So lets be clear about the thing even I-91's writers know:
That law was passed to set a moral bar that would be very difficult for any council member to vote against. Even at the time they passed it they knew it was written in a way that was designed to make it very simple to understand and sympathize with publicly. It was never intended to hold up in court, merely to provide a bar that City Council would be uncomfortable in crossing. The council has since looked at this deal and determined that they are more uncomfortable turning down such a great deal than they were worrying about VanDyk's vengeance.
- Revenues are guaranteed because Hansen and Ballmer have agreed to pay any tax revenue shortfalls. It does not say where those revenues have to come from, just that they cannot be forecast or speculative.
- The argument that a building is worthless is sure pulled out of the closet whenever convenient considering they spend the rest of the time telling us what a great option and community asset KeyArena is. You can't say it's "almost worthless" when there is a guaranteed buyback option for $200M in 30 years. It will be worth $200M minimum and given property value escalations and inflation that is going to seem like a bargain.
- This case will be tossed out in summary judgement because a judge will determine that 7 city council members voted in favor of this proposal. Since it is more than two years since the passage of the initiative the more recent laws implemented by the council will supersede the previous ballot interpretation.
- In the event that it is not thrown out in summary judgement those same 7 city council members will simply take a vote to exempt the policy from I-91. They have already stood up and said they think this deal is good for the community. The issue is behind them. They don't want to deal with this crap, have the city pay the legal fees and then run the risk of being proven wrong.
All you have to do is look at the timing to realize that this is a publicity stunt.