Phoenix CXXIII: Who Wants to Pay Our Bills?

[Mightygoose]

You could be right. In some states, I believe, the Rules Comittee can kill a bill. At the other extreme, the tradition in North Dakota has been that every bill has a right to a vote on the floor, with or without committee approval. I don't know the tradition in AZ, or where they fit on that spectrum. We'll see, as the more controversial bills common to later in a session start to emerge from committees. And I guess 1149 is one of the more controversial, so we'll learn some tomorrow.

Another day at the office it seems today!

My understanding is there is no actual vote to move the bill to the senate floor or kill it.

If there is no vote, how is a decision really made either way?

I'm thinking, if there are 2 reps from Glendale that don't want this bill to pass and are in the Rules committee, would they not want to do whatever is in their power and influence to kill this today is possible?

 

[Killion]

Let's say Leblanc's bill is repelled. Then what's next?
Another lame-duck season is Glendale?

I guess that depends on the NHL & IA, IA's Lobbyists & if Worsley's game, they could kick the can down the road yet again if its Kill Bill time within the next week to 10 days or even extended into April, end of the current Legislative Session, then re-tabled in 2018. Alternatively if it gets shot down, Worsley promising to make a second and goal in 2018, tweaking the components giving hope (false or not) to the market & hard core fan base, IA another 12mnths of life. I suppose its possible the NHL goes nuclear, thats it, were outta here, sell the club to QC and thats that. Just no idea. What you or I or any other individual would probably do or already have done based on just common sense doesnt seem to apply here.

 

[Llama19]

Could the Arizona Coyotes be moving to downtown Phoenix?

To quote:

"Councilman Jim Waring says this isn't the best way to spend taxpayer dollars.

"Frankly I just don't know why that's necessary again at a time when we're talking about we don't have enough money for schools and we don't have enough money for police officers. We seem to have unlimited money for stadiums."

Statement from Coyotes owner Anthony LeBlanc:

"We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City.""

Source (Video): http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/237612484-story

 

[MNNumbers]

I guess that depends on the NHL & IA, IA's Lobbyists & if Worsley's game, they could kick the can down the road yet again if its Kill Bill time within the next week to 10 days or even extended into April, end of the current Legislative Session, then re-tabled in 2018. Alternatively if it gets shot down, Worsley promising to make a second and goal in 2018, tweaking the components giving hope (false or not) to the market & hard core fan base, IA another 12mnths of life. I suppose its possible the NHL goes nuclear, thats it, were outta here, sell the club to QC and thats that. Just no idea. What you or I or any other individual would probably do or already have done based on just common sense doesnt seem to apply here.

I completely agree with Killion here. If the bill is killed today, then that is 2 years of a 'no' from AZ Legislature. How IA and NHL respond to that, we don't know. There is, of course, the quote "conversations" about "things". Whatever that really means....

The options:
1- This franchise still has time where it is, so they stay another year. What would contribute to this conclusion seem to be 3 things: NHL has been very patient with the situation. They have nowhere in the West to move to. And, 3rd, the lease has been extended for next year.

2- Move to Seattle. I know this defies #1, but there is a chance that the league could shoehorn something in Seattle. I think it would be a huge mistake, though. And, many things would have to happen quickly for them to even try. They would need an owner with clear financing to purchase the team (I assume IA is out in a relo scenario). They would need SCC to decide that Key is not able to be renovated to NHL specs. They would need Hansen to be sure that Key won't be renovated to NBA specs. They would need SCC to vote to vacate the street, so construction could start on SoDo. And, they would need assurances from Hansen that the lease would be reasonable for an NHL team in Hansen's new arena. Personally, I think most of these CAN'T happen. Some, ever. Some, in the time frame allowed. And, I have been vocal about my analysis of the Seattle market before. I think hockey only works there if it gets its own arena. Not shared. And, preferably, with NBA renting from them. Anyway...

3- Move to QC. This is the best relocation option. And, if it were possible to pick up the entire City of Quebec City and plop it down at, for example, Sault Ste Marie, on the eastern tip of Lake Superior, I am sure this is where they would be headed. Geography is the main obstacle. Things in QC's favor? The aforementioned "conversations" and "things" which seem to suggest the possibility that this is the last chance for AZ. LeBlanc confession of the amount of losses.

