Richard: Yes of course, according to Susan those well documented reasons for recall, conflict of interest, neoptism, have nothing to do with dishonesty? Susan: You must be from another planet; some dark one in an alternate universe.

"This recall had nothing to do with dishonesty?" This must be how we got Balico. He could get his supporters what they wanted, so his lies were irrelevant. Now we have Boulanger, he can get the waterfront supporters what they want, and his lies are irrelevant. Not even mentioned anymore, actually.

I have no idea how we got Balico, because I got burned out on Hercules politics in 2003, when I saw the unethical conduct of Valstad & Balico & their developer pals as they tried to raze Franklin Canyon in a blaze of construction. I got burned out, stopped paying attention for 7 years, and when Charlie Long and Tom Lochner woke me up in 2010, I found that we were being run by a kleptocracy, a kleptocracy chosen and chosen again, and again, by an ignorant and/or selfish and/or stupid electorate. We were run, and run into the ground. So, we got rid of Balico. Now we've got Boulanger.

The loudest applause that I heard at yesterday's meeting was for Phil Simmon's comment about how dishonesty was never a goal, and that fixing Hercules was the only thing that mattered. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AGAINST PHIL PERSONALLY. Of all the people I've met during all these campaigns, he was the one who most impressed me (I had already known Dan before, who will always impress me.). Another parenthetical aside: (Gerard Boulanger was my second favorite. And I twice voted for kuehne. So, my choice of leaders is not totally unflawed. But, Phil rocks.)

Phil rocks, but he did say that honesty was never an issue in the recall and the election campaign. I had thought it was the ONLY issue. Yes, Balico and Kuehne and Ward were incompetent, but how do we know that Boulanger, even with his many postgraduated degrees in science, engineering and business adminstration, even with his many years of service on a city council serving a much bigger city than ours, how do we know that this much-experienced, overeducated person is competent? I have been told by one client of his wife's carpet-cleaning business that he does good work, but that is the sum total of what I know about the quality of his work-product.

The electorate was angry with the Valico council for its stupidity, but, as I saw it, the greatest rage was reserved for balicoliva's lies. Why were Balico's lies bad, but Boulanger's are okay? The scale of Boulanger's lies went far beyond Balico's. Yes, it appears that some of Balico's lies were used to enrich himself and his family, and that is a very bad thing. How do we know that Boulanger won't do the same? How do we know that city hall won't be getting its carpets cleaned under no-bid contracts to his wife's company? We know of no facts, at this point, which indicate he might steal; we know of no facts which indicate that he won't. What we do know is that Boulanger lies. For me, that means that anything coming out of his mouth in future is unrealiable,...

...and so, he is worthless. That fact that he is a liar and schemer is all I need to know that he cannot serve in a position, like councilman, which involves trust, which involves stewardship. Why isn't this enough for you?

What dismayed me most about Phil's comment yesterday was not that he said it...he was one of the two top players in Boulanger's election (and if there was someone else of whom I am not aware, please correct me), and he has to rationalize his continuing support for Boulanger...what really dismayed me was the power of the applause which he received for saying: Honesty was not an issue in the recall. Fixing Hercules was the issue. We were not after the Holy Grail. I think that anyone would interpret those words as saying that having a lying schemer on the council is okay, ethical behavior is optional and unnecessary, so long as that lying schemer can deliver practical benefits, especially for waterfront supporters. THAT is what they were applauding: honesty, character, ethics, none of that matters; deliver the goods, and we'll overlook everything else.

This is why I am now feeling as burned out as I did in 2003. We have elected a dishonest person, but he's a useful liar, so it's cool. That doesn't say so much about Boulanger...about whom I already know more than enough...as it does about the Hercules electorate, or at least, its activists.
That electorate will get...

...what it deserves. If having a dishonest person in your government is okay, you will have earned all of the Sycamore Norths and Fields of Dreams which that person can deliver. And when, in 2014, Tom Lochner writes about the horrible Champ de Rêves scandals, the insiduous insider deals involved in Marché Hall: I'll probably read the articles, but I'm pretty sure I won't join in the Recall Boulanger campaign of 2015. I've seen this movie before. I'm not blaming everyone else, and saying that I'm blameless. I bear a lot of responsibility for getting absentee voters to send in those Boulanger ballots. That may be why I feel so badly about this. But all that applause for the coronation of a scoundrel to the highest position of trust and stewardship which we can offer...APPLAUSE, for chrissake!...makes me doubt that Hercules can get it right. Must be something in the water. Or in the city hall.

