It sounds like relations with your brother aren't so great, either, or else he has a bad conscience about his wife's behavior. For the sake of family peace, I'd be tactful, but I'd be clear and firm: express a willingness to share cuttings and explain how to get them to root, but make it clear that your sister-in-law is not to take cuttings without your permission, so that she doesn't damage rare and vulnerable plants. It might help if you explain that these roses didn't come for the nearest big box store, as lagomorphmom said. If you can work in an implication that she'll have a better garden in the long run if she has you as a friend and gardening ally rather than as an enemy, so much the better, but unfortunately a lot of people don't understand this line of reasoning. Good luck!! Melissa

Hi, Another question about split face backsplash tile. Do you start putting up the tile in the center of the wall and working out to the edges like some people do with normal tile? I also heard it is sometimes hard to get this tile to fit just right, are there any tricks or suggestions. Please if anyone can help with this type it looks very intimidating.

Lily, I think you could lose the wonderful aesthetic of your spit tile back splash in an attempt to grout it in a conventional manner using a regular float. IÂm aware that Bill universally recommends grouting and occasionally sites the DYI author, Michael Byrne, whoÂs almost "militant" on the subject. Bill has nearly cult leader status on this forum (donÂt even have to say Vincent!) so it is with risk of retribution that I make these comments. I think the argument is that an ungrouted back splash can become a breeding ground for e-coli and salmonella. Anyone with real concern about this speculation should seriously consider not having an undermount sink in their kitchen. That joint between the counter top and sink, with its constant exposure to food by-products and moisture, has the potential to be a little bacteria factory. BillÂs advice is wide reaching and has been greatly appreciated by many forum participants. So IÂm reluctant to disagree and say that I wouldnÂt grout your tileÂbut I wouldnÂt.

Jakkam said, "It should be noted that Lindsay's experience with CA state pensions is only relevant between her employer and her specific union. Different unions/employer agencies negotiate contracts that are usually similar, but NOT identical." Gee, my very first comment was, "In California State Service, the terms of the retirement pension can vary according to which bargaining unit covers your position, when you were hired, and what "Tier" you are in." (emphasis added) Did you somehow miss that? Jak went on to say, "Union workers should be aware that at least in CA, CalPERS does not fund any health benefits. All retiree healthcare is funded directly by the agency involved. If your employer has not bothered to set up a separate funding for retiree healthcare, you should contact your union rep and make this an issue - a BIG issue." Incorrect, or at the very least, incomplete. The funds for State employee and CSU employee retiree health care benefits come from the State's General Fund, as allocated by the Governor's Budget each year. Perhaps you are thinking of other public agencies such as city and county government agencies and School employees. In fact, the CalPERS site for Health Plans & Rates for retirees says on the link for Public Agency and School Retirees, "Contributions vary by employer. Contact your employer's personnel office to find out how much they contribute toward your health premium." Click on the link for State & CSU Retirees and you will see the following: "The state employer contribution amounts for 2017 are: "One-Party: $707 "Two-Party: $1,349 "Family: $1,727 " The only difference in the amount that State retirees receive towards their health insurance costs is governed by the length of time of their service. Different "hired by" dates have different vesting requirements to receive the full amount of the State's contribution: (1) If you were hired before January 1, 1985, you are entitled to 100% of the State's contribution; (2) If you were hired between January 1, 1985, and January 1, 1989, there is a 10-year vesting requirement. If you have 10 years of service when you retire, you will receive 100% of the State's health care contribution. For less than 10 years of service, the State's contribution is reduced by approximately 10% for each year of service less than the required 10; and (3) If you were hired after January 1, 1989, the length of time of your service determines what percentage you will receive of the State's contribution. Less than 10 years, you get 0%; at 10 years, you will receive 50%; with 11-19 years of service you will receive 50% of the State's contribution plus an additional 5% for each year over 10 years. If you have at least 20 years of service when you retire, you will receive 100% of the State's contribution. Four (4) bargaining units (6, 9. 10, and 12) now have a 25-year vesting requirement, with different hire dates. My husband and I both had well over the required number of years of service when we retired, so we do receive the full benefit. The amount is more than enough to cover our Medicare Plan B premiums, Medicare Plan B IRMAA premiums, and our PERSCare Blue Cross PPO Medicare Supplement Plan premiums. There is more than enough left over to also cover the cost of our Medicare Plan D IRMAA premiums (our Medicare Plan D is included in the PERSCare Medicare Supplement Plan), but California law does not provide for the reimbursement of Medicare Plan D IRMAA premiums. But the $26.60 per month is the only health care cost we have.