Councilman Hernandez ‘Has No One to Blame but Himself’

I suspect that Mike Hernandez wanted the article (“Back From the Bottom,” by Beth Shuster, Feb. 6) to show that he has cleaned up his act. It only reveals that he has yet to take responsibility for his problems and is still unfit for city government.

Here we have an elected official who drank a quart of tequila a day, snorted cocaine and smoked pot while “attending” to city business. Hernandez repeatedly states the politically correct mantra that he thanks the police for revealing his addictions but he later reveals his innermost suspicion that the police actually set him up as they wanted to crush a rising political star.

Whom does Hernandez think he is fooling? He has no one to blame but himself for all the embarrassment, humiliation and pain he has heaped on his family, his constituents and his city.

Jeffrey N. Stewart

Eagle Rock

*

Can anyone explain why our schools operate under a “zero tolerance policy” while high-profile elected officials such as Mike Hernandez get repeated chances after blatant substance abuse? Children can be expelled from school for many reasons without any second chances.

Shouldn’t this be reversed? Children should have the chance to learn and grow from their mistakes through reasonable discipline, while adults should know better!

Tanya Rutter

Manhattan Beach

*

Let’s get this right: I am supposed to feel sorry for a guy with a not-so-great childhood who graduated from a private university and now makes more than $113,000 a year, driving a city-owned vehicle that he can fill up with gas whenever he chooses?

I wasn’t quite sure what the thrust of Shuster’s article was but it only served to clarify why reform is so long overdue in the city of Los Angeles. Where else can a lawbreaker stay in a job like Hernandez’s with a salary many times that of his average constituent’s? And after all these years of his holding office, his district remains among the worst in the city.

Kenneth W. Keller

Valencia

*

It’s really a shame that neither the Los Angeles Times nor Mike Hernandez has any respect for the personal anonymity clause of Alcoholics Anonymous’ 11th Tradition: “Our names and pictures as AA members ought not be broadcast, filmed or publicly printed.” Whenever public figures proclaim their membership in a 12-step program, they take the risk of influencing the public’s perception of the effectiveness of these programs. If Mike doesn’t stay clean and sober, will the public judge AA or Mike?

The best example you can set, Mike, is to just go about your life and let your recovery speak for itself.

Liz Sells

Los Angeles