For the one or two masochists out there who are willing to read more of me, I'm attaching here the "comment" which I asked Doreen Mathews to deliver for me at the council's special meeting yesterday. I didn't deliver it in person because, (1) I am awful at public speaking, and (2) I couldn't be in the same room with Gerard Boulanger.

"Hercules has just endured a long ordeal in an effort to rid the city council of persons thought to be dishonest or incompetent or both, persons who had been judged to be unworthy of the community's trust. The entire intent of the recall and election process was to remove those who could not be trusted, and to replace them with people who could. The election of Myrna de Vera and John Delgado in November constituted a significant first step in the construction of an honest and competent and trustworthy council. The election of Dan Romero and Bill Wilkins on June 7 completed the triumph. The installation of Gerard Boulanger would destroy everything."

"Having been cornered by the press and forced to admit some of the truth, Gerard Boulanger continued to try to wriggle out of the trap which he had set for himself. It could be argued that this prior dishonesty would have been acceptable...a specious argument, but never mind that...if he had, when caught, made a full confession and, from that moment on, conducted himself in a completely honest manner. He did neither. On June 6th, the day after parts of his true résumé were exposed in the Patch on June 5th, he sent an email to ten supporters, myself included, in which he alleged the existence of a plot by Myrna de Vera to have him resign and push for Sherry McCoy in his place. As far as I can determine, this plot did not exist. The apparent intention of Gerard Boulanger's email was to rally support for his decision not to resign; the implication was that his retention of the seat would prevent a greater evil. Thus, Mr. Boulanger established himself as, not only a liar, but also a schemer. Even later, on June 15, Gerard Boulanger denied to Myrna de Vera and John Delgado that he had ever said that Ms. de Vera had wanted Ms. McCoy to replace him. He thereby established himself as, not only a liar and schemer, but an inveterate liar and schemer, a repeat offender whose misconduct would continue. He had learned no lesson."

" It was at this point that I broke irrevocably with Gerard Boulanger, and transmitted, to a number of people, the email in which he said that which he later denied having said:
"Myrna called me....
.... this afternoon asking me to resign right after the election due to the controversy around my bio. She is obviously trying to manipulate me and a few others to push for McCoy as a nominated candidate once the council will have voted the appropriate resolution we don't have yet."

Gerard Boulanger was elected by trickery. We were duped. Mr. Boulanger's lies remained hidden until after the submission of sufficient absentee ballots to ensure his election. Were the election to be held today, Mr. Boulanger surely could not prevail against any other candidate whomever. Gerard Boulanger was elected by fraud, and his claim to a seat on the council is based on fraud.

If Gerard Boulanger were serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, he would be censured for his conduct during the election campaign, and his conduct after; if he were serving in the Senate, he would be censured or expelled. Under Hercules City Council Rules of Procedure, Section 4.7, the city council has to power to impose similar discipline. I ask that you do so. Even better would be to refuse this swearing in, this proposed coronation of lies and schemes."

An hour or so after Doreen read this out, Gerard Boulanger was sworn in, and installed on the city council.

Thanks Glenn....we, together with a great number of Herculeans, share the same sentiments. It's a shame that he has not budged despite all the plea for him to step down and let the city council to either do business with 4 council members or appoint a citizen. This city will not move on with him in there. It just can't. If he really wants to help this city out, he needs to RESIGN. He has TO LET GO of his EGGO(Ego)!!!

Glenn,
Thank you for the kind words. I do want to be clear about my position on the recall. I am only speaking for my participation. If others were more inclined to go after Balico and friends for what was deemed dishonesty then that is of course their choice and reason. I always try to give room for doubt over concerns of honesty. I view it much like we all should view crime, innocent until proven until guilty, and the punishment should fit the crime. I know it is not a pure ideology. But then, what really is?

If the RECALL team interviewed candidates like they said they would initially, not only this Boulanger drama could have possibly been avoided ... We could have probably vetted the rightful candidate to go against Keuhne. I would have preferred this man for that slot. Yes, Phil, I have told you that a thousand times!!! I have distanced myself from the group ever since.

