Oh I totally believe so. Weirs would enjoy throwing former members of council and city management under the bus, then stuffing and mounting them on his wall.
Hypothetically, Glendale might stack
- Con/Tort for fraudulent inducement (possibly negligent misrepresentation)
RSE made intentional misrepresentations (revenue projections); misrepresentation was material to Council decision; Council relied on the misrepresentation; City suffered financial harm as a result
- 38-511 for Tindall and Frisoni
They are employee and consultant of a party to the contract; both had direct correspondence with voting members of Council (Frisoni apparently in clear violation of OML; Tindall apparently proving drafting guidance on at least one section of the contract)
- Article 9 Sec 7
By routing the AMF entirely to FIG, the city unconstitutionally gave to the aid of the team/arena llc
- Wistuber 1
The Council unquestionably abused its discretion in the course of deciding public purpose of the contract
- Wistuber 2
The fee paid is grossly disproportionate to bargained for consideration received
The remedies available for each would include voiding the contract. To me, Wistuber 1 is a pretty big stretch. The others don't appear to be much of a stretch at all. Obviously, lots of procedural motions between here and there, assuming alternate resolution isn't achieved. That still seems most likely (even if the alt res is the NHL selling the team from under IA and sending it to LV or QC or the moon, wherever they had an MOU/LOI already in place so they don't take a bath as desperate sellers)
The optics of the NHL fighting to persist an absurd "arena management fee" while Glendale produces all the inner workings of how arena subsidies work against the back drop of a cap floor team playing last place hockey in an nearly empty barn cannot seem like a very good idea to Gary and Bill.