

Executive Office of

Housing and Economic Development

(v) 617-788-3626

[email protected]





Subject: RE: We are still working on it


Yes I agree. Thx for being part of the team.


-------- Original message --------From: "Povich, Lon (GOV)" <[email protected]>Date: 07/27/2015 2:19 PM (GMT-05:00)To: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: We are still working on it

Ok, Good luck.

Lon

Lon F. Povich



Boston, MA 02133(617) 725-4082

From: Ash, Jay (EOHED)Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 6:34 PMTo: Povich, Lon (GOV)Subject: RE: We are still working on it

Thx. We’re working on it. Have a team of 6 going down, including Mark Nunnelly and me. Here’s

the outline of our deck we’ll be presenting.

1. Opening Argument2. About Massachusetts3. About the Gov

a. Biz/public serviceb. Most popular governor in country and politician in statec. About LG

4. About Political Stabilitya. Current relationships have produced whatb. Average time for a Gov and a Mayor of Boston

5. Budget in Generala. $1.8b in cuts without tax increases and use of rainy day fund

6. HED and the Quasis7. ED Agenda

Attorney-Client Communication

Attorney-Client Communication



8. Business Climate9. Fortune 1000 companies10. Recent wins/Current candidates11. Ecosystem12. Higher Ed13. Testimonials14. Workforce15. Existing GE relations

16. Incentives17. Taxation

18. Locationsa. Bostonb. Cambridgec. Somervilled. Worcestere. Springfieldf. Southfield

19. Proximity to major centers20. Airlines21. Trains22. Public Transportation23. Other

a. Heliport

b. Private plans 24. Boston/Culture25. Education26. Greater Boston communities27. General Quality of Life

28. Closing Arguments Work/Live/Play29. FAS 109

Non

Responsive



Non Responsive Materials



From: John Barros


Cc: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Daniel Koh

Subject: Re: We have some homework to do on the Boston project


Here is summary information on Parcels N and P that will be helpful for the conference call:

The one thing we will need to clear up is which Parcel N they are referring to because there is one in the BMIP and a different one located at Seaport Square. I assume the one located at Seaport Square but I will provide context for both so we can discuss all possibilities.

Parcels N and P (Seaport Square)

Its important to note the Parcels N and P are privately owned by WS Development. The Parcels sit side by side on the South Side of Seaport square along Summer Street.

A PDA was approved for Seaport Square in 2010. Office is not a currently an allowable use. PDA amendments require a BRA

Board vote.

Per the PDA docs, Parcel N is 348,000 GSF, 80-120'street wall height, overall height is 240'

Parcel P is 418,000 GSF, street wall heights of 42-90' and 270' max height

WS Development purchased Seaport Square in 2015. The Boston Globe reported in Oct 2015 that it was sold for $359

million and "It’s one of the priciest land deals ever in Boston. And at 2.8 million square

feet of permitted space over 10 blocks, it’s among the biggest developments in the

city.

Parcel N (BRA/EDIC)

The Parcel N, Boston Marine Industrial Park has a street address of 25 Fid Kennedy Avenue. It is located across 88 Black Flacon the Massport building we discussed earlier. It is owned by the BRA and designated to Cannistraro--HVAC company. They plan to renovate the building, starting construction Q1 2016.

Chapter 91 forbidden uses include general office. This would need an amendment.

Parcel N contains approximately 141,425 square feet of land improved by a two story structure with gross building area of approximately 160,000 square feet. The existing structure is currently vacant.

East of 25 Fid Kennedy Avenue is the EDIC owned facility known as 3 Dolphin Way. 3 Dolphin Way consists of 148,150 square feet also owned by BRA.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Kadish, Steven (GOV) <[email protected]> wrote:



Colleagues:

We have some homework to do. Our deliverable is due by 7 pm Sunday evening.

I have set up a phone call for tomorrow/Saturday at 10 am.

While the entity remains very interested in 2 different MassPort parcels (A2, D2), we have also been asked to follow up on 2 hypotheticals described below.

For each, the entity would be looking at what the incentive option package could be from the state/city.

We need to think about how to apply the tools that we have.

We should assume the same parameters in terms of

--total square feet (250,000 – 300,000),

--lease of at least 20 years, 150 parking spaces on-site, and

--300 spaces nearby.

1. Existing Office Building

a. MassPort gains control of the building (purchase, lease?) and entity is lessee

b. Building remains in private control and entity is lessee

c. Entity owns building

2. Other sites: Do we know the status of parcels N or P in the Seaport? If it were possible to gain control, then:

a. MassPort gains control of the site(purchase, lease, land swap?), develops the building, and entity is lessee

b. Site remains in private control, building is developed privately, and entity is lessee



c. Entity gains control of the site and builds building

d. Entity gains control of the site, MassPort builds building, and entity is lessee

e. Other?

Sec Ash, Mike K – can you please begin to frame what tools would work in each of the alternatives?

I look forward to our discussion.

Thanks, in advance, for your good work!