Joseph, hi. How do we know that ego is Boulanger's motivation for keeping his claws dug into the councilman's seat? How do we know that it isn't something more sinister? How can we know what he's REALLY after? We cannot (as we could with normal people) just ask him, because his proven capacity to lie would vitiate the possibility of veracity in anything he might say. What the hell are we supposed to DO with a guy like this? What good is he, to anyone? Some people clearly think that he's useful, but is he really? Who would ever do business with a known liar?

Sunsan, first off, thank you for what you did and the effort you put into the recall. I'm sure all citizens (well the ones that voted/were informed) are thankful. But, conflict of interest = dishonesty? I think so. To me, this recall included honesty regardless if it was spelled out or not in your documented reasons for the recall. Just because your original Recall team didn't see that as one of the reasons, doesn't mean others did not. I guess you're verifying to me what your Recall team decided on. I hate to harp on the issue of Mr. Boulanger lying but as he said in his candidate profile, "I understand the differences between private business and City Hall, but I also understand the things they should have in common: accountability, service, honesty and fiscal responsibility." HONESTY. It really is unfortunate that even when we, the city, do something positive, it is still tainted by something negative.

Ah, sorry. Susan..not Sunsan.. my apologies

Just one comment.
Don't doubt that I understand the concepts of honesty and dishonesty and I know fully the conflict of my views. My view of the recall effort was that even if (Even If) there was nepotism, conflict of interest, or a lack of transparency (anything short of criminal effort) the recall team considered all along the way any sign that some corrective action was afoot. There was much time spent considering s stop to the recall of one, two, or all three council people involved. It was fairly late in the effort before it was decided that there was no turning back. The recall had a momentum and life of its own.
But there was alway a chance that corrective action and efforts could happen and the plug might have been pulled on the whole effort.
Sorry if my view is not of the highest order. I will try to seek perfection in my own way.

Of course the recall was about dishonesty. The alternative view would have been to see the actions of concern as "honest" mistakes. We chose not to believe such was the case.

Giorgio,
You and others may have chosen "not to believe such was the case". I did not. My efforts in the recall was about performance and results.

"Now its time to move on. There is much to do."

Dear, sweet Susan: you know how much I value your friendship. But, here, you're asking the community to ignore what we know, to act as if it never happened, and to move on to other things. We should never forget. We've been warned: why erase the warning? And, yes, we have much to do; and, we can do it without the help of a person of dubious morality. We can remain true to our cause (which DID involve honesty), and keep ourselves worthy of self-respect. There is much to do, but I think we can still find time to try to get this guy off the council, and let the remaining four, all people of proven good character, do the much that there is to do.

"...even if (Even If) there was nepotism, conflict of interest, or a lack of transparency...."

Dear-enough, not-excessively-sweetish Phil: We all know: there WAS nepotism, there WAS conflict of intest, the WAS a lack of transparency. But, you and I have discussed all this before, and I'm okay with your the-ends-justify-the-means rationale. I'm fine with you. My problem is with that Boulanger guy.

Glenn,
No doubt the conflict.....
In the case of the previous group the ends did not justify the means. In fact the means sowed the seeds of destruction for the end.
In Gerards case for me the ends justifying the means is not really my rational. It is more the punishment fitting the crime, so to speak. Of course in some ways that is the ends justifying the means. Do we cut of the hand of the thief or do we at times put them on probation. I think the better way is the latter.
Out.... Gone Sailing,...

Phil, I'm not arguing with your argument about the appropriate punishment for Gerard (I am, but never mind.). For me, Gerard's punishment is not an issue. This is not about Gerard. This is about good, and clean, governance for Hercules. I don't see the potential exclusion of Gerard from the council as a punishment of him, but rather as a cure for us.

Enjoy the bay.

Phil,
The recall petition documents were heavy on very serious allegations. What was I supposed to think when I read them? The recall team communicated to me that acts of dishonesty and retaliation were being perpetrated by city council staff. That is how these documents were written and that is why I voiced my concerns about them. The words alone warranted immediate formal investigations that so far I have seen no evidence of. And now I hear that the recall was about the city being broken-some acts of incompetence.

That is not what the recall team communicated to the citizens.

