And I should warn you in advance, its going to really piss you off.
City Representative Larry Romero, who has now resigned quite a while ago and hasn't been working for his constituents since before Christmas, is still collecting a check at tax payer expense.
Why? Because of the Texas Hold-Over Clause.
That's right, despite the fact that Rep Romero clearly let it be known what his intentions were when he resigned, which got him off the hook for the investigation by the way, Rep Romero is still collecting a pay check. And he hasn't returned any of it to the city either.
"How is that fiscally responsible? That's the most fiscally unresponsible (sic) thing that could (sic) possibly do", Dr. Noe said about Romero still collecting a check.
That is what Dr. Noe said about paying the working poor a livable wage. (Also, I think he really meant to say "irresponsible", not "unresponsible".)
Noe and Acosta actually support giving a guy who has a business and his own income from that business, that despite the stroke he has been taking care of, a paycheck from the taxpayers of the City of El Paso.
Despite the fact that he isn't working for those tax payers.
What did Dr. Noe, the ever watchful guardian of tax-payer dollars have to say about that?
"I'm not gonna pay for it, the tax payers out there are going to pay for this. We are volunteering our tax payers to pay, above and beyond, what the private industry is saying they are willing to charge us."
Again, that is what he said about paying workers a livable wage.
Rep Ordaz made a motion to not excuse the absence of Rep Romero. Ultimately, after objections from Noe and Acosta, Ordaz asked the City Attorney to check to see if the City Charter has a provision to remove a city rep with consecutive unexcused absences.
As in Bye Felicia, no more tax payer funded paycheck.
Until then, Romero can, and has been receiving, a check from the tax payers. There is no way to stop Romero from receiving a check despite the fact that he isn't working for the people anymore.
Incredibly and unbelievably Reps Noe and Acosta were opposed to Rep Ordaz's common sense motion.
If you haven't noticed, the dynamic duo of Noe and Acosta almost always seem to cover for city screw ups. Both have continued to be really big supporters of the embattled City Manager.
Both have basically supported former City Rep Larry Romero. And now they are both now trying to ensure that Romero can continue to get a paycheck for not working.
That is a fact, no matter how much they both try to spin it.
Rep Noe is trying to argue that Romero could conceivably get better and could somehow get better and come back to work. City Attorney Firth had to explain that once you resign from office there is no "do-over". At best Romero could come back and continue to maintain his powers and privileges as a city rep until he is replaced in a special election.
Another important fact, Romero resigned. He didn't ask for a leave of absence to recover. His letter of resignation made his intent clear. He wasn't pulling a Jesse Gandara in Socorro where he resigned but not really. Romero very clearly explained he was no longer going to be the city rep because of his medical condition.
Had he intended to come back he would've asked for a leave of absence rather than resigned. There really is no other way of looking at his resignation as anything but a resignation and it defies logic that Reps Acosta and Noe would try to make sure the guy keeps getting pay checks from the tax payers.
It just don't make Noe sense.
Here's the video: