CXLV - Tempe Entertainment District citizen referendum vote upcoming May 16th

[Llama19]

Continuation of CXLIV - The Tempe era set to begin as ASU opens Mullett Arena

Summary:

- Tempe City Council voted 7-0 to pass off TED decision onto voters
- PAC groups, TempeWins (Coyote-based) and Tempe1st (grass-roots opposition) face-off over costs
- Lawsuit filed by Phoenix Sky Harbor, counter lawsuit filed by Coyotes
- Grand Canyon Institute and ASU/Seidman come to differing revenue analysis, and GCI rebuttal
- Tempe residents voting (mail-in only) starts April 19

Live debate between the two PACs is tonight (6 p.m. Arizona time), April 18 - tempe.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=5
(Repeat of debate will also be available from Tempe.gov website)

Click to read more...

 

[Fenway]

From CKGM Montreal

Lalonde: About one month away from the public vote in Arizona

About one month away from the public vote in Tempe, AZ, regarding the most recent arena project to keep the Coyotes in place. Amazing that this is still going on!

www.tsn.ca

 

[Fenway]

 

[Llama19]

Tempe's May 16, 2023 Special Election Information on Props 301, 302, and 303

Source: www.tempe.gov/government/city-clerk-s-office/election-information/may-16-2023-special-election

 

[Llama19]

Here's how much political fundraising groups for and against Coyotes' arena district in Tempe have raised

To quote:

"Arizona Coyotes’ owner Alex Meruelo’s political action committee Tempe Wins outraised by twelvefold local residents' PAC Tempe 1st in the first quarter of 2023, new campaign finance reports show.

Tempe 1st, a PAC opposing the proposed Coyotes development project, is made up of residents, advocates and even former Tempe Councilmember Lauren Kuby. Its report showed it has received $21,409 in donations.

Tempe Wins, a PAC in favor of the project run by Meruelo and his development company, Bluebird Development LLC, received $266,000 this filing period.

In January, it filed its 2022 fourth-quarter report that showed it received $224,377 from Meruelo ‘s development company. Tempe Wins has received a cumulative amount of $490,377 from Bluebird Development."

Source (Paywall): www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2023/04/18/what-tempe-pacs-for-against-arizona-coyotes-project-have-fundraised/70128042007/

 

[TheLegend]

"Thread is WAY over the 1,000 post mark, at 1,488...and should be closed."


@Llama19 ..... Just as an FYI.... 1000 post thread limits are optional now. I know the "name that thread" stuff gave some people the jollies but that was so CX long ago.

 

[Llama19]

Live debate starting now...

tempe.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=5

Hope they introduce everyone...as what is Nick Wood doing there...it was only to be each of two PAC reps there...

 

[Llama19]

Did not acknowledge Nick Wood being there...

 

[Llama19]

Gutierrez attacked the author of the GCI report...and its independence...yet the Arizona Republic stated the GCI is unbias...

 

[TheLegend]

Gutierrez attacked the author of the GCI report...and its independence...yet the Arizona Republic stated the GCI is unbias...

The moderator stated GCI projects itself as non-partisan. "Unbias" is a subjective term.

BTW.... this debate will be available on YouTube for anyone to watch.

 

[Llama19]

This debate...is like a PowerPoint presentation...

 

[PredsHead]

Gutierrez attacked the author of the GCI report...and its independence...yet the Arizona Republic stated the GCI is unbias...

He has not come across very well IMO. Not a great look when your CEO and a city councilman with their high-priced attorney riding shotgun are unable to outdebate a loopy professor and a elderly bookstore owner.

 

[TheLegend]

He has not come across very well IMO. Not a great look when your CEO and a city councilman with their high-priced attorney riding shotgun are unable to outdebate a loopy professor and a elderly bookstore owner.

That "loopy professor" has a PhD and knows exactly what she's doing.

Well.... other than she couldn't figure out she had the wrong Meruelo.