The other new council members' speeches will be added. We focused on capturing Boulanger's comments off the live feed last night and were unable to capture the other two. As soon as the city makes the recorded video available on its site, we'll grab those segments and post them. (It's not available as of 9:30 a.m.)

I partly agree. However, I don't think it is Mr. Abraham hiding behind anonymity. I think everyone on here pretty much knows his name (for better or worse) and those his letter was directed at definitely know him as well. I sympathize for the guy though. He was one of the strongest supports of the Recall candidates and his passion was very evident for better or worse. Based on reading his posts, perhaps a friend as well to Mr. Boulanger. I think to myself now. If one of my friends betrayed, lied to me, conned me, and I felt compelled to write a letter with such passion, would I be able to deliver such a speech? I've known people to leave letters/notes at people's houses/desks because they did not want to be around when the other read what had to be said. Writing such a letter and making it public did take "some real brass sacks."

You're right Richard, I don't believe that Mr. Abraham was being anonymous especially since he uses his full name. My last sentence was just an added editorial comment not directed at anyone in particular. Thanks for the reply.

Richard: I had Doreen read my comment out because (1) I'm a very poor public speaker with a lisp and a habit of clearing my throat, and I wanted the message delivered by someone whose poise would allow listeners to concentrate on the message, and not on the speaker, and (2) at least for now, I cannot bear to be physically close to Gerard Boulanger. As you might have noticed, I despise him. I have nothing more to say to him: I've done all I could to convince him that he did something wrong, and that he should resign; he didn't listen to me before, he won't listen now. I only speak to those with the ethical character needed to realize that we have a problem, and we have an obligation to solve it. I have no need to deliver any more messages to Gerard Boulanger's face.

Excellent advice Susan. Which by the way is my normal approach but had to comment on this one.

"But I feel like with him in there, none of these will happen." Joseph, I agree. We had a huge victory. We elected four good people. Much more difficult, we ran a successful recall campaign, something which very rarely succeeds. We were a textbook case of grassroots democracy in action; "Hercules recall" could have been in the index of hundreds of history and political science and social studies books, far into the future. Now, we have to stick an asterisk on everything we've done. We had a famous victory; Boulanger's presence on the council ruins it.

Honestly, I find Boulanger arrogant and one selfish individual because from his previous interviews with the patch, He said that his decision to keep his seat will be based on what the people want. If I'm not mistaken, a number of people have requested for him, some nicely and some point blank, to step down and do the right thing. Obviously, he didn't listen to the will of the people. What is his purpose then for staying? Could it be EGO?

Richard: you've been paying very close attention to all this. You're right on all counts; I'm guilty on all counts, at least those which apply to me. I do think that I owe an apology to Mr. de la Vega. I still consider the issue of whether or not he signed the recall petition to be a valid indicator of whether Mr. de la Vega would have been the agent for change which I still believe we needed; I do not, though, feel very good about letting myself be used to spread a political message. I haven't changed my opinion about Mr. Jones. But I come away from this being disillusioned by two people, and disappointed by two others. I wasn't as smart as I thought I was, and I was overly credulous. Nonetheless, I am firm in my support of Dan Romero and Myrna de Vera (and I am only omitting John Delgado because I do not know him). I owe my newfound cynicism to others.

Thanks Steve! I appreciate your reasonable and well thought of a response.

Just to clarify: I wasn't directing my comment to you Mr. Guadagne. It was to Steve which is why my post was a reply to his and he kindly clarified what he was saying. Thanks.

Thanks Richard L. Don't forget all the ragging on Sherry that was done too.

JoeG, Glenn is referring to city council related "business" and not his livelihood as a carpet cleaner. I think his comments were not meant to attack Gerard personally. I think it's for him to listen, not to the few of his advisers, but to the will of the people, and not particularly just Glenn's. They are honest and valid sentiments just like how others feel about this whole Boulanger fiasco.

Am I missing something? What did Ari do?

Why Richard, can't you plainly see? Ari fanned the embers! Fire! Fire!

Glenn,
Don't beat yourself up for helping Mr. B get elected. You also helped Mr. Romero and Mr. Wilkins win their seats. For that, I am very grateful. We have a very fine council of 4. Thank you.

