Dear Editor,
I’ve lived in Culver City for almost 30 years and voted in every election. I’m a big fan of politics and I’m also a big sports fan. When the New Orleans Saints won the Super Bowl, three years after Hurricane Katrina, I was very happy for them and their city! But when I heard recently about how they won, when I heard about the “Bounty Plan” their coaches ran to reward their players for deliberately injuring opposing players and “taking them out,” I was very disillusioned by it. And I believe it will affect how fans now and in the future will view that victory.
As I read through all the letters to the editors of our local publications, I can’t shake the feeling that some of the current Culver City candidates are using that exact strategy. Rather than relying on their own experience, expertise, intelligence and strong positions on pertinent issues to win, they have resorted to a really unrelenting and very disappointing campaign of trying to take out one of their most competent opponents. I don’t believe in “bullet voting,” and I will be voting for more than one candidate next Tuesday, but my first and foremost vote will be for the one I consider the best candidate; Scott Malsin. I will also be voting for two other outstanding candidates: Andy Weisman and Mehaul O’Leary. All three have worked together extremely well in the past … I like to think of them as my “home team.”
Sincerely,
Monika Rogasch
Dear Editor – Vote for the Home Team
I’ve observed the Council race closely and agree with many that this election cycle has been a fairly negative one. It will all come to an end on Tuesday night.
I find it interesting that many think in “these difficult financial times” the City Council and staff should be more fiscally responsible. Shouldn’t we be fiscally responsible all the time?
No current or previous (part-time/term limited) Council member should be entitled to lifetime benefits of any kind. Had a Council member served the city for 30 years and made it a career such as a police officer, firefighter, street maintenance or sanitation worker, there would certainly be a case for a pension and lifetime health insurance. But it’s not the case and eight years is the maximum, unless of course they decide to sit one out and run again.
The honorable thing for Mr. Malsin (or any other Council member) would have been to state that he would seek re-election, but no matter where he finished he would only accept the two-year open seat that he vacated. Why would anyone feel they are entitled to exploit the system and potentially serve eight more years without sitting one out.