[img]1307|left|Meghan Sahli-Wells||no_popup[/img]At the kickoff reception Sunday afternoon for her second bid for the City Council, Meghan Sahli-Wells, sounding more like an incumbent than an outside bidder, typically stood her ground, staunchly, when asked about the recent ruling abolishing Redevelopment Agencies.
Never one to flow with the majority because of a popular viewpoint, Ms. Sahli-Wells said she realizes redevelopment is “sacred” in Culver City — but so are competing priorities, namely school funding and low-income housing, she contends.
Speaking while standing near the picture window of the hosting Gregg Fleishman Studio, Ms. Sahli-Wells was afforded a front-row seat on how dramatically the Redevelopment Agency has transformed a now-swirling Downtown that used to be compared, unfavorably, to a cemetery at midnight.
“There is no doubt redevelopment has done a lot for Culver City, especially in the arts, less in affordable housing,” she said at her noisy, packed reception. “There have been investigations (into the under-representation in building low-income housing). We really have been behind on our obligations. This is something Culver City should have done better on.
“My point is, redevelopment overall has been very positive. However, it has not been perfect. I think has been proven.”
A Question of Support
Would Ms. Sahli-Wells support a reported resurrection of scaled-down Redevelopment Agencies?
“Not at the expense of our schools,” she said, alluding to one of her principal passions. “In tough financial times, you have to make choices. And education has to be one of your top priorities.
“Development is great when it is done well. It is not always done well. When it is a choice between the future and well-being of our entire state — it is not just that our children are cute and we love them. They are our future,” said the mother of two young sons. “They are our future workers. They will be paying our benefits later on, our Social Security. We need for them to be smart and productive and healthy.
“If it is a choice between (funding) schools or these developments, you have to choose schools.
“I know that in Culver City, redevelopment is sacred,” said the community’s best-known bicyclist. “I remember a couple of City Council meetings last year, at special sessions. The Council members were trying to squirrel away our money for redevelopment. I understand that. But they were doing a lot of Sacramento-bashing at the same time because we love redevelopment.
“From my personal experience, I am not missing the part that we are in this gallery because it is part of redevelopment.
“I am not saying it is terrible or that it has been unsuccessful.
“In my experience, I have fought 4043 Irving Pl., (a still-unbuilt, smaller-than-planned redevelopment project just off Downtown). This is what made me politically active in Culver City.
“Forty, forty-three was a controversial, not well-thought-out project, (to be built) on public land with redevelopment money. It was not something neighbors wanted to see.
“I am not talking Nimby. I am not talking ‘oh, we don’t want this building.’ I am talking lead in the soil and no mitigation.
“When you think that public land and public money are going into projects like that, sorry, no, that wouldn’t be my first choice,” Ms. Sahli-Wells said.
(To be continued)
Ms. Sahli-Wells may be contacted at http://meghanshaliwells.com
