CXLIII - UPDATED 6/3 - Coyotes arena deal takes next step after Tempe council votes to open negotiations

[KevFu]

I remember when the Cardinals moved after the 87 season it was Tempe was going to be short term until a new stadium was built. Then stuff happened and it took 18 years. So out of curiously does anyone remember what the agreement was at the time? Was it just a vague promise or was there something more in place?

I don't know if they ever had concrete plans. The major issue with getting something done was the S&L crisis of the late 80s/early 90s.

Once the 2000s began, there was a plan for a Tempe/East PHX stadium, about a mile NNW from ASU's stadium (almost due north of the Coyotes planned site!). But Glendale won out

 

[Dirty Old Man]

Green Bay is the perfect example of this. Most season ticket holders live 2+ hours away and come from all over the upper Midwest.

Which, incidentally, is how college football works in the south in all those 100,000 seat stadiums we have. No one lives in Gainesville, Auburn, Tuscaloosa, Clemson, etc....for those 6-7 weekends every fall the alumni drive from all over their state to attend.

 

[Summer Rose]

I don't know if they ever had concrete plans. The major issue with getting something done was the S&L crisis of the late 80s/early 90s.

Once the 2000s began, there was a plan for a Tempe/East PHX stadium, about a mile NNW from ASU's stadium (almost due north of the Coyotes planned site!). But Glendale won out

Guess who got in the way of that one?

Wait for it... Sky Harbor.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

I wonder how the Super Bowl ended up in Tempe in the early 90s considering how substandard Sun Devils stadium was at the time?

 

[TheLegend]

I wonder how the Super Bowl ended up in Tempe in the early 90s considering how substandard Sun Devils stadium was at the time?

Not much different than playing the Rose Bowl three times between 1983 and 1993.

The NFL didn’t have a plethora of palaces in those days. Many did come online shortly after.

Super Bowl Winners and Results - Super Bowl History - National Football League - ESPN

Find out each Super Bowl winning team throughout NFL pro football history.

www.espn.com

 

[blueandgoldguy]

Not much different than playing the Rose Bowl three times between 1983 and 1993.

The NFL didn’t have a plethora of palaces in those days. Many did come online shortly after.

Super Bowl Winners and Results - Super Bowl History - National Football League - ESPN

Find out each Super Bowl winning team throughout NFL pro football history.

www.espn.com

Well I could see the Rose Bowl given its sheer size of 100,000 capacity...but fair point other stadiums that hosted at the time which were somewhat barebones compared to today's palaces.

 

[TheLegend]

Well I could see the Rose Bowl given its sheer size of 100,000 capacity...but fair point other stadiums that hosted at the time which were somewhat barebones compared to today's palaces.

Today it’s about luxury suites for all the corporate partners.

Rose Bowl, SDS and some of the others either had very few of them (if at all) so the sheer mass number of seats made up for it. Plus with ticket prices escalating exponentially (Ticket for SB1 was around $15) filling a 100k seat venue becomes difficult (and a bad look if you see empty seats on TV). Even though the NFL requires a 70k seat minimum.

 

[1CasualFan]

Wouldn't that violate Arizona's gift clause by using the city's "Credit in support of" a private project? That would be something Goldwater would be all over.

Q: Wouldn't that violate...
A: "Well, it depends..."

May we please first pause to appreciate billable hours?

=============

Okay, that aside: it is probably not "Credit in support of" that matters. It is more likely that the equitable or proportional return - or COI - that matters.

Schires v Carlat is currently the controlling law in Arizona.

​

... the court of appeals gave deference to the City’s determination that it would receive “an equitable or proportional economic return” in exchange for its payments. Schires, 2020 WL 390671,at *5 ¶23. ​

​

We recognize that in Cheatham, this Court stated that “courts must give due deference to the decisions of elected officials” in applying the second prong. 240 Ariz. at 322 ¶ 35. ​

​

We now disapprove that statement. ​

​

The Court cited no authority for its position. See id. ​

​

Earlier in the opinion, it cited Wistuber’s statement that in applying the two-prong test, courts “must give appropriate deference to the findings of the governmental body.” Id.at 318 ¶ 10 (quoting Wistuber, 141 Ariz. at 349). ​

​

It would become an adequate value case, if Tempe approved a GPLET for an arena that violated law; and that GPLET relied upon a 'future tax revenue' COI calculation; and an individual with proper standing filed suit; and it went to trial...

Seems like a lot of "ifs" ...

 

[1CasualFan]

I wonder how the Super Bowl ended up in Tempe in the early 90s considering how substandard Sun Devils stadium was at the time?

What a great question.

