Advertisement

Looking for an Answer

September 07, 1986

With regard to the article in your Aug. 31 article titled "Nestande, Moriarty Aided Developer in Gettling Loan": I couldn't help but chuckle when I read that the article made Supervisor Harriett Wieder chuckle.

The entire story was on the subject of a member of the Orange County Board of Supervisors, Bruce Nestande, having written a letter to a bank encouraging a loan to a real estate investor on a project awaiting approval by the supervisors.

The article dealt with possible conflict of interest: Should a member of the board who would vote to approve a project also be encouraging a bank to make a loan based upon an assured approval of the project?

I love the way some in political positions respond to questions without responding to the question. Harriett Wieder said she thinks that it is a unique situation and wondered whether a bank should rely on such a letter to make a loan, noting that that kind of letter is not collateral. She went on and on about what a bank should accept to make a loan, never once commenting on the question--writing letters on behalf of a developer who has a project pending before the board. Her summation was that if the bank approved the loan based on such a letter, "it would be stupid."

Talk about skirting an issue. It's blatantly obvious that Wieder didn't want to answer a question about her cohort, so she chose, instead, to verbalize on the practices of banking institutions and how they should make loans.

A political response--yes. A response to the question--no.

But then, that's what so characterizes many in public office today.

DONNA IMRIE

Huntington Beach

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|