[valo403]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

The argument that one of the GI board members stands to gain does not hold up in terms of an action against ALL GI board members. Just against that one, unless the others can be shown to be acting in collusion (unlikely).

The fact is that this is a bad deal for the taxpayers from the get-go; the taxpayers in Glendale *should* be suing their city for the funding of an arena that had no expectation of profitability. With only one major tenant and little other use, the city left itself hugely exposed. Now they (and their taxpayers) are reaping the rewards of such a choice.

I'd buy a team, too, if the taxpayers of a city would finance me.

I'm surprised, so far, that no-one has taken city (or province, state or country) officials to court for making fiduciarily inept and indefensible decisions. A good decision that goes bad is one thing - a decision that was provably bad from the get-go is quite another....

(Given that I'm in the tax business, one of the interesting things is when CRA tries to second-guess a taxpayer's legitimate - but wrong - business decision and then denies a loss based on hindsight. It always fails for them. And so it should for Glendale, whose decision I find hard to qualify as 'legitimate'.)

What decision are you talking about here? The initial construction of the arena and related developments?