| Robimus |
03-04-2011 02:08 AM |
The Winnipeg Jets Possible Return
I think this requires a seperate thread from our standard NHL thread so as we can keep the on ice news somewhat seperate from the off ice shenanigans surrounding this seemingly never ending story..
http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/a...imus1/Jets.jpg
The chatter surrounding the return of the Winnipeg Jets is almost deafening at this point having reached a fever pitch today with the mayor of the City of Glendale calling a press conference to flat out blame the Goldwater Institute for holding up the sale of the Coyotes to this Hulzinger fellow.
Hulzinger has stated that he won't buy the team with the pending lawsuit.
The NHL had extended the December 31st "deadline" for this deal to be done with the hope that it would close in early spring. That ain't happening and the parties involved appear to be preparing exit strategies(like finger pointing at Goldwater).
Tonight we've also had several reporters claiming the move back to Winnipeg is a done deal.............of course we've heard similar things before.
I'll be keeping my fingers crossed in anycase. There's a lot of smkoe right now for there to be no fire.:clapping:
Goldwater had this to say following the mayors press conference:
Dear Mayor Scruggs: Thank you for your interest in meeting with the Goldwater Institute.
We have discussed our concerns and met repeatedly and at length with Jordan Rose and the city of Glendale’s attorneys. Our concerns have not changed since these discussions and meetings were held, except when the City decided to pledge sales tax revenues to repay the bonds. That places the taxpayers in the position of having massive liability if the team fails again. We also shared this concern with the city.
As you know, the Gift Clause requires a tangible quid pro quo for payments made to a private company or individual. The crux of the deal is the City obtaining parking rights in exchange for giving a payment of $100 million to the purchaser. We believe the City already owns the parking rights. We have examined all of the documents the City contends prove the opposite, and those documents fortify our conclusion. If the City owns the parking rights, then there is no consideration and the deal is unquestionably invalid.
Even if the team owns the parking rights, they must be worth the $100 million the City is paying. We believe the revenues will be insufficient to repay the debt. If they are insufficient or if the team fails, the taxpayers, not the purchaser, is liable. That is where we believe the deal should be restructured to avoid an illegal gift. If the parking rights are as valuable as the City apparently believes, then the purchaser should borrow the money necessary to make the purchase, not the City.
We continue waiting on the City to provide us with the remaining documents that are relevant to this arrangement, per the Court order. Once we have those documents, we will review them. At that time, we would be glad to offer additional analysis. At this point, however, we have no new analysis to offer. If the City chooses to restructure the deal, we will also be pleased to review it.
Sincerely,
Darcy Olsen
The Goldwater Institute |
