Concerned about Rohrbacher article
I am concerned about your half page article featurning our representative in congress, Dana Rohrabacher, and his appearance at Pedego. Why is there no name attributed to the article? It says “For the Sun” with no author or writer’s name. The article reads like a puff piece extolling the wonderful things Mr. Rohrbacher is working on for his constituents.
We learn about his surfer cred, but nothing about his anti-environment voting record scoring an abysmal 5 percent by the League of Conservation Voters. As a member of the House Committee of Science and Technology, he continues to parrot the anti-science rhetoric of the extreme right in his denial of climate change and its anthropocentric origins. This from a man who recently embarrassed himself with a question to NASA scientists regarding civilizations on Mars “thousands of years ago.”
The only somewhat negative reference in the article was in regard to the upcoming race being a “bit more competitive”, however only two opposition candidates were mentioned when there is a crowd of candidates running against the now vulnerable congressman who has aligned himself tightly with President Trump. Recently a real scientist and health/business entrepreneur, Hans Keirstead, won the Democratic Party’s endorsement and has support among moderate Republicans and independent voters.
If the Sun wants to fill its paper with articles such as this, that’s fine, but let the readers know who wrote the article. If it is “sponsored content,” we have a right to know that and the source of that sponsorship. If you are endorsing Mr. Rohrbacher, that needs to made clear as well in your editorial pages.
Thank you for Cameron article
Is there some way to get the message below to Elizabeth Kane who wrote the lovely article (Thurs, Feb 22, 2018 – pg. 2) “The passing of Pauline Cameron”? I would like her to know how much I enjoyed her excellent writing and story about Pauline. Thank you.
As a suggestion, some newspapers show the author’s emails at the end of articles so folks can respond–ever consider doing this in The Sun?
Thanks for your assistance to get this message to Ms. Kane.
2018 Golden Rain budget must be amended
As I wrote in previous Letters to the Editor, in November to 9,000 Leisure World residents came a very bad news: the Golden Rain Foundation in the 2018 Budget overcharged them on the Liability Insurance Premium—$427,806 or $5.40 in monthly assessments.
In my letter to GRF president and Board of Directors I proposed that the board amend the 2018 Budget based on premiums, presented by DLD Insurance Broker, and reduce GRF and Mutuals Assessments a total of $5.40.
In response I received a letter from GRF president in which she refused to amend the Budget, without any reasons to justify the decision, presenting it as the Board decision. One month later it is apparent that the Liability Insurance overcharging is not the only one. Below are the 2018 budget lines with shareholders/members receiving excess charges:
• Liability Insurance Premiums—$427,806
• Workers Compensation Insurance—$90,820
• Employee Insurance—$89,703
The above numbers return us to a long time question regarding the quality work of DLD Insurance Broker. GRF has a separate Contract with DLD on $501,282 for year 2017, and more than 20 percent mistake on short time estimation is unacceptable.
Insurance premiums are not the only 2018 Budget lines on which GRF members/shareholders were overcharged. A big contribution to overcharging was made by the GRF Finance Department in calculating the SRO Labor Cost Recovery, which Mutuals are paying for Maintenance Department services. The 2017 Budget was calculated based on $40.00 per hour. Beginning from May 2017 GRF Board approved the CEO’s request and increased it up to $42.00 or on 5 percent.
In 2018 Budget the SRO Cost Recovery revenue increased only on 1.4 percent. The difference contributed to additional overcharging shareholders on $53,211.
The result of Budget manipulation appeared immediately—in January 2018, according to Financial Report, the favorable SRO Labor Cost Recovery is $26,317. It does not make a difference even with the use of 21st Century technology—in this case the human factor is working.
The total shareholders/members overcharge is $661,540 or $8.34 per apartment per month.
On January 25, I had a short conversation with the CEO in which he stated that his main and the only point was that in November he presented to Finance Committee an option to amend the 2018 Budget. So according to GRF President and CEO it is the Board of Directors refusing to amend the budget. Let them to answer a simple question “Why they are against the Budget Amendment? Why they fill free to violate the Davis-Stirling Law?” As I wrote this letter, came a big surprise. According to Leisure World newspaper GRF now charging SRO Labor Cost at rate $43. To easy it is become to GRF management to make 9,000 elderly residents victims of financial abuse. The 2018 Budget must be amended the same way as it was done with the 2015 Budget. Nobody is above the law.