*** UPDATE 1 *** Greg Hinz says Terry Duffy was OK with a delay earlier. And Hinz believes a November 28th special session may very be called to deal with the tax issues…
Aides to Mr. Madigan today are saying it will “take some time” to put together a bill that can fly — likely into next week, and quite possibly until after Thanksgiving.
Mr. Duffy Tuesday suggested his exchange couldn’t wait. But earlier, he told my colleague Lynne Marek that working this out in a special legislative session would be okay.
*** UPDATE 2 *** This Crain’s story is from Sept. 28th…
Mr. Duffy said the Chicago-based company, which operates the biggest futures market in the country, aims to reach an agreement on a corporate tax revision with Illinois officials before the Legislature’s October veto session, or for consideration during a special session this year. […]
Mr. Duffy said he doesn’t want to set a deadline for reaching an agreement with Illinois officials because he doesn’t want to put pressure on them. But he thinks it isn’t unfair to expect an agreement to be reached within a year of starting negotiations, which began in January. [Emphasis added,]
So, at the end of September, he was OK with waiting until January. Now, all of a sudden, he has to have a decision by Thursday.
[ *** End Of Updates *** ]
* If you watched the House Revenue Committee hearing yesterday afternoon, you saw an obviously tense but polite exchange between CME Group Executive Chairman Terry Duffy and Chairman John Bradley…
CME Executive Chairman Terrence Duffy said his hands are tied by “fiduciary duty” to shareholders, who want to know why the big trading company pays tens of millions of dollars a year more in Illinois taxes than it would in another state.
Legislative leaders had told him they would deal with this matter in this week’s General Assembly veto session, and Mr. Duffy said he intends to hold them to that promise.
Asked by a lawmaker if he could give them “a few more days,” Mr. Duffy replied: “I have shareholders that are very concerned about this issue. I have a fiduciary responsibility. . . .I will do what I need to do, in the best interests of the CME Group.”
Mr. Duffy gave a similar response when House Revenue Committee Chairman John Bradley, D-Marion, asked about an extension until a date specific — say, Nov. 29.
“With all due respect, I cannot put the CME Group (there) and limit their options,” Mr. Duffy said. “That decision would have to made by the (CME) board, not by me. . . .I am not going to commit the company to anything other than what I have.”
I wish I had video of that debate, but I don’t. Sorry.
* More…
Duffy explained that he couldn’t limit the options of CME’s board of directors, which is considering leaving Illinois after 163 years as the exchange’s home base.
“I will do what I need to do in the best interests of the shareholders of CME Group,” said Duffy, who intends to remain at the state capital in Springfield the rest of this week.
The committee did not take action Tuesday night, but Bradley indicated the panel will work through the issue “as quickly and as thoughtfully as we can.”
“We’ve got to get this right, because there’s too much at stake,” Bradley also said.
* Duffy was defiant and unapologetic…
“To expect one company to pay 6 percent of the aggregate tax liability of all companies … and think that’s acceptable, that’s not acceptable,” Duffy told the House Revenue and Finance Committee.
“We’re not threatening anybody,” Duffy continued, disclosing his firm paid $108 million in taxes to Illinois in 2010. “We like Chicago. We love Illinois. We want to remain a big part of it.”
* But Sears was more understanding about legislative realities…
“We understand the need for appropriate review by the legislature and we are willing to work with them on this matter,” said Sears spokesman Chris Braithwaite. “As a retailer, our fourth quarter is the most important time of the year and we hope this can be resolved as soon as possible so we continue our focus on the upcoming selling season.”
Sears is asking for an extension of its current tax deal, as well as job-creation credits from the state.
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said that the complex deal might not move as quickly as the kind of Internet stock trade CME deals with every day.
“It just doesn’t move quite as fast in the legislature, and I ask you to understand that,” Harris said.
* The tax cut bill has become a classic legislative Christmas tree…
The bill that started out as a vehicle for providing tax relief for financial exchanges has evolved into a broad, potentially costly tax-break bill. It not only aims to keep CME Group and Sears Holdings Corp. from moving operations out of state, but also includes a range of breaks for other businesses and individuals.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, said she introduced the bill on behalf of Gov. Pat Quinn.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement, although she told me she is working to pass it.
* CME, by the way, has released a statement about the impact it has on the local economy…
CME Group jobs impact alone (not including other exchanges, clients or support industry):
3.37 employment multiplier
2,060 CME Illinois employees produces an additional 4,880 jobs
Trading Industry in Chicago:
50,000 Trading employees in Chicago metro
85,000 Additional jobs created to support those trading jobs
135,000 Total Illinois jobs reliant on the trading industry – estimated $330 million in state income taxes
CME Group is a hub of job creation and innovation
Notional value of CME Group 2010 trades was $994 Trillion
Approx $25.5 billion of CME Collateral (margin) is held at Chicago Banks
550 new trading companies added to Illinois in last 5 years
CME has customers in 150 countries with access to its electronic trading platform
Other Losses to Illinois if CME Group were to relocate:
CME Group and its related foundations and charitable programs donated $22 million to Illinois nonprofits in the past 5 years
Other taxes, eg. utility and sales and use tax
Increased unemployment
* And if you’re wondering what this decoupling aspect to the tax package is about, here’a primer…
The federal government created a new economic incentive involving depreciation on major purchases. Basically, it let companies write off the full depreciation at once instead of doing it over several years. Because Illinois law is tied to the federal tax code, Illinois suddenly found itself offering the same tax break.
By decoupling from federal law, Illinois would no longer automatically offer that tax break. Illinois businesses would pay what they’ve always paid and do it on the same old schedule.
That would prevent a $570 million hit to state revenues this year and a $350 million hit next year.
But then it goes down to nothing.
* Related…
* John Bouman and William McNary: No to more corporate tax breaks
* Tax cut package in Illinois faces uncertainty
* Chicago’s financial exchanges contribute more cash at the federal level, but there’s history of personal relationships within Illinois
* Should CME Group have flagged MF Global shortfall? - Owner of exchanges had lead regulatory role over broker-dealer before bankruptcy filing
* Electronic trading is emptying Chicago’s pits, but a few holdouts still wear the jacket
- Robert - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 9:44 am:
Duffy is right - his job is to make as much money as possible for CME Group; that’s what the board hires him to do. I don’t blame him for his lobbying effort.
It is up to the state to call CME’s bluff and negotiate tougher.
- William - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 9:55 am:
Exactly what is CME asking for? A flat refund of $50m or 100m a year? A reduction of their rate? I saw they want to not be taxed on trades that originate in another state but wouldn’t that be a sort of sales tax break? If they are still making the same taxable profit on those sales wouldn’t it still be taxed at the same corporate rate? All I keep seeing is Duffy saying “We pay too much.”
- soccermom - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:07 am:
I was at the Chicago Innovation Awards last night. It was a great event, and I was so impressed by the variety and ingenuity of the winners. I just kept thinking — If the State of Illinois gave these folks $100 million a year, what could they do with it? How many great new ideas could they bring to market? How many new jobs — heck, new industries — could they create? Why don’t we invest more in the future?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:08 am:
Sorry, this should go here.
–”We are not threatening anybody,” Duffy told committee members. –
The gall.
In 1928, JD Rockefeller Jr. took out an option on a couple of acres in Midtown to build an opera house.
After the Crash of 1929 and the onset of The Depression, he bought up another 20 acres and personally financed Rockefeller Center, the largest privately financed building project in history, estimated to cost $250 million in 1930 dollars.
Capitalism was on the ropes, and the biggest capitalist of his day put up his own money to invest in the system, putting thousands to work for years. He didn’t have to do it.
Contrast with today.
In the worst economic crisis since The Depression, the uber-capitalists of CME see an opportunity to extort millions from the people of Illinois.
