Confirmed with Link: All-Purpose "Days of Our Meruelo" Talk

The Feckless Puck

Registered Loser
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2006
18,751
12,006
While I agree with what the mayor is saying, it's also a ridiculous statement considering they just recently helped the Suns with their renovations. Additionally, how many different companies will build office space, or headquarters in an area because they are receiving benefits from the city? Are those companies not able to absorb the costs themselves, as they are expecting an NHL owner to do so?

I think that Gallego's statement is more of a warning that the city is not just going to kowtow to Meruelo just because people are hungry to have a team back. And it's also an under-the-table notification that Gallego doesn't trust Meruelo any more than most of us do. He's making a lot of promises and statements that haven't paid off, and I think her statement's verbiage is intended to communicate an unstated message that until Meruelo puts his money where his mouth is, Phoenix is not going to just roll over and give him carte blanche.
 

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,682
31,794
Buzzing BoH
I think that Gallego's statement is more of a warning that the city is not just going to kowtow to Meruelo just because people are hungry to have a team back. And it's also an under-the-table notification that Gallego doesn't trust Meruelo any more than most of us do. He's making a lot of promises and statements that haven't paid off, and I think her statement's verbiage is intended to communicate an unstated message that until Meruelo puts his money where his mouth is, Phoenix is not going to just roll over and give him carte blanche.

It's an election year. And by their contract with the Suns the city can't assist Meruelo financially.

Her statement was expected.
 

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,682
31,794
Buzzing BoH
While I agree with what the mayor is saying, it's also a ridiculous statement considering they just recently helped the Suns with their renovations. Additionally, how many different companies will build office space, or headquarters in an area because they are receiving benefits from the city? Are those companies not able to absorb the costs themselves, as they are expecting an NHL owner to do so?

At the time, like every other pro sports owner, Sarver was threatening to jump to another city. The only way they got around it and avoid a public vote on it was because they had a fund specifically earmarked they could go to to pull the money from.

The game has always been the same.... only the players change.
 

AZDesertKnight

Deactivated Coyotes Fan
Jan 13, 2021
832
968
Gilbert, AZ
Yes….. but a new arena downtown as Stanton wanted in 2016 probably would have faced a public vote.
Forget 2016, if he was the standing Mayor of Phoenix he would've been in public support of the Meruelo need/want.

But that's a fantasy reality. This is just par for the Course and if AM is actually surprised by this he will fail immensely, again.
 

LAIslanderFan

Registered User
Nov 18, 2010
3,905
913
Los Angeles, CA & Surprise, AZ
If the City of Phoenix had insisted on making the Footprint renovations include an
NHL ice surface we wouldn't be having these discussions. My understanding is the city wanted
that as part of the deal, but folded to Sarver's demands in the end. I don't think it's Monday morning quarterbacking to say that Phoenix was 100% wrong in the end. It's common sense on so many levels.

At some point a hockey arena was going to be needed and if Meruelo or some other owner had succeeded (or does succeed going forward), the future arena would have surely drawn concerts and other events away from Footprint. Hurting Footprint's revenue stream. I'm certain if TED had been built, that area would have been more desirable then Footprint.
The guaranteed 40 dates for NHL hockey is another revenue stream.
 

LAIslanderFan

Registered User
Nov 18, 2010
3,905
913
Los Angeles, CA & Surprise, AZ
I think that Gallego's statement is more of a warning that the city is not just going to kowtow to Meruelo just because people are hungry to have a team back. And it's also an under-the-table notification that Gallego doesn't trust Meruelo any more than most of us do. He's making a lot of promises and statements that haven't paid off, and I think her statement's verbiage is intended to communicate an unstated message that until Meruelo puts his money where his mouth is, Phoenix is not going to just roll over and give him carte blanche.
From Morgan's post you were able to infer the Mayor was letting Meruelo know she doesn't trust him? That's amazing! There's not even a direct quote from the mayor.
 

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,682
31,794
Buzzing BoH
If the City of Phoenix had insisted on making the Footprint renovations include an
NHL ice surface we wouldn't be having these discussions. My understanding is the city wanted
that as part of the deal, but folded to Sarver's demands in the end. I don't think it's Monday morning quarterbacking to say that Phoenix was 100% wrong in the end. It's common sense on so many levels.

At some point a hockey arena was going to be needed and if Meruelo or some other owner had succeeded (or does succeed going forward), the future arena would have surely drawn concerts and other events away from Footprint. Hurting Footprint's revenue stream. I'm certain if TED had been built, that area would have been more desirable then Footprint.
The guaranteed 40 dates for NHL hockey is another revenue stream.

You need to understand Sarver didn’t negotiate the lease terms he was working under… that was all done with Jerry Colangelo decades earlier when cities just built arenas and tossed the keys to the team owners. Sarver had ALL the cards.

Now if John Ziegler had told Colangelo years ago that the NHL was considering Phoenix as a future market, Colangelo was ready to built an arena built for both the NBA and NHL and none of this may ever have happened. Coyotes very well could have been playing downtown for the last 28 years and avoided all the drama the fans got put through.
 

TheLegend

"Just say it 3 times..."
Aug 30, 2009
38,682
31,794
Buzzing BoH
Forget 2016, if he was the standing Mayor of Phoenix he would've been in public support of the Meruelo need/want.

