7E7 pitch from state to be made in shadows

OLYMPIA — Behind all the public pronouncements, photo-ops and politicians' promises to do anything to win a new Boeing plant, details about what the company wants are being kept secret.

Gov. Gary Locke has agreed to Boeing's request that it not disclose a detailed questionnaire the state has to fill out to compete for the right to build the proposed 7E7 airliner.

The questionnaire, part of a 27-page "request for proposal" Boeing is sending to interested states, is exempt from the state's public-disclosure law on the grounds it contains "trade secrets," Locke says. The state's answers — presumably details of everything from available land to tax rates — will also be a secret.

"It will show exactly what Boeing is interested in and what are the factors that Boeing considers as part of their business decision, in terms of their operating costs and things like that," Locke said. "Those are considered trade secrets and business financial information."

Other states, too, are keeping the work secret, and some say they can't even talk about courting Boeing.

On May 16, Boeing delivered a more general list of 7E7 selection criteria to state officials. In Olympia, Locke released the criteria with fanfare and promises to complete the company wish list. He followed up with three press conferences in 11 days to tout Washington as the logical site for the plant.

The publicly released criteria include items such as "taxes, utilities, insurance and other recurring and non-recurring costs" and a requirement that the weather be neither too hot nor too cold.

The details behind the criteria, the request for proposal and an additional nine-page cover letter were delivered to Washington officials May 19. Responses are due June 20.

Prepared by the company directing Boeing's search, McCallum Sweeney Consulting, the document is divided into 14 sections with dozens of categories of questions and requests for data, said Roger Nyhus, Locke's communications director.

Boeing has told state officials that the selection process will include some subjective criteria. But Nyhus said the questionnaire is "fairly quantitative."

It includes specific questions that elaborate on Boeing's publicly released list, said Martha Choe, director of the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development.

Choe said Boeing's request for proposal is fairly typical for a large corporation looking to locate or expand in Washington state. The work is often handled by consultants who sometimes keep even the name of the company confidential from government officials.

Boeing's request that the document be kept confidential could help Washington keep a competitive edge over other states hoping to land the 7E7 plant, Nyhus said.

"I think states will be very aggressive in monitoring other states' activities," he said. "This is a full-scale effort to win the future of Boeing."

Officials with Choe's office say Boeing's questions can be kept confidential under the state's public-records law, which specifically exempts "financial or proprietary information collected from any person and provided to the department or the office of the governor in connection with the siting, recruitment, expansion, retention, or relocation of that person's business."

The law also says even the identity of someone providing that information can be kept a secret.

The trade department's public-disclosure officer, Debra Rhinehart, referred questions about the decision to keep the document secret to Boeing officials.

Boeing is using the request for proposal and the questionnaire to create an "efficient, fair and rigorous process," according to company spokeswoman Mary Hanson. She said the request for proposal is a way "to gather as much data about a state, as it relates to the criteria, as possible."

She declined to provide details. "Boeing never discusses the details of an ongoing negotiation, and this is no exception to that rule," she said in an e-mail sent in response to questions.

Large corporations routinely try to remain confidential while scouting locations.

In 1995, chipmaker Intel wanted to remain anonymous as it worked with officials of the state, Pierce County and the city of Dupont on a potential site for a new plant.

At first, local economic-development officials didn't even know what company was asking for demographic information. Intel was referred to at Dupont City Hall as "Brand X" and as "The Company" in some interoffice discussions.

Intel said it chose Pierce County for the plant in part because of tax incentives passed by the Legislature for high-tech businesses and the state's willingness to speed up construction of a Dupont freeway interchange.

Economic-development officials in other states say they, too, are keeping Boeing's works under wraps.

Georgia also has an exemption in its public-records law, said Kevin Langston, spokesman for the Georgia Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism.

"We do traditionally keep those secret unless a company tells us they don't mind us making it public," he said.

In Texas, officials can't even talk about the matter. In fact, their law says they can't confirm or deny that Boeing is interested in Texas or that Texas is interested in Boeing, said Patrick Shaughnessy, spokesman for Texas Economic Development.

Shaughnessy said the restriction is designed to protect the interests of both a company and the state.

Like Nyhus, Shaughnessy said one concern is that other states might find out what Texas is offering a company "and be able to out-compete."

"Secondly, if the state is particularly interested in attracting one company and puts together a particularly attractive package, the next company that comes along would expect us to match that offer," he said.

Times aerospace reporter David Bowermaster contributed to this report. David Postman: 360-943-9882 or dpostman@seattletimes.com