Steve

--

John BarrosChief of Economic DevelopmentOffice of Mayor Martin J. Walsh6th Floor, Room 603Boston City Hall, Boston MA 02201t: 617-635-5729http://www.cityofboston.gov








Subject: Re: We have some homework to do on the Boston project


Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 12, 2015, at 5:59 AM, Kennealy, Michaelh (EOHED) <[email protected]> wrote:

Jay, Ricks, Steve called last night and suggested that some thoughts be sent to the group ahead of the 10am call - Jay did you say you were working on something or should I send? Mostly tied up before 10am (we're up in Kennebunkport) but could send something high level. Initial thoughts/questions I had on scenarios below:

1a - say that we're still good for $120 MM, but very different lease since we had to buy the property? 1b, 1c - no idea what we could do here. We wouldn't own the building, no capex so no EDIP 2 - I don't know sites N or P - just texted Barros. 2a - Massport acquiring a parcel through a swap shouldn't change our offer at all. Really need Massport to weigh in on this, and everything else. 2b-d - EDIP could be used here, 10% of capex. Reminder on Liberty Mutual deal - $353 MM capex, $22.5 MM EDIP, 600 jobs. Other thought - MLSC. By statute can only do $25 MM per year in tax credits. Would we say $5-10 MM per year for 5 years to plug any holes in a new proposal? Question -

Could always use MassWorks or I-Cubed particularly for garage. Tools:$120 MM in development (note - assuming $120 MM cap and floor on whatever we do)MassWorks/I-CubedEDIPMLSCLocalOther? Mike



From: Kadish, Steven (GOV)Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 7:50 PMTo: Ash, Jay (EOHED); Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Tom Glynn; Morse, Elizabeth; [email protected]; Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Garrity, Rob (DOT); Povich, Lon (GOV); [email protected]: Zarrella, Lily (GOV)Subject: We have some homework to do on the Boston project

Colleagues:

We have some homework to do. Our deliverable is due by 7 pm Sunday evening.

I have set up a phone call for tomorrow/Saturday at 10 am.

While the entity remains very interested in 2 different MassPort parcels (A2, D2), we

have also been asked to follow up on 2 hypotheticals described below.

For each, the entity would be looking at what the incentive option package could be

from the state/city.

We need to think about how to apply the tools that we have.

We should assume the same parameters in terms of

--total square feet (250,000 – 300,000),

--lease of at least 20 years, 150 parking spaces on-site, and

--300 spaces nearby.

1. Existing Office Building

a. MassPort gains control of the building (purchase, lease?) and entity is

lessee

b. Building remains in private control and entity is lessee

c. Entity owns building

2. Other sites: Do we know the status of parcels N or P in the Seaport? If it were

possible to gain control, then:

a. MassPort gains control of the site(purchase, lease, land swap?),

develops the building, and entity is lessee

b. Site remains in private control, building is developed privately, and

entity is lessee

c. Entity gains control of the site and builds buildingd. Entity gains control of the site, MassPort builds building, and entity is

lessee

e. Other?

Sec Ash, Mike K – can you please begin to frame what tools would work in each of the

alternatives?

I look forward to our discussion.



Thanks, in advance, for your good work!

Steve




To: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Povich, Lon (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Morse, Elizabeth; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)




For our records.
















To: Polito, Karyn (GOV); Lepore, Kristen (ANF); Ash, Jay (EOHED); Pollack, Stephanie (DOT); Tom Glynn; Povich, Lon (GOV); Buckley, Timothy (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Conroy, Jim (GOV); Sullivan, Jennifer F. (ANF); Morse, Elizabeth; Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Frazier, Ricks (EOHED); Garrity, Rob (DOT)

Cc: Zarrella, Lily (GOV); Wehrs, Brianna (GOV)




For our records.















From: Saia, Susan (EOHED)


Subject: Telephone call with GE"s lead team member Ann Klee

Date: Thursday, June 18, 2015 9:53:52 AM

Jay,

You received a call from Ann Klee, she is the team leader for GE. She would like to speak with

you regarding GE’s potential move. She may be reached at the following numbers: 203-373-

3198 (office) or (cell).



From: Distefano, Maria (MOBD)

To: Kennealy, Michael (EOHED); Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)


Subject: Top 50 public schools Boston Mag

Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 4:28:32 PM

All, this is a link to the 2014 sortable list of Boston Magazine top 50 public schools

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/best-public-schools-boston-2014-chart/

Thanks again for including me today,Maria

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone. Please excuse brevity and typos

-------- Original message --------From: "Kennealy, Michael (EOHED)" <[email protected]>

Date: 07/30/2015 7:57 AM (GMT-05:00)To: "Kirk, Carolyn (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Cc: "Ash, Jay (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Nunnelly, Mark E (DOR)" <[email protected]>, "Pham, Nam (EOHED)" <[email protected]>, "Distefano, Maria (MOBD)" <[email protected]>, "Servetnick, Adrian (EOHED)" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Meeting Confirmation, GE Team & Logistics - Massachusetts

I think we have 4 cars going down, based on individual plans for travel/calls/work: - Jay/Carolyn/Adrian- Nam/Maria- Mike- Mark Also please see the most recent version of the deck attached - a few edits will happen this morning but this is very close. Re: speaking roles, expect everyone to be involved/engaged especially in Q&A, but with respect to specific slides here is what Jay and I discussed, by slide number: 1-12 Jay13-15 Mark 16 Carolyn17-18 Mike19-27 Jay28-29 Mike30-32 Carolyn33-34 Jay Please call with questions and I expect we'll have some discussion by phone on the drive down. Mike