|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Aug 18, 2012 9:33:26 GMT -5
Labor deal has Phoenix Coyotes in limbo. Doan, Maloney wait on CBA, ownership Sarah McLellan The Republic | azcentral.com Aug. 16 The Coyotes have been among the more conservative operators this off-season, waiting for potential buyer Greg Jamison and long-term captain Shane Doan to decide their futures with the team before the front office could further retool the roster. But in the weeks leading up to the scheduled open of training camps in mid-September, the pulse around the league has copied that of the Coyotes, slowing as uncertainty picks up with the collective-bargaining agreement expiration date approaching. "Everybody is in a holding pattern in regards to the deals they can potentially make," Coyotes General Manager Don Maloney said. "The last number of years August is a quiet month anyway, but this CBA makes it a little quieter than normal." Discussions between the NHL and NHL Players' Association are ongoing, with each side already presenting a proposal, but the gap in negotiations appears wide. The current CBA expires on Sept. 15, and if a new deal isn't reached by then, the league plans to lock out the players. With that possibility looming, caution has replaced the enthusiasm that kicked off the summer. "I don't foresee a lot happening around here right now," Maloney said. That could change if Jamison's bid to purchase the Coyotes is approved. With that could come the return of Doan, who has loitered on the sidelines of free agency in an attempt to remain with the Coyotes once they've secured new ownership. "We're still waiting on our ownership situation to be resolved," Maloney said. "It's still trending positively. We're still very optimistic about it. Once that happens, hopefully we can re-sign Shane to a deal that works for both of us." Maloney has remained in regular communication with Jamison, updating him on the team's plans for new player contracts and the status of talks with Doan. "He's certainly been a part of keeping current on where those discussions are right now," Maloney said. "He's fully aware of where we're at from a hockey perspective." Smith update Securing a contract extension for goalie Mike Smith was an end-of-the-summer objective for Maloney, but that has been put on hold until ownership is resolved. "When you start looking at big contracts (including the length of deals), you certainly want ownership to be included in the process," Maloney said. Smith is entering the final year of a two-year deal worth $4 million, and although a deal isn't imminent, both sides have talked about an extension. "We exchanged some ideas," Maloney said. Roster set, for now Barring a lockout, it's very likely the current roster will be the one that debuts at training camp. "I really like our goaltending and defense," Maloney said. "Do we need to get stronger up front? Yes. But I look at it the season, God willing, starts in early October, and we have lots of time to figure out where our needs are or how to get better." The notable off-season acquisitions have been forwards Steve Sullivan and David Moss and defenseman Zbynek Michalek. "The ownership situation, if that concludes in a positive manner and we're able to re-sign Shane, which we certainly remain optimistic that we'll be able to get something done, then it certainly gives us a real boost going into training camp," Maloney said. www.azcentral.com/sports/coyotes/articles/2012/08/16/20120816labor-deal-has-phoenix-coyotes-limbo.html
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Aug 25, 2012 0:46:10 GMT -5
www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2012/08/24/appeals-court-rules-against-glendale.htmlAppeals court rules against Glendale in sales tax ballot measure battle Phoenix Business Journal by Mike Sunnucks, Senior Reporter Date: Friday, August 24, 2012, 2:53pm MST - Last Modified: Friday, August 24, 2012, 3:04pm MST Mike Sunnucks Senior Reporter- Phoenix Business Journal The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled against the city of Glendale Friday, saying a measure seeking to reverse a city sales tax increase should go on the November ballot. The city of Glendale is considering whether it will appeal the ruling to the Arizona Supreme Court. The city has been fighting to keep the sales tax measure off the ballot. “We are currently reviewing the ruling and are looking at our options to determine the next step,” said city spokeswoman Jen Stein. The appeals court sided with the proponents of the sales tax cut measure, Save Glendale Now, and disagreed with a lower court ruling that ballot measure language was misleading to voters. The three-judge panel said the ballot measure’s language “was neither misleading or inaccurate” and ordered Glendale to move forward with seeing if the group’s voter petition signatures will qualify it for the November ballot. The measure reverses a temporary Glendale sales tax increase passed in June, along with some other tax increases. Those increases will help the city close budget shortfalls and are indirectly linked to Glendale’s $300 million arena deal with prospective Phoenix Coyotes buyer Greg Jamison. The city is slated to pay Jamison $17 million next year to run the arena if he buys the Coyotes. Questions have been raised about whether the removal of the sales tax increase could jeopardize Glendale’s ability to afford the Coyotes arena deal. The appeals court did not rule on whether Glendale City Clerk Pam Hanna had the power to disqualify the measure as part of her duties, but said the city’s disqualification based on misleading language was not proper. Save Glendale Now (SGN) had argued city clerks don’t have the substantiative power to nix ballot measures in its appeal. The court also ruled against Glendale on its arguments related to when the tax measure could go on the ballot and other technicality issues with the measure. SGN is backed by Sanderson Ford, Hickman’s Family Farms and the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona. Opponents of the Coyotes deal and the sales tax increase welcomed the decision. “I am pleased to see that Arizona Appeals Court unanimously ruled that Glendale voters can have a say on Glendale’s sales tax increase. Glendale should not have to try and deny the voters a say on the sales tax on technicalities after 4,700 voters signed the ballot initiative,” said Walt Opaska, a conservative attorney running for Glendale mayor. The temporary sales tax increase would give Glendale one of the highest sales tax rates in the country, Opaska said. The new 0.07 percent increase went into place Aug. 1. Glendale’s city sales tax rate is now 2.9 percent, and that doesn’t include additional state or county levies.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Aug 25, 2012 0:46:55 GMT -5
Darcy Marwick @zanjerofalls The other ruling today was that COG has to pay court costs for Glendale Now as well. Current COG keeps throwing good $ after bad!
