Peter Corbett

The Republic | azcentral.com

Three members of the Glendale City Council held a meeting with an attorney for the Arizona Coyotes

Meeting occurred 4 days before council OK%27d %24225 million deal with IceArizona%2C owner of the Coyotes

Mayor Jerry Weiers is considering asking Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne to investigate the meeting

Glendale Mayor Jerry Weiers on Monday asked the state attorney general to investigate a previously undisclosed meeting of City Council members and an Arizona Coyotes attorney last June, days before the council approved a $225 million agreement with the team.

Weiers, who voted against the deal that kept the hockey team in Glendale, said he believes the meeting violated the Arizona's Open Meeting Law and revealed key information to the Coyotes about the city's negotiating position.

"I think it's a clear violation," he said. "That meeting is wrong on so many levels. It's like playing poker and showing your opponents all your cards."

Violations of the Open Meeting Law can rescind actions taken by elected officials, which could potentially void Glendale's deal with the team, which was then called the Phoenix Coyotes.

Council members Gary Sherwood and Yvonne Knaack dispute the allegation, though their version of events appears to conflict with an e-mail obtained by The Arizona Republic.

In the e-mail from Sherwood to Councilman Manny Martinez, Sherwood wrote that he and Knaack "spent over an hour with Nick Wood last night." Wood is an attorney representing IceArizona, the entity that owns the Coyotes.

He went on to write that, "Sammy (Chavira) is already on board as he was with us last night" and closed the e-mail by writing "Manny, please delete this email after you've read it."

Chavira is also a City Council member. Neither he nor Martinez responded to requests for comment.

The council approved a $225 million deal with IceArizona days later, on July 2, on a 4-3 vote, with Sherwood, Chavira, Knaack and Martinez voting yes.

Both Sherwood and Knaack said Monday that they did not violate the Open Meeting Law or disclose sensitive city information that would compromise negotiations with the Coyotes.

Sherwood said he and Knaack were in the same car as they spoke on a mobile phone with Wood to discuss ongoing issues for the Coyotes deal, which was approaching a deadline.

Martinez and Chavira were not there and did not take part in any discussion by phone, Knaack and Sherwood said.

Sherwood said he believes Weiers is making the claim because he was upset over the council's vote last week in favor of a tribal casino near Loop 101 and Northern Avenue.

Coyotes spokesman Rich Nairn declined to comment. Jeff Teetsel, the Westgate City Center development manager who also was a recipient of the e-mail, also did not comment.

Media attorney David Bodney, who represents The Republic, said the deliberations by the four council members who voted for the Coyotes deal were not held in a public meeting and "would be a likely violation of the Open Meeting Law."

The council approval of the Coyotes deal would be voided if it is determined that the Open Meeting Law was violated, he said.

The Glendale council would have 30 days after a violation ruling to ratify the Coyotes deal in an open meeting, Bodney said.

At the end of the business day Monday, the Attorney General's Office had not confirmed whether it received the investigation request from Weiers.

Sherwood said he advised Martinez to delete the message because Martinez was sensitive about not having a private e-mail address and relied only on his official city e-mail.

Sherwood said he had nothing to hide and did not delete his message to Martinez.

Sherwood's e-mail discusses arena parking, tax-exempt municipal bonds and an escape clause that would allow the city to evict the Coyotes.

Sherwood said the NHL would not allow an escape clause because the team could get evicted in the middle of the season and would have no place to play.

The councilman also said Wood was a "trusted friend" but indicated he did not feel comfortable with "anyone in the city manager's office or our acting city attorney."

The Republic obtained the e-mail through a public-records request. Sherwood sent the message from a personal e-mail account.

Earlier Monday, Weiers met with more than 20 Glendale residents who were outraged by the contents of the e-mail and called for an investigation. Some of those residents also had obtained copies of the e-mail over the weekend.

"They betrayed the trust of the people of Glendale," Bobby Cassares said of the four council members. "It can't get any worse than this."

Councilwoman Norma Alvarez, who voted against the Coyotes deal, said she was shocked to learn of the meeting.

"We're losing money because of deals like this," Alvarez said.

As part of the deal, the city paid IceArizona $15 million in the previous fiscal year to manage Jobing.com Arena and had expected to get back $6.8 million in parking and ticket revenue. The city received about $4.4 million.

City Attorney Michael Bailey is out of the office and unavailable to provide a legal opinion on the meeting last June and the subsequent e-mail to Martinez.

A gathering of, or discussion among, public officials is considered a public meeting if a majority of the members of an elected body are involved, according to the law. In the case of Glendale, that would be four out of seven City Council members. Public meetings are required to be open and announced with 24 hours of notice.

A three-member meeting of Sherwood, Chavira and Knaack could raise legal questions because Martinez was included in a post-meeting e-mail.

Arizona's Open Meeting Law defines a public meeting as a "gathering, in person or through technological devices, of a quorum of members of a public body at which they discuss, propose or take legal action, including any deliberations by a quorum with respect to such action."

Glendale was in the spotlight earlier in June 2013 for open-meeting issues involving the Coyotes. Council members met with Coyotes executives in a series of private meetings of one to three council members. That appeared by design to avoid having a quorum of the council.

The council purposefully circumvented the law, depriving the public of its right to listen to deliberations, Bodney said at the time. The city denied any violation and no action was taken.

A public official who violates the Open Meeting Law can be fined $500 and in some cases can be required to pay legal fees, state law says.