City Rep. Larry Romero answers Ethics Commission questions

A month and a half after a special investigator sent him 53 questions stemming from an ethics complaint against him, El Paso City Representative Larry Romero has answered the questions. But not all.

The city’s Ethics Commission is investigating Romero and City Manager Tommy Gonzalez for irregularities uncovered during an investigation into the aborted search for a new financial adviser, repaving of streets in Romero’s district and the placement of speed cushions in front of Cathedral High School, Romero’s alma mater.

The special counsel hired by the city to conduct the investigation, Ross Fischer, sent Romero the questions February 1 indicating a deadline of February 9. Romero submitted his reply March 15 after Mayor Oscar Leeser sent him a letter at the request of council strongly urging him to comply, and weeks after the answers of the other two people under scrutiny, Tommy Gonzalez and businessman Noe Hinojosa, were made public.

Romero, who told Mayor Oscar Leeser he wanted to resign three days after receiving the questions, had refused to answer them saying he had already appeared on ABC-7 Xtra, held a news conference and provided answers to the community. The city representative went on medical leave since he reported suffering a stroke on December 19 and resigned February 11. He is still getting paid and will continue to do so until his replacement takes office following a May election.
Still, Romero failed to answer the questions fully.

Request for Qualifications for Financial Adviser
The investigation seeks to answer how the city initiated the search (Request For Qualifications or RFQ) for a new financial adviser even though the contract with First Southwest had a couple of years remaining. Records of a 2014 public meeting show Romero suggested looking for another firm. Outside of the meeting, he suggested calling Estrada Hinojosa, though he did not disclose he had previously worked with one of the firm’s members, Noe Hinojosa. The process was halted when the city attorney became aware of it and raised concerns about it.

Asked specifically if he disclosed with anyone with the City of El Paso his prior relationship with Hinojosa, Romero answered, “To the best of my recollection, no.”

The city representative said he believed the majority of the city council was not satisfied with First Southwest “because of the ballpark financing problems” so he suggested a new financial adviser in the summer of 2014.

Fischer asked Romero if he had had any communication with Estrada Hinojosa to discuss issuing an RFQ before the July 22, 2014 hearing.

“A few months after being elected in 2013, I was given a briefing by (former city manager) Joyce Wilson and (city CFO) Carmen Arrieta about the City’s finances. I read through the documents and wondered why the second largest financial firm in Texas was not doing any of the City’s business,” responded Romero. “That is when I called Noe Hinojosa and asked him why his firm did not even do at least some of the underwriting business for the City. He told me that they did not receive a positive response from the City. I asked him to let me know when he would be in El Paso again. A few weeks later, he gave me a date and I asked the City Manager if she had time on her calendar to meet with Mr. Hinojosa. She did meet with him and me and the entire conversationwas a meeting so they could get to know each other.”

Romero made no mention of a call Hinojosa admitted he made to Romero in July of 2015 asking about the status of the search. That contact raises questions about whether Hinojosa and Romero violated the city’s “cone of silence” policy which prohibits individuals competing for a city contract to communicate with city representatives during the RFQ process.

The city representative was asked whether it would be reasonable to conclude his request to seek a new financial adviser could have influenced the city manager or whether his relationship with Hinojosa could have influenced him, and if not, to state in detail why not. He answered “Not Reasonable” six times.

Romero also said he became aware that the contract with the city’s current financial adviser, First Southwest, would have to be terminated before retaining another adviser during a meeting with the city’s current CFO, Mark Sutter, but said he wasn’t sure of the date.

Asked whether he had used city resources when he intruduced Noe Hinojosa to Public Service Board executives, Romero answered, “No.”

Resurfacing Streets in District Two
The complaint against Romero centers around the addition of streets to the Capital Improvement Plan that was approved by the previous council using objective criteria. The addition of those projects meant money would not be available for some streets already on the list.

In his responses, Romero wrote, “the changes that were made in my district were done because of letters, emails, and personal comments from constituents and from personal visits (emphasis added) to the requested site.”

He said he toured the district with City Manager Gonzalez and told him his predecessor, Joyce Wilson had “made the commitment to listen to our concerns and make modifications to the street plan.” He said he didn’t know he had an obligation to have the entire council approve any changes to the plan and said it hadn’t been done in the two-plus years he’d been on council and he wasn’t the only city rep who had made changes to the plan.

When asked if he had talked to Gonzalez about the changes to the plan, Romero replied, “To the best of my recollection, no.”

“Did you take into consideration that, by addint unlisted streets to the Resurfacing Plan for Dist. Two, streets that were higher on the Pavement Condition Index would not be resurfaced for lack of funding?” asked the investigator.

“Yes,” answered Romero.

Installation of the Stanton Street Speed Cushions

Romero denied he requested speed cushions to slow down traffic in front of Cathedral High School. City staff had said Stanton Street did not meet the criteria for that traffic control device but they were installed anyway. Furthermore, the trolley will use that route so the $9,000 speed cushions had to be removed to make way for construction.

“I did not request the installation because it was not in my district,” wrote Romero.

He said teacher Frank Rimkus contacted him about the speed cushions in mid-December 2015 on behalf of Cathedral. He said he then contacted Rep. Cortney Niland, who represents that area. Niland said the humps were a project led by Gonzalez and Romero.

Romero failed to detail what, if any other, communication he had regarding the project. After saying he had contacted Niland, he went on to say he was contacted by the city manager who told him the cushions had been installed.

Romero denied he spoke with Gonzalez about them, said he didn’t know the project failed to meet the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program criteria

In a statement sent to ABC-7 in November, City Manager Gonzalez said the speed humps were installed due to safety concerns.

“The Neighborhood Traffic Management Process in place usually would address these concerns; however, I firmly believe that safety issues are a priority and I did direct staff to install speed humps on Stanton Street, which is a very heavily traveled street and poses major concerns.”

Gonzalez said he didn’t know the speed humps violated city policy, though records show staff raised concerns about it.

The investigation

The Ethics Review Commission is set to discuss the ethics complaint filed against Romero and Gonzalez during its next meeting.

Without the answers from Romero, Ross Fischer’s investigation found City Manager Gonzalez did not violate the law, though he strayed from city policy when he authorized the search for a new financial adviser. As a result of the investigation, city council has placed Gonzalez on a performance improvement plan which the mayor then called “goals and expectations.”

The commission must now determine whether Rep. Romero violated the city’s ethics rules. The highest penalty would have cost Romero his job, so the result may be moot. However, city council and the mayor asked Romero to provide answers in order to provide closure to months of turmoil at city hall.

The commission’s next meeting is set for April 26 at 9 a.m. at city council chambers.