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Aug 25, 2012 0:50:06 GMT -5
Patrice Lavigne @patlca @lisahalverstadt I doubt they will bring it to supreme court. Doesn't look good when a city fight at this point to avoid elections. Retweeted by ZoneNordiques 2.0
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Aug 25, 2012 0:52:28 GMT -5
^^^Re appeal to Supreme Court - my understanding and recollection is that Save Glendale Now actually already ASKED for the Arizona Supreme Court to hear THEIR appeal, and "leave to appeal" was denied by the Supreme Court. I'm not sure how it works in Arizona law, but it kinda sounds like this Court of Appeal decision will stand, and that leave to appeal to the Supreme Court will be unlikely for the City of Glendale, even if they ask for an appeal.
|
|
|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Aug 31, 2012 19:52:10 GMT -5
Trending Topics: Can we just move the Coyotes?
By Ryan Lambert | Puck Daddy – 3 hours ago Trending Topics is a column that looks at the week in hockey, occasionally according to Twitter. If you're only going to comment to say how stupid Twitter is, why not just go have a good cry for the slow, sad death of your dear internet instead? Remember like three or four weeks ago when Greg Jamison finally put enough money together to go out and actually buy the Coyotes and re-sign Shane Doan and keep hockey in the desert and vindicate Gary Bettman and everyone would be happy forever? Yeah, that was like three or four weeks ago. Nothing has happened with it since, not really, because of course all this stuff moves at a glacial pace unless the league swoops in and basically sneaks a team out of the country overnight because it's a lost cause. Such was the case with Atlanta, and it should be the case with Arizona. The latest bit of news in this seemingly never-ending saga is that the City of Glendale, broke and limitlessly daft, has asked Jamison to rework the deal they agreed to earlier in the summer to give the team a lease for Jobing.com Arena for the next 20 years. The deal as originally structured would have given Jamison's group, or whoever ends up buying the team, $324 million over that time. That's more than two Shane-Doan-To-Buffalo contracts a year! And the problem seems to be a rather vicious cycle. While the city is allowed to approve the deal even if Jamison doesn't yet own the team, it's not comfortable doing so. Meanwhile, Jamison doesn't really want to buy the team without the deal being in place, and of course there's that whole business with the lockout. If the league is asking for $170 million to buy the team — and maybe Jamison and his buddies actually have that money on hand these days — he wants assurances that he'll be able to collect on that with a team that actually plays and generates revenues and things of this nature. All of this has, of course, been complicated by referendums and potential work stoppages and all that, so who can blame anyone for wanting to stay out of it? But at the same time, how much more of this stupid garbage are we going to have to sit through before someone just says enough already? Coyote fans exist. They care about this team. But as with Atlanta, there aren't enough to justify keeping them in a market that doesn't really want them all that badly. But look, I wrote about this same issue almost exactly a year ago: Jamison's name has been kicking around for more than 12 months now, and apart from him actually getting some cash together, very little indeed has been accomplished. Shouldn't that, on top of all the other failed bids, be enough to convince everyone involved that really, this team and this city aren't worth the effort any more? You couldn't blame any party for wanting to walk away. The league has been dumping money into a hole in the desert like a pre-retirement Mike Ehrmantraut for four years. The City of Glendale has been pumping dollar after fruitless dollar into trying to make something work, and now that it almost might, they want to renegotiate. Jamison has been dangling from the line with a hook in his mouth for a year, and no matter how nice it must be to own a hockey team, no one can want to own this hockey team this badly. Just move the team. It almost doesn't matter where at this point. I hear they're building an arena in Quebec City, and I know it's not ready yet, but the city's junior team plays in a rink that holds more than 15,000. That's more than the MTS Centre. Of course that's complicated by the fact that you might not have a buyer yet, and certainly moving the team to Canada would increase the price tag to the point where it's too rich for Jamison's blood. But if this many people are willing to pony up hundreds of millions of dollars to keep a team that routinely loses money in Phoenix, there have to be more than a few willing to keep it in a tiny rink for a few years before moving into a brand new building, especially in a market so deliriously desirous of an NHL team that they're literally breaking their own laws to get it there. No one involved in this doesn't know why the Coyotes are still in Glendale. The city sure isn't kicking and screaming to keep the team. The fans don't seem to care either; the team moved to Glendale in 2003, and have had two seasons with average attendance of more than 15,000 exactly once since the lockout ended (and that was in 2005-06, so maybe it is the fans' fault for welcoming the team back with open arms after all). Nope, it's because Gary Bettman wants a team in Glendale. Losing another team north of the border would look bad for him personally, and thus it doesn't happen. We can all rest assured that everyone involved tried really hard to make this work, but it just didn't. This is past the point of being a farce. Given how much he's getting puppeteered by ownership in the current CBA negotiations, how much longer can he justify these losses to the guys who cut his checks? If these latest CBA negotiations are all about profit certainty, rather than cost certainty, then one way to shore everything up in a big, big way — and stop losing millions of dollars a year — is to get the Coyotes the hell out of Arizona. Am I actually turning optimistic about hockey being played on time? I'm not naïve enough to think that we're anywhere near either the NHL or the Players' Association reaching any kind of accord in this CBA war but I'm starting to feel like they're at least trying to do it, which is encouraging. Today, maybe by the time you read this, the PA will have