Anger Over Report on Chamberlain, Loh

* Regarding your May 23 report on the campaign pay dispute between Marge Chamberlain and Trudi Loh, I am searching for appropriate words to describe my reaction. Dismayed and chagrined are good words to start with.

I truly am dismayed over the implication that I, as a close friend to Marge, am involved in some conspiracy involving “bad guy politicking.” There is no truth whatsoever to the implication that I had anything to do with Marge Chamberlain’s decision to file a claim against Trudi Loh for monies owed to her.

And I am chagrined (factually, downright angry) that The Times would print an accusation without attempting first to interview all parties concerned. I was never contacted by your reporter or by anyone else from The Times. Had I been, I would have responded that, yes, I am a close friend of Marge Chamberlain and have also been a friend of Trudi Loh. To my knowledge, this pay dispute is a legitimate business issue, having nothing do do with Trudi Loh’s present political race.

It is an issue of “women’s work, women’s worth,” of a woman who had worked many volunteer hours on a primary campaign for a close friend and co-activist and then, after substantially helping Trudi win the primary, had decided it was not fair to herself or her family to continue to work those long, unpaid hours in the runoff election. It is an issue of being hired for pay to do a job that someone desperately wants you to do and then not being paid, just being used. Legally, it is an issue of breach of contract.

MARLENE ALEXANDER

Thousand Oaks

* I found it incredulous to read the May 23 article, “Woman Says She’s Owed Campaign Pay,” in which Trudi Loh indirectly linked myself, a friend and our husbands to what Ms. Loh prophesied was a politically motivated small-claims court lawsuit against her brought by Marge Chamberlain.

Not only is this untrue, it was insulting to even remotely suggest that I, a friend of both Marge and Trudi, would capitalize on their vulnerability to further a dispute in order to influence the June 6 special city election. Your article led me to believe that Ms. Loh twisted a money dispute with her former campaign supporter and friend Chamberlain into an election conspiracy against her.

I feel betrayed that no one bothered to call me to ask directly whether I would be a party to such political trickery. Times representatives admitted to me after the fact that this was a slip in policy and judgment in printing speculation and innuendo without checking all sources. Such reporting is much less than I have come to expect from The Times.

The reality is that life is a lot about relationships and very little about conspiracy. I was stunned by the unbelievable reports of the assault on the capability, credibility and loyalty of Marge Chamberlain while working for Loh in the supervisor campaign and the recent depiction of her by Ms. Loh. I have always found Marge to be a dear and trustworthy friend, and reports of the hurtful remarks directed at her are so sad in their indication of a breakdown of past friendship and loyalty. Such rhetoric can do nothing but inflame passions and put up roadblocks to appropriate resolution of conflicts between people.

ELOISE COHEN

Thousand Oaks