So neither the NHL nor RSE has discussed any hard numbers with COG yet and there are no further meetings between RSE and COG scheduled for this week? Also, IIRC meetings last all of 45 minutes?
I don't think that qualifies as negotiation. It's COB, May 29, 2013.
I don't think there are going to be any additional meetings scheduled, ever. It's slightly nuanced, but I still consider all of this stuff to be pretty much basic Gov/Econ:
- Glendale is chartered as a council–manager government form. The role of the City Manager includes budget preparation, in conjunction with the Exec Director of Financial Services.
- The FY14 Budget implements some pretty serious financial policies with regards to equitable return on investment for city expenditures. The city staff essentially wrote the Arizona Gift Clause right into their policy book. The key passages are:
"The city will not give ... payment of any public funds, by subsidy or otherwise, to any ... corporation, except where ... the city ... receives direct consideration substantially equal to its expenditure " :
"debt service will not exceed 10% of the 5‐year average of the General Fund’s ongoing operating revenue"
- In order for Team Gosbee or any other entity to contract with the city, they have to negotiate with the Glendale City Manager. The Glendale City Manager, in turn, acts as a CEO and evaluates the pros and cons of any potential deal between the municipality and a private entity. In doing so, the City Manager abides by the city's financial policies.
- If Team Gosbee or any other rogue group the NHL can dig up wants a lease with Glendale, they have to approach the city manager with an offer that provides revenue substantially equal to expense. Obviously, anyone who can read a basic Budget Book knows the Coyotes, in the most generous light, generate about $4.5MM in total revenue between arena rents, fees, and sales taxes generated at the Westgate complex. So, not only is the FY14 AMF memorialized at $6MM, the adopted policies require direct consideration in return for expenditures for any future lease.
- The previous Glendale administration, with Beasley and Colson, attempted to utilize the concept of "loss avoidance" to validate their expenditures rather than requiring direct consideration. That's how we ended up with the
hilarious Hocking report where Thomas L projected it would cost $12MM to run the arena without the franchise yet only $1MM in revenue would be realized, creating a loss avoidance scenario of $11MM.
- There is nothing in
Dick Bowers bio to indicate he is going to conduct business as Beasley did. It doesn't seem like there will be any more erroneous Hockingization of the numbers. Skeete was retained as Asst City Manager and as I recall, he recommended against the JIG lease as it was fiscally imprudent. If potential Coyotes owners do not present a deal that complies with the city's financial policies, Bowers is unlikely to advance it to the council for consideration.
- Based on the leases from Hulsizer and JIG, it seems safe to assume that a potential Coyotes owner is not looking for a deal that pays anything even close to substantially equal consideration for the city's AMF expense. Also, LeBlanc was quoted as saying it would take something close to what JIG was offered and then Martinez had this quote after the Tuesday meeting:
"Let’s put it this way: They’re successful businessmen who are not out to lose money". I don't think I'm reading too much into that to assess that Manny means they want Glendale to backstop any potential losses.
In conclusion, if the NHL isn't willing to play at Jobing.com for AMF $6MM, they are pretty much done playing in Glendale.