submitted it's counter-proposal to the league's latest offer, which itself came down later this week. You'll recall that the initial, rather discourteous salvo came in late July, and the Fehr brothers took more than two weeks to respond with their own, rather saner but still unacceptable answer. At least now, we're progressing at a much faster clip. It was another two weeks before the league answered, and at least this was an offer that could be viewed — if you squinted real hard and closed one eye and kind of let your eyes unfocus like a Magic Eye image — as a reasonable one. It was a non-starter as well, but hey, the NHLPA took only three days to turn around an offer this time. That's improvement, and shows that maybe the league isn't intent on simply locking everyone out when training camps are set to open. Might they be trying to keep up appearances and still plotting to proceed as it seemed they would a month ago? Sure. But — and I don't know why I'm going glass-half-full here — everything I've read makes it seem like they're trying in earnest, and that's kind of encouraging. My default answer whenever someone asks me, "Will there be a lockout?" is "At least until Thanksgiving," but now I'm at least less sure of that answer. And given where we were a week ago, I'll take it happily. Pearls of Biz-dom We all know that there isn't a better Twitter account out there than that of Paul Bissonnette. So why not find his best bit of advice on love, life and lappers from the last week? BizNasty on the worst thing ever: "Finally found something worse than the people who post food pics on Instagram and Twitter. The people who comment on them." If you've got something for Trending Topics, holla at Lambert on Twitter or via e-mail. He'll even credit you so you get a thousand followers in one day and you'll become the most popular person on the Internet! You can also visit his blog if you're so in
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 4, 2012 2:13:25 GMT -5
September 04, 2012 | OPINIONS Type Size: A A APrintEmailMost Popular Tax initiative alone won't rescue city 4 comments Sept. 2, 2012 06:43 PM The Republic | azcentral.com The group fighting Glendale's recent sales-tax increase dubbed itself Save Glendale Now. That's a lofty goal -- one that will take far more than reversing a 0.7 percentage-point sales tax. Whether the measure will land on November's ballot is still in the hands of the courts. Glendale is challenging last month's ruling permitting its inclusion on several fronts, including that staff believes the description of the proposed measure would mislead citizens. City Attorney Craig Tindall said Glendale recognizes the right of citizens to pursue ballot initiatives, but the city must ensure that everything is done properly so residents make an informed decision and the election process is preserved. The tax increase went into effect Aug. 1 and is expected to bring in about $20 million this year. City leaders supporting the increase say it is necessary to avoid severe budget cuts and elimination of city services. Opponents of the tax point to Glendale's continued support of the Phoenix Coyotes, at a cost of $17 million this fiscal year. Glendale has pledged $50 million in the past two years to the National Hockey League to manage the team and the city's arena until a Coyotes buyer is secured. Only $10 million of that has come directly from the city's operating budget. The rest was borrowed from the city's utility funds. That $40 million is expected to be repaid over time from the operating budget. Reversing the tax increase only complicates Glendale's already dire financial situation, exacerbated by the economic downturn. In six years, Glendale drained more than $71 million in reserve funds, leaving less than $2 million today. The city's budget shortfall was $36 million this year, forcing layoffs, other cuts and the tax increase. Glendale is committed to paying more than $800 million in debt obligations for its expansion into the sports and entertainment business. Those debts are not going away. We wish we could undo some of the decisions made by the council over the past decade, particularly approval of $200 million for Camelback Ranch. Forward thinking, however, led to development of Westgate City Center, University of Phoenix Stadium, Tanger Outlet Center and nearby restaurants and office buildings. Glendale has hosted college football's bowl championship and is preparing for its second Super Bowl. Did the city overreach with Camelback Ranch? Certainly. Has the city been held hostage by the NHL? No doubt. Should citizens have been more engaged throughout the years? Most definitely. So where to go from here? If the sales-tax measure appears on the ballot, it is imperative that all voters have a clear understanding of what will happen with their vote. Those supporting the measure need to accurately explain what it means. The city, in turn, must explain what is in jeopardy if the tax increase is repealed. City and community leaders need to work together to create a plan to move Glendale forward. Everything should be on the table -- a city audit, zero-based budgeting, scaled-back services, arena-use fees, negotiations with Phoenix on Camelback Ranch and innovative partnerships with neighboring cities. If we are to "Save Glendale Now," it will require a herculean effort involving more than a sales-tax initiative. Read more: www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2012/09/02/20120902glendale-tax-initiative-not-enough.html#ixzz25TzlcPsF
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 5, 2012 16:46:28 GMT -5
