Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

On  June 10, the Glendale city council voted 5-2 to cancel the current lease management agreement with Ice Arizona. This was the agenda item:

“DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO CANCEL THE PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND ARENA LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GLENDALE AND ICEARIZONA MANAGER CO., LLC AND ICEARIZONA HOCKEY CO., LLC, PURSUANT TO ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES § 38-511, AND TO PURSUE ANY AND ALL OTHER LEGAL ACTIONS AND REMEDIES NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE CANCELLATION OR TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT.”

Here is the text of Arizona Revised Statutes §38-511:

38-511. Cancellation of political subdivision and state contracts; definition

  1. The state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either may, within three years after its execution, cancel any contract, without penalty or further obligation, made by the state, its political subdivisions, or any of the departments or agencies of either if any person significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on behalf of the state, its political subdivisions or any of the departments or agencies of either is, at any time while the contract or any extension of the contract is in effect, an employee or agent of any other party to the contract in any capacity or a consultant to any other party of the contract with respect to the subject matter of the contract.
  2. Leases of state trust land for terms longer than ten years cancelled under this section shall respect those rights given to mortgagees of the lessee by section 37-289 and other lawful provisions of the lease.
  3. The cancellation under this section by the state or its political subdivisions shall be effective when written notice from the governor or the chief executive officer or governing body of the political subdivision is received by all other parties to the contract unless the notice specifies a later time.
  4. The cancellation under this section by any department or agency of the state or its political subdivisions shall be effective when written notice from such party is received by all other parties to the contract unless the notice specifies a later time.
  5. In addition to the right to cancel a contract as provided in subsection A of this section, the state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either may recoup any fee or commission paid or due to any person significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on behalf of the state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either from any other party to the contract arising as the result of the contract.
  6. Notice of this section shall be included in every contract to which the state, its political subdivisions, or any of the departments or agencies of either is a party.
  7. For purposes of this section, “political subdivisions” do not include entities formed or operating under title 48, chapter 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 or 22.

The special voting meeting was preceded on Tuesday, June 9, 2015 by a special workshop session when council immediately voted to go into executive session and then there was a regular workshop meeting. Did the executive session lead to council’s decision to hold the special June 10, 2015 vote about the IceArizona contract? We will never know for executive session cannot be discussed per state statute.

Interestingly Anthony LeBlanc revealed some executive session information when he was on the radio last week. Gary Hirsch, a Glendale resident, raised a question about LeBlanc’s radio comments during the public comment period of council’s regular meeting on June 9, 2015. He asked if anyone representing the city had filed a complaint. No one on council responded but that is not unusual as a statement is made at the outset that council is there to receive public comment but not to respond.

OK, so there is a state statute that allows a political subdivision to cancel a contract. So what? There is one more piece of information that is essential to this surprising action. Most of you do not have a copy of the IceArizona/Glendale Lease Management Agreement. I do and A.R.S. § 38-511 is cited in that contract on Page 84 (in an old contract, page 96 of newer version). I quote:

“24.13 Conflicts of Interest

24.13.3 (in newer contract this is 23.13.2) The Parties acknowledge that the provisions of A.R.S. §38-511, which are hereby incorporated in this Agreement by this reference, may create a situation in which the City might have a right to cancel this Agreement pursuant to A.R. S. §38-511.”

Who made sure this clause was included the Lease Management Agreement? And why? Was city council aware of this provision when they approved the contract? I doubt it. The Jamison contract written by Tindall is the framework for the Ice Arizona contract. There were modifications to specifically address the IceArizona deal. The first thought when reading 24.13.3 is Craig Tindall. How does Tindall fit into all of this? Here’s a quick timeline:

  • April 1, 2013 Tindall resigns as Glendale City Attorney but continues employment with city for 6 months
  • June, 2013 Tindall emails prior to approval of agreement demonstrate his extensive involvement in crafting the final language (please refer to my previous blog on Tindall. Here is the link: Former Glendale City Attorney Craig Tindall…Act 2 http://wp.me/p3aHul-xb )
  • July 3, 2013 Glendale IceArizona Lease Management Agreement approved by city council
  • August 20, 2013 IceArizona hires Tindall as its General Counsel
  • October 1, Tindall’s employment with the city officially ends

State statute says quite clearly that a political subdivision within 3 years after a contract’s execution may cancel the contract if any person is significantly involved in negotiating, crafting or drafting the contract on behalf of the political subdivision and is an employee or agent of any other party. Why did IceArizona accept this provision? Did Sherwood read this contract? If so, why did he not object to provision 24.13.3 within the contract? Why did Tindall and Nick Wood (another Coyotes attorney) allow this clause to remain within the contract? Was it deliberately placed within the contract to offer either side a way out without invoking the 5 year out clause? If it was deliberately left in and invoked by the city then the city wears the “black hat” – not IceArizona for invoking the hated 5 year out clause. Hmmm…

Councilmember Sherwood did not attend tonight’s meeting. Apparently he was in Salt Lake City.  I don’t know but one would think that such a critical vote would demand that he cancel his trip.  He did find time that afternoon to be interviewed on NBC Sports Radio 1060AM by Roc and Manuch.

Why cancel the contract now? The time limitation under state statute is 3 years.  This July 3, 2015, 2 years will have passed. If council’s move to cancel the contract did not occur now it would have happened sometime in the next 12 months. Why this exact moment? I don’t know.

Since the approval of the contract City council has changed dramatically with the departure of former Councilmembers Martinez, Knaack and Alvarez.  Martinez and Knaack supported the deal while Alvarez did not. The majority that approved the contract at the time of its approval was Martinez, Knaack, Sherwood and Chavira. With new councilmembers taking office in December of 2014 a seismic shift occurred. No longer did the deal appear to enjoy a 4 councilmember majority.

