Phoenix CXXIII: Who Wants to Pay Our Bills?

[The Feckless Puck]

I wonder if Bettman, Daly and LeBlanc are going to go to the Arizona Senate and do the same ''Monorail'' routine that was done to make the Glendale City Council cough up millions and millions for the Coyotes time and time again.

I'd trust Lyle Lanley more than I'd trust LeBlanc. At least Lanley knows how to rhyme.

 

[aqib]

I wonder if Bettman, Daly and LeBlanc are going to go to the Arizona Senate and do the same ''Monorail'' routine that was done to make the Glendale City Council cough up millions and millions for the Coyotes time and time again.

I really don't have it in me to watch Arizona Senate meetings like I did the Glendale City Council meetings. Its not going to be fun without Arthur Leroy Thurston.

 

[Llama19]

I really don't have it in me to watch Arizona Senate meetings like I did the Glendale City Council meetings. Its not going to be fun without Arthur Leroy Thurston.

Or Ken Jones...

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

Arizona residents in the future:

"I still think we should have spent the money on education."

"Well you should have written a song like that guy LeBlanc."

 

[Mightygoose]

Roberts: Coyotes deal is dead. Or is it?

To quote:

"The lack of support from Lesko, Kavanagh and Yarbrough should be enough to kill the Coyotes’ plan, given that 16 of the Senate’s 17 Republican votes likely will be needed. Democrats have long been more interested in funding schools than in funding professional playgrounds.

Still, Senate Bill 1149’s sponsor, Sen. Bob Worsley, isn’t throwing in the towel.

"We are still working on it. It's not easy," he told Harris.

With a deal that was terrible for taxpayers. By the time Glendale’s residents are thoroughly squeezed for that horrendous mistake, they will have dumped a half a billion dollars into keeping an NHL team in town.

Curiously, despite evidence of doom in the state Senate, Coyotes Chief Executive Anthony LeBlanc isn’t giving up his tin cup.

“There are a lot of moving parts in this legislative process and everything is malleable and open for discussion until the very end,†he told Harris. “We will continue to educate lawmakers about a complex project that creates a true public-private partnership and offers the Coyotes an economically viable solution to remain in the Valley for the long term."

Hmm. Might one of those moving parts have to do with the Coyotes’ lobbyist, Jim Norton of Axiom Public Affairs? Jim Norton, who just coincidentally is still pals with his former fraternity brother from ASU?

Yeah, a guy named Doug Ducey.

Eyes wide open, Arizona."

Source: http://www.azcentral.com/story/opin...017/02/24/roberts-coyotes-deal-dead/98357794/

If this proposal is getting so much push back from lawmakers, would anyone including Governor Ducey really want to put their neck out for this?
Seems like through Worsley’s and Norton’s comments, it’s just for a new home for the team, they’re not happy where they are despite the public expense and the team cannot afford to build on their own.

Looking over at the Islanders thread with the investors involved at the Belmont site, though there are still some details to come out, on the surface it looks like it will be a privately funded project.

If that’s the case, then it make the Coyotes plan even more of a waste of funds that can go somewhere else.

The 2 teams have some similar issues.

Both have low attendance and ‘optics’ of wanting to get closer to their fans

Both are having major issues with the owner of their current building and are being ‘kicked out’ plus they were/are being paid to play there and the building owners are realizing the ROI falls short.

Both are looking to add an additional arena in the marketplace.

Yet, the Islanders may find a way to avoid using public funds yet the for the Coyotes it’s essential?

 

[WildGopher]

I wonder if Bettman, Daly and LeBlanc are going to go to the Arizona Senate and do the same ''Monorail'' routine that was done to make the Glendale City Council cough up millions and millions for the Coyotes time and time again.

Highly doubt it. There's no opportunity to testify when the Senate takes it up, and I think the absence of Bettman and Daley at the Transportation Committee hearing, where they might have been able to testify, speaks volumes.

They would have had to answer direct questions from that one Senator who voted no, questions like: "Tell us about how you burned Glendale for $50 million dollars, 1/2 of which Daley assured them was just for 'insurance.'"

