The Hollywood Farmers Market; the battle over healthcare reform; the ouster of the head of L.A.’s troubled Department of Children and Family Services

Save the market

Re “Farmers market squabble could spill over,” Dec. 13, and “Parking vs. produce,” Editorial, Dec. 13

As creatively challenged as Hollywood can seem, it shouldn’t be too much of a stretch to come up with a solution to the parking issue for the film school blocked by the Sunday farmers market.

How many parking spots are needed by students and staff on a Sunday? Certainly there is no shortage of parking in the area. Perhaps one of the neighboring parking structures would be willing to allow free parking to film school students and staff during market hours.

To allow such a vibrant and vital local institution to be shut down over school parking on a Sunday seems ludicrous.

Margaret Blalck

Santa Monica

For nearly 19 years, I have started my week at the Hollywood Farmers Market. Like many, I was surprised to learn that it is threatened with closure over an issue that seems to be a resolvable one.

The market epitomizes a lot that residents care about. It provides financial opportunity for farmers of all kinds, many of whom travel great distances at an early hour to get there. It does the same for craftspeople who sell their wares. The market provides the very kind of community that gives lasting life to an urban area and removes the anonymity that destroys it.

The market needs its space to continue to flourish. If the film school cannot be easily accessible for its students, then isn’t that the problem of the private school to solve, not one for the public community to accommodate?

Shana Weiss

Los Angeles

Healthcare and freedom

Re “Key healthcare provision voided,” Dec. 14

For those who think being required to buy health insurance infringes on personal freedom, what about the imposition on my freedom as a doctor by uninsured patients?

Federal law requires hospitals and doctors to treat all patients who show up to an emergency room needing care. In 20 years, I have never had an uninsured patient pay me for their care.

It’s fine to believe you have the right not to be insured. But then the healthcare system should have no obligation to treat the willfully uninsured when they need care. They can ease their pain and suffering by reading Ayn Rand.

Nayyer Ali, MD

Huntington Beach

Forcing consumers to buy something they may not want goes against everything this country stands for.

It is my hope that consumers truly understand the impact of the government telling us what we must purchase, like it or not. It reminds me of the old Russia in the 1960s.

Wait a minute — that was called socialism.

Steve Casey

Agoura Hills

It seems odd that Virginia’s attorney general thinks mandatory health insurance is unconstitutional when Virginia law requires that motor vehicles are covered by insurance or the owner must pay an uninsured motor vehicle fee of $500.

What’s the difference?

Clay Duke

Ventura

Same old story at DCFS

Re “County ousts child agency chief,” Dec. 14

Not much has changed in the Department of Children and Family Services during the more than 20 years since my late husband, Robert Chaffee, resigned “under pressure” as director in 1990.

Every few years yet another article appears in The Times about a director resigning or being removed. The Board of Supervisors invariably attempts to distance itself from responsibility for the agency’s problems with innocuous statements like that of Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who said, “The department needs to put child safety, transparency and effective administration first.”

The DCFS faces the same challenges as child protection agencies across the country. So long as we are unwilling to provide the resources that these agencies require, children will continue to be at risk.

Donna Chaffee

Los Angeles

I guess I don’t know what “ousts” means.

Read further: DCFS chief Patricia Ploehn “will be reassigned to a position in [county Chief Executive William T. Fujioka’s] office handling administrative tasks unrelated to child welfare, and it was unclear if she would retain her $260,000 annual compensation package.”

Trudy Sibley

Northridge

Fatal shooting in Long Beach

Re “Man killed by police held nozzle,” Dec. 14

To all those who will be condemning the Long Beach Police Department officers for shooting an “unarmed” man, I would just like to say the following: If you have something in your hand that even remotely resembles a gun and you point that object at officers, you certainly run the risk of being shot.

For those who claim the police didn’t identify themselves or first order him to drop the gun, you’ve been watching too much TV.

What happened was truly unfortunate, but don’t make the cops the bad guys.

Jack Berkus

Dana Point

It is absolutely incomprehensible that police departments seem to have not learned to “shoot to disable” rather than “shoot to kill.”

If I or any regular civilian shot another person under the same circumstances, we could be excused because we don’t have years of training. But how do you excuse law enforcement officers from shooting and killing people who they thought “posed a threat”? Does anyone remember Eula Love?

Either change the training these guys get or make them pay for their act. Ordinary civilians should not be treated as if they live in a police state.

Daisy Matthews

Los Angeles

On Vernon’s case

Re “Reining in Vernon,” Editorial, Dec. 13

The longstanding joke is that Vernon is a corporation disguised as a city.

If Vernon’s leadership were only hurting its residents and businesses, then The Times’ conclusion that the Legislature was overreaching with a bill to unincorporate it might be on target. But Vernon takes advantage of municipal subsidies that cost every California taxpayer in some way:

- Tax-free municipal bonds to fund Vernon’s projects.

- Inclusion of overpaid Vernon administrators in the state’s pension plan.

- Receiving state grants for infrastructure.

- Use of subsidized redevelopment funds.

Because we all pay for Vernon’s corruption, the state has a compelling interest to finally bring accountability to the city.

Hector De La Torre

South Gate

The writer is a former Democratic Assemblyman.

Baby steps

Re “Who will pay for baby?” Dec. 12

The headline speaks volumes about how some Americans selfishly contribute to the demise of this great country.

Joanna Joshua said, describing health insurance with maternity benefits, “There need to be more choices.” Other choices include adoption or delaying or deciding against pregnancy.

Susan Phillip, director of the California Health Benefits Review Program, said, “Most people don’t realize that if you have insurance, you may not be covered for something as basic as being pregnant.” This propagates the victim mentality that people are too stupid to realize what they have purchased or that insurance companies are shortchanging consumers.

Common sense says if you can’t afford the cost of having a baby, then it’s not a smart financial decision to raise a child. Common sense also says to look over every legal and financial obligation to ensure you know your rights and responsibilities.

Luke Brown

Culver City