Anyone can handicap the way they want to. The reality is that there is NO answer that NHL and IA like, if the Leg says "no". Which actually pleases me quite a bit. Let them simmer. Let them cook. I have no respect for them. Crooks and Liars.

 

[Mightygoose]

I guess that depends on the NHL & IA, IA's Lobbyists & if Worsley's game, they could kick the can down the road yet again if its Kill Bill time within the next week to 10 days or even extended into April, end of the current Legislative Session, then re-tabled in 2018. Alternatively if it gets shot down, Worsley promising to make a second and goal in 2018, tweaking the components giving hope (false or not) to the market & hard core fan base, IA another 12mnths of life. I suppose its possible the NHL goes nuclear, thats it, were outta here, sell the club to QC and thats that. Just no idea. What you or I or any other individual would probably do or already have done based on just common sense doesnt seem to apply here.

I don't recall, did Worsley actually say he would resubmit if it fails? Or just one of many plausibilities...guess can't rule anything out as long as at least one public official wants their name out there.

Could the Arizona Coyotes be moving to downtown Phoenix?

To quote:

"Councilman Jim Waring says this isn't the best way to spend taxpayer dollars.

"Frankly I just don't know why that's necessary again at a time when we're talking about we don't have enough money for schools and we don't have enough money for police officers. We seem to have unlimited money for stadiums."

Statement from Coyotes owner Anthony LeBlanc:

"We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City.""

Source (Video): http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/237612484-story

And what do the Sun think of this study?

Sounds like political cover in the event the team leave AZ

 

[Killion]

Could the Arizona Coyotes be moving to downtown Phoenix?

To quote:

"Councilman Jim Waring says this isn't the best way to spend taxpayer dollars.

"Frankly I just don't know why that's necessary again at a time when we're talking about we don't have enough money for schools and we don't have enough money for police officers. We seem to have unlimited money for stadiums."

Statement from Coyotes owner Anthony LeBlanc:

"We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City.""

Source (Video): http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/237612484-story

.... ok.... and most people following this story closely understand that thats not even an option short of Sarver himself buying the club, and I dont mean a minority share, I mean the whole kit & kaboodle and thats not going to happen. I mean, this is just crazy. LeBlanc is now acting like a door~door salesman staring down the wrong end of a 12 gauge has been warned off someones property... yet returns again & again.... knock knock.... The only thing I can think of that would give some sense of "tell" for claiming such is to alibi himself, IA & the NHL.... That despite their best efforts to get Legislation passed for a joint ASU arena, then for a stand alone they did also try & negotiate something with Sarver, the Suns & the City of Phoenix and "oh gee, that doors closed too" and he has to already know that. The club cannot survive without controlling the Master Lease & Management Contract of any facility period end of story. He knows this. The NHL knows this. Anyone who looks at the NHL & NBA Business Model with the exception of only a few markets in North America knows this. This is why the Coyotes had to get out of the then called AWA & bring their horror show to Glendale. This is one of the main concerns with Seattle, SODO & Hansen.

 

[Killion]

I don't recall, did Worsley actually say he would resubmit if it fails? Or just one of many plausibilities...guess can't rule anything out as long as at least one public official wants their name out there.

And what do the Sun think of this study?

Sounds like political cover in the event the team leave AZ

The Suns are playing it coy, and no, I dont believe Sarver has any interest whatsoever in a shared facility. None. Zero. It doesnt work for him... and ya, as I said, reeks of LeBlanc alibiing, covering himself. He has to know its a non-starter & if he believes otherwise then he truly is completely delusional. Lost it if he ever had it & that itself is highly questionable.... As for Worsley, yeah, I could see him taking another run at this if it gets shot down. He's obviously playing political football with the whole issue & from what Ive seen of him absolutely relishing it. Typical politician with an out-sized ego. Christ Complex. And... an idiot.

 

[cbcwpg]

Statement from Coyotes owner Anthony LeBlanc:

"We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City.""

Source (Video): http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/237612484-story

From what I have found, the listed capacity of the AWA was 16,210 for NHL hockey. The highest average attendance the Coyotes had while playing in that arena was: 15,585 in 1996-97 or Year #1. So.... just how exactly did the Coyotes "sell out almost every game" according to Mr. LeBlanc?

 

[David_99]

So.... just how exactly did the Coyotes "sell out almost every game" according to Mr. LeBlanc?

