Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

For those rabid fans who become offended every time I post a blog on the Coyotes…sit on it.

The Coyotes played 15 seasons in Glendale and like it or not, Glendale (and I) are now part of their history.

Recently it was reported that the Tempe city council may very well approve the deal and then establish a referendum vote of its citizens to approve or deny the council decision. What does this mean? It appears the city council will approve the deal but it needs ‘cover’ for its approval. By having a referendum of the people on this issue, it offers the council an ‘out’ if its residents do not approve the deal.

There will be plenty of support from the business community who, bless their greedy hearts, are already hearing the cha-ching of their cash registers. Count on them to pour money into a slick campaign to convince voters that this proposed deal is the second coming.

What makes this possible referendum vote so interesting is that there are approximately 101,822 registered voters in Tempe out of a total population of 184,361 residents. In the last election, 21,338 registered voters voted. That’s about 20% or 1/5 of the total number of registered voters. I wonder how many of those 20,000+ of those likely voters are avid Coyotes fans willing to throw taxpayer dollars at yet another sports franchise? The purported 5,000 fans attending games at the Mullett Arena? Obviously, not all the attendees reside in Tempe. An interesting question is how many Tempe residents attended?

If there is a referendum vote it will come down to two issues:

  • MONEY

Make no mistake, this is all about money and who stands to gain and who stands to lose. Obviously, the Coyotes hope to make a ton of money utilizing public funding. It’s going to cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $70 million just to clean up the old landfill site. Muerelo will invest $40 million to clean up the site but where does the other $30 million come from? The City of Tempe will have to issue $30 million in bonds. That’s $30 million that could be used for parks, public safety, etc. Of the anticipated $430 million generated in new sales taxes, Muerelo would keep half (approximately $215 million) as reimbursement for cleaning up the site.

The Coyotes also want a 30-year property tax exemption on the arena, practice facility and theater. In addition, they want an 8-year property tax exemption on the hotels, office, retail and residential.

Arizona House of Representatives Athena Salman, representing Tempe, said these requests total $649 million (over half a billion dollars) in tax abatements for the Coyotes. While Moms see grocery bills skyrocketing and everyone sees gas at the pump hovering around $4.50 a gallon.

  • FLIGHT PATHS

There is concern on the part of Sky Harbor Airport about the proposed apartment complexes at the site. Recently the airport sent fliers to residents in Phoenix, Tempe and Scottsdale advising them that the airport may have to change its current flight paths. This move could end up shifting routes over currently unaffected neighborhoods. The noise from the aircraft will be nothing compared to the noise generated by affected residents.

To placate citizens Tempe is hosting a series of meetings. The first was hosted by, wait for it, the Coyotes, on October 15th at 11 a.m. I wonder how many residents took time off from work to attend this one. The next three meetings are hosted by Tempe at its Development Review Board meeting on November 15th, and two city council meetings on November 22nd and 29th. Residents’ time to speak is usually limited to 3 to 5 minutes. Not quite a fair fight.

It comes down to two basic questions for Tempe voters. Are Tempe residents willing to subsidize a sports franchise for $649 million dollars? Are residents willing to live with altered Sky Harbor flight paths that could destroy their quality of life?

If a referendum vote occurs, I guess we’ll find out.

As a side note, I heard from several people who attended the first several Coyotes games at the Mullett Arena. All said there were empty seats. One person revealed that actual ticket sales were around 3,000 out of a total of 5,000. Over 1,000 tickets were ‘comp-ed’. That would explain why there were empty seats. It’s one thing to plunk down $100 (or more) for a seat. You would make sure your money wasn’t wasted and would attend. Not so with free tickets. You may or may not, attend.

Make no mistake. Despite their hype, it appears that the Coyotes are losing money. I guess they can afford to do so if their pot of gold becomes a reality in Tempe. What if the deal falls through? Someone told me, they have a back-up plan. Oh, really?

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘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 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 material. 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.

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

In September of 2014 the FAA unilaterally changed Sky Harbor flight paths over the Metro Phoenix area. It was dubbed the NextGen Program and was implemented across the country at 13 major metropolitan airports. The most important element of this program was the decision that the program could not follow pre-existing routes. The Phoenix Metro’s pre-existing route was to the east over Tempe Town Lake and the Salt River bed in Tempe and Phoenix. Instead the routes would now be west of the airport with flight paths over countless residential areas in Phoenix and Glendale. Thousands and thousands of complaints were made to the City of Phoenix, Sky Harbor and the FAA.

There were no public meetings and certainly no opportunity for public comment. The new routes were developed and implemented without any warning in utter secrecy.

One of my intrepid constituents, Mitch Bodrie, resides at the 7000 block of W. Medlock Drive in Glendale. When the flight path change occurred suddenly the Bodries were inundated with noise (many flights at excessive and unapproved sound levels) from over flights. That’s when Mitch decided to get involved. He attended every FAA and flight path meeting and asked the tough questions of officials. It was not easy but he managed to be selected as the site of one of the FAA’s monitoring sites for a noise measurement report. Mitch graciously shared all of the information he has amassed with me. Here are the numbers of over flights of his home recorded over a short window of time by the FAA’s monitoring equipment:

  • 2/7/15 80 flights (monitoring begun at 9 AM)
  • 2/8/15 124 flights (monitoring from 12 AM to 11 PM)
  • 2/9/15 194 flights (monitoring from 12 AM to 11 PM)
  • 2/10/15 126 flights (monitoring from 12 AM to 11 PM)
  • 2/11/15 88 flights (monitoring from 12 AM to 11 AM)

Take a look at this graphic depiction of radar arrival and departure flight tracks over the same 5 days. I don’t know if you can make it out but Mr. Bodrie’s home is site C:

If you would like to check out Sky Harbor’s arrival and departure activity there is a neat site, flightradar24@comlive, where you can check for yourselves. Or check out skyharbor.com/flightpaths. What makes these over flights even worse is that many of them exceed accepted noise levels:

  • 2/7/15 12 flights exceeded noise level
  • 2/8/15 16 flights exceeded noise level
  • 2/9/15 18 flights exceeded noise level
  • 2/10/15 19 flights exceeded noise level
  • 2/11/15 9 flights exceeded noise level

Arizona’s Congressional Representative Ruben Gallego in his Summer of 2016 legislative update said the following, “I remain as committed as ever to ensuring the FAA reconsiders flight paths that expose residents to unacceptably (sic) high levels of aviation noise. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) recently introduced the Senate version of my bill, the FAA Community Accountability Act.” Since then…crickets.

So, what’s next? After 3 years of complaints, the FAA has bent…slightly. They have indicated that they will change the routes but just as before, no one knows what the new routes will be or when they will be implemented. There will be no public notification and certainly no opportunity for public comment.

Is this any way to run a government that we, as taxpayers, fund? I think not.

© Joyce Clark, 2017                 

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘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 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 material. 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.