Greensboro's Civil Rights Museum Audit doesn't have to be "clean", but "acceptable"

From the City of Greensboro's Audit before Council voted for the loan;

http://hartzman.blogspot.com/2014/02/yvonne-johnson-greensboro-city-council.html
.
.
The Carolina Bank loan is guaranteed by the Sit in Movement, which doesn't own the property.

The Sit in Movement is the ICRCM.
Yvonne Johnson voted for the loan after withdrawing as a Manager of the ICRCM.

Yvonne voted for Skip and Earl's bailout, which was a conflict of interest in my view.

I believe the vote was illegal.

Yvonne, Earl and Skip are in the Simpkins PAC together.

Skip and what looks like Yvonne's kin have been paid by the Simkins PAC.

The city attorney said the audits would need to be "acceptable" as opposed to "clean"

I believe Skip and Earl need to step completely away from any fiduciary control over this project.

I believe Yvonne should not have anything to do with what happens to this issue going forward.

http://hartzman.blogspot.com/2014/02/yvonne-johnson-greensboro-city-council.html
.
.
I was lobbied by Eric Robert, as to why Skip Alston and Earl Jones would be justified in taking an income from the Museum property, once the City helped pay off the debt.

The News and Record has not reported to the public Skip and Earl's actual financial interests.
.
.
"There are generally three types of auditor's opinions.

A "clean" or unqualified opinion states that the financial statements present a fair and accurate picture of the company and comply with generally accepted accounting principles.

A qualified opinion contains exceptions, which may include the scope of the audit.

An adverse opinion contains a major exception or warning.

The most well-known adverse opinion is the "going-concern" exception, in which the accountant expresses doubts about the company's ability to remain in business."

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/auditors-opinion.asp#ixzz3hOuRJoD5
.
.
From what I have read, the Museum's latest audit "contains a major exception or warning" which includes a "going-concern" exception, in which the accountant expresses doubts about the company's ability to remain in business".

As there is no audit definition of "acceptable" as far as I can find, the City can make the word mean anything City Council wants it to mean.

So if the City gives Skip and Earl's potential future income another $250,000 bailout, they will have only themselves to blame for the misappropriation of taxpayer monies.