As the candidates for City Council seek the votes of residents of the Culver City community, they make representations and promises concerning what they believe in, what they will support, vote for, and for the positions they will take once elected. The residents of this community have the right to expect that these representations are made with sincerity, integrity, and a sense of honor and commitment. The community is entitled to believe that what the candidates say trying to get elected, is what they believe in and will vote for once elected. Integrity matters.
For that reason it was especially disturbing to hear Scott Malsin (the Council member who resigned last December amid months of drama about his lifelong benefits for himself and his family, only to immediately seek re-election to the City Council) address the residents who attended the Tellefson Park and Gateway Neighborhoods Candidates Forum on Thursday, March 1.
At that time he was asked a very specific question about the future of the Animal Services Program in Culver City. Mr. Malsin was asked whether he would vote to have the Culver City Animals Services Officer become a permanent full-time position and whether he would vote to make the spcaLA shelter the permanent Culver City shelter.
Mr. Malsin’s response was disturbing because it contradicted his prior public and written commitment to make this program a permanent service in Culver City. This is a straight forward issue, one that has been put to Mr. Malsin and the other candidates during this election cycle in public forums on several occasions.
At this forum (and at the Culver City Senior Center Forum earlier in the day), Mr. Malsin now added caveats and conditions to his support for this program. Unlike the other unconditionally supportive candidates, Mr. Malsin backtracked with his“Yes, but” reply that clearly conveyed that he did not truly support the Animal Services Program. (Mr. Malsin had voted against Culver City having its own Animal Services Officer in the past.)
Scott Malsin has the right to take any position he likes. However, once he has committed to positions publicly, citizens expect him to keep his word. It is dishonorable to later change a stated position so materially as to make the original position misleading and deceitful.
Yes, integrity matters, Mr. Malsin. That is something that the other candidates possess. All of the candidates need to keep in mind as they seek re-election, or seek other office, that they carry with them whatever reputation for integrity and honor they have earned, or forfeited.