But that's a fantasy reality. This is just par for the Course and if AM is actually surprised by this he will fail immensely, again.

The entire Tempe city council and nearly all its business leaders were in favor of TED. How far did that get them??

Footprint got its renovations because the city had a budget account in place specifically defined for that purpose. They ended up selling a hi-rise building they owned (at a HUGE loss) to put the money into it. Because it was a fund account already on the books they could those funds for that purpose.

There was a lot of media coverage to it, and several AZ Republic articles about how they pulled this off and if you had been following along you would know there was a lot of screaming about it, including threats of lawsuits, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZDesertKnight

Arizonatah Coyetis

Formerly Kai Yo T
Nov 27, 2006
3,951
4,685
Scottsdale, AZ
If the City of Phoenix had insisted on making the Footprint renovations include an
NHL ice surface we wouldn't be having these discussions. My understanding is the city wanted
that as part of the deal, but folded to Sarver's demands in the end. I don't think it's Monday morning quarterbacking to say that Phoenix was 100% wrong in the end. It's common sense on so many levels.

Can an NHL team in Arizona survive if it's paying rent on an arena? Isn't it the consensus that the Coyotes need the same person to own the team and the arena and/or an entertainment district to be financially viable long term?

Anyways, I don't think obstructed views was the only reason they didn't stay at America West Arena. I thought they needed a bigger slice of the pie too.

:dunno:
 
Last edited:

HowlofRevel

Registered User
Mar 21, 2014
188
143
Phoenix
It probably did not help AM's case to the mayor that just six weeks ago, his organization was making public statements that they were going to buy and build on the land with or without the theme park district. If I were the mayor, I'd support him building it without the theme park district, too.
 

Desert Ice 11

I'm here!
Aug 9, 2012
3,509
137
Tempe
It probably did not help AM's case to the mayor that just six weeks ago, his organization was making public statements that they were going to buy and build on the land with or without the theme park district. If I were the mayor, I'd support him building it without the theme park district, too.

Which is all fine and great except it sets a bad precedence. Current businesses (like Mattel theme park) and future businesses will be affected. Its also something that looks like politics politicking. If the only tax payers that pay are the ones visiting the entertainment district or spending money in the theme park district, why is there that much care?

I see it as politicians saying they are "standing up to billionaires" for reelection clout without realizing or caring about the precedence they are setting.
 

finkelsteinberg

Registered User
Jul 1, 2016
174
187
Phoenix, AZ
Which is all fine and great except it sets a bad precedence. Current businesses (like Mattel theme park) and future businesses will be affected. Its also something that looks like politics politicking. If the only tax payers that pay are the ones visiting the entertainment district or spending money in the theme park district, why is there that much care?

I see it as politicians saying they are "standing up to billionaires" for reelection clout without realizing or caring about the precedence they are setting.
To me, it's more than just precedent. It seems dumb, economically speaking. You have a bunch of land with no access/utilities that someone is going to bid on and develop with utility access that will make the other plots of land around there easier to develop and more attractive. All of this is to say, helping them with a tax district seems to provide more financial benefit to the city/state than not. I don't think I view the tax district as taxpayers paying for the arena which is why the verbiage used by Gallego makes me question, even with Craig's follow up post, what exactly she is saying she won't support.
 

Desert Ice 11

I'm here!
Aug 9, 2012
3,509
137
Tempe
To me, it's more than just precedent. It seems dumb, economically speaking. You have a bunch of land with no access/utilities that someone is going to bid on and develop with utility access that will make the other plots of land around there easier to develop and more attractive. All of this is to say, helping them with a tax district seems to provide more financial benefit to the city/state than not. I don't think I view the tax district as taxpayers paying for the arena which is why the verbiage used by Gallego makes me question, even with Craig's follow up post, what exactly she is saying she won't support.
I agree with that added point. There hasn't been any issues until its highlighted project with views. Same goes for the Scottsdale mayor, and the other politicians that have skin in this game making a stink about it.

Didn't they do a strike everything on a bill that was meant for first responders just to raise a stink about this?
 

Coyotedroppings

Registered User
Jul 16, 2017
7,163
6,028
Boys, the problem is that Phoenix will not receive any taxes from the district whatsoever. No property tax, no sales tax, the only benefactor will be the Meruelo group. It's true that Am's efforts will bring additional development sooner, that will be taxed, but the optics are not good.
 

Desert Ice 11

I'm here!
Aug 9, 2012
3,509
137
Tempe
Boys, the problem is that Phoenix will not receive any taxes from the district whatsoever. No property tax, no sales tax, the only benefactor will be the Meruelo group. It's true that Am's efforts will bring additional development sooner, that will be taxed, but the optics are not good.
No, according to Sen. Jake Hoffman, lawmakers are upset that only the city of Phoenix will benefit and not other developing areas.

"A spokesperson for Arizona Senate Republicans said Hoffman is working on a new version of his amendment.

“Theme park districts have the potential to create robust economic development for Maricopa County communities; however, under the current rules, the system is rigged to benefit the City of Phoenix alone,”"

Arizona lawmaker proposes changes to laws on special taxing district Coyotes hope to tap
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad