ADVERTISEMENT

Austin Judge rule new El Paso Arena can't host sports

What the hell thats just stupid. What the hell is arena used for? These people really defense was cause wording didnt say sporting events. OMG
And the judge bought it.lol
 
Well then just rewrite ballot just to make sure they dont get confused. Do a revote
 
WTF! Better fix that or put it to a re-vote. It will cost money but no sports would be a waste.
 
So they're going to be able to 150 dates a year and none of those can be athletic events? Might as well build an amphitheater.
 
Doesn't the definition of an arena directly imply it is a building used for sports and entertainment? Considering this is a multi purpose arena it should be common sense that it will be used for various events such as concerts, shows, and athletic competitions.
 
Doesn't the definition of an arena directly imply it is a building used for sports and entertainment? Considering this is a multi purpose arena it should be common sense that it will be used for various events such as concerts, shows, and athletic competitions.
Exactly! The City should continue as planned, and once it's built, go back to the ballots to add a measure indicating use of the arena. Too much time has been wasted. Sounds like they will appeal the decision regardless.
 
In 2012, over 101,000 people voted for this and it passed with more than 70%(101,657 to 40,198) People knew what they were overwhelmingly voting for, yet now we are being told that sports can not be used in a building that is being built for: "Multi-purpose performing arts and entertainment"? As a tax payer, I say build it for as many uses as possible, including sports.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: axingfools1
Only in El Paso......
The judge is from Austin and this kind of shit happens everywhere. There's always politics involved and judges/lawyers make mince meat of fine print and loop holes. I'm still confident this will get fixed somehow, but the more we wait the more money is lost. No way this arena gets built if is can't host boxing, UFC, basketball, etc..
 
We have some stupid politicians and lawyers. This is just plain embarrassing.

I am Speechless.
 
This decision should be appealed and easily overturned. Entertainment is on the original ballot and athletic events are entertainment.
 
Wrong! It says they can't build a sports arena. It doesn't say the venue can host sporting activities. It was never slated to be a sports arena. It was slated to be a multipurpose venue that can host any number of activities. This decision changes nothing accept that the city can move ahead with building it.

Edit: I take that back, she actually said no sports but that is never going to hold up under appeal. You can't tell a city what to do with their arena. What is this Russia?
 
Last edited:
Wrong! It says they can't build a sports arena. It doesn't say the venue can host sporting activities. It was never slated to be a sports arena. It was slated to be a multipurpose venue that can host any number of activities. This decision changes nothing accept that the city can move ahead with building it.
From the EPT this morning.

When a lawyer for the city asked Meachum if the multipurpose center can include sports, she replied, “I have said that you cannot build a sports arena, so no.”

 
From the EPT this morning.

When a lawyer for the city asked Meachum if the multipurpose center can include sports, she replied, “I have said that you cannot build a sports arena, so no.”
This was a stupid question from the lawyer. Never should have been asked but what are they going to do if we hold sports there? Hold the city in contempt? Just build it.
 
From the EPT this morning.

When a lawyer for the city asked Meachum if the multipurpose center can include sports, she replied, “I have said that you cannot build a sports arena, so no.”

I would have followed up with the question, is wwe a sport?
 
I guess a best case scenario might be that the Judge states that no single event type can exceed say 51% of the usage. So sporting events can not be held more than 183 days per year. That would be fine with me and reasonable. But if she begins stating that it can not have a sports anchor tenant then it becomes more of a problem. It becomes completely ridiculous if she stands by her ruling that no sports are allowed. To do that, is she going to have to create a list and detail every single sports variation event that can not be held at the facility? No drone flying conventions, No RC racing events, no motorcycle events, but what about a Harley Davidson show?, can car shows can be held but race cars would not be not allowed to be displayed?, etc. etc. It's ridiculous to state that no sports are allowed.


Another question is; Can we use the ruling to have the sellers start demolishing the properties and selling them to the city beginning on August 1? Then after we secure this land and end that issue, can we place on the November ballot an amendment with verbage that allows it to be a multipurpose entertainment arena which includes sports? Obviously that would pass and we could build it exactly how we want.
 