The city issued a press release on the morning of June 10, 2015 stating, “The City Council has scheduled a discussion and possible vote regarding Glendale’s contract with the Arizona Coyotes. Discussions and negotiations regarding the contract have been ongoing for months. Specifically, the City is open to a resolution but it must be one that provides certainty and fairness to both parties, especially the taxpayers. The Council has agreed to stand for transparency and the highest standards of ethics for any future agreement with the Coyotes.” Was the city’s press release forced by IceArizona’s threat to sue the city? Translating the government speak, the city appears to have taken the position that it wants the Coyotes to stay as the anchor tenant in its arena but it can no longer sustain the annual loss of revenue. Clearly it is sending the signal that it wants to renegotiate the annual management fee from $15 million a year to ??? Tom Duensing, Interim Assistant City Manager, has pegged this year’s loss to the city to be in the $8.7 million dollar range. To date IceArizona’s position is that they refuse to renegotiate the contract and they reiterated that statement when Barroway and LeBlanc met with Mayor Weiers and Vice Mayor Hugh. And why would they entertain a renegotiation? They are in the catbird’s seat and they retain that pesky 5 year out clause.

Some of the comments made by various individuals during the course of the meeting:

  • City Attorney Bailey – his office sought numerous outside opinions; the contract is the opposite of the goal of public-private partnership; management fee paid by the city not to be used to retire ownership debt; the purpose of the statute is to protect taxpayers from any employee having a dual relationship
  • Nick Wood (Attorney for the Coyotes) – city has no claim; said NHL and Coyotes will sue; claimed Tindall was a ‘former employee’; questioned timing of council action; predicted terrible things will happen to Westgate
  • Anthony LeBlanc (Coyotes minority owner) – the city’s action has had a significant financial impact on the Coyotes already; called council action ‘political grandstanding’; claims meeting on Monday with Mayor Weiers was the first time city had asked to renegotiate
  • Many citizens spoke for over an hour – majority were Coyotes fans; included Jeff Teesel, Manager of Westgate; however there were a few brave Glendale citizens who asked council to weigh the needs of the community vs. the needs of professional sports.

At the start of the meeting Councilmember Aldama made a motion to table for 2 weeks. Chavira seconded. The majority voted no on the motion. The vote on cancelling the contract was 5-2 with Aldama, Tolmachoff, Turner, Hugh and Weiers voting to cancel and Sherwood and Chavira voting to keep the contract. Mayor Weiers commented prior to his vote with the cryptic statement, “if you are breaking the law there is no exception.” He went on to say as time progressed more information would be available so that the public would understand why council voted as it had.

There’s more to say but I will save it for my next blog. I will offer one comment now. The meeting was ugly and the air was filled with threats, intimidation and breathless anger. If there are any typos or poor English please accept my apology. It was due to a rush to get this blog out. My only hope is that LeBlanc and crew reach out immediately to the city, willing to renegotiate the deal and living up to their promise to keep the Coyotes in Glendale.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

 

It has been 17 years and 158 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

At 6 PM on Wednesday, June 10, 2015 the Glendale city council will meet to consider and vote upon an action to cancel the current Lease Management Agreement with IceArizona. Here is the only item on the agenda:

“DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO CANCEL THE PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND ARENA LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GLENDALE AND ICEARIZONA MANAGER CO., LLC AND ICEARIZONA HOCKEY CO., LLC, PURSUANT TO ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES § 38-511, AND TO PURSUE ANY AND ALL OTHER LEGAL ACTIONS AND REMEDIES NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE CANCELLATION OR TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT.”

There are rumors flying furiously on Twitter, Facebook, etc. speculating on the reason for the possible cancellation. That’s all they are…rumors. I can affirm that the reason has nothing to do with the infamous audit or the brough ha ha over naming rights. I have agreed to not say anything further until after the council meeting.

Don’t expect Councilmember Sherwood to be at this meeting or call in. Apparently he will be in Salt Lake City tomorrow. How convenient especially if the deal he brokered blows up. His pals (Chavira and Aldama), or as all three call themselves, the “Tres Amigos” (I like Three Stooges better), will have to vote without their “jefe” to keep them in line. Oh oh…

Bring your seat cushions for tomorrow night’s meeting folks. Expect it to be a long one with every possible Coyote fan in attendance reiterating over and over again how stupid this council is. Has it occurred to anyone that they couldn’t be that stupid if they have discovered a way out of the current contract?

You will see the agenda item makes specific reference to Arizona Revised Statutes § 38-511. I suggest anyone that is interested in this issue take the time to read it.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

It has been 17 years and 147 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

We all know about the billions the NFL (as a non-profit organization) made from the Super Bowl. It is estimated that the city lost somewhere between $1 and $1.6 million dollars. It turns out it was lucrative for some city employees working overtime for these major events. A total of 305 city employees were credentialed for the Super Bowl. They did not have assigned seats but that would not have prevented them from being in attendance. Many of them worked. The guys and girls on the line – 36 firefighters and 92 police officers – worked hard that day. Some credentialed employees in attendance if truth be told didn’t work at all but certainly were in attendance.

Fire Department numbers and figures provided under a Public Record Request reflect combined Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl figures as the department did not track each of these events separately. However the Fire Department had 105 of its employees credentialed for the Super Bowl (Please note: The Public Records Request provided names of all credentialed employees. I chose not to use them):

  • Fire Chief -1
  • Deputy Chief -1
  • Deputy Fire Chief-1
  • Executive Assistant Fire Chief-1
  • Deputy Chief of Logistics-1
  • Assistant Chief of Operations-1
  • Assist Chief of Logistics & Personnel-1
  • Deputy Chief of EMS-1
  • Fire Marshall-1
  • Assistant Fire Marshall-1
  • Deputy Fire Marshall-3
  • Division Chief of Communications-1
  • Division Manager-1
  • Resource Manager-1
  • Inspector-1
  • Battalion Chief-2
  • Acting Captain EMS-1
  • MD-1
  • Administrative Support-5
  • Administrative Supervisor-1
  • Firefighter-36
  • Fire Engineer-11
  • Fire Captain-29
  • Cadet-2
  • Recruit-1

Rates of pay differed for the top five earners encompassing all 3 major events (Fiesta Bowl, Pro Bowl and Super Bowl)  and each earned (again names were provided and I chose not to use them):

  • Fire Captain at 148.75 hours for $11,339.21 (Overtime at $76.23 per hour)
  • Fire Captain at 138.50 hours for $10,939.73(Overtime at $78.98 per hour)
  • Fire Captain at 98 hours for $7,235.34 (Overtime at $73.83 per hour)
  • Fire Engineer at 152 hours for $7,081.68 (Overtime at $46.13 per hour)
  • Division Manager at 19 hours for $4,180.00 (Overtime at $220 per hour)

Police Department numbers and figures provided under a Public Record Request do reflect the Super Bowl figures alone. The Police Department had 190 of its employees credentialed for the Super Bowl (Please note: the Public Records Request provided names of all employees. I chose not to use them):

  • Police Chief-1
  • Assistant Chief-2
  • Lieutenant-9
  • Commander-6
  • Detective-1
  • Sergeant-18
  • SWAT Sergeant-3
  • Sergeant EOD-1
  • EOD Officer-4
  • Sergeant K9-1
  • PIO Lieutenant-1
  • PIO Sergeant-1
  • PIO Officer-3
  • Detention Manager-1
  • Detention Officer-2
  • OIT Officer-1
  • Check In-5
  • Dispatcher-3
  • Communications-6
  • SWAT Officer-24
  • Officer-92
  • K9 Officer-5

The rate of pay for these Sergeants was $45.22 per hour (Again I chose not to use names):

  • Sergeant for 123 hours at $5,561.25
  • SWAT Sergeant for 70 hours at $3,165.27
  • SWAT Sergeant for 66 hours at $2,984.40
  • Sergeant for 60 hours at $2,713.09
  • SWAT Sergeant for 55 hours at $2,486.99

Of the total of 305 City of Glendale employees credentialed for the Super Bowl 10 were not Public Safety employees. Some of the more notable non Public Safety credentialed employees were:

  • Former City Manager Brenda Fischer
  • Former Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni
  • Current Assistant City Manager Jennifer Campbell
  • Intergovernmental Director Brent Stoddard
  • Former Communications Director Julie Watters
  • Development Services Director Sam McAllen
  • Program Administrator of Economic Development Jean Moreno

When asked under a Public Records Request to verify those employees who actually used their credentials this was the city response, “The city does not have any records to produce that would be responsive to this request. The credentials provided did require the user to scan in and out upon entering the hard perimeter of the stadium; however, the scanning equipment used did not belong to the city, nor was the city provided with any reports or other information about city employee scans.” How about that? The city doesn’t know but presumably the NFL does.

The city’s designated 22 member Operational Planning Team for the Super Bowl was comprised of the following employees:

  • Richard Bradshaw – Police
  • Cathy Colbath – Public Works
  • Justine Cornelius – Building Safety
  • Chris DeChant – Fire
  • Trevor Ebersole – Traffic
  • Walter Fix – Airport
  • Patty Frey – Fire
  • Jon Froke – Planning
  • Julie Frisoni – Communications/Asst. City Manager
  • Anthony Gavalyas – Fire
  • Joe Hengemuehler – Communications
  • Tamara Hicks – Licensing
  • Charles Jenkins – Fire
  • Matt Lively – Police
  • Sam McAllen – Code Enforcement
  • Jean Moreno – Economic Development
  • Tabitha Perry – Planning
  • Lorraine Pino- Convention Bureau
  • Claire Smith – Management Aide
  • Kristen Stephenson – Economic Development
  • Brent Stoddard – Intergovernmental Relations
  • Julie Watters – Communications

Quite a few of the members of this committee are department heads and even directors of departments. In city hierarchy their time was very valuable in terms of pay. Yet the city never tracked their hours of planning nor counted their hours of meeting as an identified cost incurred by the city for the Super Bowl. The same can be said of the 16 member Public Information Officers group comprised of the following:

  • Tracy Breeden – Police
  • Jackie Cole – Police
  • Ronald Hart – Fire
  • Joe Hengemuehler – Communications
  • Tamra Ingersoll – Communications
  • Sam McAllen – Code Enforcement
  • Jean Moreno – Economic Development
  • Jay O’Neil – Police
  • Robin Phillips – Communications
  • Laurie Sapp – Media Center
  • Daniel Senese – Fire
  • Rochelle Thomas – Police
  • Daniel Valenzuela – Fire
  • David Vidaure – Police
  • Julie Watters – Communications
  • Michael Young – Fire

Jean Moreno, Sam McAllen, Joe Hengemuehler and Julie Watters worked within both groups. These 2 groups were made up of 34 employees some of whom are high salaried employees. What remains troubling is that no accounting of their time and talent is tracked by the city yet they are expenses that the city incurred to host the Super Bowl.

Whatever figure the city claims as its cost to host the Super Bowl is bogus as long as all costs are not tracked. Employee time and wages are one component of the cost. What about equipment used? Police and fire vehicles, sanitation trucks, transportation equipment, etc. the city used? What about O&M costs for these vehicles? What about other equipment or personnel I wasn’t wise enough to ask for in attributing costs? Although my Public Record Requests were as specific and detailed as I could make them there were sure to be items I never thought of including. As we all know if you don’t specifically ask, you won’t get it. The city is not going to volunteer to give up information.

There you have it. Based on the information provided by the city I did my best to calculate expenses and revenues for hosting the Super Bowl. After all is said and done, Interim Assistant City Manager Tom Duensing’s figure of $2.2 million is incorrect. Add another million to two million dollars and you would be in the ball park. Perhaps the city will take note and if there should ever be another Super Bowl in Glendale city administrators will make every effort to track ALL costs not just the most visible – Public Safety. The city loses money owning the spring training ball park and the arena. Should it consciously continue to lose money hosting the Super Bowl and other major events? Perhaps it’s time to revisit any and all contracts associated with these major events as a means of city loss prevention. We love hosting them but the taxpayers of Glendale should not have to pay for them. It is incumbent upon the city to insure that all event promoters pay their fair share to alleviate the burden of loss the city continues to experience.

By the way, the city in its city council meeting of May 26, 2015 refunded $3 million dollars to AZSTA (Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority) in sales tax. That sales tax would have gone a long way to covering the loss sustained by the city. What’s wrong with this picture?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

It has been 17 years and 107 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

USA Today photo

Andrew Barroway, Anthony LeBlanc Courtesy USA Today

On December 31, 2014 we were greeted with an announcement released by Coyotes Co-Owner, President and CEO Anthony LeBlanc, “Today is an exciting day for the Arizona Coyotes and our great fans. The addition of Andrew Barroway to our ownership group further solidifies the Coyotes long-term future in the Valley. Our entire ownership group is excited about this opportunity to work with Andrew in taking this franchise to the next level. It’s a great day for hockey in Arizona!” Here is the link: http://heatwaved.com/2014/12/31/andrew-barroway-approved-buy-arizona-coyotes/ .

We were told that Andrew Barroway’s purchase made him majority owner of the team holding 51%. The deal was praised as a means of creating financial stability for the team and some of the money would be used to raise payroll. Barroway said, “he and the nine minority owners were committed to infusing $30 million back into the team, with up to $9 million going directly to upgrading the on-ice product through trades and free agency.” As majority owner, Barroway would be the team governor, current governor George Gosbee would be alternate governor, and Anthony LeBlanc would remain as chief executive officer.

Two days later, on January 2, 2015 Craig Morgan of Fox Sports News interviewed Barroway. Here is the link: http://www.foxsports.com/arizona/story/q-a-with-coyotes-majority-owner-andrew-barroway-010215 . Morgan asked Barroway how active he would be as the new owner. Barroway indicated that he planned to be an active owner and would take part in all major decisions regarding the team. Morgan also asked if there would be any major changes and Barroway responded that he didn’t expect any.

th6FIKDB1J

Where’s Waldo?

That was 4 months ago. So where’s Waldo? Er, Andrew Barroway? Sources inside Glendale City Hall indicate that Barroway, as the  majority owner of the team, has not signed the lease management contract. At the very least, that should have occurred after the Board of Governors approved the sale to Barroway on December 31, 2014. Does Barroway’s absence from the team scene and Gila River Arena plus a lease management contract without Barroway’s signature signal trouble with the deal? At the last game of the season the Coyotes distributed their annual book replete with statistics, photos and bios of everyone (except God) including the owners minus any mention or photo of Andrew Barroway. It makes you scratch your head and ask what’s going on.

thDYDNS84PThere’s another Where’s Waldo moment…the failure of the Coyotes to submit a certified financial team audit to the City of Glendale as stipulated in the lease management agreement. It was due September 30, 2014…7 months ago. In anticipation of receiving the audit the city hired Tony Tavares in December of 2014 to perform the city’s audit.

Peter Corbett of the Arizona Republic in an April 17, 2015 article offered some very interesting comments from principals involved. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2015/04/17/glendale-arizona-coyotes-first-season-audit-drags/25922095/ . He reported that:

  • “Coyotes officials said the reports were late because it was the organization’s first year of operations under the new deal and more complications surfaced when a new majority owner acquired the team at the end of last year.”
  • “The financial-reporting delay has created tensions with Glendale officials who are frustrated that the team has not closed the books on its first season even as the second season wrapped up April 11 on the ice at Gila River Arena.”
  • “Ian Hugh, Glendale vice mayor, said the Coyotes must be held accountable for the money the team is taking from taxpayers. ‘I expect both sides to live up to our agreement,’ he said. ‘Our auditor is still trying to get information from the Coyotes’.”
  • “Jeff Shumway, Coyotes CEO from 2006-09, said that during his tenure the team typically completed its audits by November. The audit reports were public documents that were available to anyone who made a records request to Glendale, he said.”
  • “The current Coyotes arena-management agreement includes language that requires the city to protect the team’s proprietary information.”

What’s so “proprietary” about an audited financial statement of profit and loss submitted to the City of Glendale that shouldn’t be a public record? After all, Glendale’s taxpayers are paying $15 million dollars a year. You would think we would be entitled.

The team’s financial audit wasn’t “proprietary” when Steve Ellman and/or Jerry Moyes owned the team. Did LeBlanc fudge in his public statements about the team’s losses? Who knows? Apparently we, the public, the taxpayers of Glendale and the fans supporting the team with ticket sales, will never know the truth. Former President Ronald Reagan said, “Trust but verify.” LeBlanc and company want all of us to trust but at the same time they don’t seem to want us to verify.

Questions remain unanswered…Where is Waldo? Where is Andrew Barroway and where is the certified team financial audit? There are answers but we are not getting them.

Post Script: Today is the NHL Draft Lottery. Coyotes placed third in lottery line up. Anthony LeBlanc tweeting a good face on the situation…but Where’s Waldo?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

It has been 17 years and 95 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

For 4 years, from the time Jerry Moyes declared the team bankrupt in 2009 until the end of 2012, as a councilmember I was part of the high drama surrounding the Arizona Coyotes and the arena, a city owned facility. Suitors to buy the team came and went with regularity. The city paid the NHL $25 million a year to manage the arena while everyone desperately hunted for a new owner. In 2013 a new city council was seated and promptly approved the current management agreement of $15 million dollars paid annually to IceArizona, the new owners of the team. If truth be told that $15 million goes directly to Fortress Lending and the NHL as interest payments on the IceArizona’s purchase debt owed by LeBlanc, Gosbee, and et.al. If you remember the cash raised for the team purchase was approximately $45 million. The rest of the purchase price of $170 million was strictly debt. Today Andrew Barroway is the majority owner (51%) of the team.

A recent article on March 30, 2015, by Mike Sunnucks of the Phoenix Business Journal entitled Could the Phoenix Suns, city build a new arena at Phoenix Convention Center site? It is intriguing to say the least. Sunnucks reports on speculation about where the Phoenix Suns will be playing its games in the future, “ ‘US Airways Center is owned by the city of Phoenix and the Suns lease doesn’t expire until 2029’, according to city spokeswoman Deb Ostreicher. The Suns could look to the city for renovations of the downtown arena or could look for a new home.” Sunnucks goes on to say, “One scenario being talked about — at least in real estate and downtown Phoenix circles — is a new arena being built where the current South Building of the Phoenix Convention Center is on Jefferson and Third streets. That is the oldest convention center building and is a block away from the Suns’ current arena.”

Granted all of this is extremely speculative but there is the possibility of the Phoenix owned US Airways Center becoming vacant if Phoenix and the Suns decide to build a new arena at the site of the south building of the convention center. Take it a step further and it is not outside the realm of possibility that Phoenix would attempt to lure the Arizona Coyotes to a newly renovated and vacant US Airways Center with better sight lines for hockey patrons.

Think about it. Since purchasing the team two years ago IceArizona has consistently lost money due to many factors. One of those factors has always been fan complaints about trekking out to Glendale for the games. Many in the East Valley as well as from other locations such as Tucson simply choose not to make the trip. A more centrally located arena in downtown Phoenix has a certain appeal for many.