Because no one will challenge him on it, so why not say it?

 

[The Feckless Puck]

From what I have found, the listed capacity of the AWA was 16,210 for NHL hockey. The highest average attendance the Coyotes had while playing in that arena was: 15,585 in 1996-97 or Year #1. So.... just how exactly did the Coyotes "sell out almost every game" according to Mr. LeBlanc?

Because LeBlanc is now committed to the fiction that the East Valley is the only place where there are any hockey fans in order to get his arena project off the ground. What's one more lie if it buttresses that perception with the lawmakers he's wooing in order to get their money?

 

[SunDancer]

Let's say Leblanc's bill is repelled. Then what's next?
Another lame-duck season is Glendale?

Regardless of what happens to the bill, they'll definitely be playing in Glendale next year. Although it won't be any more or less "lame-duck" than any other year. The only difference might be that with a bad team and Leblanc openly criticizing the location, attendance may really crater. As far as the NHL's MO is concerned, nothing will change. Keep the ship afloat until they catch the big fish. IA will continue to do what they've been doing since their arrival ... seek out additional revenues (public/private) and leave no stone unturned. They'll continue lobbying various levels of government, prepare for the next year's state budget, string along Glendale, take advantage of Stanton's public comments, talk to Sarver's secretary, explore options with the tribes, plant vague relocation rumors, etc, etc, lather, rinse, repeat.

So what's next? In a word ... nothing. Welcome to the Megathread.

 

[Killion]

Because no one will challenge him on it, so why not say it?

Exactly. When Moyes threw the Coyotes into BK in 2009, they apparently had app 5800 Seasons Ticket Holders (and Id hazard to guess most of them holdovers, original STH's from AWA) which given the state of the economy at that time and an absolutely lousy record starting in 04 under Gretzky when they first moved to Glendale you have to figure there was some attrition between 04 & 09, people not renewing (followed by a major attrition bordering on a total Exodus from 09-16). In the first couple or 3 years at AWA you had the Honeymoon Effect so sure, attendance healthy enough however the facility as we know like Barclays not at all hockey friendly, real-bad Lease with Colangelo, and precisely the kind of Lease Sarver would IMO offer the Coyotes so so much for that. Its ridiculous. And no one asks followups, challenges his disingenuous narrative.

 

[WildGopher]

Another day at the office it seems today!

My understanding is there is no actual vote to move the bill to the senate floor or kill it.

If there is no vote, how is a decision really made either way?

I'm thinking, if there are 2 reps from Glendale that don't want this bill to pass and are in the Rules committee, would they not want to do whatever is in their power and influence to kill this today is possible?

There should be a motion from one of the 7 members of the Rules Committee today to vote SB1149 "Proper for Consideration." A majority vote of the 7 would send the bill to the Senate floor.

And yes, Sens. Yee and Lesko, who represent Glendale, might oppose the motion. But what we don't know is, what is the custom in this legislature? Is it considered a courtesy to a bill's author that if a bill makes it out of a committee, it is generally entitled to a vote in the full Senate? That's the case in some states. Or does the Rules Committee also have a policy role in AZ, meaning it's in their tradition that Rules can deep-six this thing?

On Monday, Rules approved all 22 of the bills I looked at. But as someone pointed out above, they might have started with the non-controversial bills, intending to give more time in debate to bills like 1149. We'll see today.

 

[Whileee]

Could the Arizona Coyotes be moving to downtown Phoenix?

To quote:

"Councilman Jim Waring says this isn't the best way to spend taxpayer dollars.

"Frankly I just don't know why that's necessary again at a time when we're talking about we don't have enough money for schools and we don't have enough money for police officers. We seem to have unlimited money for stadiums."

Statement from Coyotes owner Anthony LeBlanc:

"We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City.""

Source (Video): http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/237612484-story

So, back to plan A, or is it plan B, or maybe plan C.

The dirt piles and shovels are still waiting...

 

[Bixby Snyder]

From what I have found, the listed capacity of the AWA was 16,210 for NHL hockey. The highest average attendance the Coyotes had while playing in that arena was: 15,585 in 1996-97 or Year #1. So.... just how exactly did the Coyotes "sell out almost every game" according to Mr. LeBlanc?

Do you not know what average attendance means?

