Isn't Ramani running for office to be a legislator, a person that makes the rules under which we all must live? It seems that it doesn't matter whether one who holds the public trust should break the rules just because the same person is a charitable sort.
As a Republican, I want a representative who has integrity, honesty, fortitude and a respect for the law. Making excuses that Ramani will move into the district after he gets elected is laughable, and anyone that believes it is naïve.
Moreover, the rules don't prescribe post-election residency. It's just another way of making an excuse for breaking the rules.
If Ramani is elected, how many more excuses will we hear when he breaks a rule?
He wonders who videographer was working for
In the furor about whether Peter Musurlian's activities as a guerilla videographer transcend his First Amendment rights as a claimed "journalist" outside of his job with the city of Burbank ("Videographer was rightfully ejected," July 28); and whether this is a case of stalking and harassment of various individuals, we are losing sight of one critical question.
What third parties are supporting or instigating these actions? Is there prior employment in the history of Musurlian that shows him to be a partisan of the opposing political party that promotes his seeming vitriol?
A camera can be intimidating, as has been shown by guerilla actions by campaign operatives and Fox News wannabes. One's personal space should be respected and a fair distance should be considered for honest, true public discourse to be promoted.