The era of 16 to 30 bathrooms; L.A. Unified’s ban on blindfolds; pension ‘spiking’ in California

A lot of Charmin

Re “Royal flushes,” March 3, and “They made it a family affair,” Column, March 3

I can’t be the only one to have contrasted the values of the families described in the front-page story — who have 16 to 30 bathrooms in their estates — with the couple in the article on Page 2 who, in addition to their own children, adopted six foster children, most with special needs.

I wonder how many bathrooms they have?

Deanna Williams

Monterey Park

This article certainly provides a lot of material for remarks and jokes by those with only two, much less one, throne in their homes.

But it gives us all something to work and strive for, 3, 4 ... 8, 9?

Only in America!

Bob Scofield

Fallbrook

So former Dodger Adrian Beltre’s wife Sandra says that they use all 16 of the bathrooms in their 16,600-square-foot house.

One would think that she should be a political consultant for Mitt Romney and teach him how to identify with the average American.

That kind of comment and attitude is right up there with Romney’s remark about how his wife drives “a couple of Cadillacs.”

Matthew D. Kerster

Gardena

There are so many more vital stories to be told; why did this make the front page?

A more interesting story would have been to highlight the staff that is responsible for cleaning the 16 to 30 bathrooms regularly — and gather their thoughts on their self-absorbed employers.

Jeanette Neumann

Long Beach

Don’t blame the blindfolds

Re “L.A. bans blindfolds in school curriculum,” March 3

So it was the blindfolds that caused the problems at Miramonte Elementary School?

I am relieved that it was not the teacher nor the inadequate supervision of the teacher.

In my view, banning blindfolds in the school curriculum is little short of ridiculous. What educational value is there in such a ban? A temporary reduction in the ability to use one sense — vision or hearing, for example — can indeed be a useful educational tool.

Having children temporarily spend time in a wheelchair or wearing headphones can give them a far greater understanding of peers who may have hearing, vision or mobility impairments.

Would we ban talking or writing if a teacher used obscene words?

Come on, L.A. Unified. Surely it is time to focus on the real problem.

In this case, it does appear that the problem was not the blindfold.

Brian Richardson

Pacific Palisades

The problem is not the teachers; the problem is the supervisors who have abrogated their responsibilities by staying out of the classrooms where they should be. In my teaching role, I was visited only sporadically, if at all, by the principal or assistant principal.

Over the years, I was dismayed to see so many colleagues content with a situation that I believe has led to today’s climate of tarnishing every teacher with the brush of scandal because of a couple of perverts who locked the door and knew no one would ever bother them.

How effective can supervision be if a principal shows up at an appointed time to “observe” a lesson?

Classrooms need to be open, and teachers need to know that someone may show up at any time. If they are doing their jobs, they have nothing to worry about.

Let’s stop bashing teachers and stop criminalizing all because of the actions of a few. Let’s stop shuffling bad principals from school to school, like the Roman Catholic Church did with pedophile priests.

Instead, fire them once and for all.

Terry Snyder

Los Angeles

Inspiring story of teaching

Re “Lessons of gifted teachers,” Column, March 4

Steve Lopez’s piece was such a pleasure to read and a testament to those who work hard to be good teachers.

Let’s spread the good news that there are excellent teachers out there, such as Harry and Patrick Gordon.

Thanks to Lopez, the Gordons’ story was told. It shows that there is no more important legacy than a dedicated teacher who reaches out to students and guides and inspires them.

Audrey Hauth

Seal Beach

Pension reform needed, now

Re “‘Spiking’ drains pension coffers,” March 3

Quite obviously, those manipulating the public employee retirement system in California are those in whom the public has invested the most trust.

As a resident of Ventura County, where many individuals have lost jobs and are now facing the reality of poverty in old age, I was simply appalled to learn that Chief Executive Marty Robinson arranged to pay herself about $44,000 in retirement benefits on top of her on-the-job pay of $228,000.

What is badly needed in California and in the nation generally is an outbreak of public responsibility, fiscal ethics and good citizenship.

The fact that 20 counties in California do not participate in CalPERS, the public employee retirement system, and thus were not covered by salary reforms is shocking.

It seems to me that the system of loopholes for “spiking” pensions was left in place in some counties by those planning to sweeten their own compensation at retirement.

Is there no way to prosecute for fiscal irresponsibility?

Gloria J. Richards

Simi Valley

How does one explain the absurdity of letting accrued benefits, including unused vacation time, be rolled over into a higher pension instead of being paid off or simply forfeited, as routinely happens in the private sector?

The public simply has no meaningful voice in the setting of pay and benefits for public employees — and this has to stop.

A good place to begin is to somehow invalidate the principle that, once granted, any improvement in conditions for public workers is irrevocable.

This certainly doesn’t exist in the private sector, where “givebacks” are routinely negotiated

between unions and management as conditions change.

William Bradshaw

San Diego

I agree there’s a serious problem when the pension is larger than the salary during an employee’s working years, even if some are bound by contracts and thereby legitimate.

But where’s the hue and cry over chief executives who receive huge “golden parachute” deals when they stop working?

Someone’s forking over the money to pay for them — either stockholders or the public, in the form of higher prices to purchase the goods produced.

I can’t even hear a pin drop.

Anita C. Singer

Laguna Woods

Although the headline says “county workers” are draining pension coffers, the story acknowledges that “the vast majority of county employees retire “ on an average of just $32,580 a year after 30 years of service.

In fact, it seems that upper-level managers are the ones who enjoy such spiking, not average county workers. The examples given for Ventura and Kern counties suggest that some of the executives would qualify for the “1%” club.

If executives are overpaid and retire with extravagant pensions, that is a good story and worth publishing. For the headline to make it seem that the average workers in county government are guilty of such practices is misleading.

Dave Middleton

Rancho Mirage