Now its about his appointment to the City Planning Commission. The El Paso Times wrote a scathing editorial recently about Romero that surely will ultimately be the death of his political career. The Times editorial focuses not only on the controversial appointment to the CPC, but also the streets incident.
Here is a link to the editorial if you haven't read it yet.
They recently wrote a column critical of City Rep Niland that was critical as well. When I read them the first time my only thought was "Zas!".
Look its one thing for those of us in the blogosphere to be critical of an elected official, but we are just bloggers. Its a whole other story when the daily paper of record is critical of policy positions.
Its far more serious.
Personally I think the streets things is a bigger deal because it was about the process that was went about. It was about the optics of what was done as well. To compare what he did to Reps Limón and Robison is simply silly.
None of them got paving projects for campaign donors or the streets they live on.
I think this portion of the editorial in particular nails it: "Contrary to Romero's beliefs, elected officials are not best positioned to know the engineering needs of their districts. That would be a job for engineers.
What El Paso elected officials have been good at over the years, to the detriment of our community, is back-scratching, self-dealing and pay-to-play. That led to a culture of corruption exposed by the FBI in the past decade that El Paso is still recovering from."But calls for resignations and the like are premature. Its always the knee-jerk reaction whenever someone does something stupid or unpopular. Both of which Romero's latest move are.
Resignation gets thrown around a lot irresponsibly like other words including nepotism, unethical, illegal, etc. Most of the time when people use those terms they are describing something they don't like rather than something that actually fits the definition of the word.
But all we can do is roll our eyes when we hear it because its up to the people who live in his district to decide if they think its time for him to go during the next round of elections. Sure you can make the argument that city reps make decisions that affect us all, and the streets thing is a perfect example, but we get to vote one way or another because we don't live in his district. Its up to the people of District 2 to make up their minds about Rep Romero during the next election.
Will he have an opponent? I think that is a foregone conclusion considering how many people ran for the seat the first time and now they have something to run against. But that is their choice, not ours.
What is more concerning for me in all of this is Rep Noe's rather quick about-face on the street thing. He went from calling it corruption one day and then two days later says there was no wrong-doing. What piece of information does Rep Noe know that we don't that made him change his opinion so drastically in such a short time?
He should probably share it, otherwise he's leaving his wingman behind.
And you never leave a wingman behind, just ask Maverick.
Whatever that information is, I think we'd all like to know what Noe knows...
(NOTE: David K said something interesting in this piece that was interesting. Find out later today about the use of "burner emails" to communicate with those of us in the blogosphere. I think you'll find it very interesting.)