www.glendalestar.com/news/article_fe6f330a-f69d-11e1-984d-001a4bcf887a.htmlThe Glendale Star Glendale's community weekly Group files amicus brief opposing Save Glendale Now Related Documents Amicus Brief Glendale First Posted: Tuesday, September 4, 2012 7:36 am | Updated: 1:54 pm, Wed Sep 5, 2012. By CAROLYN DRYER, Editor | 16 comments The group, Glendale First, which first filed a statement of organization opposed to the referendum petition that wanted to void the city’s arena management agreement with potential Coyotes owner Greg Jamison, has now filed an amicus brief opposing Save Glendale Now’s sales tax initiative petition. The brief was filed Friday with the Arizona Supreme Court. In summary, the amicus brief cites several other court cases and state law, which it states is in direct conflict with the ruling of the appellate court, which ruled Save Glendale Now’s petitions were legal in spite of the fact the petitions circulated for signatures did not have the serial number on the petitions along with the name, Save Glendale Now. In its own brief filed with the Supreme Court, SGN said the city’s petition for review should not even be considered, citing reports in the media that the decision by the city to appeal the appellate court’s ruling was made “behind closed doors.” “The court may take judicial notice that the city’s website lists no public meeting with an agenda item reflecting a public vote on whether to appeal the Court of Appeals decision in this case,” SGN attorney Stephen Tully wrote in his brief. “Since ‘the legal action violating the open meeting law was the very decision to file this appeal,’ the court should deny the petition for review because it is null and void.” Tully cited A.R.S.Section 38-431.05(A) that states, “A legal action taken in violation of the open meeting law is null and void,” adding, “Even if the appeal was legally authorized, it is without merit.” The court must now decide if it will even review the briefs, and following that, it must determine if the Glendale First’s brief arguments are valid. SGN treasurer Connie Wilhelm remained optimistic about the outcome, saying, “It’s just rehashing the same thing. The court has not made a decision whether they’ll accept the brief. “If they accept it, it will be done on the brief, not oral arguments.” She said, “We went on the ballot today (Aug. 31). They have until Sept. 7 to take it off. “We feel very good about what came out of the appellate court. There’s nothing new. We feel very optimistic. They either deny the request for review or affirm the appellate court ruling.” Glendale First’s statement of organization and financial report show Cave Creek residents George Fallar as chairman and Jessica Engel as the treasurer, and a Cave Creek address for Glendale First. As of Aug. 16, one loan in the amount of $8,000 was made July 16 by Fallar. A repayment was reported as of Aug. 14 in the amount of $7,900. In-kind contributions by various individuals totaled $2,493.13. This included printed fliers, water and food for volunteers, flags that were handed out with the fliers, web domain registration, tape measure and chalk to set up at libraries, various supplies, and a three-minute informational video, which cost $1,400. Of the 19 in-kind contributors, two were Glendale residents, four listed Phoenix addresses, one lives in Buckeye, one is from Surprise, and the remaining contributors, 11, listed Cave Creek addresses. A decision by the Arizona Supreme Court is not expected until Thursday, but could come as early as Wednesday.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 5, 2012 21:16:13 GMT -5
Lisa Halverstadt @lisahalverstadt #Glendale sales-tax initiative to appear on the November ballot. #AZ Supreme Court denies city’s request for review.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 5, 2012 21:18:10 GMT -5
www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20120905glendale-sales-tax-initiative-appear-ballot.htmlGlendale sales-tax initiative to appear on ballot by Lisa Halverstadt - Sept. 5, 2012 06:29 PM The Republic | azcentral.com Glendale voters will have a say on the city's sales-tax hike. The Arizona Supreme Court on Wednesday decided not to review a recent state appeals court ruling that placed the initiative back on the November ballot. Court's ruling City elections officials initially rejected the initiative, but an appeals court sided with initiative supporters. If voters approve the initiative, some city leaders say it could devastate the budget-strapped city. In June, the Glendale City Council had approved the increase to add about $20 million to city coffers and avoid severe cuts. The increase, which took effect Aug. 1, would help the city cover an arena management payment to the Phoenix Coyotes' likely buyer. The initiative puts the issue before voters, who must decide whether they are willing to pay a 2.9 city percent sales tax on most city purchases. Before the city council approved the increase, that city sales tax rate was 2.2 percent. With Maricopa County and state sales taxes included, shoppers in Glendale already pay a total of 10.2 percent on purchases. That's among the highest sales tax rates in the Valley. The city had rejected the petitions submitted by the anti-sales-tax group called Save Glendale Now, saying the measure was misleading because an initiative could not reverse the council's vote to increase the tax. Save Glendale Now sued in hopes of getting the measure back on the ballot. A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled in favor of Glendale, but a three-judge appellate panel said that the issue should appear on the November ballot. The state supreme court decided Wednesday that it would not review the latter ruling, which means the appeals court ruling stands. Check azcentral.com for updates.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 5, 2012 21:47:45 GMT -5
Jets Hockey Forum @nhlwinnipeg Now that #Coyotes tax is going to ballot, the tax payers of #Glendale get to decide if they want increased taxes in return for NHL hockey.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 5, 2012 21:49:11 GMT -5
swervinmervin @justgotupndjava The fuse is lit; the alarm clock is set; the sales tax referendum is on the ballot. The Coyotes howl into a North wind.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 6, 2012 9:28:50 GMT -5
Fred Poulin @fredpoulin98 The Phoenix #Coyotes saga is far from being over. Next you will find the necessary steps before anything can be made official.
The City of Glendale and Greg Jamison need to officially finalize and sign the arena management lease. 1/5
Greg Jamison and his group of unknown investors need to have all the money necessary to purchase the team #NHL #Coyotes 2/5
The sales tax vote now officially on the November ballot has to go in Glendale's favor, which is far from certain. #NHL #Coyotes 3/5
The deal, including the purchase of the team & the signature of the AMF, has to close before 12/31, before the new council takes over 4/5
The closed deal has to survive the gift clause challenge from the Goldwater Institute, which is far from certain 5/5
swervinmervin @justgotupndjava @fredpoulin98 I agree with your analysis. The other interesting thing will be the composition of city council after Nov. 6....
@fredpoulin98 Even if the new councillors don't take office till 1/1/13, if they are opposed to the Coyotes deal, that could also...
@fredpoulin98....influence the actions of the city council through 12/31/12 - especially if the sales tax increase is rejected. #lameduck
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 6, 2012 11:09:00 GMT -5
thehockeywriters.com/the-phoenix-coyotes-the-saga-that-keeps-dragging-on/The Phoenix Coyotes: The Saga That Keeps Dragging On Fred Poulin | September 6, 2012 With the beginning of the NHL season only one month away (if there is no lock-out), everyone thought the Phoenix Coyotes saga would be over by now and that the NHL-owned team would have a new owner ready to turn things around in Glendale, a suburb of Phoenix. Greg Jamison, former CEO of the San Jose Sharks, who has been interested in buying the Coyotes for several months now, has yet to officially purchase the team from the NHL despite stating that he found the necessary financial backing and investors to make it official. Earlier this week, it has been reported by Scott Burnside of ESPN that potential owner Greg Jamison has secured enough equity to purchase the Coyotes and meet the NHL’s rumored asking price of $170MM, even though the Coyotes are valued at only $134MM. Jamison had previously entered into a deal with the City of Glendale for a 20-year lease that would see the City of Glendale pay him $324MM in management fees over the life of the proposed lease. Among the potential investors are some members of Ice Edge Group, a collection of North American businessmen who were front-runners to buy the team themselves back in 2009, purchase that never happened to due to a lack of equity. In May 2012, after one year of negotiations, Ice Edge walked away from purchasing the Coyotes, because they were unable to strike an exclusivity deal preventing other bidders from buying the team. Last week, Jamison came out publicly to announce he had finally found the necessary financing to sign the arena management contract with the City of Glendale and purchase the Coyotes from the NHL. However, following a closed-door meeting on the issue, the city council told administrators not to close the deal with Jamison and his group until they officially buy the team from the NHL and some changes can be made to some of the terms and details of the agreement. “Since June, the city and the NHL have been saying the next step is for Mr. Jamison to purchase the team, at which time the city was ready to sign the agreement,”Glendale spoeswoman Julie Frisoni said. “At this time, in light of other issues, the council has asked us to go back and look at options that are feasible in terms of the management agreement.” Greg Jamison has reportedly secured the necessary financing to purchase the Coyotes (Matt Kartozian-US PRESSWIRE) Glendale recently granted for the fourth time a 30-day extension to the NHL so it could continue operating Jobing.com Arena while the deal with Jamison is being worked on. With the collective bargaining agreement coming to an end on September 15th, 2012, the NHL certainly wanted to settle the ownership situation in Glendale in order to avoid distractions as a new CBA will have major impacts on revenue sharing as well as the salary cap. The Coyotes will almost certainly play at least one more season in Glendale, if the expected lock-out doesn’t wipe out the entire season, because now it’s too late to move the team to another market. September 15th is also a key date regarding team captain Shane Doan, who has yet to sign with the Coyotes or another NHL team as an unrestricted free agent, because according to Doan’s agent Terry Bross: “Shane is going to sign a contract before the CBA expires on the 15th. Ownership has to be done before the 15th, otherwise we’re signing somewhere because we don’t know what the new CBA is going to look like, and I don’t know if it’s going to limit any scope of a contract, so we want to make sure we sign before then.” Shane Doan has yet to re-sign with the Coyotes (Icon SMI) Doan, who turns 36 in early October, scored 22 goals and added 28 assists with a -8 plus/minus rating in 79 games with the Coyotes in 2011-12. Doan’s return would certainly help boost tickets sales as the team was dead last in attendance last season with a disappointing 12,400 fans per game, about 5,000 less than the league average, that, despite having a very competitive team that made the playoffs and reached the Western Conference finals, which they lost 4 games to 1 against the Stanley Cup Champions, the Los Angeles Kings. Now, let’s pretend for one minute that Jamison has secured all the required financing and is ready to move forward with the purchase of the Coyotes. There are still a few hurdles along the way that could prevent the deal from happening. 1. The City of Glendale and Greg Jamison need to officially finalize and sign the arena management lease. What was a certainty a few months back doesn’t seem set in stone any more since Glendale wants to change some terms of the original deal, which could prove detrimental to the value of the original deal that was developed last Spring between the parties. 2. Greg Jamison and his group of unknown investors need to have all the money necessary to purchase the team. While Jamison has said that he finally secured the necessary equity required to buy the team, he hasn’t made any official announcement to the public, whether it is by press conference or press release. Moreover, he has yet to name his financial backers after more than one year of negotiations with the city. 3. The sales tax vote now officially on the November ballot has to go in Glendale’s favor, which is far from certain. Yesterday, the Arizona Supreme Court announced that it will not be hearing the City of Glendale’s appeal regarding Save Glendale Now!’s tax petition. As a result, the petition will go on the ballot allowing citizens to vote on the sales-tax initiative in the November election. Glendale council voted in June to raise its share of sales tax to 2.9 per cent on August 1 in an effort to deal with a $35-million deficit as well as a $20-million payment to Jamison for managing the arena. The increase is expected to raise $22-million/year, mostly to pay for the AMF signed with Jamison, but it is opposed by many business owners who created the Save Glendale Now! group. 4. The deal, including the purchase of the team & the signature of the AMF, has to close before 2012/12/31, before the new council takes over. With the uncertainty surrounding the financial situation of the city, several candidates at the November election asked the current city council to reject the deal with a prospective owner. And with pro-Coyotes councilwoman Joyce Clark defeated in the primary election in the Yucca district by firefighter Sam Chavira, the Glendale city government is poised for turnover which doesn’t bode well for the approval of the deal with Jamison. A candidate had to pick up more than 50 percent of the vote to win outright on the August 28th election. As a result, Chavira, who is opposed to the deal, and Clark will battle head-to-head in the southwest Glendale district. 5. The closed deal has to survive the gift clause challenge from the Goldwater Institute, which is far from certain. GWI, patiently waiting in the shadow, would mostly challenge on the Arizona gift clause, on the grounds that the AMF (arena management fee) far exceeds market value, and is truly a subsidy. It could also challenge that the T.L. Hocking’s report seriously over-estimated the damage to Glendale if the Coyotes leave, in that other possible tenants/events were not seriously considered. The Goldwater Institute watchdog group helped unravel a deal with shady investor Matthew Hulsizer when the city tried to sell bonds aimed at financially facilitating Hulsizers’s purchase of the team in 2011. It will make sure the city signs a deal that doesn’t contravene the state constitution’s gift clause. You can also follow me on Twitter for more information on the NHL.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 7, 2012 7:30:54 GMT -5
tvasports.ca/tvasports/hockey/archives/2012/09/20120906-231622.htmlgoogle translate, with corrections by myself DOAN NOT WAITING FOR JAMISON The September 6, 2012 at 23h16 TVA Sports Shane Doan has never wanted to leave Phoenix. That's why he agreed with the Coyotes on the terms of any contract that will keep him with the formation of Arizona. This is what he told Thursday at the local radio station XTRA 910. However, for this agreement to be valid, Greg Jamison has to officially buy the team before September 15. According to Doan, the businessman has already raised funds for to purchase the Coyotes. However, Doan has reduced the number of other teams that he would be willing to continue his career with, down to two or three. The details of this agreement are not yet known. Earlier this summer, he was offered $ 30 million for four years by the Buffalo Sabres. "My goal has always been to stay here, repeated Doan. The organization has been great with me. " Last season, the 35-year veteran tallied 50 points (22 goals, 28 assists) in 79 games. He added nine points in 16 games during the playoffs. He totaled 788 points, including 318 goals in 16 NHL seasons. Doan was a first round pick (7th overall) of the former Winnipeg Jets draft pick in 1995. He spent his whole career with the team, following the team when it relocated to Arizona in 1996.
|
|
|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Sept 8, 2012 7:51:42 GMT -5
If You Build It, They Might Not Come: The Risky Economics of Sports Stadiums the Atlantic By Pat Garofalo and Travis Waldron 2 Sep 7 2012, 2:37 PM ET The trials of the Phoenix Coyotes, the least popular hockey team in the NHL, offer a lesson in public debt and defeat In June, the city council of Glendale, Arizona, decided to spend $324 million on the Phoenix Coyotes, an ice hockey team that plays in Glendale's Jobing.com Arena. The team has been owned by the league itself since its former owner, Jerry Moyes, declared bankruptcy in 2009. For each of the past two seasons, Glendale has paid $25 million to the league to manage the Coyotes, even as the city faced millions of dollars in budget deficits. Now, Greg Jamison, who is also part of the organization that owns the NHL's San Jose Sharks, is making a bid for the team, and would therefore be the beneficiary of the subsidies. "Take whatever number the sports promoter says and move the decimal one place to the left. Divide it by ten. That's a pretty good estimate of the actual economic impact." To put the deal in perspective, Glendale's budget gap for 2012 is about $35 million. As the city voted to give a future Coyotes owner hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, it laid off 49 public workers, and even considered putting its city hall and police station up as collateral to obtain a loan, according to the Arizona Republic. (The latter plan was ultimately scrapped.) Overall, Glendale is not only on the hook for $15 million per year over two decades to a potential Coyotes owner, but also a $12 million annual debt payment for construction of its arena. In return, according to the Republic, the city receives a measly "$2.2 million in annual rent payments, ticket surcharges, sales taxes and other fees." Even if the Coyotes were to dominate the league like no other in recent memory and return to the Stanley Cup Finals year after year, the city would still lose $9 million annually. This is an altogether too common problem in professional sports. Across the country, franchises are able to extract taxpayer funding to build and maintain private facilities, promising huge returns for the public in the form of economic development. For instance, just three of the NFL's 31 stadiums were originally built without public funds. In two of those cases, public funding was later used to upgrade the stadium or surrounding facilities, even as all 32 of the NFL's teams ranked among Forbes' 50 most valuable sporting franchises in the world in 2012. (Only MetLife Stadium, shared by the New York Jets and New York Giants, received no public funding.) Time after time, politicians wary of letting a local franchise relocate -- as the NBA's Seattle Supersonics did, to Oklahoma City before the 2008-2009 season -- approve public funds, selling the stadiums as public works projects that will boost the local economy and provide a windfall of growth. However, according to leading sports economists, stadiums and arenas rarely bring about the promised prosperity, and instead leave cities and states mired in debt that they can't pay back before the franchise comes calling for more. "The basic idea is that sports stadiums typically aren't a good tool for economic development," said Victor Matheson, an economist at Holy Cross who has studied the economic impact of stadium construction for decades. When cities cite studies (often produced by parties with an interest in building the stadium) touting the impact of such projects, there is a simple rule for determining the actual return on investment, Matheson said: "Take whatever number the sports promoter says, take it and move the decimal one place to the left. Divide it by ten, and that's a pretty good estimate of the actual economic impact." Others agree. While "it is inarguable that within a few blocks you'll have an effect," the results are questionable for metro areas as a whole, Stefan Szymanski, a sports economist at the University of Michigan, said. PUBLIC MONEY BALL There are numerous reasons for the muted economic effects. The biggest is that arenas often sit empty for a significant portion of the year. Jobing.com Arena is guaranteed 41 hockey games annually. The other 324 nights, it must find concerts, conventions or other events to fill the schedule, and in Glendale, where the arena competes with facilities in nearby Phoenix, that can be tough to do. "We've looked at tons of these things, and the one that we found that seemed to make sense is the Staples Center in Los Angeles," Matheson said. "But they use it 250 dates a year. They don't make sense when you're using it 41 times a year and competing with another venue down the street." Another reason the projects rarely make sense is because of the way they are structured. Stadiums and arenas are financed with long-term bonds, meaning cities and states will be stuck with the debt for long periods of time (often 30 years). And while cities make 30-year commitments to finance stadiums, their commitments to government workers and other local investments are often made on a year-to-year basis, meaning that, just as in Glendale, it becomes easier to eliminate public sector jobs and programs than to default on debt incurred from arenas. The counterargument -- made by council member Joyce Clark, who voted for the subsidies, and Glendale First, an organization in favor of the package -- is that the Coyotes and their arena provide support to the local economy that otherwise wouldn't be there. "It's a huge economic engine for Glendale," Bea Wyatt, a spokesperson for Glendale First said. According to Wyatt, who doesn't live in Glendale but frequents the city for Coyotes games, sales tax revenue made up 41 percent of Glendale's budget last year, and a significant portion was derived from sales around the arena. Supporters also claim the deal with Jamison is a good one for the city, since he will eventually pay for the arena's management and employ local workers. But again, economists don't seem to buy the argument. While Glendale First claims that more than 600,000 visitors -- three times Glendale's population -- came to the city for hockey last year, the Coyotes finished last in the NHL in attendance. And it is unclear how many of those visitors were, like Wyatt, residents of nearby communities who may patronize restaurants but don't spend money shopping or staying in hotels. Matheson estimates that 20 percent of fans for a Major League Baseball game come from outside the local area, and that the figure for hockey games is likely much smaller. That's hardly enough to fill the local hotels or to add outside spending to the local economy in other ways, he said. "It's not generating new revenue. This is local spending on a local event," Matheson said, adding that most of the money spent in and around arenas and stadiums would likely be spent elsewhere in the local economy if there were no sporting events to attend. Though it is clear that new facilities are not a wise investment for taxpayers, the argument from Glendale First stems from the fact that Jobing.com Arena is already there. Refusing to use more public financing - and potentially allowing the Coyotes to leave for a new town - Wyatt said, would amount to the city turning its back on its initial investment and risking the failure of hotels, restaurants, and other businesses. Glendale "jumped in with both feet, and to now change course would be detrimental to the city," Wyatt said. "Finding a management company that's going to for nothing, relying on acts of god, I don't think that's the way the world works anymore," added Clark, who objected to the characterization of the $324 million as a subsidy, instead called it a "lease management agreement." Even faced with that question, though, Szymanski was skeptical of the decision to continue financing the team. Yes, Glendale made a sizeable investment - one that went bad surprisingly fast - but that doesn't mean it should throw more good money into a project that likely isn't sustainable. "The argument here seems to be that if you only put a little more in, even though the initial investment wasn't viable, we now have a plan," Szymanski said. "It's kind of a perverse argument that taxpayers should subsidize this because businesses depend on this deal that isn't viable." "It's like doubling up in gambling to get your money back," he added. "At some point, you have to say stop." HOCKEY IN ARIZONA? If Glendale lets the Coyotes walk to another city, it won't be alone. The NHL's experiment to bring hockey to southern America has had mixed results, succeeding in cities like Nashville and Raleigh, but failing miserably in Atlanta, which lost the Thrashers to Winnipeg last year. By all indications, the Coyotes are more Atlanta than they are Nashville, particularly in the sense that they have yet to be embraced by the local population even during periods of success. "This is hockey in a non-hockey city where the average resident hasn't seen ice outside of a margarita," Matheson said. With the city shedding jobs and cutting services, the logical decision would seem to be to take back the funding it has promised to Coyotes in order to preserve those jobs and programs, a stance taken by city council member Phil Lieberman, who voted against the funding package. "I can use that $15 million for good things for Glendale," Lieberman said. "Open our libraries up again...Replace the 55 cops that we're short right now." But if the city and its residents are desperate to keep the Coyotes in town, they have to understand that doing so comes at a cost that likely won't be replaced -- not by sales tax revenue, not by economic growth, and not by outside spending. When the city subsidizes hockey, it reduces its ability to pay for public safety officials, public transportation, and services upon which its citizens rely. That's a choice the city is free to make, of course, but it shouldn't pretend that the mere presence of the Coyotes is an economic investment. Doing so simply enables a further transfer of public dollars to a private enterprise, without much hope for a return. www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/if-you-build-it-they-might-not-come-the-risky-economics-of-sports-stadiums/260900/
|
|
|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Sept 8, 2012 7:56:25 GMT -5
I wish I had seen that article sooner! Very fair assessment of the poor decision making by Glendale. WHY would you ignore the obvious and continue to pump money in when only 10% of that comes back to you??? Simple economics. Glendale would be far better off subsidizing the businesses it says are relying on the Coyotes than the Coyotes themselves.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 10, 2012 14:22:03 GMT -5
Glendale leaders are planning in case voters approve a ballot initiative that would reverse a sales-tax hike meant to help the city pay its bills and avoid massive cuts. Interim City Manager Horatio Skeete has asked the Glendale City Council to gather for a public workshop this week to discuss what should be done if the 0.7 percentage-point sales-tax increase is repealed. The council is set to meet 1:30 p.m. Wednesday. Some city officials have said the initiative could be devastating for Glendale, which faced a $35 million shortfall in its spring budget talks. The city council coped with the deficit by making cuts, laying off 49 employees and increasing the city's sales-tax rate. Although the city initially rejected the initiative group's petitions, a state Appeals Court has ruled that it should appear on the November ballot. City Attorney Craig Tindall has argued the initiative is incapable of reversing the sales-tax increase but Skeete said he must prepare for the worst. At the Wednesday workshop, Skeete said he plans to describe potential cuts and scenarios should the city lose out on the more than $20 million it's projected to receive in additional sales-tax hauls this year. Skeete hopes to get council feedback about budget priorities and where cuts might make sense if required. Skeete has provided similar information to city staff in recent days to get suggestions and to prepare them for the public discussions. All city departments would be affected should the initiative pass, Skeete said. "In my mind, we cannot come up with $22 million in cuts in the operations budget and not impact every single operation in the city," Skeete said. A planned $17 million arena management payment to likely Phoenix Coyotes buyer Greg Jamison also would be on the table. Skeete said he plans to show the council what cuts would be required should the city be locked into the $17 million fee, and those required with a "newer number." Late last month, Skeete approached Jamison about reworking the 20-year, $324 million arena deal. The interim city manager would not elaborate on suggested changes to the lease for the city-owned Jobing.com Arena but said he cannot sign the deal as it is. Since the council approved the deal in June, the sales-tax initiative has been placed on the November ballot and a National Hockey League lockout has become increasingly likely. Neither possibility was considered in the city's current deal with Jamison. Late Friday, Skeete told The Republic that he and Jamison planned to talk throughout the weekend and hoped the two could reach a middle ground soon. Jamison recently said he had the money necessary to buy the team and is waiting on the city to sign the deal so he can move forward with his purchase. The NHL Board of Governors, made up of owners and executives, is set to meet later this week and could vote on Jamison's bid for the team. Read more: www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20120910glendale-leaders-discuss-sales-tax-hike.html#ixzz2664ZOAA3
