I know that Cato plans to be active the next few days, but he has agreed that a front page article in the El Paso Times yesterday (February 24, 2013) should be addressed.
The article indicates that the Mayor wants to charge the city for some $500,000 dollars worth of legal fees that he incurred. It says that his claim is based upon bad advice that he received from a former City Attorney.
Later the article indicates that city lawyers’ claim that the recent citizen petition that seeks to stop the tearing down of city hall is not a valid action since “… the charter affords no right to place the proposed matters on the ballot …). They claim that the recent petition is a “referendum” not an “initiative”.
The reporters write that a referendum measures voter approval or disapproval of an action while an initiative proposes action. They then point out that the charter only provides for referendums that relate to collective bargaining agreements between the city and it’s employees.
The full story is of course different. The charter does have two different sections titled “Initiative” and “Referendum”. What they do not point out is that the city charter in section 1.04.040 says “The headings and subheadings in this code are for convenience in searching only, and are not intended to limit or expand the text.” In other words the petition is neither an “initiative” nor a “referendum”, it is a petition.
“Whenever a number of registered voters equal to at least five percent of the voters who voted in the last general City election sign a petition setting forth the precise content of an ordinance desired by the signers (emphasis added), the Council must place that ordinance on the agenda of a Council meeting to be held within thirty working days of the receipt, by the City Clerk, of the petition bearing the authenticated names and addresses of the petitioners. Such an item shall be treated by the Council exactly as any other proposed ordinance”.
The item on next Tuesday’s council agenda calls for an election on a proposed ordinance. The ordinance would take action. The action would repeal a prior resolution (a resolution is just an expression, not a law or ordinance) relating to the ballpark and to evacuating city hall. According to the proposed ordinance “This petition called for the proposed ordinance to be placed on the ballot …”.
A petition calling for an ordinance. New action.
The city lawyers are of course arguing for their side as they are paid to do. What about the Times reporters? Were they doing their jobs too? Did they not do their research to find section 1.04.040 or did they only tell half of the story on purpose?
Either way the article is misleading to the voters of El Paso.
I quote the Yiddish proverb “A half truth is a whole lie”.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
Cook seems to be playing all the angles on creative ways to get his legal bills paid. And let’s not forget he picked the fight that resulted in those legal fees.
He started a website to collect legal fund donations. For whatever reason, the original address for that site now seems to take you to a totally different site.
It would be interesting if the public could track donations to his legal fund after he leaves office. We’ll probably never be able to know who donates to it. One can’t help but wonder, however, if his financial concerns have had any effect on his positions, decisions and votes over the past several months.
I question the judgment of a person who holds public office and is entrusted to do what is in the best interest of all citizens, and he is walking around with his hand out, playing the pity card, asking for money. It’s bad enough that politicians are influenced by campaign donations, but this kind of fundraising by a person holding office is unacceptable.
On a different note, in Sunday’s EL PASO INC, Cook talks about a potential new U.S./Mexico bridge shuttle service. He has already concluded that if it goes forward, the contract not only should be but likely will be awarded to Transborde (without any competitive bidding. As best I can tell, Transborde is a Mexican-owned company?). Why would Cook advocate for one company so early in the game?
LikeLike