Our city government is evidently appealing the judge’s ruling in the multipurpose performing art and entertainment center lawsuit.
The Austin, Texas judge in the case said that the city cannot use money from the quality of life bonds that we passed to build a sports arena. She went further and said that the city cannot use any other source of funds to add on to the center in such a manner as to facilitate making it a sports arena.
The story the city is telling us is that they are appealing the judge’s order to seek clarification on what the city can and cannot do.
It seems to us that a motion for clarification of the judge’s order is what the city should be using if they are really only interested in clarification.
An appeal takes the case to a different court. A motion for clarification asks the existing judge to be specific on certain points.
Civil appeals are supposed to be based on errors in findings of fact or conclusions of law.
It could be that the appeals court will refuse to hear the case.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
Good point.
What the City is saying is this: “So you, the judge, say we can’t use bond money to build or equip a sports arena. So what if we use bond money to build a performing arts center but have say, basketball, in there. We’ll pay for the basketballs and nets ourself.”
LikeLike
The judge already said no to that also.
LikeLike
Meanwhile, who is paying for the appeal? (as if I didnt know).
LikeLike
The city and county want to spend money so that those with money and in power stay so!!
LikeLike
To me the city’s ‘dilemma’ is, you need to have the flexibility to have some kind of sports component ability associated with this project, to have any realistic possibility of generating income to help offset the operational costs. As many, many posters have already forcefully said, this whole project is going to be ‘a money loser’ and ‘tax drain’ on property taxpayers for years to come.
If city is going to build this damn thing, they are smart to get this legal issue cleared up now.
And it’s really funny how people with no property investment in that old, rundown downtown area, want to block owners who want to sell their property.
If the city is really interested in revitalizing the old downtown area, it better continue this fight to clarify this area issue. Suspect if the city fails to prevail on this issue, any serious revitalization downtown will be stymied for years to come. It will continue to run down and decay, with on only a few brave souls risking their economic resources.
Really doubt that Grossman, Stout, the Rodriguez’s, Leva, or all the others have any interest of investing their own resources downtown. But hey, this whole thing sure generates a lot of ‘free’ news media coverage. This thing is certainly better than a TV novella and has lots of drama and never ending subplots. Folks, stock up on your popcorn, sliders and beer.
Seems like the Times made out well on its building sell to the city. Looks like it likely gave them an opportunity to reduce their operating costs, and they get to report on all the action. Man, this SUNSHINE is blinding me.
LikeLike
Ok. I’ll say it again. It is against the law in Texas to use bond money to build a sports arena. End of story. That’s it. In what way did the city attorney not know this. The judge, rightfully, says no.
LikeLike
If the City can stall . . . and quickly demolish everything and start building a Sports Arena , . . gee. . . what will happen ???
Oh, thats right . . . nothing.
The city council can quit, or leave or go get another job. So what ?
What’s gonna happen to them ?
Nothing, because the City Attorney is in on the deal.
The City Attorney is paid by the City and income/job is dependent on the City Council.
The City is not even questioning whether they really NEED a Sports Arena downtown and the parking required for it ALSO.
LikeLike
do any of you not realize that Paul and Bibi want this thing for a possible Soccer Arena ? That is why we are appealing it along with having a chance to host the NCAA basketball Tourney. Im confused though, I thought we voted on an Arena ? Every “Arena” I have ever heard of had Sports. Hell, even on Spartacus they call it an Arena.
LikeLike
This is what you voted on. It is the exact ballot wording.
PROPOSITION 2: MUSEUM, CULTURAL, PERFORMING ARTS, AND LIBRARY FACILITIES
“THE ISSUANCE OF $228,250,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR MUSEUM, CULTURAL, MULTI-PURPOSE PERFORMING ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT AND LIBRARY FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING NEW CHILDREN’S MUSEUM, CULTURAL HERITAGE CENTER AND INTERACTIVE DIGITAL WALL.”
LikeLike
thanks, i never really remember the details. I voted against it anyway, but I would think Sports would fall under “Entertainment”. Boxing matches, whatever.
LikeLike
Well of course the “City Government is CONFUSED”. The City Council, Commissioners, The Mayor and all the LAWYERS they hire to “Represent US, are CONFUSED. THEY are CONFUSED about who ELECTED THEM. THEY are CONFUSED about who PAYS THEM. THEY are CONFUSED about who, what THEY are SUPPOSED to REPRESENT. Anybody in El Paso think THEY REPRESENT US??? These LAWYERS they are taking OUR money to represent THEM, don’t REPRESENT the PEOPLE of El Paso and what WE want. The Judge in Austin has already made her DECISION and that DECISION does REPRESENT the PEOPLE of El Paso. She didn’t make the decision to REPRESENT Mountain Star Sports, the Foster family or any of the local POLITICIANS who hang onto those “Check books”. The Arena is no less a CON, SCAM on the PEOPLE of El Paso, than the ball field that THEY wanted for the same people. Thank you Judge for all that YOU did to REPRESENT US.
LikeLike