 

[Bixby Snyder]

I completely agree with Killion here. If the bill is killed today, then that is 2 years of a 'no' from AZ Legislature. How IA and NHL respond to that, we don't know. There is, of course, the quote "conversations" about "things". Whatever that really means....

The options:
1- This franchise still has time where it is, so they stay another year. What would contribute to this conclusion seem to be 3 things: NHL has been very patient with the situation. They have nowhere in the West to move to. And, 3rd, the lease has been extended for next year.

2- Move to Seattle. I know this defies #1, but there is a chance that the league could shoehorn something in Seattle. I think it would be a huge mistake, though. And, many things would have to happen quickly for them to even try. They would need an owner with clear financing to purchase the team (I assume IA is out in a relo scenario). They would need SCC to decide that Key is not able to be renovated to NHL specs. They would need Hansen to be sure that Key won't be renovated to NBA specs. They would need SCC to vote to vacate the street, so construction could start on SoDo. And, they would need assurances from Hansen that the lease would be reasonable for an NHL team in Hansen's new arena. Personally, I think most of these CAN'T happen. Some, ever. Some, in the time frame allowed. And, I have been vocal about my analysis of the Seattle market before. I think hockey only works there if it gets its own arena. Not shared. And, preferably, with NBA renting from them. Anyway...

3- Move to QC. This is the best relocation option. And, if it were possible to pick up the entire City of Quebec City and plop it down at, for example, Sault Ste Marie, on the eastern tip of Lake Superior, I am sure this is where they would be headed. Geography is the main obstacle. Things in QC's favor? The aforementioned "conversations" and "things" which seem to suggest the possibility that this is the last chance for AZ. LeBlanc confession of the amount of losses.

Anyone can handicap the way they want to. The reality is that there is NO answer that NHL and IA like, if the Leg says "no". Which actually pleases me quite a bit. Let them simmer. Let them cook. I have no respect for them. Crooks and Liars.

Not only is it not the best option it's not an option at all. The NHL is not letting a western based team move east.

 

[Slashers98]

Not only is it not the best option it's not an option at all. The NHL is not letting a western based team move east.

That's what you want to believe. A Quebec-based team can play in the Central Division for a few seasons, moving Colorado to the Pacific Division until Seattle gets the shovels to the ground.

 

[MNNumbers]

Not only is it not the best option it's not an option at all. The NHL is not letting a western based team move east.

I am sorry, HB. I must not have made the rest of that clear enough. I meant to say that, in simple terms of a market and ownership with enough organization and fanbase already established, Quebec is the 'most ready.'

And, in reading further, I did remark that geography is the ONE thing that stands in Quebec's way. I even went on to remark that, if Quebec City were as far west at Sault Ste Marie, which is one the western edge of the Eastern Time Zone, the team would be moving there almost certainly.

You and everyone else here and myself can argue all day about whether or not the NHL would let the Yotes move to the East. In the end, our arguments don't hold any weight.

My reality here, and I am very sure of it, is that NHL/Bettman/IA/LeBlanc have a very big problem on their hands. The franchise is bleeding cash, and there is no good solution. A new arena seems like a panacea, but it is not a sure thing to get it built the way they need it. And, with no new arena, there will be a relocation. And, there is no western market into which to relocate right now. Therefore, I have to believe that there is no way to say with certainty, "They move to Seattle." "They move to Quebec." "They stay in AZ." No way. We don't know how they will weigh the options.

That is what I think, and what I meant to say. Sorry you misunderstood.

 

[aqib]

Do you not know what average attendance means?

If they sold out "almost every game" and still had average attendance at 700 seats below capacity that would mean they would have had many games in front of no fans at all.

 

[cbcwpg]

Do you not know what average attendance means?

Definition of almost : very nearly but not exactly or entirely

I would hazard to guess that maybe my definition ( and most people's definition ) of "almost" isn't quite the same as LeBlanc's.

LeBlanc said "The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown".

This would apply to all the seasons in the AWA, not just the first season. I'm not say the attendance wasn't decent given the restrictions of the building of the time... I'm just saying to LeBlanc to STOP LYING or at least be clear in what you mean.


**

Take these two sentences as examples:

- The Coyotes sold out almost every game. Which LeBlanc said, and by definition means the Coyotes had sellouts in most but not all games.

- The Coyotes almost sold out every game. By definition this means the Coyotes could have had no sellouts, but came close to doing so. If LeBlanc had said this, then this would have been more accurate.