Again, thanks, Giorgio. No need for me to beat myself up; some of my erstwhile recall colleagues are doing a fine job of that for me. A few formerly-righteous recall supporters are rediscovering the primacy of practicality over ethics. A very righteous indignation over wrongdoing has become a very rationalizing shrug of if-it-works-for-me,-what-the-hell?

John,
As I have noted here, you are expressing this opinion based on....? Are you implying the majority of volunteers and recall volunteers have in some way bribed Gerard? Do you know all the recallers and all the volunteers and their various views on all the issues? And what "club" are you referring to? I belonged to no card carrying, dues paying, volunteer/recall club and still don't. In fact, I regret very much the Recall Leadership team, of which I was a member, disbanded after the Recall and did not devise a process to vet possible candidates as had been discussed. We certainly should have done that!

When you feel strongly enough about something, being solo in a group of 1 works for me.

Goodnight fellow citizens of Hercules.

Glenn,
You are making an assumption regarding your former colleagues based on what? The fact they don't post?

Toni: the defenses of Boulanger, and his "right" to stay in office, are the most incredible aspect of the Great Betrayal of these suddenly-pragmatic recall campaigners. Time to move on, we have work to do, inappropriate punishment, honesty is not an issue...these righteous recallers never said that about Balico. Amazing, this flight from morality, from these former crusaders for the triumph of right over wrong. I'm still hoping that they're a minority; but, I'm slowly discovering that some of that minority are from the leadership.

Disclaimer: nothing in the preceding is intended to apply to Phil Simmons who, I think, has principles (possibly somewhat different from mine), and has remained true to them.

John,
I agree. And there will be another election November,2012.

Sue, the fact that the election will be held in nov '12 is no excuse whatsoever for keeping that seat filled with boulanger for 17 or 18 months. The other four, proven honest, can give the city everything it needs. Having a crate full of boulanger going bad on a council seat will spoil the whole thing.

And, no, this is not a personal attack. It's a general commentary on the whole lot of recall hypocrites (probably a minority, but a loud one) who thought that lying was bad when Balico did it (cuz he wasn't gonna give you anything you wanted) but cool when your guy does it (cuz he's gonna serve your personal goals). Pure hypocrisy. But I single out you and Phil for special exemption. You two are very complicated hypocrites. I will not attack you. The rest are simple hypocrites, and should be ashamed of themselves.

Toni,
Folks shouldn't assume that because many haven't posted here they are not hurt and disappointed by recent events. The majority of the volunteers we worked with do not post on the Patch for a variety of reasons including fear of being flamed when they do. The very few of us who do post here always run that risk, and we do get flamed from time to time and that is painful. The point is bloggers should not assume they know the feelings of the Recall volunteers and campaign volunteers just because they are not posting.

Susan, I never meant to imply that most recall folk are okay with Boulanger's dishonesty. I'm only aware of the confirmed opinions of a half dozen, and the unconfirmed opinions of another half dozen. But you only mention people being "hurt and disappointed" by "recent events" (why is this in code?). Boulanger hurt and disappointed EVERYBODY. My concern is with those formerly-moral recallers who are now rationalizing and prevaricating and modifying and redefining and euphemizing and doing anything else they can come up with in order to be able to realize the material personal benefits of doing business with a person known to be a serial liar and schemer, who can (as proven by the events of June 15) be counted on to continue lying and scheming. These recallers, the once-righteous, are spinning the world upside down when they redefine honesty as an unnecessary value.

I would fall far below the bar but I didn't run for office and didn't put myself out there for public scrutiny. If I did run I wouldn't say I had a masters when I don't I wouldn't say I held office when I didn't not just because it isn't true but because in this day and age it is way too easy to verify. When your found out you loose credibility and that is all you really have as a politician. You also loose any political capital you may have gained. You ask at what price to Gerard and what price to the city I would say the price for Gerard is to step down the price for the city none, tell me what Gerard can accomplish that the four other council member can't? What does he bring to the table that is so valuable that we can ignore his deception? I hope it isn't just the waterfront because I believe that others on the council are friends of the waterfront and what to see it built just a badly as Gerard.

Toni: do we really know that Boulanger wants the waterfront? How do we know that there isn't another, more sinister reason for his clinging so tightly to that chair on our council? Should we just ask him what he wants? Would any answer of his, on this or on any other matter, matter?

