Anthony LeBlanc lays out the team's arguments in a radio interview. 11 minute audio:
http://arizonasports.com/?nid=244&a=312972&p&n
Summary:
- Team views it as an attempt to force a renegotiation
- Says the city interpreting the statute wrong.
- Says the statute says that a person with the city who was "significantly involved" in a negotiation cannot work for the third party who negotiated. However, LeBlanc said the lawyer in question was terminated by the city prior to the opening of negotiations, and his entire involvement in the process was to respond to a single email sent by three councilors five days before the vote on the contract, as they wanted "a second opinion from a source they trusted".
-Says the city wouldn't tell them anything ahead of time.
-Said he thought the city expected the team would "come with its tail between its legs" and cave in.
-On the use of city money to pay down team debt, he disputes that, but also says the contract had a "cure period" where the team could fix any concerns the city has, and said they did that. Evidently the concern the city raised had to do with a specific lender, which the team subsequently stopped dealing with. Not sure of broader context there.
-Says the team has no intention of renegotiating and will fight this "tooth and nail" in court. Expects Glendale will be "laughed out of court".
-Team had to bail on its bid for the WJHC in 2018 and suggested that the city has already caused "tens of millions of dollars in damages" to the team in 24 hours. Noted that this will impact season ticket renewals and sponsorships.
-Requesting injunction to block the termination of the lease. Then will sue to force the city to honour it.
-Asked what the team would do if a court sided with the city, LeBlanc hedged. "You would have to focus on 'contingency planning'." In context, I think he basically said they will go elsewhere.