"The NHL is almost a 4 billion dollar a year industry. Why doesn't the NHL put some of that $50 million back toward Glendale to make it whole, and give the Coyotes a chance to make it work there?"

"How can you have the gall to come here and ask for $225 million, when you're going to leave an empty hulk of an arena 30 miles away because you messed this situation up so bad?"

Optics wouldn't be good. Make great evening TV news clips. Senators wouldn't swoon over the big guys in from New York, like Glendale council did. Best to stay away.

 

[Llama19]

Highly doubt it. There's no opportunity to testify when the Senate takes it up, and I think the absence of Bettman and Daley at the Transportation Committee hearing, where they might have been able to testify, speaks volumes.

They would have had to answer direct questions from that one Senator who voted no, questions like: "Tell us about how you burned Glendale for $50 million dollars, 1/2 of which Daley assured them was just for 'insurance.'"

"The NHL is almost a 4 billion dollar a year industry. Why doesn't the NHL put some of that $50 million back toward Glendale to make it whole, and give the Coyotes a chance to make it work there?"

"How can you have the gall to come here and ask for $225 million, when you're going to leave an empty hulk of an arena 30 miles away because you messed this situation up so bad?"

Optics wouldn't be good. Make great evening TV news clips. Senators wouldn't swoon over the big guys in from New York, like Glendale council did. Best to stay away.

Yes...LeBlanc and company want to stay away from Glendale and move elsewhere...

The absence of the Big Guns From New York does seem somewhat strange, given the previous history of this saga, even though they did show up when they knew the Glendale Council would be voting 'Yes' for the last 'arena management' agreement...

This time around...not so much...so I do agree with your analysis...

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Arizona residents in the future:

"I still think we should have spent the money on education."

The irony, of course, is that even if they don't do the arena deal, they're not going to spend that money on education.

Arizona is the absolute worst when it comes to spending money on things that really need it like education. The retiree bloc consistently votes down any education-friendly legislation because they figure they don't need it.

 

[WildGopher]

Yes...LeBlanc and company want to stay away from Glendale and move elsewhere...

The absence of the Big Guns From New York does seem somewhat strange, given the previous history of this saga, even though they did show up when they knew the Glendale Council would be voting 'Yes' for the last 'arena management' agreement...

This time around...not so much...so I do agree with your analysis...

They might be able to do some damage from the Senate visitors' gallery, though, throwing fruit down on the Senators.

Now, Bettman . . . I've never heard he played any baseball, so you wouldn't want him throwing much. Could accidentally take out Worsley with an errant beanball, and that's a vote they really need.

But Daley - that's a dude that looks like he might have done some spot starts or long relief in high school. Get him some unripened cucumbers, gourds, cantaloupes - Bill throwing some chin music and maybe taking out a handful of "No" vote Senators just might salvage this thing for IA! Final vote: 12 Aye, 11 Nay, 7 on Disabled List!

Might be their best hope!

 

[MNNumbers]

Does this bill have to be put to a vote to actually kill it? Would Worsley pull it instead, in hopes of trying again next year? Or, would he pull it in hopes of amending it some way back in his committee to make it more likely to pass?

And, when does the Senate docket for Monday get posted?

 

[GuelphStormer]

Agree on LeBlanc having all the traits of a salesman...will blame everything and everyone on why the sale could not be closed...

As far as his other two options...LeBlanc may have a friend in Mayor Stanton but Mr Sarver is whole other matter...discussed previously...where the numbers likely will not work for LeBlanc...

Same goes for working with the tribal group(s)...

LeBlanc requires someone to pay him for the wares he is selling...which is not working too well...even with the lobbying by Axiom...

does he? i thot stanton told him to grow up, get along with glendale, be thankful and play in the arena the public has already built for him.

i think anyone who has even an ounce of knowledge about this guy and the actual numbers involved wants nothing to do with him.

 

[Whileee]

Yes...LeBlanc and company want to stay away from Glendale and move elsewhere...

The absence of the Big Guns From New York does seem somewhat strange, given the previous history of this saga, even though they did show up when they knew the Glendale Council would be voting 'Yes' for the last 'arena management' agreement...

