I found the July 7 editorial troubling. Yes, the mayor did admit to making a mistake by not amending the budget prior to demolishing the old post office. However, was it a mistake?
The editorial writer suggests that the probe is politically motivated in favor of a challenger during the next mayoral election. It appears to me that the mistake gives the mayor a political advantage during the next election, if gone unchallenged.
With the old post office out of the way, he has a clear path for his future plans. The lot being vacant for only employee parking would be unacceptable. This pressures council members to have no choice but to approve the development of another building in its place. This, in effect, takes the council out of the process.
The mayor is an experienced mayor as well as council member. He knows the powers that each branch holds. Talking story with individual council members doesn't finalize the process. Is it possible that after talking story with individual council members the administration realized that its plan wasn't going to be a slam-dunk with the council as a whole? The 5-3 vote by the council to look into this matter further appears to confirm this.
Oftentimes one hears the advice, "Sometimes asking for forgiveness after, albeit an unlawful act, is an easier process than requesting approval beforehand." In this case, the editorial writer appears to agree wholeheartedly with this way of doing business. Auwe!