A little GPAC creative accounting shift from the Aquatic Center Bond Payment Source? Bait-and-switch

The account/revenue was used to pay for the Aquatic Center debt service.

The city shifted the funding for the Aquatic Center debt to the general fund/tax levy to free up the money to sell the Performing Arts Center debt.

I would think most would think this strategy is a bit deceptive.

The only reason the money was available was because the city made it so by paying for the Aquatic Center debt with other monies.
.
.
First, taxpayers were "baited" by being told the City of Greensboro had available revenue streams at an affordable price.

Second, the electorate discovers that the advertised revenue was "switched" from a different account, while the old debt gets paid for with other monies.

The goal of the bait-and-switch is to persuade the public to favor the switch as a means of avoiding disappointment over not getting the performing arts center and hotels, and for the city to spend more money without the public really knowing.

This suggests that the city doesn't want to tell our community what is actually happening, but instead is showing a feasible deal with available money that really isn't, because revenue allocated to our net debt burden was shifted from one place to another.

Bait-and-switch

Has this been reported?