Hopefully the City's new swirling logo will flush itself before it ends up glued on vehicles and emblazoned on letterhead. It's horrible, but that's only half the story. And we will probably never get the rest.

Herald reporter Sam Taylor's initial article on the subject included the City's Communication Coordinator saying, ""Draft concepts from the past are not now on public display. The selection is made and it would be counterproductive to look at things we did not choose."

I disagree. Public documents should be freely available, not hidden behind administrative embargoes. The reporter should know that. That's exactly why we have public disclosure laws. Why not compare the selected firm's designs with proposals presented by the other respondents, many of whom were local and had lower bids?

Why not read the correspondence and memoranda leading to the adoption of this design debacle? The Herald reports the former mayor as saying that even though it was "paid for with tax dollars", "It's just not subject to a voting process", the City Council "played no part" in the decision, and that he's "not going to change (his) mind". What kind of an attitude is that?

The public is better served when reporters dig in to challenge this type of arrogance. Often, it is the rest of the story that is truly telling.