Stuts, you REALLY need to get a new mission in life. This one's worn out.

Bart,

From reading the comments from Stuts and others like Roger below I have to admit I've gleaned some insight on this bit of politics.

Do I agree with the tone? Yes and no.

I see a lot of passion in what people write because they are fighting for their homes and families. I suspect the dialogue could be more civil if it was that, a two way interaction. But when politicians preface statements with a refusal to take questions or engage with constituents you pit the little guy against the system.

I talked to some local community leaders recently about this situation. There is a good bit of disgust with the executive's office and the councilman. But what struck me as odd was their opinion of this being a cash grab for which their plan was to get in on it.

Some think if the councilman ponies up with cash perks for neighborhood improvements they'll take what they can get. Considering no one has any idea of the numbers of this deal it seems strange to they think they'll get anything other than an empty promise.

Not to mention the fact that sale of public land should benefit the whole citizenry and not a select few I wouldn't be surprised to see a lawsuit preventing this sort of collusion.

Essentially it is resource harvesting and targeted profiteering. The Bureau of Land Management has reams of case material on its illegality.

So until there is light shed on the specifics I say "play on."