WTF! Better fix that or put it to a re-vote. It will cost money but no sports would be a waste.

This was a stupid question from the lawyer. Never should have been asked but what are they going to do if we hold sports there? Hold the city in contempt? Just build it.

Have an ahole neighbor who built that fence or carport that encroaches by a few tenths of an inch on to your side of the property line and you found out they did not pull a permit? City can make them tear it down. In this case, a state judge has many options and if this gets pushed any farther the AG Paxton and the Gov will grab on to it and politicize it as "government over reach" and then the damn thing will be pushed back even farther.

Just put it to a re-vote. The majority of the city folk want this. It will pass again.
 
Pardon my limited knowledge on law but how does an Austin judge have jurisdiction on matters here?
 
IMO, the ruling doesn't change anything. I didn't see it written where it says the arena can't host sporting events, it just says the arena can't be built specifically for sports. So as long as the city builds it with loading docks, seating that can be added or taken out to accommodate an incoming event's dimensions, it falls under a multipurpose arena because it can host a wide variety of entertainment options. Now if it was built with the same dimensions of a basketball court, and and had a permanent basketball court, and the city will only allow sports related activities in it, then it was built specifically for sports. So as long as the city is booking concerts, sporting events, shows, it falls under a multipurpose arena. Sports falls under the definition of "entertainment", so I just don't see any way of them blocking sporting events in the new arena.
 
  • Like
Reactions: miner661
Does this have to do with the state funds contingent upon the arena being built in proximity to the Convention Center? The only thing I can think of is that the Convention Center provision is somehow intended to promote non-sports activity at the arena (what does a convention center have to do with sports activities?), so building a sports arena somehow violates the spirit of that law.

It still requires twisting your brain in a pretzel to try to understand, but I can't think of any other reason why the state would care.
 
Pardon my limited knowledge on law but how does an Austin judge have jurisdiction on matters here?

I was told that it had to go to Austin because this Austin Court/Judge deals specifically with Texas Bond hearings. Since this was a quality of life bond project, then they had to go to this court in order to get the validation that they wanted for spending the bond money. I don't believe that this type of court exists in El Paso(or most Texas cities), therefore they had to go to Austin.
 
Its time for people that for the arena to be louder than these what 10 people that are against it???? Tax payers voted for this so state should listen. Whats gonna happened to all the money that was suppose to be used for the arena?
 
I hope this falls in the category of what constitutes as a "Sports" arena vs "Multi-use" arena. It's not going to be a Sports-only arena so this ruling is much ado about nothing. I wouldn't want to put this to another vote because we now have some high profile and very influential Naysayers (Rich Wright and Jud Burgess) that are banging away in media blogs with disinformation that inflames and confuses the low information voter.
 
I was told that it had to go to Austin because this Austin Court/Judge deals specifically with Texas Bond hearings. Since this was a quality of life bond project, then they had to go to this court in order to get the validation that they wanted for spending the bond money. I don't believe that this type of court exists in El Paso(or most Texas cities), therefore they had to go to Austin.


I see, thank you sir.
 
I hope this falls in the category of what constitutes as a "Sports" arena vs "Multi-use" arena. It's not going to be a Sports-only arena so this ruling is much ado about nothing. I wouldn't want to put this to another vote because we now have some high profile and very influential Naysayers (Rich Wright and Jud Burgess) that are banging away in media blogs with disinformation that inflames and confuses the low information voter.

Amen. Couldn't agree more. There's stuff I hear on the radio and it makes me shake my head because it confuses people.
 
So, they should reduce my taxes and give me a credit until the revote, no? :)

This is such total BS. The way any normal person understood it, it was a multi purpose arena that would have sports as well. I KNEW there would be concerts and shows and such, but I figured some sort of sports would be there too.

geezuz mary and joseph....
 
  • Like
Reactions: axingfools1
So do those buildings really have any historic value to them? Besides just being old?? Did any famous people live in them? Cant they save the buildings and build areana using those buildings? Maybe make a restruant in one of those buildings and owner gets some % of profit??
 
