Email
PrintBrown’s rental foreclosure fallout
Editor, Index-Tribune:
Press Democrat reporter Derek Moore’s Dec. 10 article about the foreclosure and eviction of Sonoma Councilman Ken Brown’s family, bizarrely blames the victim.
Seeking sensationalism rather than clarity, Moore throws around unfounded insinuations like a monkey in a zoo cage.
Like hundreds of thousands of California renters unnecessarily losing their homes, Mr. Brown’s landlord, not Mr. Brown himself, was foreclosed upon. The out-of-state mortgage holder, clueless like most lenders concerning their impact on families, sought to regain the property, and never asked for rent, or offered to refund tenant deposits.
Mr. Brown is in full compliance with all California laws; he has come to a formal legal settlement in court resolving all financial issues, and has found a new home.
An article focusing on the impact of the foreclosure crisis on Sonoma County’s lower-income renter population would have been appropriate, with a discussion of long overdue “just cause” eviction legislation ensuing.
Instead, we got a report on Ken’s hair length. Moore’s rant was a third-rate hack job. Can the PD just go back to ignoring Sonoma like before?
David Brigode
Sonoma
Please note: Your full name will be published with your comment.
Dear David Bolling,
I am disappointed in your lack of objectivity regarding Ken Brown. Your article in Tuesday's paper (on the front page, not the editorial page) was inappropriate. You, as I, don't know all the facts. Perhaps the PD article will prove to be specious, but your role as reporter requires that you leave opinion out of your reportage. Had your article been on the editorial page, I would still have regarded it as overly sympathetic to a man who has often demonstrated flirtatiousness with ethical issues, but as a front page white wash of a local leader it is beneath you and your role as editor of our local paper.
Sincerely,
Susan Goldstein