One wonders if it appeals to Barroway. Today, 2015, the Glendale arena is 12 years old, having opened in December of 2003. In another 3 years, by 2018, the arena will be 15 years old and the Coyotes will have the available option of moving due to the opt out clause any time thereafter. One of Barroway’s imperatives is to keep the team viable over the next 3 years until some major decisions are made.

In 8 years, by 2023, the arena will be 20 years old and in need of major renovation and upgrades. In the meantime, if Barroway and the City of Phoenix worked out a deal regarding US Airways it could solve one persistent fan complaint by relocating to a more convenient and centralized location. It would certainly fulfill the owners’ mantra of “here to stay”…just not in Glendale.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

On Friday, March 13, 2015 we learned that the Coyotes had finally finished their audit and submitted it to the City of Glendale. What is troublesome is the fact that the results were submitted to Glendale five months late. The first question is, why? IceArizona’s rationale is sure to be that the Barroway purchase was the cause of the delay. But his purchase was in December and it is now March. Audits do take time but not this much time.

Another troublesome aspect is IceArizona’s inability to abide by the arena management agreement stipulation 8.16.1 (c) Annual Financial Reports, “Not later than 90 days after the end of each Fiscal Year (June 30), provided, that if all necessary information from the NHL related to the following items (a), (b) and (c) shall not have been received by the date which is 30 days after the end of each Fiscal Year, then interim reports shall be provided within the normal time frame and final reports shall be provided within 60 days after the receipt of all necessary information from the NHL related thereto): (a) a balance sheet relating to Arena Facility operations as to the end of such Fiscal Year, (b) a statement of profit or less for Arena Facility operations during such Fiscal Year, and (c) a statement of charge of financial condition for Arena Facility operations during such Fiscal Year, each prepared in accordance with GAAP as consistently applied (if there are multiple interpretations of the application of GAAP, GAAP as traditionally interpreted by the Arena Manager and the Team Owner shall apply) (collectively, the “Annual Financial Reports”), and accompanied by a report containing an opinion of the Arena Manager’s accountants, stating that such Annual Financial Reports relate, that such Annual Financial Reports have been prepared in accordance with GAAP as consistently applied and that the examination by the Arena Manager’s accountants in connection with such financial reports was made in accordance with GAAP.” The agreement then states in 8.17.1. Audits, “The City shall have the right to conduct an independent audit of the management and operation of the arena (or any part thereof) and the Account Records (or any part thereof) and the Team Owner Records (or any part thereof) by the City Staff or by an independent certified public accounting firm selected by the City.”

The City should have received an Interim Audit about October 1, 2014. Instead it received the Final Audit on March 13, 2015, five months late. On November 4, 2014 in anticipation of receiving the expected Audit, the City hired Proeminent Sports, LLC, and a Nevada limited liability company, to audit the information IceArizona was supposed to provide in a timely fashion and to present its findings by December 15, 2014.

Note that the City’s expectation was that the audit would take about Coyotes Audit contract_Page_26 weeks, not months and months and months. Tony Tavares, former president of the Anaheim Mighty Ducks and Los Angeles Angels and Managing Member of Proeminent Sports, is the lead in conducting the audit. Tavares just happened to have been involved with Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf in 2011 when Reinsdorf was trying to purchase the Coyotes from the NHL. Is there any conflict of interest?

On March 13, 2015 the media began sharing leaked results of the audit. Since the city has not publicly posted the audit results the leaking appeared to have been on the IceArizona side. What has been reported by some media traditionally sympathetic to the Coyotes is a total loss figure of $34,831,000.  It breaks out into operating losses of $16,458,000 and one time charges of $18,373,000. Their argument is that one should only look at the operating losses of nearly $16.5 million dollars and should not consider the nearly $18.4 million dollars in additional losses because they are one time charges and will not recur. They are correct in stating those specific charges will not recur but it is reasonable to assume that there will be other, onetime charges each and every year. While they will not be the specific ones attributed to this Fiscal Year, there are bound to be other onetime charges annually.

I attended the Blackhawks game last week and couldn’t help but notice that the majority of attendees were Hawks fans. The robust chants for the Hawks in our house were downright embarrassing. It appeared as if nearly every Coyotes ticket holder had sold their seats to Hawks fans. With a team that is not performing well it is not surprising to see the fan base shrink. Fans are fickle. Everyone loves a winner…a losing team? Not so much.  It may well be that operations and team revenue earnings will reflect this downward trend this Fiscal Year.

That brings us to the troublesome “out” clause that IceArizona may exercise after 5 years of losses totaling $50 million dollars or more. There has been considerable past discussion that lingers to this day over that particular clause. Many fans asked why the stipulation was necessary if the owners’ intent is to keep the team in Arizona. Others, from the Glendale resident side, called for the very same stipulation for the city. Quietly, oh so quietly, the IceArizona owners retained the “out” clause and the city never received such a stipulation in its favor. Is it any wonder that speculation about the owners’ long term intent has surfaced again upon learning that first year losses are $38.4 million dollars? After all, that figure is more than half of the $50 million dollars required in demonstrated loss before the owners can exercise the “out” clause.  

In a March 13, 2015 Craig Morgan story for FoxSports Arizona CEO Anthony LeBlanc stated, Naysayers will try and bring up the out clause at every opportunity… It leads to a simple question: If the franchise is successful financially, why would you even consider exercising it? The out clause was a protection mechanism.” The better question is…if the franchise is successful financially, why are you, Mr. LeBlanc et.al, keeping it? There would be no speculation every time Las Vegas or Seattle is mentioned if there was no “out” clause.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

There’s certainly been a lot of news concerning Glendale this week:

  • On February 20, 2015 the group led by Anna Lee filed the necessary paperwork once again to recall Councilmember Gary Sherwood of the Sahuaro district. The group’s first effort was denied by the city on various grounds. Consider their first effort a life’s lesson. They now know exactly what eyes to dot and tees to cross. Expect them to gather the necessary signatures to compel the city to call for a Sherwood recall election. If you would like to sign the petition (must live in the Sahuaro district)  and/or help gather signatures please call 602-657-0303 and your call will be returned.
  • The city council accepted former City Manager Brenda Fischer’s resignation effective April 3, 2015. Her request of the emails of only 3 councilmembers may have been the last straw for council.
  • The city council appointed former Scottsdale City Manager Dick Bowers as Glendale’s Interim City Manager. Mr. Bowers has filled this position before during the last search by council for a city manager. One of his first decisions was to retain the services of Jon Froke as the city’s Planning Director.
  • Mayor Jerry Weiers, on Friday, February 20, 2015 issued the following statement regarding the proposal to sell Foothills Library and relocate it to the Foothills Recreation and Aquatic Center:

