Sky ownership lawsuit begins at a pivotal moment for the franchise

An ownership dispute involving Sky principal owner Michael Alter and minority investor Steven Rogers landed in Cook County court Thursday. It was the first hearing in a fight that could shed light on whether the franchise is ready for the WNBA’s big-money future.

Rogers, who filed the lawsuit last week, accuses Alter of using “self-dealing” transactions to unfairly dilute minority investors at a moment when the team’s value had skyrocketed.

More broadly, Rogers claims Alter runs the business like a Little League operation, without proper checks, balances or professional standards.

Thursday’s hearing didn’t touch the substance of those allegations, which Alter’s counsel has called “meritless.” (The lone Sky season-ticket holder who showed up to -observe likely left disappointed.)

Instead, the case began with some legal throat-clearing. Robert Chapman, Alter’s counsel, requested to swap judges before the case proceeds. Under Illinois law, each side is entitled to one free “switcheroo” at the start of a case, without explanation. Judge Myron Mackoff granted the request, delaying the next hearing until the case is assigned a new judge.

So now we wait for the “good stuff.” The next hearing promises higher stakes: it will address the plaintiffs’ request to file the complaint under seal.

Only a heavily redacted version of Rogers’ complaint is available to the public. That means the details behind Rogers’ claim that the Sky’s business is a “mess” are blacked out.

Rogers’ counsel argues that redactions are necessary because the Sky’s operating agreement and a separate nondisclosure agreement prevent Rogers from publicly disclosing certain financial and governance details.

But an unredacted version of the complaint would be illuminating — and depending on the details, could reshape the franchise.

From Rogers’ complaint:

“For years, [Alter] has run the Sky with blatant disregard for the operating agreement and minimum standards of competence for business operations (like REDACTED).”

That redacted example might fall into the category of foibles Sky fans have grown used to hearing. Or it might start an entirely new genre. What matters is that it’s a specific example coming from a minority investor. That carries weight, especially given the timing.

The Sky find themselves in a precarious position. As the WNBA rapidly expands and modernizes, the Sky have fallen behind other ownership groups — some better funded, others simply better organized — winning the race in facilities, analytics and basic corporate infrastructure.

Despite this sea change happening in plain sight, management has maintained a business-as-usual posture. Last summer, when asked how expansion would affect the league’s competitive balance — five new teams by the end of the decade, all with deep pockets — CEO Adam Fox told the Sun-Times he would have to wait and see.

Points for caution, maybe, but a “wait and see” attitude only works when you’re protecting a lead. It fails when you’re playing from behind.

The Sky have taken plenty of steps in the right direction this year. They’re building a dedicated practice facility in partnership with the Village of Bedford Park, which Fox said will be ready by “late spring.” For the first time, they’re hiring more roles typical of a modern sports organization, like sports psychologist and massage therapist.

Still, more urgency is required.

Asked last summer about the Sky’s recent increase in spending on player experience, Fox told the Sun-Times:

“It’s not like a watershed moment where you wake up and say we gotta do more. Adding things to the player experience is a part of the maturation of the organization that is matching the growth of the league.”

In reality, women’s basketball has been nothing but watershed moments over the last couple of years, from the ownership sea change in the WNBA to the Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese effect.

Sky executives enter the 2026 season with an imperative: purge themselves of the old-school WNBA mindset and prove they can compete in a hyper-growth league.

Maybe this lawsuit will be just the kick in the pants they need.

Or maybe the two businessmen settle before any juicy details come to light, and the Sky’s status quo prevails.

For now, we wait and see.