![Information on incentives offered to Amazon have been redacted from the bid document. [City of Cleveland]](https://npr.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/b6172ca/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2244x1262+0+0/resize/840x472!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnpr-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Flegacy%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F6%2F19%2F0619amazon.jpg)
Cleveland has quietly released its failed bid for Amazon's second headquarters, but redacted any information about tax incentives or other subsidies offered to the company.
Read the Amazon bid document released by the city here.
Numerous lines of text and several images are blacked out in the document, obscuring the dollar amount of the incentive package and what appear to be renderings of a proposed downtown building site.
The bid refers to a property tax rebate and city income tax credit. The specifics have been redacted.
Cleveland.com first reported on the release of the bid late last Friday. The document is now available for download in the city’s online public records portal.
“The requested records are proprietary and a ‘trade secret’ of the City of Cleveland, Amazon.com, Inc. and the various public and private entities that supplied information in the records,” a statement from the city accompanying the information reads. “Notwithstanding the foregoing explanation the City Of Cleveland is providing public access to a redacted version of the Amazon bid and supporting documents.”
In May, the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency released 27 pages of information after an Ohio Court of Claims special master ruled that the NOACA documents didn’t contain trade secrets.
According to those records, Cleveland offered the downtown Post Office Plaza and facilities at Terminal Tower for the “initial build-out” of Amazon’s headquarters.
The NOACA documents also showed that the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority offered a 25 percent discount on passes for Amazon employees.
Read the records released by NOACA here.
Cleveland.com columnist Mark Naymik filed the complaint against NOACA with the Court of Claims calling for the release of records. A similar case is pending against the city.
At the time of the release, NOACA disputed the special master’s ruling.
“NOACA believes the ruling of the Special Master does not fully understand the position of the Agency as they relate to competitive elements of the bid proposal,” the statement reads, “however NOACA leadership believes it is in the best interest of the community to not pursue the matter on appeal with the Court.”