I know that Phoenix was initially set to host the 1993 Super Bowl - but that was rescinded due to Arizona not recognizing MLK Day. And before anyone gets it twisted, I am not saying anything negative about Arizona or the people there. I am only accounting for the historical facts. When Bill Bidwill moved his Cardinals to Arizona in 1988, he apparently believed that his team would soon be the recipient of a publicly funded dome stadium in downtown Phoenix. For whatever it may be worth, Baltimore was the other city that courted the Cardinals. Baltimore was about to build Camden Yards and wanted to add a football stadium to their plan, which would happen just a few years later.

On 3/19/91, NFL voted to removed Super Bowl from Arizona. The NFL also passed a resolution giving Arizona prelim approval for the 1996 Super Bowl, if they approved MLK Holiday.

And I believe that is how Phoenix ended up hosting a Super Bowl @ Sun Devil Stadium. (even if I have some details incorrect - this is a way better BOH conversation than any of the usual drive-by stuff)

 

[TheLegend]

Q: Wouldn't that violate...
A: "Well, it depends..."

May we please first pause to appreciate billable hours?

=============

Okay, that aside: it is probably not "Credit in support of" that matters. It is more likely that the equitable or proportional return - or COI - that matters.

Schires v Carlat is currently the controlling law in Arizona.

​

... the court of appeals gave deference to the City’s determination that it would receive “an equitable or proportional economic return” in exchange for its payments. Schires, 2020 WL 390671,at *5 ¶23. ​

​

We recognize that in Cheatham, this Court stated that “courts must give due deference to the decisions of elected officials” in applying the second prong. 240 Ariz. at 322 ¶ 35. ​

​

We now disapprove that statement. ​

​

The Court cited no authority for its position. See id. ​

​

Earlier in the opinion, it cited Wistuber’s statement that in applying the two-prong test, courts “must give appropriate deference to the findings of the governmental body.” Id.at 318 ¶ 10 (quoting Wistuber, 141 Ariz. at 349). ​

​

It would become an adequate value case, if Tempe approved a GPLET for an arena that violated law; and that GPLET relied upon a 'future tax revenue' COI calculation; and an individual with proper standing filed suit; and it went to trial...

Seems like a lot of "ifs" ...

Stepping back into history a little.

Goldwater Institute went hard after the Hulsizer deal because of the infamous $100 million parking subsidy Glendale would pay up front.

But decided Ice Arizona’s 15 year deal with the additional $9 million annual subsidy rolled into the arena management agreement was constitutional.

Goldwater Institute thinks Coyotes arena deal is constitutional

Matthew Hulsizer abandoned his efforts to buy the team after they opposed his lease agreement.

nhl.nbcsports.com

Nick Wood’s presentation at the meeting already has shown they’ve changed their approach with how they’re going to utilize the $200 million in bonds the proposal asks for. With Meruelo putting $40 million up front for land reclamation and he’s taking the parking structure back into his costs. Wood was also mentioning the TPT and GPLET numbers being tweaked.

Since then I’ve been really curious as to how they might be penciling this out.

 

[Llama19]

Coyotes' modifications to ASU arena won’t be complete until well after NHL season starts

Source (Paywall): www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2022/06/21/coyotes-modifications-to-asu-arena-nhl.html

 

[TheLegend]

Coyotes' modifications to ASU arena won’t be complete until well after NHL season starts

Source (Paywall): www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2022/06/21/coyotes-modifications-to-asu-arena-nhl.html

Been well known since the beginning that the annex won't be ready until December.

ASU is possibly allowing the Coyotes to use the facilities within the community rink arena of the MPU until the annex is ready.

This part offers some new bits of info:

Another potential source of revenue for the Coyotes this season is the NHL's decision to allow small corporate sponsor patches on player jerseys for the first time, after already having approved helmet sponsor logos. The jersey logos that will appear on player's jerseys this season can be no larger than 3.5 inches by 3 inches.

Because the ASU multipurpose arena is considerably smaller than the Coyotes former home venue – and other NHL arenas – Gutierrez said the team has to be strategic with its season ticket sales to ensure there are enough tickets left over for individual game sales. He also said he wants to reserve about 500 seats for each game for a “student section” where ASU students could purchase tickets at a reduced price of around $25, he said.

According to the venue license agreement between the Coyotes and OVG, which the Business Journal received from ASU, the Coyotes must give a percentage of most advertising sales inside the arena, as well as seating and food and beverage revenue to OVG and ASU. The Coyotes do get to keep all sales from luxury suites and merchandise.

An ASU spokesman said the university estimates that it’ll receive about $2 million a year from the Coyotes under the agreement.

