I want to start off by commending both Marvin Rinnig and Paul Koretz. Without the former, this case would likely not have been solved. Without the latter, there would have been less media coverage and, thus, less chance to get Mr. Rinnig's attention.
All that said, I resent two of the implications put forth by the article/writer: The idea of Rinnig as a victim, and the argument that Koretz--and, by association, Los Angeles government as a whole--has any responsibility for the actions of a third party (i.e. the Zelmans).
Speaking of which, the Zelmans are the people--the ONLY people--who owe Zelman the $10,000. The article clearly states that Los Angeles government paid Zelman the $25,000 it offered. That's resolved. I won't bother with name-calling or moralizing. The facts speak for themselves.
I will, however, repeat that Rinnig is NOT a victim. I do not feel sorry him, nor do I care that he "needs the money". We all need money. Millions of people in Los Angeles have rent to pay and/or property to pay. The more the writer keeps trying to position Rinnig as a victim--"my apartment is going to condo"; boo-freaking-hoo, ever consider moving?--the more I question the need for this story to even see print.
Here's the bottomline: The ONLY victim here is Benjamin Zelman, and the ONLY bad guy is Michael Goldman. And, as the article points out, Rinnig still has the option of suing the Zelmans for the money. (Afterall, despite just receiving that $25,000 from LA government, he still really, REALLY needs that extra $10K, right?)