Not because they’re in trouble, they’re not. Profits are through the roof, up 29% in the last quarter. Not because they reside in a bad business climate, they don’t. Duffy said the other day that CME has enjoyed an average 19% annual growth for the last 30 years.
They’re doing it because people are worried about their jobs and scared for the future. They’re doing it they have the mayor of Chicago decreeing that a CME tax break is his biggest priority in Springfield. They’re doing it because they have the state Senate president decrying how “unfair” the CME tax burden is.
They’re doing it because they think the fix is in and that they can get away with it. That they can just threaten us, then steal from us, like we’re a bunch of rubes.
This is nothing more than an Outfit-like shakedown, aided and abetted by two of the top leaders in the Democratic Party.
If it goes down, we’ll all know where we really stand.
- soccermom - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:12 am:
Word — I thought your point about MF Global yesterday was well-taken. This seems like a pretty clear attempt to get Illinois taxpayers to offset the losses for their failure to do their job.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:17 am:
Wow wordslinger how many threads you gonna make the same comment on? There might be a caption contest later, don’t forget that one either.
So I am sure when you buy on-line you pay the state the sales tax right? No trying to reduce your tax costs for you, regardless of how well you are doing. Never appeal an assessment either, glad to pay every cent of tax you do. Don’t do business with any company that seeks to reduce it’s tax burden either, do you?
You must be very pure and noble, good for you.
Well then good for you. Even the example you site, I suspect Rockafeller saw a chance for I don’t know that evil profit… So if they can make more profit by moving to Indiana it’s their right to do so.
- Aldyth - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:18 am:
Reality will be what it is. Doesn’t make it any less disgusting.
Wasn’t it Leona Helmsly who said “Only little people pay taxes”?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:18 am:
===This seems like a pretty clear attempt to get Illinois taxpayers to offset the losses===
Since they started threatening to move months ago, I’m pretty sure you are connecting way too many dots.
- Borealis - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:19 am:
You go Wordslinger-
This deal with stink, no matter what the final numbers are if approved by the tools in the legislature.
Move to Indiana, and see what a great place it is to do business. Employees will enjoy a quality of life that will not measure up to what it is available in the Chicago region. It will be fairly noticeable right away, especially when it comes to cultural and entertainment options.
I spent a month in Indy one weekend..
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:20 am:
–So if they can make more profit by moving to Indiana it’s their right to do so.–
It sure is. I’m in business, I have nothing against profits.
I object to being extorted.
- walkinfool - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:26 am:
It’s not clear from news reports just what CME is threatening to do. Many other states just don’t yet have the electronic infrastructure, and the many attractions for financial professionals, of the Chicago area. Indiana, Missouri, and Wisconsin do not, for example.
There might be some reasons to move the legal HQ to gain financial incentives from other states; but there certainly are many reasons to keep the trading and the skilled employees who support trading in Chicago. Thus the whole list of economic benefits that CME supposedly brings to Illinis is misleading, because many might continue regardless.
- Borealis - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:28 am:
oops-I meant to say will stink, but of course it will come with stink too..
- hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:32 am:
hold up. cme did 994 TRILLION in trades last year? isnt that more than 10 times the entire gdp of earth?
- OneMan - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:42 am:
So never tried to get a better deal from a vendor by pointing out how you can get something cheaper someplace else?
- Bill Edley - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:46 am:
No entity within our society gains more benefits from government than corporations. Their very existence and limited liability are created by government, and yet, they pay an ever decreasing burden of the cost of government.
Americans are entering a period of diminishing expectations for themselves. The idea that what’s good for corporate America will somehow trickle down to the middle class never had any empirical justification, and yet, today’s CEOs demand more tribute. The greatest challenge we face in the 21st Century is getting corporations to operate as our servants rather than our masters.
- Responsa - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:56 am:
==entity within our society gains more benefits from government than corporations. Their very existence and limited liability are created by government==
Wait. What?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:57 am:
–So never tried to get a better deal from a vendor by pointing out how you can get something cheaper someplace else?–
Is that how you view it? Well it’s a free country.
