The City of Cleveland has filed suit over Quicken Loans Arena against the City of Cleveland

In the latest example of legal creativity, the city of Cleveland is looking to bypass a legal requirement to put the use of tax money to finance renovations at Quicken Loans Arena up for a public referendum by suing itself.

A $70 million payment to the Cleveland Cavaliers for Quicken Loans Arena renovations is at stake in a new lawsuit filed by the City of Cleveland’s law director against the city council.

The drama began on May 23 according to Robert Silverman of Vocativ, when the Greater Cleveland Congregations organization presented a petition to the Cleveland city council. The over 20,000 citizen signatures triggered a provision that requires the matter of whether tax dollars could be diverted to pay for the renovations to be put up for a public referendum.

The council’s immediate response wasn’t kind to the petition. Kevin Kelley, the council’s president, refused to even enter its receipt into the public record. In response, counsel for Greater Cleveland Congregations filed suit against the city council, arguing that Ohio law had been violated with the council’s refusal to certify the petition.

This just adds to the already shady nature of the Quicken Loans Arena renovations deal. The measure which redirected funds in the city budget away from admissions taxes was rushed through without a public vote as an “emergency measure,” despite the fact that the spiffiness of Quicken Loans is about as much of an emergency as P.K. Subban’s purported bad breath. In response to the unnatural contortion of the emergency measure distinction, the council stated that it was an addendum to an already-executed, binding contract, and the public could not vote on the matter.

The Ohio State Supreme Court is soon to decide on whether the council can use the tax funds, and that’s where the case gets weird. The city’s law director filed a writ of mandamus against the city council on Monday that would force the council to certify the petition.

It’s a genius move in a Snidely Whiplash kind of way. The city is both plaintiff and defendant in the case, which is like playing a two-player fighting game on a gaming console by yourself. Additionally, taking the case directly to the state’s highest court makes the ruling nearly unchallengeable.

Greater Cleveland Congregations will petition the court to add itself as a defendant to the case, as it looks like the city’s suit against itself is nothing more than keeping up an appearance of acquiescing to taxpayer demands while stacking the deck in its favor.

Next: Which NBA players can help you survive the zombie apocalypse?

It’s likely that the city will get the result it wants, Dan Gilbert and the Cavaliers will get the $70 million, and the people of Cleveland will have had no say in the matter. It would behoove the residents of Cleveland to remember these events when the city council members come up for re-election.