This time around...not so much...so I do agree with your analysis...

I wonder if LeBlanc is more desperate to keep his dream job as an NHL executive more than Bettman and the NHL are desperate to keep the Coyotes in Arizona. Bettman has no reason to dissuade LeBlanc from flailing around for options, but I think they likely have a suitable Plan B cooking, and probably have had one since the agreement with Glendale was signed with the 5-year "out clause" window.

 

[WildGopher]

Does this bill have to be put to a vote to actually kill it? Would Worsley pull it instead, in hopes of trying again next year? Or, would he pull it in hopes of amending it some way back in his committee to make it more likely to pass?

And, when does the Senate docket for Monday get posted?

Yes, it would need a vote to kill it.

In legislatures I'm familiar with, I don't think the author can pull the bill once it emerges from the committee. But I don't know Arizona's rules. I do know he wouldn't be able to pull it back into a committee for additional changes. The Senate owns that bill now.

The calendar for bills to be debated each day tends to not be posted until that day, sometimes right before the floor session. Rules meets Monday at 1:00, will quickly vote on 4 bills, and then presumably decide which bills are coming up for floor votes in the 1:30 Senate floor session that day and each day until they meet next. Last week, they met twice, I think, so maybe Monday they'll decide which bills will get Senate votes on Monday and Tuesday; and then Rules might meet again Wednesday to decide which bills will be voted on Wednesday and Thursday. As more of these bills come flying at them, they might have to start meeting daily, so then you probably won't know which bills are coming up until right before the Senate floor sessions. Last week, the Senate met at 1:30 Monday and Tuesday, and at 10:00 Wednesday and Thursday, so those would be times I'd be watching for.

 

[MNNumbers]

Yes, it would need a vote to kill it.

In legislatures I'm familiar with, I don't think the author can pull the bill once it emerges from the committee. But I don't know Arizona's rules. I do know he wouldn't be able to pull it back into a committee for additional changes. The Senate owns that bill now.

The calendar for bills to be debated each day tends to not be posted until that day, sometimes right before the floor session. Rules meets Monday at 1:00, will quickly vote on 4 bills, and then presumably decide which bills are coming up for floor votes in the 1:30 Senate floor session that day and each day until they meet next. Last week, they met twice, I think, so maybe Monday they'll decide which bills will get Senate votes on Monday and Tuesday; and then Rules might meet again Wednesday to decide which bills will be voted on Wednesday and Thursday. As more of these bills come flying at them, they might have to start meeting daily, so then you probably won't know which bills are coming up until right before the Senate floor sessions. Last week, the Senate met at 1:30 Monday and Tuesday, and at 10:00 Wednesday and Thursday, so those would be times I'd be watching for.

Since it belongs to the floor, can it simply not be voted on? Or, does everything that comes to the floor (I mean everything that is referred to the full Senate by the rules committee) get voted on?

 

[aqib]

If this proposal is getting so much push back from lawmakers, would anyone including Governor Ducey really want to put their neck out for this?
Seems like through Worsley’s and Norton’s comments, it’s just for a new home for the team, they’re not happy where they are despite the public expense and the team cannot afford to build on their own.

Looking over at the Islanders thread with the investors involved at the Belmont site, though there are still some details to come out, on the surface it looks like it will be a privately funded project.

If that’s the case, then it make the Coyotes plan even more of a waste of funds that can go somewhere else.

The 2 teams have some similar issues.

Both have low attendance and ‘optics’ of wanting to get closer to their fans

Both are having major issues with the owner of their current building and are being ‘kicked out’ plus they were/are being paid to play there and the building owners are realizing the ROI falls short.

Both are looking to add an additional arena in the marketplace.

Yet, the Islanders may find a way to avoid using public funds yet the for the Coyotes it’s essential?

New York is a different market. None of the venues in NY were built with public cash (maybe tax breaks, infrastructure etc). I am not sure the Tri-State area could support a 4th major arena but apparently people who know this business better than me disagree.

