Finance Reports & Lies

The campaign finance reports for the run-off election for the two EPISD races were very revealing. They revealed that one candidate appears to flat-out lie and the other revealed that he doesn't have an understanding of policy.

Both cases are bad and should (although they won't) impact the election.

Lets start with Tom Hicks, the Republican candidate for the EPISD seat on the westside in the Franklin area. He appears to have told a Trump-level, bold-faced lie about his finance report.

The races are non-partisan, but when you think about it, are they?

Hicks has the El Paso GOP helping his campaign out - which is sign #1 that he is going to get defeated on Saturday - and they are pushing a really scary narrative about Klayel-Avalos. This is all the brainchild of Carlos Sierra, who used this narrative in the first part of this election with his other candidate, Mickey Loweree. Loweree, who suffered the biggest political beat-down since Eric Stoltz, was trying to appeal to Republicans by saying that Planned Parenthood was trying to infiltrate EPISD.

I know, it sounds stupid.

Really stupid.

But she really said it and she repeated it often.

Now Carlos Sierra's other candidate - Tom Hicks - is pushing that same narrative. Hicks and the GOP going so far as to call Klayel-Avalos an "agent of Planned Parenthood".

I didn't know PP had "agents".

In this article in the El Paso Times, they report that Hicks didn't file his report until several days after the filing deadline. Filing reports is a habitual problem of Carlos Sierra's stable of candidates.

Now, had Hicks just admitted that he didn't file it on time because he didn't know he was supposed to, like Josh Acevedo pretty much did, he would be exposed as being unqualified and uninformed, but wouldn't come across as a liar.

But Hicks said that he didn't turn in the report on time because of last minute donations received over the weekend.

Here's the problem with that - his finance report doesn't show that he actually collected any donations over the weekend. So, he either lied about why the report was late - or he lied on his finance report.

Does lying about something that is so easily verified sound familiar? Yeah, it sounds a lot like Mickey Loweree, Carlos Sierra's other candidate, who famously stated she had a degree and experience that was very easily verified.

Also, Hicks is absolutely a Republican. His consulting expense I suspect has some sort of shadowy connection to Carlos Sierra. But read what the website says about the services...

They specialize in conservative advocacy and political campaigns...

The reason I harp on the honesty card is twofold. First, its because Hicks' currency has been how he's so nice and honest and religious. David Saucedo really harps on that every time I write about Hicks.

Which reminds me, this is a tweet I sent out when I was live-tweeting a forum involving the candidates in the first part of the race. Here's what Hicks' own words are about lying....

The other reason is because the last occupant of the seat basically perpetrated one big fraud the entire time he was on the EPISD Board of Trustees.

So yeah, being honest and accurate is a pretty big damn deal.

Josh Acevedo was at least honest about why he didn't file his report until the same day as Hicks. Acevedo is facing attorney René Vargas.

Acevedo said he didn't know they were due, but his big mistake is that he tried to blame EPISD for the report not being filed. Now look, when it comes to something having anything to do with EPISD that is messed up, its usually a pretty good bet to blame EPISD.

However, this time its actually NOT their fault. That is the responsibility of the candidate, not the school district. Its really hard to talk about how you're going to hold the superintendent accountable when you don't hold yourself responsible for your own mistakes. And that is a key point to remember.

Acevedo can't point to his political experience as an asset to voters and then turn around and fail to take responsibility for a mistake for something he clearly should have known precisely because he has that experience.

He was a staffer for a commissioner, as was I. So I know for a fact that he was aware of filing requirements.

One last tidbit that I think deserves some conversation. Like I said, Acevedo is a good guy and under any other circumstance would be considered a qualified candidate. But anyone who has ever heard the two candidates speak, the difference between Acevedo and Vargas is immediately evident. Vargas is simply head and shoulders far more versed on education policy and far better suited to shake things up at EPISD and hold the Superintendent accountable. Seriously, listen to the two of them speak and ask yourself who is more likely to ask the hard questions?

The career student studying to be a superintendent one day, or the guy who asks the hard questions for a living?

The answer is simple - René Vargas, the attorney.

Which is why I wasn't able to figure out the El Paso Times endorsed Josh Acevedo over an accomplished attorney with a reputation for holding government accountable.

And then I found out something really interesting that may be able to explain it.

Turns out Josh Acevedo lives across the street from a former editor of the El Paso Times that conducted the recent rounds of endorsements.

I checked with all the candidates and that fact was never disclosed to any of them. Maybe that isn't something that necessarily needs to be disclosed to readers, but I do think that it should have been disclosed to the candidates that were competing for the endorsement.