“Over the past few weeks, the citizens of Glendale have voiced their opinion regarding the proposed relocation of the Foothills Branch Library. Their voice has been almost entirely united in opposition to the proposal. While I share their concerns and am personally opposed to the proposal, I await the recommendation of the Library Advisory Board, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Arts Commission. “I am glad that Glendale residents have taken such an active role on this issue. Ever since it was announced, I urged staff to seek the input of the public to ensure that our citizens were incluced an any propoal to alter the library. It is my sincere hope that Glendale residents will continue to actively participate in this and other important issues facing our great city. “I also thank Midwestern University for their long-term support of the Glendale community. In addition to producint hundreds of doctors, pharmacits, physician assistand, and many other types of medical professionals every year, Midwestern opens their campus to the community through clinics and other wonderful events. Our City is a better place because they are here.”             

  • Tony Tavares, the former president of Disney Enterprises and the Anaheim Ducks, will conduct an audit of the Arizona Coyotes’ financials for $45,000 (anything over the $50,000 cap would require council approval). The audit was supposed to have begun by the end of September. It has been delayed because IceArizona has taken over 5 months to perform its own audit and still is not finished. With this audit the city will be able to examine revenue sources related to the Coyotes and Gila River Arena. Tavares was involved with Jerry Reinsdorf, owner of the Chicago White Sox in a failed 2011 attempt to buy the Coyotes…hmmm.
  • In the Glendale Republic of February 21, 2015, under the title of West Valley Sound Off, elected officials were asked their thoughts on SB 1435 which would gut Arizona Open Meeting law. Mayor Kenn Weise of Avondale expressed opposition as did Councilman Roy Delgado of El Mirage and Councilman Jamie Aldama of Glendale. Not so with Councilman Gary Sherwood. Still smarting from an ongoing Attorney General’s Office into allegations of violation of the Open Meeting Law, he said, “I do believe that reform is needed to allow for additional dialogue amongst the council” and “On Glendale’s seven-member counci, it is difficult to speak to three other members without violating the law.” Well, if anyone should know, he should.
  • Each of the three citizen commissions who heard the presentations on selling the Foothills Library last week will be meeting again this coming week. Citizens are welcome to attend as they are public meetings BUT it will NOT be an opportunity for citizen comment but rather an opportunity for the commission members to have their questions answered by staff and then to decide on an advisory recommendation to the city council. The meeting dates are as follows:
  • Glendale Arts Commission at the Foothills Recreation Center on Monday, February 23, 2015, 6 PM
  • Library Advisory Board at the Foothills Library on Wednesday, February 25, 2015, 6 PM
  • Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission at the Adult Center on Thursday, February 26, 2015, 6 PM

© Joyce Clark, 2015 FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Make no mistake. The team has a new owner…Andrew Barroway. Below is the press release on the Arizona Coyotes website with the announcement:

NHL Approves Agreement for Andrew Barroway to Become Majority Owner of the Coyotes

Wednesday, 12.31.2014 / 10:16 PM

Arizona Coyotes

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, December 31, 2014

GLENDALE, ARIZONA — The National Hockey League (NHL) and the Arizona Coyotes announced today that an agreement for IceArizona to sell 51 percent of the Arizona Coyotes franchise to Andrew Barroway has been finalized by the NHL’s Board of Governors. Barroway will serve as the Coyotes Chairman and Governor immediately.

‘This is truly a dream come true for me and my family,’ said Barroway. ‘I am extraordinarily grateful for the opportunity of a lifetime and look forward to working and solidifying a strong partnership with the Club’s current ownership group.

‘As a group we are committed to serving our fans with a new level of excellence and our collective goal is to put a competitive team on the ice every season and, one day, win the Stanley Cup.’

‘Today is an exciting day for the Arizona Coyotes and our great fans.’ said Coyotes Co-Owner, President and CEO Anthony LeBlanc. ‘The addition of Andrew Barroway to our ownership group further solidifies the Coyotes long-term future in the Valley. Our entire ownership group is excited about this opportunity to work with Andrew in taking this franchise to the next level. It’s a great day for hockey in Arizona!’

Andrew Barroway is the Managing Partner of Merion Investment Management LP, an event driven hedge fund that currently manages more than $1 billion. Merion was founded in January 2009. Barroway graduated from the University of Pennsylvania Law School in 1991.”

Andrew Barroway is the new owner of the team. A simple analogy is this. You can no longer afford to make the mortgage payment on your house. You get your uncle to buy 51% of the value of your home. Then you decide you want to repaint and recarpet your house but your uncle says, “No.” Who prevails? Your uncle, of course. He is the majority owner.

It’s the same with the team. Rumors abound that the Gosbee/LeBlanc group have been missing their cash calls. Missing a cash call means that the ownership group (prior to Barroway) refused to use personal funds to cover losses. This probably made the NHL (Commissioner Bettman and the other team owners) very, very nervous. No wonder Bettman worked so hard to find another investor for the team.

One has only to look at this photo to see how thrilled George Gosbee and Anthony LeBlanc are to relinquish control of the team. While it is an old photo it reflects what each must have felt. Each looks as if their dog died.

image1

Photo credit: Matt Kartozian, USA Today Sports via Five for Howling by Brendan Porter

 

The minority owners have no choice but to put a ‘good face’ on the situation. LeBlanc’s mantra was Barroway’s purchase “further solidifies the Coyotes long-term future in the Valley.” Barroway offered “our collective goal is to put a competitive team on the ice every season and, one day, win the Stanley Cup.” Barroway’s function over the next few years will be to shore up the team financially and to cover those pesky cash calls.