Phil,
I like your approach to life. Keep on sharing your well-meaning thoughts-words. I'm not saying I want to change 180 degrees, but if some of your well-balanced approached rubbed off on me, it probably wouldn't hurt.

I will add that some of this, Mr. Boulanger has brought upon himself. He has shown no evidence of compassion or forgiveness in recent months for the 2 recalled officers. In many ways, he himself helped foster an atmosphere that is unforgiving. Perhaps I was primed by him to report him for his misconduct. Irony.

Thanks for taking the time, Phil.

Giorgio,
Thank you, of course, for your comment.
I want to take this as a pause in this fair debate and during the pause bring up a couple of completely off topic issues.
There is a WCCTAC meeting at the San Pablo Court House tomorrow at 8:00AM. Hercules stands to gain $300k in funding for the train station effort. Hopefully a few from Hercules will attend in an effort to show support and concern and retain this money for the city.
There is also an effort afoot to organize public concern about the outcome of Sycamore North. Rumor has it that the current direction of its potential sale will not have a good outcome. Everyone should stay tuned to future communications about this. The community is going to need to express it's concerns to the city council with at least the same vigor as the Gerard debate. Please stay tuned for what might be the most important decision this city has to make in defining its future.
Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

Joseph there is no punishment Gerard took his place on the council all is right with the world.

Joseph: I'm not sure what made Boulanger so special that he is being defended by people who apparently appreciated the difference between right and wrong only seventeen days ago, but it's possible that a few of those people only see wrong in the acts of people who don't serve their interests, and are incapable of seeing (or caring about) wrong in those who might further their interests. Boulanger may do a lot of good for people who support waterfront development, and some of those people seem to be rapidly revising their definitions of goodness.

Boulanger is not the rightful owner of that seat, but he's desperately clinging to it. He wants it, but we don't yet know what he wants it for. We'll all find out when, sooner or later, Tom Lochner starts writing about it.

Glenn, I support the waterfront development too but I do not want him nowhere near negotiations between developers and the city as he might do us more harm than good. Remember, he's not trustworthy and trust goes a long way. If I was the developer, would I want him to be around?.....Hell to the No!

Joseph: I support the waterfront too, but there's nothing I want badly enough to sell my soul to get it, or if there is, it sure isn't Boulanger. As you pointed out, when I said that no one would be willing to do business with him, I was talking about city council business. I, as a developer, would not enter into an agreement with a known cheat. I, as a councilmember, would not trust him with the information necessary to accomplish anything. I think that those people who see practical personal advantage to keeping Boulanger in power may be surprised to find that his presence on the council hinders, rather than helps, them to get what they want. Hindrance or help, having Boulanger on the council is wrong, and that is enough.

Joseph G,
We are just having a discussion. We are not going postal. We are not doing anything wrong. You should be more concerned about what might have been the intentional leaking of the complaint document against Mr. Boulanger to the media. The release of this document never went through the proper channels, via the city clerk's office.

A citizen has a legal right to file a complaint against a candidate (seated or otherwise) if they believe they have violated the law. The now seated candidate has a legal right to not be harassed. City Administrative Policy #44 prohibits harassment, discrimination, and retaliation against all city employees, officials, officers, employees and contractors.

The punishment is a misdemeanor, not a felony. According to the Contra Costa Times, there is a high likelihood that he will not even be prosecuted. The biggest punishment might have been publishing this complaint in the news, which the city council decided was acceptable.

His life will be fine.

Sue, I am making no assumptions about those recallers who do not post. There were hundreds of them, and I'm fairly confident that they're as opposed to having Boulanger in that seat as I am. I'm concerned with the bunch who loudly applauded Phil's dishonesty-doesn't-matter address at the special meeting last Tuesday. I wasn't there, I didn't see which people were banging their palms together. My assumption about them is this, and I've said it a number of times already: the righteous recallers were howling about Balico's lies. When the other guy, who wasn't doing much for the waterfront or other pet projects of the handclappers, lied, that was awful. And it was. But when their guy gets caught, it's cool, because he can provide those folks with what they, personally, want. That is pure hypocrisy. You can't lie, but I can, because it's different, because of translation barriers, because the French system (which is not exactly Borneo) is so vastly different from the American (it is not) that you simple Americans can never understand the equivalents. It's different because he worked for the recall; it's different because, so far as we know, he only lies and schemes, and doesn't steal. We're only just beginning to learn the truth about him, but we don't know of any theft, so we'll assume he won't steal (though we're not quite sure why he wants that seat so badly), so it's different...

