azsouthendzone said:
Viper, she can line item veto it. Pierce has a limited say, from what I hear. Plus...lawsuits would be flying around so fast against the state it would be sick. Won't happen...I think. Maybe you can give a perspective on that since you are a lawyer. Couldn't that be construed as breach of contract?
I'm in criminal law and don't hassle around much with contracts or civil law or have any expertise here. Nevertheless, I predict if the funding for this dries up, stadium doesn't open by 2006 because of it, etc, I would expect it to be like an armaggeddon of litigation that would make the flight path thing look a small claims court case.
I'm hoping the gov just uses that veto and this won't turn into anything. The path to getting this stadium into reality has had so much drama, turns, twists, villains, even with it rising up in that field as we speak, I still don't feel safe.