On Friday, January 2, 2015 there was a press conference at the Gila River Arena to introduce Barroway to the Arizona fan base. (By the way with the name change to Gila River Arena, why does the very top of the arena, seen in aerial views, still say Jobing.com?) The presser was interesting on many levels. Anthony LeBlanc made several rather telling comments. In terms of a sale of the majority interest to Barroway, “we (the ownership group) weren’t looking for this.” They might not have been looking for it but it appears that Bettman and company most certainly were. He also confirmed that the sale consummated on the last day of 2014 “offers tax advantages for 2014.” The best face LeBlanc could offer was that the sale provides “financial flexibility.” Don Mahoney, the team’s General Manager, confirmed the importance of the sale to Barroway by saying, “we (the team) are solvent” and the sale provides “(financial) stability for long term success.”

It is no secret that Barroway has been trying to acquire a hockey team for years. Witness his attempts with the Philadelphia 76ers, the New Jersey Devils and the New York Islanders. In his case, the 4th time is a charm or as Barroway put it, “keep trying and don’t quit.” With regard to his relationship with the City of Glendale Barroway praised the “strong partnership” with the city. It seems the strong partnership is the $15 million a year the city pays the team. Le Blanc and Barroway reiterated that they are “committed to be here.”When asked about the “out clause” in the current Glendale/IceArizona deal, Barroway casually confirmed “the out clause remains in place.” As long as that option remains so will the speculation about a move after 5 years of losses. If Barroway is truly committed to keeping the team in the Valley working with Glendale to remove that stipulation would scotch the notion once and for all but don’t hold your breath. Barroway emphasized that he will be “very involved in all major decisions” and that “the buck stops with me.” LeBlanc painfully agreed by saying Barroway “wears the crown” as the majority owner of the team.

Just as every Coyotes fan, I desperately want Barroway and the team to succeed for that insures the team in Glendale for a very long time. An integral part of that scenario is constantly building a strong and ever growing fan base. That is difficult to do in today’s climate. Everyone, especially a fan base, loves a winner…a loser, not so much. The team’s performance is in a state of flux as older, experienced players are replaced with young, unproven new faces as part of a rebuilding cycle. The only star player the team will probably retain over the long haul is Shane Doan and he can’t do it alone. The financial bleeding will diminish when the team’s performance proves to be a consistent game winner.

What does the future hold for the Arizona Coyotes? Only Andrew Barroway knows and he’s not telling. Remember there is an option in the Glendale/IceArizona deal that the team can move after demonstrating 5 years of loss. Barroway, first and foremost, is a smart businessman. While he expects losses he also expects those losses to diminish over time as he works to build a more competitive and winning team. Only Andrew Barroway will decide if the team’s future includes a move to a more profitable locale with the financial resources to build his dream team that wins the Stanley Cup. We all hope that the dream of a Stanley Cup includes Glendale, Arizona. We all hope that is Barroway’s dream as well.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

A crack in the ice

Posted by Joyce Clark on December 2, 2014
Posted in Arizona CoyotesCity of GlendaleGila River Arena  | Tagged With: , , , | 5 Comments

Several days ago a blog follower suggested I go to Jo Jo Fraser’s FB page. Jo Jo is a good guy. He has been and continues to be a staunch supporter of the Coyotes. His recent FB posting demonstrates the, up until now, silent sentiment of many Coyotes supporters. What is so surprising is his openness in questioning the direction of the team’s ownership and plans for the team. It is the first crack in the ice of support for a team performing poorly. His post evoked replies both pro and con. Here is what he posted and a sampling of replies:

Jo Jo Fraser

November 29, 2014

“Driving home from the game tonight I couldn’t stop asking myself if I had fun tonight. I love NHL hockey as much as anything in this world but going to the arena is not fun right now. After riding the roller coaster since the great playoff run all I can see is the bleeding off of true NHL players that have not been replaced ( starting with Raffi and going through Verby ) . I have to ask myself who is to blame for this. Up till now I was unwilling to question the new ownership group because I was just so glad to have my team here but that started to change over the summer with no movement to get some quality talent to fill the holes that were vacated. I was told the idea was to put a winning product on the ice RIGHT away to start to build the fan base back. That has turned out to be all talk and no walk.  We are now heading towards our third year out off the playoffs and the team seems to be in complete disarray with no clear direction.  We are not a big team and we are not a fast team so what are we? What is the direction we are heading? GMDM says he thought we were going to be a playoff team. I am not sure what he is seeing because I see a team that is just a touch better than the oilers. I am finding myself expecting this team to lose. This is not a recipe to grow the game. If a die hard fan like myself is having a hard time getting up to go to a game how in the heck are we suppose to get new fans to come seem this team. We have the best captain in sports in the twilight of his career and he deserves better from ownership and management for his loyalty when the team was at its lowest. Oh and can someone tell me what all the great improvement to the arena over the summer were. All I see is they tore out the tile in the team shop and said it is newly remodeled. I hope something changes soon.”We are now heading towards our third year out off the playoffs and the team seems to be in complete disarray with no clear direction. We are not a big team and we are not a fast team so what are we? What is the direction we are heading? GMDM says he thought we were going to be a playoff team. I am not sure what he is seeing because I see a team that is just a touch better than the oilers. I am finding myself expecting this team to lose. This is not a recipe to grow the game. If a die hard fan like myself is having a hard time getting up to go to a game how in the heck are we suppose to get new fans to pay money to come seem this team. We have the best captain in sports in the twilight of his career and he deserves better from ownership and management for his loyalty when the team was at its lowest. Oh and can some one tell me what all the great improvement to the arena over the summer were. All I see is they tore out the tile in the team shop and said it is newly remodeled. I hope something changes soon.

Mike Doyle Well said Jo Jo. It is really sad. I’m starting to think we were sold a bill of goods by ownership to fail so they can move in 5 years.

Jon Pletcher Do you see the ownership walking around anymore? You saw that all the time last year. And they were always vocal as well. I see nor hear that no more. And honestly that really makes me nervous.

Paul Gheduzzi I’m getting really concerned, but not giving up, Jo Jo. Right now, I have a feeling that the ownership issue is getting sorted out with Andrew Barroway and afterwards we could see changes that can help improve the team on the ice. Same with their visibility. The Coyotes unfortunately are playing poorly in a number of areas while the young guys go through the growing pains. The veterans the team has are just not enough to compete in a tougher Western Conference. All I know is, the team cannot stay status quo. It can’t. And I’m not going to target either Don Maloney or Dave Tippett because this is on the players, not them. Agreed it is unfair to Shane Doan he isn’t getting to play for a winning team right now before retirement comes.

