Skip to content

Glendale can vote on Coyotes deal, but the vote might not hold up in court

Jun 8, 2012, 1:32 PM EDT Arena

Glendale council is free to hold today’s vote on its proposed 20-year lease with the prospective owner of the Phoenix Coyotes that would have the cash-strapped city that owns Arena commit $300 million over the course of the agreement in arena-management fees.

The taxpayer watchdog Goldwater Institute wanted the vote blocked to allow more time to review the deal after it accused the city of failing to release public records in a timely fashion. However, the judge denied Goldwater’s request, ruling the court doesn’t have that authority.

This might not be the end of it though. (Is it ever?) The two sides could be back in court Monday, as the judge conceded Glendale didn’t provide the records on time, leaving Goldwater the opportunity to request a voiding of the vote after it’s occurred.

“We absolutely will challenge the vote if it is passed,” Goldwater attorney Carrie Ann Sitren said, as per Phoenix Business Journal.



(Image via

  1. lewdood - Jun 8, 2012 at 1:47 PM

    Great — so the City of Glendale has the go-ahead to conduct a 10am Friday vote on whether it should give under-funded investors $300 million so that said investors can buy a $170 million team. At least they provided a public hearing on the matter at 10am on Thursday.

    How the F are there not protests at the homes of the CoG councilors’ offices and homes for supporting this boondoggle?!?!? I’m about as left as you can get politically, but if my bankrupt city were trying to pull this to float a team that draws about 50% of building capacity regularly I’d personally be running for office against one of these buffoons.

    • ballistictrajectory - Jun 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

      $15 million/year to manage the arena. What does the city pay to manage the arena now? Then the arena gets its cut of the gate and also its cut from concessions. Then the team pays rent to the arena (regardless of who owns it). Plus the other things that take place in arenas, like Indoor Lingerie Jello-Rugby or something else, plus gate, rental and concessions.

      You might have 75 people on full-time payroll (some high skill union workers too), another 300 on part-time. Utilities… HUGE electric bill. Maybe 15 is close to what it should be, maybe not.

      No one seems to have reported on these things, at least at the national level. I’m sure the local dishrag has an article or two. Ultimately, no one outside the city really knows. Perhaps that is why there’s any argument at all.

  2. georgemuresanwasmygiant - Jun 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

    lewdood – Do you live in Glendale or even Arizona? If you don’t, let them spend their own money. Its not the best deal, but it costs less to pay the management fee then to have an empty arena

  3. rupertslander - Jun 8, 2012 at 3:00 PM

    Goldwater had little chance of succeeding with this particular motion because courts are highly reluctant to interfere with the democratic process in this manner, as well they shouldn’t.

    But that probably was never the point. Goldwater’s real audience this morning was Jamison’s skittish investors, and the message was don’t count on that $15M/yr being there before you commit your money.

  4. rupertslander - Jun 8, 2012 at 3:08 PM

    Love ’em or hate ’em, you got to hand it to the Goldwater people. They ought to write the book on how to most effectively utilize legal dick moves.

  5. buffalomafia - Jun 8, 2012 at 3:28 PM

    Quit the red tape & either move them to Sesttle, Quebec or Kansa City?

    • georgemuresanwasmygiant - Jun 8, 2012 at 3:38 PM

      You are a genius, Sesttle or Kansa City are great locations

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1524)
  2. P. Kane (1374)
  3. S. Matthias (1250)
  4. M. Zuccarello (1164)
  5. D. Carcillo (1129)