Public statements need to be accurate.

 

[Llama19]

There should be a motion from one of the 7 members of the Rules Committee today to vote SB1149 "Proper for Consideration." A majority vote of the 7 would send the bill to the Senate floor.

And yes, Sens. Yee and Lesko, who represent Glendale, might oppose the motion. But what we don't know is, what is the custom in this legislature? Is it considered a courtesy to a bill's author that if a bill makes it out of a committee, it is generally entitled to a vote in the full Senate? That's the case in some states. Or does the Rules Committee also have a policy role in AZ, meaning it's in their tradition that Rules can deep-six this thing?

On Monday, Rules approved all 22 of the bills I looked at. But as someone pointed out above, they might have started with the non-controversial bills, intending to give more time in debate to bills like 1149. We'll see today.

To throw in the Governor's thoughts on the current political climate which may likely affect LeBlanc's 'bill'...

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Definition of almost : very nearly but not exactly or entirely

I would hazard to guess that maybe my definition ( and most people's definition ) of "almost" isn't quite the same as LeBlanc's.

LeBlanc said "The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown".

This would apply to all the seasons in the AWA, not just the first season where they still didn't sell out almost every game. I'm not say the attendance wasn't decent given the restrictions of the building of the time... I'm just saying to LeBlanc to STOP LYING.

Agreed.

And even if LeBlanc is only referencing the first season or two, we could counter with this:

http://www.hockeyattendance.com/team/phoenix-coyotes/2005/

It's another example of LeBlanc choosing consciously to say something that, denied proper context, leads his audience to assume something entirely different than the truth. A proper politician... or snake-oil salesman.

ETA: Some of those sellouts in 2005 are amazing. The Wild... the Avalanche... the Ducks... but no sellouts for the Blackhawks. One of the Chicago games that year drew barely over 13,000. What does that tell you about the Valley's transplant hockey fans?

 

[GuelphStormer]

Do you not know what average attendance means?

leblanc's statement was "We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City."

that means they sold out many, but not necessarily all games. it does not mean they sold 90% of tickets to every game or that they sold 95% to some and 80% to some. it means they SOLD OUT some games, and in fact, "almost every" means they sold out the majority.

now perhaps that's not what he intended to say, perhaps his understanding of the terminology is lacking. but that is indeed what he said.

as to whether is is true or not, well ...

 

[WildGopher]

Definition of almost : very nearly but not exactly or entirely

I would hazard to guess that maybe my definition ( and most people's definition ) of "almost" isn't quite the same as LeBlanc's.

LeBlanc said "The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown".

This would apply to all the seasons in the AWA, not just the first season where they still didn't sell out almost every game. I'm not say the attendance wasn't decent given the restrictions of the building of the time... I'm just saying to LeBlanc to STOP LYING.

Yeah, I hope the various officials who might still be asked to fund IA's schemes - the state, Phoenix, the tribes - understand the facts of this issue as much as we do here. Ignorance is LeBlanc's and the NHL's best friend when they keep telling whopper after whopper in trying to pry loose taxpayers from their money.

 

[MNNumbers]

leblanc's statement was "We are open to exploring every economically viable solution in this market. The Coyotes sold out almost every game when we originally played downtown, and we are eager for the opportunity to explore such options with both the Suns and the City."

that means they sold out many, but not necessarily all games. it does not mean they sold 90% of tickets to every game or that they sold 95% to some and 80% to some. it means they SOLD OUT some games, and in fact, "almost every" means they sold out the majority.

now perhaps that's not what he intended to say, perhaps his understanding of the terminology is lacking. but that is indeed what he said.

as to whether is is true or not, well ...

Yeah, I hope the various officials who might still be asked to fund IA's schemes - the state, Phoenix, the tribes - understand the facts of this issue as much as we do here. Ignorance is LeBlanc's and the NHL's best friend when they keep telling whopper after whopper in trying to pry loose taxpayers from their money.

Of course he's lying. He's losing lots of $$ in Glendale. He's running out of $$. He can't own the team if it has to leave the market. He needs a new arena and a new subsidy, er, AMF.

He's a salesman first and foremost. We've all known that from the beginning. He will say whatever he think of, in the moment, to try to get someone to trust his word and his narrative.

The thing that's significant about that is that he is talking to Phoenix, not Mesa.