Phoenix XC: Down to the Weiers

[Alesle]

They can't change agreement to add stuff or remove stuff and vote the same time.

Why can't they make amendments to the proposal they are voting on during the session if the majority of the council agrees to it?

 

[cbcwpg]

Defining "eligible" expenses when defining the financial losses for the "out clause" could be a rather interesting exercise. If it includes a wide enough range of Coyotes-related expenses, then this is essentially a "blank cheque" for RSE to pursue relocation / resale options in five years. So, if the COG is conducting its due diligence, it will ensure that the RSE out clause does not allow them to game the system, so that any relocation option is based on a legitimate effort to retain the team in Glendale. For example, if the eligible expenses include player salaries, the RSE group could simply boost payroll in the final year or two by signing top free agents and trigger their relocation, taking their newly signed players with them. If it looks like a lucrative market like Markham, QC or Seattle is opening up, it would be very tempting for the RSE group to try to manipulate their deficits to trigger the "out clause".

Totally agree. I can't believe the CoG would sign anything that states " RSE has an out when losses hit $50MM " without specifically defining this. Back in the day when one of the previous proposals was talking about an out clause, I for one said it would take months of negotiation just to nail down what constitutes losses. With a blanket statement like RSE has, it would be easy to manipulate things to hit the $50MM loss mark, if that's what the wanted to do.

 

[JimAnchower]

Original RSE proposal...
CoG reworked on Friday proposal...
A new proposal done up over the weekend under duress...

At this point, it would be safe to say we don't have a clue what they are actually voting on.

Maybe it is like the Paris Peace Accords, where they are still discussing the size and shape of the table they will use the discuss everything.

 

[gstommylee]

I agree, Gongdale caved! Now can the Clowns close the transaction?

They did not cave. The agreement does not have amendments attached to it.

 

[gstommylee]

Why can't they make amendments to the proposal they are voting on during the session if the majority of the council agrees to it?

They are only allowed to make minor tweaks to clear things up but any major changes they agree to add stuff or remove stuff has to have a 24 hour public notice before they can vote on it.

 

[Whileee]

Original RSE proposal...
CoG reworked on Friday proposal...
A new proposal done up over the weekend under duress...

At this point, it would be safe to say we don't have a clue what they are actually voting on.

The basis for a council vote must be a proposal that has been shared with the public at least 24 hours prior to the public meeting / vote. That means they will start from the the CoG's "counter proposal", since that is what is on the Agenda (http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213.pdf).

On the posted Agenda is a Resolution to adopt the counter proposal agreement (http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213-S02.pdf).

Page 20 of this agreement spells out the City's right to early termination of the agreement after 5 years if they lose $50 million or more. This is the clause that RSE has stated publicly is "unacceptable".

The main questions are whether the COG would be inclined (or persuaded) to amend the agreement to remove that clause, and if so, would they be able to do so without violating their rules vis-a-vis public notification.

I think that if they do decide to amend the agreement and pass a resolution to that effect, it might be challenged legally solely on that basis. Would the GWI be inclined to take this back to a judge seeking to overturn this on the basis that the public was misled about council's intentions? It wouldn't surprise me.

 

[yotesreign]

Have a feeling things are going to be pretty quiet today, right up until 7 PM PDT.

Everywhere but these threads. We might even burn through another Ph(X) thread before the 7 pm meeting starts. Just keep the computer speakers on mute though and those pop up ads will be pretty quiet!

 

[gstommylee]

The basis for a council vote must be a proposal that has been shared with the public at least 24 hours prior to the public meeting / vote. That means they will start from the the CoG's "counter proposal", since that is what is on the Agenda (http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213.pdf).

On the posted Agenda is a Resolution to adopt the counter proposal agreement (http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213-S02.pdf).

Page 20 of this agreement spells out the City's right to early termination of the agreement after 5 years if they lose $50 million or more. This is the clause that RSE has stated publicly is "unacceptable".