Mike Doyle They promised Doan a winner and that is why he signed a home town discount contract. Many teams offered him lots more money but being the great person Doan is he believed them just like we did.

Jeanne Ruairí I understand you’re frustrated, but the things this ownership group inherited to fix cannot be done overnight. The improvements to the arena was food, repairs, cleaning, extermination, etc that was ignored for 4yrs. As for GMDM, he’s done what he’s can with what he was given. We all want a winning team, but unfortunately it has to be rebuilt. I do still see the owners walk around, granted not as much as I think they’re probably try to figure out how to fix this funk. We’re not set up to fail, but any business bought out of 4yrs of bankruptcy doesn’t get fixed overnight.

Mike Doyle Losing 50 million to make twice that in the following 2 or 3 years is not out of the question. Tom you and I are normally on the same page but this time we differ in a huge way. I am always up beat about our team but I’m having second thoughts now. Many conversations you and I have had about internal situations are not a good sign either. I am very skeptical right now.

Paul Gheduzzi Understood, Tom. Again, I’m just concerned. But I already knew that the turnaround wouldn’t happen overnight. Just very tough because we saw some momentum after the 2012 playoff run and the securing of new ownership, keeping fans and growing the fan base is sensitive at this very stage to how the team plays. I have faith in everything working out, but it’s a concern if we don’t start seeing changes for the better in the near future.

Mike Doyle Everyone knew from the get go to get the fan base back we had to put a good product on the ice. That was a no brainer about sports teams in the valley.

Jo Jo Fraser Tom Kennedy makes some good points but I think maybe the priorities are screwed up. Nothing changes overnight but a direction for the team could be set. GMDM said we are a playoff team. That doesn’t add up. If they came out and said we are two or three years away I could get behind that. I don’t buy for a second that there are plans to move the team in four years I just want to see a direction for the team or hope for the future. I don’t like what I have seen so far. I am wrong a lot and I’m sure if I was privilege to information the big wigs have I would feel better but I don’t. I’m just a very disappointed and frustrated die hard fan. Going to a game and expecting the Coyotes to loose is not a fun place to be but it is a current reality.

There are many fans who are concerned. The unknown factor is Andrew Barroway. The general assumption is the NHL Board of Governors will approve the sale this month making him the majority owner. Little is publicly known about his plans for the team. We are sure to learn more when he is officially approved. A major take-away is Anthony LeBlanc, George Gosbee and all of the other current owners will be in the minority and can no longer determine the team’s eventual fate. It is to be expected that their visibility and cheerleading would wane given the circumstances. The bloom is off the rose as they realize they can no longer call the shots.

Jo Jo Fraser’s comments are illustrative of the growing fan base frustration and discontent. It is an issue the current owners must address quickly or their failure to grow the fan base will cause  further cracks in Coyote ice.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

 

On Tuesday, October 21, 2014 the Glendale city council held a workshop meeting. There were two agenda items: a review of the 4th quarter budget results (more about that later in another blog); and discussion of rescinding a March 2014 city council rejection of Becker billboards at Bell Road and the Loop 101.

You have to be a died-in-the-wool political junkie to appreciate the nuances of council discussion of the second item regarding Becker Billboards. When the issue was first rejected by city council it was on a vote of 5 to 2 with Sherwood and Alvarez being the only affirmative votes.  Keep in mind that Sherwood received over $1700 in political campaign donations from the Becker family and Alvarez received $2500 from Becker. Does that kind of money in a local, seemingly podunk, Glendale election buy not only access to these councilmembers but their advocacy?

When the request for rescinding of the original Becker billboard decision was made on Tuesday, October 7, 2014 Sherwood claimed to be making the request on behalf of Councilmember Chavira. Yet it was Sherwood who penned the letter on October 8, 2014 to the City Manager asking for council discussion and consideration. Apparently Sammy was doing his pal a favor by making the original request even though he was absent for the meeting and Sherwood read Sammy’s request. Everyone recognized that Sammy was trying to give Sherwood some cover. Didn’t work. Many acknowledge that it was Sherwood who rammed through the selection of Fischer as City Manager and that she owes him. No wonder it was on a workshop agenda two weeks later. Typically, staff does not move that fast and normally this would be a workshop agenda item a month or two after the request had been made.

Discussion of rescinding the original Becker billboard decision was extensive. Some councilmember comments stood out. Councilmember Martinez said, “some things will not go away” and the issue has “taken on a life of its own.” Councilmember Chavira tried to use the same rationale that Sherwood had used in the past when trying to explain his flip flop on his casino position.  Chavira claimed to not be fully informed when he originally voted to defeat the billboards and went on to say, “he likes to think he’s well informed about every decision he makes.” What a hoot – it seems pretty evident that Chavira takes his marching orders from Sherwood. Councilmember Alvarez chanted her usual mantra that north Glendale has all of the power in the city and gets all while south Glendale gets nothing. Same song, same verse. She was as much as saying that she was all too happy to stick it to north Glendale residents.

The argument that eventually prevailed was that of precedent. If council were to move forward and rescind their original denial of Becker billboards it would be the opening of Pandora’s box. It would put every council vote up to the possibility of rescission. It could even put past council votes on the arena management deal and the casino issue up for future reversal. It is that very thought that defeated Sherwood’s attempt to reverse council’s prior decision on billboards with Mayor Weiers, Vice Mayor Knaack and Councilmembers Martinez and Hugh indicating through consensus that they did not want to move forward and vote on a rescission. Sherwood failed but he was not finished.

City Attorney Bailey had opened another door during his disjointed remarks explaining procedure for such a rescission vote. He said that 3 councilmembers had the right to call for a special council meeting. Sherwood asked several specific questions about that procedure. Make no mistake – expect Sherwood, Chavira and Alvarez to request such a special meeting.

Why the desperation to get a revote on this issue? Sherwood faces two adverse actions that could impact his seat as a councilmember. One is the ongoing Attorney General’s investigation into allegations of open meeting law violations and the other is the current effort to recall him. Add to that Alvarez is standing for reelection on November 4, 2014 and she may, or may not, survive. With the outcomes of these two events in question it seems imperative that they make another run at the billboard issue before November 4th. It doesn’t leave them much time which makes their request for a special council meeting very attractive. The saga continues and will not conclude as long as Sherwood refuses to take a majority council ‘no’ as an answer.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.