Monday, October 15, 2012

Dignity in Fair Verona...er...Socorro

I often find myself quoting Shakespeare when discussing politics in the Borderplex. Perhaps because our region at times is quite the tragic comedy.

But its particularly true of places dear to my heart, like Socorro. For those of you that never visit, you should. Despite its often legendary political dysfunction, it is a city filled with rich history and culture. Genuinely good people who great each other on the streets and honestly care about their neighbors.

There's a saying in the Army about Privates complaining. "If soldiers ain't complaining, they ain't happy." In other words, complaining is all they do. Its their nature. Well Socorro appears to have the same philosophy when it comes to political in-fighting.

Its the stuff of legend.

Its often the stuff of Shakespeare.


“Two households, both alike in dignity
In fair Verona, where we lay our scene
From ancient grudge break to new mutiny
Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.
From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parents' strife.”


That is a quote from Romeo and Juliet that seems to sum things up down there pretty well.

I'm writing this piece because I for one am pretty baffled as to why there is a piece about the former Mayor of Socorro Trini Lopez in the paper today. I don't see what was so newsworthy that it warranted another piece. The piece is essentially a rehash of what has already been written, except to add that the former Mayor is says he's going to continue to try to force the city in to a Charter Election.

But that got me to thinking.

Wouldn't Lopez be better positioned to do so as the sitting Mayor of Socorro as opposed to trying to do so from the outside?

The timing of his resignation doesn't seem to fit the circumstances of the Charter Election. I can see why he would've resigned months ago if that was his motivation. It would've made more sense had it happened at that time.

Its only my opinion, but I think people are right to be skeptical and wonder if it had more to do with the fact that there was going to be an agenda item critical of the now former Mayor of Socorro.

With an investigation hanging over the heads of members of council and city government and now no mayor, something is certainly amiss in fair Socorro.

The next election is going to be critical for the people of Socorro. It may do more to define the region than any other vote in recent history.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sir,

If Mr. Lopez feels that what City Council is doing is illegal, then he was in office illegally from May-October. During those five months, Mr. Lopez was still collecting a salary as Mayor of Socorro. The Mayor makes $15,000 a year and it breaks down to about $1,250 a month. Meaning that in the time that Mr. Lopez remained Mayor, he collected about $6,250. If Mr. Lopez is going to tell everyone that he resigned because he wants to fight Council from the outside and that they are wrong for not holding an election in May, shouldnt he return the money that he earned "illegally"? If Mr. Lopez resigned because he truly felt that things were illegal, he would have returned the money that he earned by now. Do you think that this is a fair point to make?

Jesus

The Lion Star said...

Actually, I think its a very fair point indeed. One I hadn't considered. Good catch.

Anonymous said...

Sir,

I was hoping you could clarify something for me. I showed up last night during executive session and didnt really get a whole lot of details regarding what happened at the Socorro City Council Meeting. The only real thing I picked up was from KVIA in this link;

http://www.kvia.com/news/Socorro-s-Mayoral-election-date-unclear/-/391068/17051468/-/wwnp4i/-/index.html

I know SB 100 has created a mess here in Socorro but my understanding of it was that it only applied to a general election and not a special election. The City Charter states that a special election must be held within 120 days of the vacancy (if no uniform election date falls within that time period). I may be wrong but I do not believe that SB 100 would override this since we already moved our general election once and this would be a special election. Could you please clarify this for me if I am wrong?

Jesus