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 14, 2012 14:05:05 GMT -5
www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20120911glendale-peoria-leaders-react-courts-casino-land-decision.htmlGlendale, Peoria leaders react to court's casino-land decision 1 commentby Sonu Munshi - Sept. 14, 2012 09:29 AM The Republic | azcentral.com . Glendale and Peoria leaders this week reacted to the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision that upheld a plan to create a reservation near the border of the two cities. The decision is a win for the Tohono O'odham Nation, which wants to build a resort and casino near 95th and Northern avenues. The southern Arizona tribe still must seek separate federal approval to allow gambling there. Court to allow tribe to take casino land into trust Renderings of proposed casino near Glendale Glendale, the Gila River Indian Community and state leaders have not indicated whether they will appeal the reservation decision, either requesting another hearing in the 9th Circuit or petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court. Arguing a case before the high court could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Glendale, which has been fighting the tribal project since it was unveiled in early 2009, had spent $2.5 million as of November 2011. A city spokeswoman could not immediately provide the latest legal tally. The decision on an appeal is likely to happen before a largely new Glendale City Council is seated in January. The courts require the appeal to happen within 45 to 90 days, depending on the type of appeal. Newly elected council members could change the city's position. Many candidates favor the casino. Yucca District candidate Sam Chavira, Sahuaro District candidate Diane Douglas, Cactus District candidate Ian Hugh and mayoral candidate Manuel Cruz say it's time to stop the legal fight. In Peoria, Mayor Bob Barrett has long supported the project for the jobs it would bring. He said it would be foolish for Glendale to continue to fight the matter, especially given its financial issues. "I don't see any gain in continuing to beat a dead horse," Barrett said. "I would think it's time to acknowledge it's happening and work out the best (deal) they can with them." Peoria has benefited in recent years with hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants from the Tohono O'odham, including this week's Fiesta Peoria. But opponents in Glendale say the creation of the reservation would mean the loss of revenue. The city had anticipated annexing the property and collecting taxes. City leaders also worry a casino would tax public safety and other city resources. State and other tribal officials criticize the casino as harmful to the state gaming compact with tribes. Reporter Lisa Halverstadt contributed to this article. Read more: www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20120911glendale-peoria-leaders-react-courts-casino-land-decision.html#ixzz26TOX64xu
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 14, 2012 14:07:07 GMT -5
^^^ Glendale gets another body blow. Here, they lost their longstanding court case in which they were trying to prevent an Indian band from establishing a reservation, on which the band intends to build a casino. This is a court of appeal decision, and a loss for Glendale. Bizzare.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 14, 2012 14:09:26 GMT -5
41m Mike Sunnucks þ@mikesunx #Coyotes Glendale city manager Skeete and team buyer Jamison meeting/talking again today on arena deal, no deal final yet
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 14, 2012 14:11:26 GMT -5
Doan to make final decision public today at 5 PM ET, between signing with Coyotes or signing with the Canucks (!).
Based on what Doan has said to date, about needing assurances that the ownership was stable in Phoenix, it's hard (from my perspective) to see how that could be the case, based on what is known today (see tweet above by Sunnucks). Unless there are some further assurances being given that are not public knowledge this afternoon.
Waiting for 5 PM ET!
|
|
|
Post by NHLJets2point0 on Sept 14, 2012 21:33:00 GMT -5
Well that's it. The stupid Doan drama is over, he has signed with the Coyotes to a 4 year 21.2 year deal. The $2M bonus does not give him a freebie going into the loickout as has been reported. The bonus kicks in at the end of the deal.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 20, 2012 19:15:02 GMT -5
www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20120911glendale-considers-giving-budget-role-residents.htmlGlendale considers giving budget role to residents with audit committee Residents would get to offer input as part of audit committee by Lisa Halverstadt - Sept. 19, 2012 09:45 PM The Republic | azcentral.com Glendale residents could soon play a larger role in the city's budget process. City staffers earlier this month suggested forming an audit committee that would review city financial statements and annual external audits and push for plans to resolve issues that come up during the process. The five-member committee would include two Glendale residents, two council members and the city manager. City Council members lauded the proposal at the Sept. 4 workshop. "I love this," Councilwoman Joyce Clark said. "I love the idea of an audit committee and the layer of transparency it brings to Glendale government." Mayor Elaine Scruggs said the committee would give residents more faith in the city's processes. "What people (have seen in the past) is that things are very closely held among a small group of people," she said. The proposal comes as council candidates and residents raise questions about city spending decisions and the potential for additional cuts to city services in coming years. Most candidates have called for a comprehensive, outside audit that goes beyond the routine reviews that government entities must complete. In recent years, Phoenix-based accounting firm Heinfeld, Meech and Co. P.C. has reviewed city spending and revenue. The city will request bids from other companies next month. This past year, the calls for additional oversight increased as the city faced a $35 million budget shortfall. The council cut department spending, eliminated 49 positions and hiked the city sales tax by 0.7 percentage point. But the sales-tax increase, which is expected to generate about $20 million this year, could be eliminated with a proposed ballot measure that seeks to reverse the increase and require public votes on future tax increases. Residents who support the measure say they should have been consulted before the council approved the increase in June.
|
|
|
Post by swervinmervin on Sept 28, 2012 0:22:09 GMT -5
sonu munshi þ@smunshi @justgotupndjava should know more tomorrow. I know talks are progressing. The lease ends on Sunday but expect it to be renewed another month
|
|