Coyotes and OVG also have a one year sales partnership agreement.

Official Site of the National Hockey League | NHL.com

The official National Hockey League website including news, rosters, stats, schedules, teams, and video.

www.nhl.com

 

[Stumbledore]

Nothing new here.

Been well known since the beginning that the annex won't be ready until December.

ASU is possibly allowing the Coyotes to use the facilities within the community rink arena of the MPU until the annex is ready.

Possibly?

 

[TheLegend]

Possibly?

I reedited the post for a bit less snark after getting past the paywall, but yes, Gutierrez mentioned in another interview the facilities at the community rink within the MPU was mentioned as a possible temporary solution.

PBJ article only says OVG, ASU and the Coyotes are working towards getting some early home games in.

A person with knowledge of the dealings on the landlord/management side of the arena confirmed that OVG and ASU are working with the Coyotes and the NHL to make sure games can be played in the arena before the NHL specific construction is completed.

 

[Stumbledore]

I reedited the post for a bit less snark after getting past the paywall, but yes, Gutierrez mentioned in another interview the facilities at the community rink within the MPU was mentioned as a possible temporary solution.

PBJ article only says OVG, ASU and the Coyotes are working towards getting some early home games in.

So OVG and ASU and NHL are AOK?

 

[TheLegend]

So OVG and ASU and NHL are AOK?

10-4

 

[KevFu]

Not much different than playing the Rose Bowl three times between 1983 and 1993.

The NFL didn’t have a plethora of palaces in those days. Many did come online shortly after.

There really wasn't a lot of stadiums being built from like 1980-1993 (which coincided with the S&L thing; but also because of how many were built in the late 60s/early 70s).

Every sports league is going to go through the exact same thing that happened in the 90s with relocation rumors in the next decade, because leases are 30 years long and all the arenas/stadiums that opened in the 90s (most of which are perfectly fine!) are going to have their teams reach the end of their lease and look for handouts.

 

[Dirty Old Man]

Coyotes' modifications to ASU arena won’t be complete until well after NHL season starts

Source (Paywall): www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2022/06/21/coyotes-modifications-to-asu-arena-nhl.html

You're starting to post links to old news again. Better tighten up that QC dept.

 

[Acesolid]

You're starting to post links to old news again. Better tighten up that QC dept.

That is completely false.

This was a June 21 article. And he posted it on the morning of the 22nd.

If you think it's "old news"; complain about the Journal, dont lie to insult Llama.

 

[Dirty Old Man]

That is completely false.

This was a June 21 article. And he posted it on the morning of the 22nd.

If you think it's "old news"; complain about the Journal, dont lie to insult Llama.

(that Journal sometimes posts things that have been referenced on here for weeks. if you lived here you might know that. I'm betting he knows it too, and posts it solely because it suggests negative things about Arizona NHL...which coincidentally is why you defend him here.)

 

[TheLegend]

That is completely false.

This was a June 21 article. And he posted it on the morning of the 22nd.

If you think it's "old news"; complain about the Journal, dont lie to insult Llama.

Read my response to the same post above….

While it did have a couple of pieces of info I hadn’t seen before, the article was a summary of everything known to date. Just because the Phoenix Business Journal was late to the party doesn’t make it any more relevant.

 

[Acesolid]

Read my response to the same post above….

While it did have a couple of pieces of info I hadn’t seen before, the article was a summary of everything known to date. Just because the Phoenix Business Journal was late to the party doesn’t make it any more relevant.

It's a new article on the subject. You can think it's mostly old news, but certainly it's relevent to post it in my opinion.

And to insult someone for doing so is (once again in my opinion) grossly innapropriate. Certainly a lot of articles re-state facts.

If you have a problem it should be with the Journal, not with Llama.

 

[Dirty Old Man]

It's a new article on the subject. You can think it's mostly old news, but certainly it's relevent to post it in my opinion.

And to insult someone for doing so is (once again in my opinion) grossly innapropriate. Certainly a lot of articles re-state facts.

If you have a problem it should be with the Journal, not with Llama.

Okay, cool, you've stated two opinions. I disagree with both of your opinions. But it is telling that you took the time to post these, n'est ce pas?

 

[GordonGraham]

Dont waste your time those 2 are acting like they are owning the boards

 

[Acesolid]

Okay, cool, you've stated two opinions. I disagree with both of your opinions. But it is telling that you took the time to post these, n'est ce pas?

I have been here for many years too. What I am saying is that I do not want the all-too common toxic online bullying culture to develop in these boards. This isn't supposed to be a swamp like Twitter.

We can have strong opinions and still not act like jerks.