O’Leary, Weissman, Weigh in on Malsin’s Resignation

Speaking with Patch in separate telephone conversations on Tuesday, both Mayor Micheal O’Leary and Councilmember Andrew Weissman agreed that did not come as a surprise.

“Obviously this was somewhat expected,” O’Leary said. “Throughout the [six month] negotiation process over benefits, he made it quite clear he was upset [with the discussions regarding future benefits for council members].”

“It wasn’t a surprise at all,” Weissman concurred. “Scott has been more than just hinting at this; he was considering this for some time and it made sense this would happen last night at the final council meeting for 2012.”

Yet while both Weissman and O’Leary agreed that Malsin had to make the decision that was best for him and his family, O’Leary said he definitely had concerns with the way Malsin handled the entire situation by writing to newspapers and allowing the whole issue to play out in the media.

O’Leary said the council had initially discussed the idea that Malsin not be involved in the contract negotiations because his mind was clearly made up about what he wanted to see retained.

“I was very uncomfortable with a colleague of mine suggesting that we’re wrong and he’s right – whereas the intent seemed to be protect his own interests,” O’Leary said. “That’s not what I expect from fellow council members.”

Weissman, however, said not everyone on the council was in the same position as Malsin and that needed to be taken into account.

“The council embarked on this negotiation strategy to put the city on a more solid financial footing with regard to pension and health benefits,” Weissman said. “The decisions that were ultimately made and the contracts that were ratified directly affected Scott who was already vested in the health benefits system.”

Weissman pointed out that one of the strange things about the whole issue was the fact that elected officials in Culver City are considered employees when it comes to services and benefits.

One of the issues now facing the council is whether Malsin intends to run again for a seat on the council in the upcoming April 10, 2012 elections.

“I’m really disappointed with how [Malsin] played his hand,” O’Leary said bluntly. “I believe that if I’m going to make a decision to step down it would be free of any other pressures; it would be a final decision and there would be no attachments to it.”

He added he did not understand how Malsin could resign and believe that “the trust will be there,” if he chooses to run again in 2012. “It just seems disingenuous to me,” he said.

Weissman said he did not think Malsin’s decision on whether or not to run again reflects on the council as a whole.

“It’s one individual’s decision,” he said. “I think it’s going to be a topic of conversation for a while if he runs again, and it’s something that is going to be subject to a lot of comments and questions, but it’s going to be up to him to explain the rationale and justification for his decisions, and it’s then up to the public to judge if they believe it’s appropriate.”

However, O’Leary said he felt that Malsin’s actions have “left a little bit of a bad taste,” [with the council]. “I think he has an opportunity between now and Election Day to rectify that. He’s not bound by the Brown Act now and he could come and talk to each of us [councilmembers] individually just to clarify his position.”

O’Leary said he would still like to have an open conversation with Malsin about the contract negotiations and his true feelings and intent going forward.

Nonetheless, O’Leary said he could easily work with Malsin again if he runs for the council in 2012 and is re-elected.

“I believe we can get past this,” he said. “It’s not my job to hold personal grudges against anyone.”

In the meantime, both Weissman and O’Leary said while the council will be one member short until after the April elections, they are confident it will still be able to function effectively.

“The fact is that we’ve now got an even number [of council members] and there is the possibility of a deadlock. That’s something we’ll have to deal with if and when it comes up,” Weissman said.

However, he noted that the council has a history of being fairly united and frequently voting unanimously on issues and he said he was confident the council would be able to deal with any potential split votes.

“I don’t recall the last time we had a split decision,” O’Leary said. “I have confidence we will be able to overcome the shortage of a fifth vote and I think we’re intelligent enough to know we’ll need to work through something if there is a split decision.”

Councilmember Jeffrey Cooper sent Patch an email regarding Malsin’s resignation stating the following:

“I have enjoyed serving with Councilmember Malsin on the City Council. His knowledge and keen insight on a myriad of issues will be missed. He has made a difficult decision to protect his health benefits for his family and I am respectful of his choice.”

Outgoing Councilmember Christopher Armenta did not return requests from Patch to comment.

Be sure to like Culver City Patch on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.