The main questions are whether the COG would be inclined (or persuaded) to amend the agreement to remove that clause, and if so, would they be able to do so without violating their rules vis-a-vis public notification.

I think that if they do decide to amend the agreement and pass a resolution to that effect, it might be challenged legally solely on that basis. Would the GWI be inclined to take this back to a judge seeking to overturn this on the basis that the public was misled about council's intentions? It wouldn't surprise me.

It doesn't matter if RSE does not agree to it by 2pm today then the vote is moot no matter if they make illegal changes or not. Would they even have the votes if they are gonna attempt to change it.

 

[Mungman]

By the way, does anyone remember which poster did the first flight tracking?

Here's what I found.....

From TNSE Efforts to Acquire an NHL Team Part X: Status... Complete???

Not the format we're used to, but... From 31 may 11

Caballo Blanco 5:56 Am

morrisonHNIC Scott Morrison
Just boarding the flight to Winnipeg, just ahead in line is David Thomson. Looks like today is the day.

AF1982 5:57 AM

DarrenDreger via twitter
David Thomson is on our flight to Wpg. Good sign the announcement is today!!!
14 minutes ago

And here is the first post in that thread with our beloved format

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/LXJ262

The NHL brass are on their way to Winnipeg

/heard it here first.

 

[Quo]

So will a decision on the future in Phoenix 100% be made by the end of today, or is there a chance for a delay once again.

Well Manked, I've only been following this saga for the past month but I can tell you with absolute certainty that no one has any idea how this will shake out. Events on the ground unpredictable. There's always a chance this gets kicked further down the road and there's probably a lot of finagling going on right now out of the public eye.

That said, if the COG remains firm on their standing counter-offer and the RSE/Fortress/NHL side is unwilling to bend on terms then today would appear to be the day that the Yotes leave Phoenix. Conversely, if some agreement is ironed out then they could well stay put.

Mayor talking tough calling deadlines artificial, NHL and it's supporters saying they are, really, seriously guys, super, super cereal this time and trying to put the fear of God into the council saying Westgate will be a post-apocalyptic wasteland without the Coyotes. Don't think the latter is true considering the other Arena Management bids, with one in particular looking quite attractive without the Coyotes.

High drama. Wish I got here sooner.

 

[Fugu]

Here's what I found.....

From TNSE Efforts to Acquire an NHL Team Part X: Status... Complete???

Not the format we're used to, but... From 31 may 11

Caballo Blanco 5:56 Am


AF1982 5:57 AM


And here is the first post in that thread with our beloved format

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/LXJ262

The NHL brass are on their way to Winnipeg

/heard it here first.

Hey, it was ranold26. Ludwig Fell Down wins the Memory of an Elephant Award.

 

[brewski420]

The basis for a council vote must be a proposal that has been shared with the public at least 24 hours prior to the public meeting / vote. That means they will start from the the CoG's "counter proposal", since that is what is on the Agenda (http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213.pdf).

On the posted Agenda is a Resolution to adopt the counter proposal agreement (http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213-S02.pdf).

Page 20 of this agreement spells out the City's right to early termination of the agreement after 5 years if they lose $50 million or more. This is the clause that RSE has stated publicly is "unacceptable".

The main questions are whether the COG would be inclined (or persuaded) to amend the agreement to remove that clause, and if so, would they be able to do so without violating their rules vis-a-vis public notification.

I think that if they do decide to amend the agreement and pass a resolution to that effect, it might be challenged legally solely on that basis. Would the GWI be inclined to take this back to a judge seeking to overturn this on the basis that the public was misled about council's intentions? It wouldn't surprise me.

If they amend and remove the opt out the NHL will cave vote or no vote today IMHO.

 

[Mungman]

The basis for a council vote must be a proposal that has been shared with the public at least 24 hours prior to the public meeting / vote. That means they will start from the the CoG's "counter proposal", since that is what is on the Agenda (http://www.glendaleaz.com/clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213.pdf).

