Recall Hearing Starts Today for Mayor and Two City Representatives


POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2011 - 7:42am

UPDATED: Monday, October 24, 2011 - 2:21pm

EL PASO - The hearing to recall Mayor John Cook and two city representatives starts today.

Mayor Cook asked a judge to stop the recall process because he claims the signatures for the petitions against him were gathered illegally.

The mayor says the group, El Pasoans for Traditional Family Values used churches to circulate the petitions.  That violates the state election law.

Mayor Cook has supboenaed several witnesses, including Pastor Tom Brown.

District Attorney Jaime Esparza and Municipal Clerk Richarda Momsen are also expected to testify in the hearing.

The recall election also includes City Representatives Susie Byrd and Steve Ortega.

The recall stems from a vote to restore health benefits to gay and unmarried partners of city employees, after El Pasoans voted against it.

Comments News Comments

SAVE MONEY, TIME , AND "FACE" WHICH YOU ALL LOVE SO MUCH AND take another vote and stand by it this time ... a 5th grader could figure that out .

I will sign it for you: Nana nana, nana nana, hey hey hey, good bye!!!

Steve Ortega (a lawyer)said the wording on the petitions prior to printing them would be fine. He agreed to let the petitions be printed. Later Ortega said the wording on the petitions weren't clear enough to the voters. Ortega is playing with our tax dollars.

Many El Pasoans who voted against it thought they were voting for it, given the writing on that Brown authored text. Mayor Cook's involvement with the many charities in El Paso is proof enough for me that he should remain, along with the two other council members who had the courage to do the right thing and say no to discrimination. Less than 40K votes is not representative of all El Paso. Brown reminds me of those religious zealots who fell on their own swords, in time you will too Brown.

blah, blah blah.. 40k voters is an immense number given the poor amount of voters who usually vote in el paso

No, they voted "FOR" removing it.
Not "against it".

and that is why the voting language was twisted and voters did not know that they were voting FOR removing something, that was already legal and approved by the city councel.

Thats why the Judge said it has two different meanings and therefor the conflict now.

Post new Comment