You bet they can ask for their financial stuff. They are part of a league and have to abide by their rules. And yes if it puts them in a worse finanical position they would block it. They dont want to buy the team like the Hornets.
In case you havent been reading, there are already owners against the move that have gone public. We havent heard from the others. And like what has been said several times those other owners in big markets might not like a precident of another team moving in because they are next. The filing for relocation is the formality, its the vote that matters.
If thats your opinion, how many relocation requests have been rejected in the history of the NBA. I think you will find that in practice, vote is more of a formality than you think.
Oh and the owners can ask for financials of the Sacramento Kings, not Maloofs personal or other business income because legally they do NOT have the right to demand that. They can request it as a gesture to see if Maloofs are dumb enough to oblige (a bit like Sacramento asking Kings to put in writing that they will pay $77 million if they leave). All Maloofs need to do is prove that their business (ie basketball team) would be more viable if they moved out of Sacramento and currently thats not that hard to prove considering the limited stream of revenue that Kings have.
Also there is very little risk of the Hornets situation happening here because all of those owners are aware of Samueli's interest in owning NBA team in Anaheim, if the Maloofs are forced to sell, Samueli WILL buy and won't be scared away by possible back lash of taking a team from another team or relocation cost of buying a different team and moving them to Anaheim. Essentially, for Samueli all the dirty work would already have been done with Maloofs copping all the blame along the way. This dude is a very smart operator. He has the Maloofs right where he wants them.
And generally, the owners that have not commented on this, are the ones that are indifferent to the rule. All we have heard is 3 owners being against this move. Even if you get more of the big market owners to vote against this, you are well short of the 16 required votes. The small market teams might well be inclined to vote for this move because, it sets a precendence for possibly moving into a bigger market down the track and also with the proposed shared revenue model, smaller market teams will benefit from the big market teams.
Small market teams have nothing to lose here.