 

[WildGopher]

Since it belongs to the floor, can it simply not be voted on? Or, does everything that comes to the floor (I mean everything that is referred to the full Senate by the rules committee) get voted on?

Now that it's made it through the two committees, it will get a floor vote. Even Senators who oppose it wouldn't like it if a bill that got that far got deep-sixed with no vote, because then it could happen to one of their bills.

Also, in Rules, it was voted "Proper for Consideration," so they're kind of stuck with that now.

 

[MNNumbers]

Now that it's made it through the two committees, it will get a floor vote. Even Senators who oppose it wouldn't like it if a bill that got that far got deep-sixed with no vote, because then it could happen to one of their bills.

Also, in Rules, it was voted "Proper for Consideration," so they're kind of stuck with that now.

Thank you.

 

[CasualFan]

Since it belongs to the floor, can it simply not be voted on? Or, does everything that comes to the floor (I mean everything that is referred to the full Senate by the rules committee) get voted on?

Rule 17 G

G. When a bill or resolution is considered in the Committee of the Whole, the only regular motions which are in order are the following:

1. To propose amendments.
2. To limit debate.
3. To recommend.
4. To rise and report.
5. That the bill or resolution retain its place on the calendar.
6. That the bill or resolution be retained on the calendar.​

Or in layman terms: they can do whatever the **** they want.

 

[CasualFan]

Rule 17 G

G. When a bill or resolution is considered in the Committee of the Whole, the only regular motions which are in order are the following:

1. To propose amendments.
2. To limit debate.
3. To recommend.
4. To rise and report.
5. That the bill or resolution retain its place on the calendar.
6. That the bill or resolution be retained on the calendar.​

Or in layman terms: they can do whatever the **** they want.

I motion to recommend that Sen. Worsely eat a pinecone before the floor considers his proposal.

The ayes have it.

Bon Appétit, Bob.

 

[Llama19]

Rule 17 G

G. When a bill or resolution is considered in the Committee of the Whole, the only regular motions which are in order are the following:

1. To propose amendments.
2. To limit debate.
3. To recommend.
4. To rise and report.
5. That the bill or resolution retain its place on the calendar.
6. That the bill or resolution be retained on the calendar.​

Or in layman terms: they can do whatever the **** they want.

I motion to recommend that Sen. Worsely eat a pinecone before the floor considers his proposal.

The ayes have it.

Bon Appétit, Bob.

Ahhh...Arizona politics at its finest...or lowest...take your pick...

 

[WildGopher]

I motion to recommend that Sen. Worsely eat a pinecone before the floor considers his proposal.

The ayes have it.

Bon Appétit, Bob.

Well, if he could somehow win this vote, I'd bet he'd take that over eating crow!

 

[Ciao]

If it's up to a vote now, truly, anything can happen. Anything. Expect the unexpected.

 

[YoungGuns]

If it's up to a vote now, truly, anything can happen. Anything. Expect the unexpected.

Well I expect that somehow it lands in favour of the Coyotes, much like it always does. So does that mean it fails and relocation occurs?

 

[Jeffrey93]

Well I expect that somehow it lands in favour of the Coyotes, much like it always does. So does that mean it fails and relocation occurs?

I've almost started rooting for Phoenix/Glendale as the underdog........but hopefully if it fails it DOES mean relocation. For no other reason than I'm tired of hearing about this crap.

During the bankruptcy it was fun.....because there was a Us versus them situation (however you looked at it). Now it's just tiresome.

Asking for a new rink? A bit much....since your attendance at your virtually new arena that you pushed for is awfully low.

New owners.....great. Oh wait....they're worse than the last guy.


Still bad attendance eh? We have new owners it will turn around.

Awwwww......crap! The new owners are terrible and want a new arena to leave their new arena for.

Nobody pays for tickets....need new arenas! Government! Government!

 

[Fairview]

Well I expect that somehow it lands in favour of the Coyotes, much like it always does. So does that mean it fails and relocation occurs?

The right and common sense thing to do would be to vote this bill down, so, of course, I fully expect that against all odds the bill gets passed. . This is Arizona after all.