CME is free, of course, to try whatever it wants, I just don’t have any respect for it, at all, and am dead-set against being extorted.
- D.P. Gumby - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:58 am:
Duffy and his bilge about his fiduciary duty is just cover for corporate blackmail of the Illinois taxpayers. If his interpretation of “fiduciary duty” includes the perception that his obligation is to screw the very society that allows his corporation to profit as much as they already are, it is the same philosophy of the robber barons who kicked widows and orphans out of homes cuz that “maximized profits” too. His whole premise is corruptly misconstrued. Occupy CME!
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:58 am:
Responsa, corporations are a legal entity. That legality was created and benefits given by government.
- soccermom - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 10:59 am:
OneMan — the difference is, when I am negotiating with a vendor for a better price, it’s the vendor’s money that’s at stake, not taxpayers. I am getting tired of people giving my money away without asking me whether I think it’s a good idea.
- bored now - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:03 am:
i think responsa is suggesting that we repeal all the limits on liability, access to government benefits, resources and monies that are afforded them. i’m pretty sure that’s what he meant…
- Bill Edley - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:06 am:
Corporations are chartered by state governments and their shareholders enjoy limited liability. Ask Jon Corzine about his recent corporate bankruptcy filing ie. his personal assets are protected.
- davidh60010 - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:11 am:
Bill Edley’s comment is interesting in light of the fact that Duffy continuously says that this shakedown is compelled by a fiduciary duty to CME’s shareholders. Aside from being an increasingly tiresome rhetorical device, this is also a rather crabbed interpretation of fiduciary duty. (Employing slave labor might also maximize returns to shareholders.) If corporations are the predominant institutions in contemporary times, perhaps the concepts of fiduciary duty and a corporation’s responsibilities need to be more carefully examined.
- Responsa - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:17 am:
Rich @10:58, thanks, I know that. I was more reacting to the overall theme of the comment, the wording of which suggested to me he was saying that the “corporations” were created by government for the government’s use, rather than the narrower point that the “legality” to operate as a business was authorized/granted by the government. It sounded like an over-reaching talking point when he said: “The greatest challenge we face in the 21st Century is getting corporations to operate as our servants rather than our masters.” The servants-masters rhetoric did not sit right for me.
Perhaps I misinterpreted the previous commenter’s intent.
- Responsa - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:29 am:
bored@11:03–Of couse I neither said, or even implied ANY of that and I’m pretty sure you know that, too–which makes the fact that you thought that it was OK to personalize and print it surprising.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:30 am:
Responsa, when you try to twist somebody else’s words, you gotta expect it to be tossed back at you, but that’s enough from everybody on this. Move along.
- Bill - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:39 am:
I pick never.
- Chris - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:41 am:
Duffy is, in part, operating under the (always, always, always) correct concept of “If you don’t ask, the answer is already no”.
What does CME lose if no bill is passed and they don’t follow thru on the threat to leave? They just take another run at it in the spring after making up some BS about not wanting to undertake the disruption of moving while dealing with the MF Global fallout, and say that with finalizing the MF issues, they’re preparing to move. They can bluff and bluff and bluff and then *still* end up with the winning hand.
What I don’t get is, they paid ~$100m in taxes in 2010, but we’re dealing with a proposal that will resuce tax receipts related to CME by several times that–how does that work, exactly?
- Shore - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:45 am:
compared to the rest of the state, springfield is a lot less of an issue in the north suburbs. Some of it is because of the location, some of it is because of other issues. This issue could resonate if CME leaves. A lot of those workers live in suburban cook and lake county and I don’t really think a lot of them or their families would be happy to have to leave for indiana or texas or ohio.
- Borealis - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 11:57 am:
Shore-
I say let’s call Duffy’s bluff.
Let’s keep tabs on how many folks move away from the amenities that Chicago offers…they will have no choice of course to move unless they don’t have access to a computer with which to transact trades, but DUH, I think most of them do.