...It's different because he supports the waterfront. "Truth" and ""lie" are defined differently for our side and their side. To clear that council seat of an incompetent but probably-honest fool, we installed a clearly-dishonest schemer of unproven competence, and that's okay. It can all be explained away.

I am most assuredly NOT making assumptions about all recallers. My assumptions are devoted to Tuesday's handclappers and the handful who post excuses for Boulanger on the Patch. The recall folk were good folk. The handclappers and dissemblers should be ashamed of themselves.

Sue, you're going to have to provide the post in which I said "code". There are too many for me to scroll back. Everyone was stunned, yes, but everyone has had time to get over their shock and get to work on the first priority, which is cleansing the council of Boulanger, a stain partly caused by us. I am NOT attacking the recall leadership team (and as for volunteers, see the preceding). Phil was a leader, he is stumbling around in search of excuses, but that's okay with me, because I know Phil well enough to know that he is good and means well. Same for you. Exactly the opposite for Guadagne. Who else is telling us to forget and move on? I can't think of any offhand. Guadagne is not the leadership. Boulanger is, and you can considered him attacked. Okay, Bill and Dan don't post much, so I have no criticism for them. Same for Anton. Anyhow, no, I am NOT attacking the leadership and I am NOT attacking the volunteers. I am criticizing the handful of hypocrites amongst our righteous crusaders.

You know perfectly well that I never in any way suggested that I know of any people conducting any sort of deals with Boulanger. I do not mean you (can't imagine why you want to take this public), or, at least, I don't mean you because...

...of your friendship with Boulanger. You can be his friend, but why do you have to support his occupying a seat on our city council by talking of moving on and waiting for the next election? You don't have to excoriate him, but you don't have to ask the rest of us to Let It Be. I probably do not have different attitudes toward friendship than you, but I don't see any excuse for offering excuses that could let your friend do harm to your other friends. Can't you be his friend in the neighborhood but not on the council?

Richard,
Yes. The majority of the Recall Volunteers and a good portion of the Leadership group rarely actually post on the Patch and I doubt they will begin now. My point merely is to make suppositions regarding their views because they don't post may not accurately reflect their views at all. I am one of those few who actually did post actively on behalf of the candidates I supported. I don't know how far back Patch keeps blogs in archive but you can see my posts there, all of them. I use my real name so you can find my comments easily. And I have been very badly flamed to the point I was thinking of consulting an attorney. It is very hard to post here. As far as I know the debate can still be viewed, the Interim City Manager reports where the 44 Studio stuff came from can still be found on the Hercules website, and the comments regarding other candidates' participation and involvement prior to the Recall can be researched. For my part,I have met all but one of the other candidates' and know they are good people. I have enjoyed my conversations with them. Nothing has changed because Gerard lied. Folks thinking about running in November, 2012 have plenty of time now to get involved, attend Council meetings, subcommittee meetings, etc. and prepare. And I am sure I will be referring to Tom Lochner's articles as they appear, and pleading for a debate, just as I did before.

Richard,
I ran out of room. In response to your question re Gerard. I have posted, many times, that I have known him for over ten years first as someone who cleaned my carpets and who performed good service in that regard, and in the last 5 years as a neighbor and as a friend who has willingly helped me when I needed it. I advocated for him strongly, contributed, held up his signs, supported him. I freely admit those of us who were active in the Recall movement had originally planned to vet candidates and I wish we had. We disbanded right after winning. I never asked Gerard about his past, I just knew him as a hard worker who cared about his City. I was very hurt by what happened. I posted my response at the time and indicated I could no longer advocate folks voting for him. But I think we can feel good about the Recall, and we can feel good about the other four Council members. Of course winning on false pretenses is wrong. Did I say or imply anything to give an impression I thought otherwise? I also am not sure about what interests you think I have? But I can tell you what they are. I am for the Waterfront development and hopefully eventually the ITC as a part of that. I am opposed to nepotism, cronyism, no-bid contracts and Sycamore North as it currently is configured and stands. I would love to see it torn down frankly. Those are my interests. I would love to see the truth uncovered and if criminality is involved, those guilty go to jail.