 

[TheLegend]

From CKGM Montreal

Lalonde: About one month away from the public vote in Arizona

About one month away from the public vote in Tempe, AZ, regarding the most recent arena project to keep the Coyotes in place. Amazing that this is still going on!

www.tsn.ca

OMFG!!! A lesson on how to condense 28 years worth of saga into 10 minutes and leave tons of context out.

The most applicable line... from the host saying "We're so far from this."

5 minutes in and there are too many errors in this interview to even list.

 

[PredsHead]

That "loopy professor" has a PhD and knows exactly what she's doing.

Well.... other than she couldn't figure out she had the wrong Meruelo.

True I think she had Alex mixed up with his brother and father who are involved some sort of legal drama in Florida. That was a big gaffe on her part, Gutierrez had his own big gaffe though when he suggested one of the two women on the panel lived in one building that apparently they don't actually live in. Not only was he factually incorrect it made him look a bit creepy.

 

[bleedblue94]

Does anyone have the YouTube link to the debate?

 

[PredsHead]

Does anyone have the YouTube link to the debate?

Not seeing it yet, but it should be here sometime today or tomorrow.


https://www.youtube.com/@Tempe11Video/videos


Edit: Looks like it is there now or direct:

 

[Llama19]

Tax breaks, economic impacts among points of contention as supporters, opponents debate Tempe's Coyotes arena deal

To quote:

"One of the more contentious points of discussion centered around dueling studies on the projects' potential economic impact that were both released this week.

One from the Grand Canyon Institute found that the deal would be a "net drain, not a net gain" for the city. The other, which was conducted by Arizona State University and funded by the Coyotes organization, found that the deal would be even more lucrative for Tempe than previously expected — to the tune of $34 million.

Gutierrez cited ASU's credibility, while also critiquing GCI's heavy focus on the arena and music venue portion of the proposal as an incomplete analysis.

“There's $1.8 million more of investment on our part that were never included in this report by an entity that we hadn't heard of,” Gutierrez said about GCI’s report. “But we have heard of ASU. We have heard of the W.P. Carey School. We have heard of the Seidman Institute. And their report ... shows no tax dollars will be used in order to build any part of this development.”

The opposition countered by saying that, regardless of whether Gutierrez had heard of GCI before its report, the institute is "actually very well-known and well-renowned in Arizona and nationally." They also pointed out the fact that the ASU study was paid for by the Coyotes and questioned whether its findings were credible for that reason.

“There are many entities within ASU that are for-profit. You tell them what you want the findings to show, and they figure out a way to show what you need,” Penich-Thacker rebutted. “If I'm presented with information that was bought and paid for by the person trying to get me to buy it, I would definitely believe the information that was not purchased by the salesman himself.”"

Source: www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2023/04/18/supporters-opponents-debate-merits-of-tempe-coyotes-arena-deal/70123080007/

Note: Video of the complete debate is at the end of the article.

 

[oldunclehue]

Tax breaks, economic impacts among points of contention as supporters, opponents debate Tempe's Coyotes arena deal

To quote:

"One of the more contentious points of discussion centered around dueling studies on the projects' potential economic impact that were both released this week.

One from the Grand Canyon Institute found that the deal would be a "net drain, not a net gain" for the city. The other, which was conducted by Arizona State University and funded by the Coyotes organization, found that the deal would be even more lucrative for Tempe than previously expected — to the tune of $34 million.

Gutierrez cited ASU's credibility, while also critiquing GCI's heavy focus on the arena and music venue portion of the proposal as an incomplete analysis.

“There's $1.8 million more of investment on our part that were never included in this report by an entity that we hadn't heard of,” Gutierrez said about GCI’s report. “But we have heard of ASU. We have heard of the W.P. Carey School. We have heard of the Seidman Institute. And their report ... shows no tax dollars will be used in order to build any part of this development.”

The opposition countered by saying that, regardless of whether Gutierrez had heard of GCI before its report, the institute is "actually very well-known and well-renowned in Arizona and nationally." They also pointed out the fact that the ASU study was paid for by the Coyotes and questioned whether its findings were credible for that reason.