I know the restaurants and retail near the CME will be hurt if they leave, but other entities will eventually lease in the building…time and business will march on without CME/CBOE near Wacker, LaSalle, and Jackson.
Don’t let the door hit you on the, well, you know the rest of the saying.
- Chris - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 12:04 pm:
“I say let’s call Duffy’s bluff.
Let’s keep tabs on how many folks move away from the amenities that Chicago offers…they will have no choice of course to move unless they don’t have access to a computer with which to transact trades, but DUH, I think most of them do.”
Pfft. If (yeah, big if) anyone is actually accurately portraying the issue, CME doesn’t have to physically relocate anyone other than some IT guys to keep the servers running correctly, and their state of incorporation and/or titular HQ.
They move their servers to Hammond (or whatever) and their state of incorporation to Indiana, and keep the rest of the operations here. The electronic trades no longer “close” “in” Illinois, and they no longer have any Illinois income related thereto. Almost nobody necessarily has to actually move.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 12:12 pm:
–They move their servers to Hammond (or whatever) and their state of incorporation to Indiana, and keep the rest of the operations here. The electronic trades no longer “close” “in” Illinois, and they no longer have any Illinois income related thereto. Almost nobody necessarily has to actually move.–
Then why don’t they just do it? What’s holding them back?
Why are they opening in January a co-location in Aurora?
Why doesn’t every exchange do what you suggest? Why have none done it, if it’s so easy?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 12:18 pm:
–As the world’s leading and most diverse derivatives marketplace, CME Group believes that it is both a responsibility and a privilege to invest in the global communities where we live and work. Through our charitable foundations, matching gift program, Amicus community outreach program and other community relations endeavors, we are able to positively impact the lives of those in need. And, beyond our financial support, the lasting relationships we build in our communities will guide us in our longstanding commitment to good corporate citizenship.–
http://www.cmegroup.com/company/co
rporate-citizenship/index.html
- Doug - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 12:22 pm:
The reason they won’t do it without moving people is that the traders want to be as close to the servers as possible.
Why?
That 1/100th of a second matters in HFT (High Frequency Trading).
- but what do I know??? - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 12:39 pm:
To William - this has nothing to do with sales tax, refunds, or flat rates. It’s all about apportionment of income…Illinois tax law assumes that everyone is an Illinois resident (registered corps included), and therefore Illinois would tax you on ALL of your income from all sources, especially if you are an Illinois corp., as CME currently is. From there, when a corp does business in another state, we allow them to apportion their income based on a ratio of income. Once upon a time, that was a three-tiered calculation, based on the average of property, payroll, and sales receipts made in Illinois divided by the total of those three factors everywhere. Along the way, a large Illinois-based corporation started lobbying, and the apportionment factor computation changed until it was based soley on sales in illinois divided by sales everywhere. At the time, electronic sales were not a big issue (the late 90’s), and the tax laws (income and sales) never caught up. So, the current apportionment methods are definitely biased for one major Illinois corporation. In addition, Illinois has always provided “Special Apportionment Formulas” for transporation, insurance, and financial corporations. Most recently, Broadcast media was added to the special apportionment formula list.
I don’t think that CME is putting an unreasonable request on the table, and I believe that they definitely got left out of the loophole, especially as electronic purchasing grew by leaps and bounds. Do, I agree with the deal on the table and support how much it costs? Not necessarily, but I do agree that something needs to be done.
And the Christmas tree thing has to stop. Mr. Duffy is correct….he isn’t looking for a loophole or a handout. The IITA provides that CME could, at any time, petition the Director of Revenue for a special apportionment fact, if they can prove that existing sales apportionment factor does not fairly represent the results of the way they do business.
(f) Alternative allocation. If the allocation and apportionment provisions of subsections (a) through (e) and of subsection (h) do not fairly represent the extent of a person’s business activity in this State, the person may petition for, or the Director may, without a petition, permit or require, in respect of all or any part of the person’s business activity, if reasonable:
(1) Separate accounting;
(2) The exclusion of any one or more factors;
(3) The inclusion of one or more additional factors which will fairly represent the person’s business activities in this State; or
(4) The employment of any other method to effectuate an equitable allocation and apportionment of the person’s business income.
- mokenavince - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 12:59 pm:
The Democrat’s raising taxes a reaped this ire.
And opened Pandora’s box. We should debate and listen to your opponents, we should all learn from
the mistakes that they make in Spingfield. There are no easy answers.
- Lakeview - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 1:06 pm:
If corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to be in the lowest-tax jurisdiction, rather than the one with the most total advantages, why are so many tech companies based in California? Why are so many brokerage firms based in New York? A lot of Chicago companies have a hard time getting talented people to move from CA or NYC to here. And Duffy thinks Indianapolis would be an easier sell?
Let him go. Honestly. Let him go and be done with it. And he can go down in history as the guy who destroyed the CME.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 1:10 pm:
Lakeview, CME’s top competitor is ICE, which is based in Atlanta, not exactly a hotbed of high tech.
- Chris - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 1:13 pm:
“Why doesn’t every exchange do what you suggest? Why have none done it, if it’s so easy?”
b/c as Doug sez, milliseconds matter and they have to be sure that the active traders will follow, instead of shifting to NYC, or overseas.
And, yes, a lot of the involved folks aren’t interested in living in Indy, or Columbus, or Dallas, despite the charms of those towns.
- Ahoy - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 2:32 pm:
It’s easy to do an economic impact analysis of what CME moving would do to the Gross State Product and the effect it would have on State and local tax revenue. Surprised they did not release those numbers.
- the shareholders - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 2:54 pm:
Lets look at the facts-specifically regarding Duffy’s unending comments about his duty to the shareholders of CME stock.
After being a mutual company for 100 years, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) or Merc - went publc around 2001. Shares went for $35/share. Later, the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) - or Board - also went public. Both rose significantly.
Around 2005-2006, CME decided to purchase the CBOT and both entities merged to become the CME Group. The stock traded under the name CME. The combined operations consoldiated at the Landmark building at LaSalle and Jackson. The CME received substantial TIF subsidies for this move.
Main point - by 2007, CME stock rose to over $700/share. After steadily decreasing around 2009, it is currently trading about $270/share.
–>None of that decrease in share price was caused by Illinois corporation tax increases!
- bored now - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 3:01 pm:
Responsa: wait. i’m not aloud to mock inane comments??? what?
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 3:13 pm:
Rich,
Atlanta is actually a high-tech area with 13,000 tech companies employing nearly 200,000 tech workers. AT&T, IBM Corp., General Electric, Siemens, Verizon Wireless, Cisco, Google, HP, and others have a significant presence in Atlanta.
- Chris - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 3:20 pm:
“It’s easy to do an economic impact analysis of what CME moving would do to the Gross State Product”
Sure, but is it easy to do an *accurate* analysis of same?
- Lakeview - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 4:14 pm:
What Cincinnatus said. There’s a lot of tech infrastructure there from the BellSouth days. Also, Atlanta has better weather than Chicago or Indianapolis, and it is popular with your black MBA crowd. And, it has an international airport, something that matters to companies that aspire to be world-class. How many of the people who visit the CME from London really want to change planes at O’Hare so that they can get to Indianapolis?
- Justin Boland - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 6:26 pm:
Well, they’ll need to leave their trading floor in Chicago regardless — not just for the traders themselves but especially for the HFT infrastructure.
http://www.spreadnetworks.com/spread-networks/spread-solutions/dark-fiber-networks/overview
- Gregor - Wednesday, Nov 9, 11 @ 7:43 pm:
If this issue goes to a special session, there is a *little* more chance that the legislators will resist adding on non-related junk to the main issue, under the more direct observation.
Atlanta, Hmmm? I wonder if we shouldn’t take ICE’s temperature on relocating up here. When one guy is griefing you, instead of taking him head-on, when maybe you can’t, you help his rival a little bit, and get the same result.