This was left as a comment by cousweb, but we felt that this was important and should be brought to the Front Page...

You'll have another chance to watch the City Council at work with our money on Wednesday, February 10th. The Community Redevelopment Agency (Still our money) is purchasing vacant land on Peters Road for $385,000. We were previously told that this would be bought with CBG funds, but we will never really know. It is supposed to be for a park. Do we really need another park? The contract is interesting. The seller is not paying the documentary stamps on the deed in the amount of $2,695 - why not? This is a standard seller charge. It also states that the "City Attorney may make minor changes to this Agreement as deemed necessary and appropriate. The City Administration and City Attorney are authorized to do all things necessary to close the real estate transaction hereby approved." Another example of the city attorney acting as a member of city council. Why does Council continue to give him (and the mayor) carte blanche? Of course, he will write title, for which he gets a fee, and he will still bill the city for the transaction, an example of double dipping. Also, if you check the state's website you will find that the realtor is on probation for failure to prepare escrow reports and deposit escrow funds in a timely manner. Does the city ever do a transaction that doesn't have a black eye?