Okay, so show how *any* other development in the state has anywhere close to what TED was going to get? You're the one who said "Nothing about TED was really out of the ordinary."
The scope of it isn't really the point I was making. The point I was making is that developments get public incentives all the time.
The state has become a hub for chip makers including Intel and TSMC, as the government prepares to release a gusher of funds for the strategic industry.
www.nytimes.com
"In May 2020, TSMC announced plans to build a $12 billion factory in Phoenix. Later that year, the city provided TSMC with $200 million in infrastructure incentives, including water lines, sewage and roads. One traffic light would cost the city $500,000."
"Intel soon announced a $20 billion expansion in Chandler, with two additional factories that would bring 3,000 new jobs to the state. Chandler also approved $30 million in water and road improvements for the new plants."
Now, you're going to say that is different than what we were seeing with TED, but to me public incentives are public incentives regardless of the form they take.
Also, you want to talk about the GPLETs as if they're something different, but a GPLET is still a tax incentive. The structure might be something different, but the fundamental idea behind them isn't.
The whole point of TED for the city of Tempe was to attract the Arizona Coyotes/Alex Meruelo to their city, the same way that Phoenix wanted to attract TSMC and Chandler wanted to attract Intel. It's a different kind of business and the complexity of the development made the proposal complex as well, but it's still a city using incentives to lure a business.