“There are many entities within ASU that are for-profit. You tell them what you want the findings to show, and they figure out a way to show what you need,” Penich-Thacker rebutted. “If I'm presented with information that was bought and paid for by the person trying to get me to buy it, I would definitely believe the information that was not purchased by the salesman himself.”"

Source: www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2023/04/18/supporters-opponents-debate-merits-of-tempe-coyotes-arena-deal/70123080007/

Note: Video of the complete debate is at the end of the article.

Looks bad on the ownership group that is trying to condemn the GCI report (independent) and say their report from ASU (paid for by owner) is much more reliable. Red flag for me dog.

But heres hoping the referendum goes goo.

 

[PredsHead]

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2023/04/19/tempe-deal-with-arizona-coyotes-deserves-3-no-votes/70126321007

"As the three state senators representing Tempe, we encourage Tempe voters to vote no on all three ballot propositions in the upcoming special election, which runs April 19 through May 16."

 

[Stumbledore]

Looks bad on the ownership group that is trying to condemn the GCI report (independent) and say their report from ASU (paid for by owner) is much more reliable. Red flag for me dog.

But heres hoping the referendum goes goo.

Agreed. From a remote Bettman Hater's point of view, I was struck by the attacks on the GCI report. They don't come off looking good.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Tax breaks, economic impacts among points of contention as supporters, opponents debate Tempe's Coyotes arena deal

To quote:

"One of the more contentious points of discussion centered around dueling studies on the projects' potential economic impact that were both released this week.

One from the Grand Canyon Institute found that the deal would be a "net drain, not a net gain" for the city. The other, which was conducted by Arizona State University and funded by the Coyotes organization, found that the deal would be even more lucrative for Tempe than previously expected — to the tune of $34 million.

Gutierrez cited ASU's credibility, while also critiquing GCI's heavy focus on the arena and music venue portion of the proposal as an incomplete analysis.

“There's $1.8 million more of investment on our part that were never included in this report by an entity that we hadn't heard of,” Gutierrez said about GCI’s report. “But we have heard of ASU. We have heard of the W.P. Carey School. We have heard of the Seidman Institute. And their report ... shows no tax dollars will be used in order to build any part of this development.”

The opposition countered by saying that, regardless of whether Gutierrez had heard of GCI before its report, the institute is "actually very well-known and well-renowned in Arizona and nationally." They also pointed out the fact that the ASU study was paid for by the Coyotes and questioned whether its findings were credible for that reason.

“There are many entities within ASU that are for-profit. You tell them what you want the findings to show, and they figure out a way to show what you need,” Penich-Thacker rebutted. “If I'm presented with information that was bought and paid for by the person trying to get me to buy it, I would definitely believe the information that was not purchased by the salesman himself.”"

Source: www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2023/04/18/supporters-opponents-debate-merits-of-tempe-coyotes-arena-deal/70123080007/

Note: Video of the complete debate is at the end of the article.

The fact that the ASU study was paid for by the Coyotes is worth noting, but doesn't invalidate the study.

The fact that the Coyotes have "never heard of" GCI also doesn't invalidate that study either.

 

[Final Baton]

"Just because GPLETs were used before, doesn't mean we should keep using them" seems to be a sentiment that gains more and more traction among opposants.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

Anything notable actually happen at the debate? I assume it was just regurgitating talking points from both sides, aimed at people who aren't already reading the BoH board?

 

[TheLegend]

The fact that the ASU study was paid for by the Coyotes is worth noting, but doesn't invalidate the study.

The fact that the Coyotes have "never heard of" GCI also doesn't invalidate that study either.

It was discovered today that the woman who's been more or less running the Tempe1st campaign is a paid political consultant. There's been a $32,000 payment made to her agency. Even though she is on record via Facebook claiming she's not being paid for her work.

Also to consider is that Grand Canyon Institute operates on donations and Arizona laws are very protective of who donates to these organizations. So while they claim the GCI study wasn't paid for it's very easy to hide that via their donation channel.