Sue, once again, I want to make clear that I do NOT consider you worthy of censure for anything. I do think that Boulanger has you under his spell, but I am not criticizing anything you did, either during the recall or during the election or after. You were NOT a target of any of my criticism. Guadagne sure as hell was; there are a few others I suspect are worthy of criticism, but I'm not sure about them so have never named them. You are on the side of the angels, and I know that. Really.

ummmm?

Hmm. The webpage has vanished into thin air.

The webpage even had a quote of Ms. DeVera asking Mr. Boulanger if he was concerned about the Filipinos "rocking the Hercules vote." Is that what Hercules government is about? Racial and ethnic cliques?

Much of my family lives in the city of Chicago, around Midway airport. The way it works there is that they have 50 aldermen who represent 50 wards. The 50 aldermen comprise the City Council. Everyone is getting some degree of representation.

Is that the case in Hercules? Is everyone being represented? Are African-Americans being represented? Indians? Asians? Hispanics? Caucasian? Eastern-European? Jews? Muslims? Catholics? Christians?

Or are we a small enough city where we can just focus on representing the citizens of Hercules, regardless of race or ethnicity or religion or creed?

Giorgio,

I don't know what to say. I have nothing to do with that webpage you saw, nor did I ever ask Mr. Boulanger about the Filipinos "rocking the Hercules vote." I never even saw that website you are talking about. I have absolutely nothing to do with my sister's webpage, if that is what you were referring to. I asked her to bring it down because it was inappropriate of her to make remarks about my fellow Council Member. Thank you for alerting me to this matter.

Your attacking me as though I am only for Filipino Americans is unsubstantiated. I represent every single of the 25,000 Herculeans.

This sniping about alleged remarks or quotes is not helping me, nor are the accusations that I somehow leaked your complaint to Patch. If you had a problem about a leak at city hall, please file a formal complaint to the city manager and demand an investigation instead of accusing "Sherry McCoy's friend" or other innuendos you have been posting in Patch.

Giorgio, I wish everyone and you can move on and support the Council into focusing on the many heavy tasks ahead instead of stirring up new controversies.

Mayor De Vera,
I am in the process of seeking to have you and the rest of the council review and address this matter, making necessary corrections if necessary, so that it does not repeat itself. Thank you.

Mayor De Vera,
Regarding the comment on the webpage, perhaps you can clarify what was meant by it. Personally, I like to discuss race and ethnicity and everything else that goes into society. I know you do not only represent Filipinos, but the quote raised the issue, not me. Was it your sister's quote, not yours? The conversation that took place at the church-that quote. Was the comment about Mr. Boulanger fearing such? All I did was continue the dialogue that was posted on the webpage.

Let's all be comfortable discussing this stuff, ok? I moved here because of the diversity. Let's not change.

Mayor De Vera,
I love my sisters as I bet you love yours. She didn't do anything wrong. She just shared her thoughts just like I share mine. Either of my sisters might have done the same. Let's hear it for our sisters!

Maybe race and ethnicity is one of those things to only be discussed amongst friends or handled by sociologists or a very tactful comedian, not on blogs.

Regarding the complaint, I'll be honest right here, Mayor. At first, I thought it was a positive thing when I saw that my complaint had reached the press because I thought that meant it would be addressed instead of just being buried. And some things didn't add up.

Then I thought about Mr. Boulanger and his family and how terrible it was to see this in print. Next, I thought about myself-how come no one told me about it before posting it. It started to look like my complaint was possibly used to treat Mr. Boulanger in a way that I believed crossed the line. I didn't want to be part of that.

Seriously Mayor, some of us rely on our elected officials to help us not cross the line. We need to maintain a civilized society, even when addressing what we know to be improper or unlawful behavior. I hate to say it, Mayor, but you are being held to pretty high standard.

I'll address the compliant issue as a "lessons learned" for all involved so that we can move forward.

Mayor De Vera,
No need to censor your sister's webpage or anyone else's. Your other sister has the same information posted on hers. I support freedom of speech, except for matters of a legal-confidential nature. Thanks.

Glenn,
I figured a reply to his comment wasn't worth additional wear and tear on my computer keys. I'll reserve my replies for the intelligent.

I agree.