Council members Don Kuehne and Joanne Ward defend themselves from the charges of recall.

I support the recall. I was one of the thirty signatories for the Notices of Intention to recall presented to council members Ed Balico, Don Kuehne and Joanne Ward at last week’s Hercules City Council meeting. Citing family reasons, Balico resigned moments before receiving the notice. Ward was stoically silent. Kuehne threw a tantrum of sorts.

Kuehne and Ward have since responded to the grounds for recall, as provided and allowed for by law, and the contrast between the two council members, both upon receipt at the city council meeting and in written form, could not be any more vast.

Ward’s response was conciliatory in tone. In fact, it reads like a preliminary draft of a resignation letter. The statement that she will serve the “remainder” of her term–”whether it be years or months”–intimates that the issues at hand, and the public unrest, may be too much. Ward could do a lot for the city by doing something very simple–resign.

Kuehne could also resign but his response signals that he is determined to fight the recall. Actually, Kuehne has issued a series of responses.

Kuehne’s first response was the infamous paper tear during last Tuesday’s meeting, an obviously premeditated stunt that mercilessly backfired. His second response was supposed to be a three-page dissertation refuting the grounds for recall, as Kuehne advertised at the very end of that five-hour meeting, but it apparently never saw the light of day. The press coverage and corresponding resident outrage necessitated a tactical change.

Kuehne’s third response was a letter to the editor. It was mostly conciliatory and highlighted recent changes, but did not refute any of the recall’s charges. Kuehne’s final and official response however was much more combative, contending that the “grounds for recall are false.” While accepting financial mismanagement, conflict of interest and lack of transparency as facts during his two years on the city council, Kuehne argues that he was not responsible. And that is what is most troubling.

Kuehne concedes that “major changes are necessary,” but fails to realize his resignation or removal from office through recall may be that necessary major change.

Ward and Kuehne want it both ways. They now confess that they were lied to by former City Manager Nelson Oliva, but both continue to insist they will be able to move forward, honestly and transparently, as if they’ve now been awaken from great slumber. The argument doesn’t hold water.

Oliva’s lies were a direct result of the environment of lax oversight the city council created. They didn’t ask questions, either beforehand or as a means to follow up. They didn’t request to see supporting information or budget projections. They relied exclusively on two-person subcommittee meetings that weren’t recorded.

Additionally, evidence of Oliva’s alleged improprieties had been known for several months, and the City Council tasked interim City Manager Charles Long with fixing the apparent mess. Residents were finally relieved that the city was making productive changes. Except the council didn’t like what Long discovered, or, apparently, his tone of voice as he told them about it. So they fired him, and brought back Oliva.

The logic confounds. The council was informed that an arsonist had started a fire. They then brought in a firefighter to put the fire out, but the firefighter discovered that it was much bigger than what was expected. So the council axed the firefighter and invited back the arsonist. Done and done. This chain of events was accompanied by a 5-0 vote.

It is not just what Kuehne and Ward did–voting unanimously with the rest of the council repeatedly–but what they did not do that is so egregious. They allowed major items to be approved on the consent calendar–such as Sycamore North’s $56 million construction budget when the actual cost was $70 million–with literally no discussion.

Kuehne claims he had raised concerns in closed session since October 2009, but he voted unanimously with the council anyway. That is spineless. And that is grounds for recall.

Kuehne claims that he didn’t do anything illegal and that he avoided conflicts of interest, yet he allowed existing conflicts of interest to go unabated, even in light of frequent news reports, citizen commentary, and a grand jury report. That is grounds for recall.

Doing your job poor enough, for long enough, will eventually get you fired. Ward and Kuehne need a performance review. The recall is part of that process.

Promises, not results, will be how the mayor is remembered.

Ed Balico must be conflicted as he sits at home not a councilman for the first time in a decade. There is the legacy Balico thinks he has the right to–the one centered around a doodle on a napkin with a grand vision of a gondola, streetcars and a helipad–and the actual legacy he must accept–high on promises, low on results.

Balico is a lot like the proverbial father or uncle that promises to take you to Disneyland but never does. He’d buy the plane tickets, reserve the hotel room, make you pack your bag and get you excited for the trip, only for you to find out the day before departure the plan had changed. “Disney World in Florida is much bigger,” he’d say, and then another plane ticket, hotel room, packed bag, another sense of hope. “Wait…Disneyland Paris is supposed to be much nicer now than when it first opened as Euro Disneyland,” he’d go on, and yet another plane not to be boarded, hotel reservation never to be used, another bag needlessly packed, and all that remains in the back of your mind is that there is a Disneyland in Tokyo, too.

Ed Balico promised the waterfront–which was to include not only hundreds of new homes, but be combined with retail, restaurants, and a train and ferry station to create an urban center–but he had all but given up on delivering that promise once the personal financial benefit dried up.

Balico made commissions on homes sold in the Bayside development and the Railroad Avenue live-works. His proponents defended him saying that he was never the deciding vote on the council on these matters (which were perpetually unanimous), but that is really not the issue. His role in the deliberations preceding the vote is what should have prompted him to recuse himself and he never did.

The next promise was New Town Center and then Hilltown, and then it was the Field of Dreams on the annex. But none of it was real, and it wasn’t always consistent, either.

Balico was part of the group that invited Walmart, who the city was then forced to fight in court following public uproar, the Szabo plan, which resulted in the Waterfront Now Initiative, and now he supports Costco at Hilltown. None of these were included in the 2000 Central Hercules Plan developed by residents and approved by the council, but Balico works off a different plan–his own.

There are residents that seem to worship the man and many refer to him as Mr. Hercules. They believe that he did only good, even when he hasn’t, and that his intentions were in the right place, even if it clearly has been demonstrated that they were not. They are convinced that the only thing that destroyed his arc of greatness was the malignant, powerful force of the media.

In November 2008, despite revelations of the corrupted profits he made, Balico received the most votes in the history of the city. He was invincible, or so everyone thought.

In the face of a recall however, he had to save face–or rather, save his fledgling company, Hercules Global, which he said was was being hurt by the negative information former interim City Manager Charles Long was publishing regarding the city’s finances. Long was fired on December 7.

Balico was appointed mayor the following week by the new council (newcomer Myrna de Vera voted, “nay”). In his acceptance speech, Balico said that he was willing to sacrifice his family for the sake of the city. On Tuesday evening, just four weeks later, he resigned so he could put his “family first,” literally moments before residents presented the mayor with their intention to recall.

Balico had put his family first. Balico’s son was employed by Affordable Housing Solutions Group, which ran the city’s affordable housing agency–a company also known as NEO. The same company that had been the subject of Grand Jury investigations, and onced owned by former City Manager Nelson Oliva, his daughters, and finally Walter McKinney, but only after a Grand Jury report chastised the insidious relationship.

Balico’s daughter received financial assistance when the redevelopment agency purchased her condo in September 2009 in a short sale for one-third of the mortgaged value, which had included a $50,000 first-time homebuyer’s loan from the agency. Her father sat on the subcommittee that approved the transactions.

Balico never seemed to understand what it meant to be a public official. Although Balico understood what corruption was, he never realized that what he had done was corrupt, and he believed his reasoning seemed rational, if not obvious: Balico brought forth great plans and vision for the community and delivered or was poised to deliver great success. So why shouldn’t he benefit?

The biggest loser in Balico’s contorted legacy is not Balico himself or his company; it’s the residents. We’re still in line at Disneyland and the credit card balance is due.

The city needs a police chief as city manager to control the chaos.

On January 9 Fred Deltorchio, chief of police, will assume a most tenuous occupation–interim city manager. And it is not just because the last interim city manager was fired after only 51 days on the job.

Deltorchio’s task is unquestionably daunting. Charles Long–before he was fired, and possibly the reason he was fired–reported that the city’s financial condition is in dire straits. The implication is lost jobs, lost projects, and reduced services, such as recreation and police.

Deltorchio will report to a council with a majority that faces a recall effort in its infancy. He will be accountable to a public that has grown distrustful of city government–for good reason. Three consecutive city council meetings reinforced the sentiment that chaos is the rule of the day at city hall.

On December 7, the city council fired Long and reinstated Nelson Oliva. One week later, the council announced that Oliva’s return would be short-lived. And on December 21, a brand new council that included Myrna de Vera and John Delgado, terminated Oliva’s contract with a costly severance.

That stretch of decisions indicates that there is, and will be, a power vacuum at city hall. However, if the recall gains steam and makes the ballot, Deltorchio will likely be the city manager until the recall is resolved, potentially as late as November. A council with a majority facing a constitutionally protected recall process would be in no position to hire the next city manager. The citizens would not stand for it.

In Hercules, the city manager dominates, and always has, largely because of the secondary yet greater role as executive director of the redevelopment agency (which in recent years has spent money with reckless abandon). The council simply follows the direction of the city manager, who is often supported by the city attorney, although the dynamic should be the opposite. As a result, the city manager–not the city council–sets the agenda for the community. It is a unique role for an unelected official.

The next city council meeting–the first with Deltorchio reporting for duty–is set for next Tuesday, January 11. However, the agenda is due by this Friday, which means it is being authored by the outgoing city manager. It is yet another obstacle in an awkward transition.

The choice of Deltorchio makes a lot of sense. In addition to being well-liked and respected in the community, he is also level-headed, exactly the type of manager the city needs right now. It also is hard to imagine who the council would have been able to select unanimously–because they would have wanted to signal their full support for whomever they chose–in that heated closed session meeting on December 21, a meeting that had included a 3-2 vote against bringing Long back.

Deltorchio cannot simply hold the reins as city manager; he must steer. The conditions require it. Consideration must be made to hire Long as his consultant on redevelopment issues and to address the looming financial crisis, including rescuing the Sycamore North and Intermodal Transit Center projects. Long should also conclude the negotiations with the waterfront developer that he had re-energized long after the relationship had soured between both parties.

The job will not be easy. In fact, it is more akin to an operation. Fortunately, Deltorchio is a steady hand.