This is in response to Jerry Gottschalk's unfavorable comments in last week's Culver City News about Scott Malsin's retiring and running again:
Gerry, I believe that as a retired teacher, you earned a pension and some health care benefits. You may be approaching the magic age of Medicare. You may not have young children living with you any more. Perhaps your house is paid off.
But surely you're aware of the skyrocketing costs of healthcare insurance that many families cannot afford.
Scott is a self-employed person and, to my knowledge, doesn't have a staff that can generate income for his business. The business is Scott. Scott also does significant pro bono work for the Culver City community, benefitting several charitable organizations.. I believe his wife is employed, but they also have a young child who needs some child care, probably a mortgage, etc.
I see that CCUSD superintendent Pat Jaffe resigned for similar reasons- to secure health care benefits. She was a professional employee. Scott wasn't even a Culver City employee; he was a volunteer with a small monthly stipend for expenses.
But Scott is willing to continue donating 25 hours a week or so to the public good by running again for City Council. To me, that seems meritorious, not tawdry. We benefit by having highly experienced people on the Council. You may not agree with every single decision Scott makes, but do you agree with everything your spouse says or does?
Your question should be: will Scott Malsin be a well-informed, intelligent councilmember, not whether it's somehow tainted to follow a path provided by the Council. Scott is not getting anything more than what previous council members were entitled to.
Bobbi Gold
Blair Hills
@
Reader Comments(0)