On the posted Agenda is a Resolution to adopt the counter proposal agreement (http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Special/Agendas/070213-S02.pdf).

Page 20 of this agreement spells out the City's right to early termination of the agreement after 5 years if they lose $50 million or more. This is the clause that RSE has stated publicly is "unacceptable".

The main questions are whether the COG would be inclined (or persuaded) to amend the agreement to remove that clause, and if so, would they be able to do so without violating their rules vis-a-vis public notification.

I think that if they do decide to amend the agreement and pass a resolution to that effect, it might be challenged legally solely on that basis. Would the GWI be inclined to take this back to a judge seeking to overturn this on the basis that the public was misled about council's intentions? It wouldn't surprise me.

So, it comes down to what the definition of is, is...

Your major change may be my tweak as far as amendments go. AFAIK CoG can make whatever changes they want, vote on it and let WHOEVER challenge it in court. Unless it is beyond the pale of what normally is acceptable in governments in AZ I don't see a court being keen on overturning a decision on a mere contract decision made by an elected body. Separation of powers and all that......

 

[Major4Boarding]

The primary focus should be on Thread Titles right now

 

[madhi19]

The primary focus should be on Thread Titles right now

Funny the flight plan we dug up it now gone. I wonder if they changed their mind?
Phoenix XCI: Flight of the Weasel!

 

[hisgirlfriday]

They can't change agreement to add stuff or remove stuff and vote the same time.

Is this because of the open meeting laws in AZ? I wondered if that was in play.

Also I think I figured out where the 2 pm deadline came from. Its in the wording of the ordinance as a deadline by Glendale to RSE (under the name IceArizona) where their ordinance even if passed tonight is still only valid if agreed to by RSE by 2 p.m. (presumably the day after the ordinance is approved although it doesn't say that). This sets up a brief window of time for RSE to accept or reject the Glendale proposal before it otherwise automatically expires.

 

[Slashers98]

So it appears that Global Spectrum would be part of the RSE bid now.

Daryl Jones ‏@HedgeyeDJ 3m I can confirm Global Spectrum is part of our bid to operate and manage http://Jobing.com Arena. They are a world class partner.

 

[Mungman]

The primary focus should be on Thread Titles right now

PHOENIX XCI: Vote for the shiny turd!

 

[gstommylee]

Is this because of the open meeting laws in AZ? I wondered if that was in play.

Also I think I figured out where the 2 pm deadline came from. Its in the wording of the ordinance as a deadline by Glendale to RSE (under the name IceArizona) where their ordinance even if passed tonight is still only valid if agreed to by RSE by 2 p.m. (presumably the day after the ordinance is approved although it doesn't say that). This sets up a brief window of time for RSE to accept or reject the Glendale proposal before it otherwise automatically expires.

Yes open meeting laws. It doesn't matter if its today or tomorrow or next month. IF RSE doesn't agree to it the vote is moot.

 

[Oogie Boogie]

I'll be so glad when this garbage ends

 

[GF]

The primary focus should be on Thread Titles right now

Phoenix CXI: Land of Confusion

 

[Slashers98]

Looks like Weasel One has been cancelled.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/LXJ532/history/20130702/1830Z/KTEB/KGEU

 

[Fugu]

PHOENIX XCI: Never Gonna Give You Up


(Black Keys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVyPBiD2rAg)

 

[CasualFan]

No they can not. They can make tweats to clear things up but they can not add amendments to it to add or remove stuff with out a 24 hour notice. People have a right to see what is exactly being changed. They can not remove a major section then vote on the same day. That is illegal.

FYI: You kind of have no idea what you are talking about and pretty much everything you posted is inaccurate.

I'll be so glad when this garbage ends

That's not the spirit.

 

[cobra427]

They are only allowed to make minor tweaks to clear things up but any major changes they agree to add stuff or remove stuff has to have a 24 hour public notice before they can vote on it.

No true, they can amend it on the spot, and pass it, watch and see...