Nothing is ever easy in El Paso. Anytime someone has an ambitious plan for the city, it is met with resistance. We all saw what happened with the baseball stadium and the high rise condos on the west side. If I'm an investor looking to relocate a major company to El Paso, I will probably take my company elsewhere. The majority here are looking for progress, but the naysayers will fight tooth and nail. It's a shame how this city keeps turning down great opportunities.
 
Everyone needs to relax one of the only remaining residents has big revitalization plans for the neighborhood. :rolleyes:

636360029292743618-Duranguito-2.jpg
 

I think putting this type of false information/false ideas out there hurts the project, because it gives some people a false alternative option that they want to get behind instead of the real project that could actually happen. Maybe Duke can clarify how he thinks this could possibly work?, but this doesn't seem to be even remotely possible due to the following reasons:

1.) The UT system owns the Don. The City of El Paso is not going to issue bond debt and service that debt obligation for decades, just to then turn around and invest that bond money into a property that they don't even own. Wouldn't that also be illegal?

2.). The judge states that the money can not be spent on a sports arena, yet the Don is the exact definition of a sports arena. Just look up and see the scoreboard, banners, and jerseys hanging from the ceiling. There is no way that the Don could ever be considered something other than a sports first arena and the Judge directly said no to a sports arena.

3.). The bond was voted for and passed. The city is now required by law to execute this project. The project also tied it's location to downtown, the judge even ruled on this. The Don is not located downtown.

4.) The City of El Paso will recieve tax benefits(up to $27 million over 10 years)by building the arena within a certain number of feet within the convention center. The Don is not close enough to the convention center and El Paso would lose that money if we built there.

5.). If they "re-did" the Don, then the City would have to split any future concert/venue profits with UT/UTEP. Why would the City of El Paso want to spend $180 million to renovate UTEP's arena and then also have to split the profits with them?

6.). The city has already spent $15 million acquiring the land for this Arena. If they don't build in Durango, then we have to either demolish that neighborhood that we already bought or waste millions more bringing those terrible run down buildings up to code. Most of those 100 year old buildings need new plumbing, completely new electrical, they all have to be brought up to ADA compliance with the law. We would have to waste millions in infrastructure on them before we even started spending the money to make their exteriors look decent. I don't want the city wasting our tax money repairing those non-historic dump buildings simply because we got stuck with them due to a change in site.
 
Last edited:
I think putting this type of false information/false ideas out there hurts the project, because it gives some people a false alternative option that they want to get behind instead of the real project that could actually happen. Maybe Duke can clarify how he thinks this could possibly work?, but this doesn't seem to be even remotely possible due to the following reasons:

1.) The UT system owns the Don. The City of El Paso is not going to issue bond debt and service that debt obligation for decades, just to then turn around and invest that bond money into a property that they don't even own. Wouldn't that also be illegal?

2.). The judge states that the money can not be spent on a sports arena, yet the Don is the exact definition of a sports arena. Just look up and see the scoreboard, banners, and jerseys hanging from the ceiling. There is no way that the Don could ever be considered something other than a sports first arena and the Judge directly said no to a sports arena.

3.). The bond was voted for and passed. The city is now required by law to execute this project. The project also tied it's location to downtown, the judge even ruled on this. The Don is not located downtown.

4.) The City of El Paso will recieve tax benefits(up to $27 million over 10 years)by building the arena within a certain number of feet within the convention center. The Don is not close enough to the convention center and El Paso would lose that money if we built there.

5.). If they "re-did" the Don, then the City would have to split any future concert/venue profits with UT/UTEP. Why would the City of El Paso want to spend $180 million to renovate UTEP's arena and then also have to split the profits with them?

6.). The city has already spent $15 million acquiring the land for this Arena. If they don't build in Durango, then we have to either demolish that neighborhood that we already bought or waste millions more bringing those terrible run down buildings up to code. Most of those 100 year old buildings need new plumbing, completely new electrical, they all have to be brought up to ADA compliance with the law. We would have to waste millions in infrastructure on them before we even started spending the money to

Winner, Winner, Chicken Dinner^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT