Culver City Observer -

I am not voting for Scott Malsin because I don’t condone his lack of action. Millions of people a year see his inaction from the 405.

The Design for Development (Amended May 2009) pertaining to Advertising Content of the Westfield Culver Billboards said, "Signs will be used exclusively to advertise the business conducted or service rendered or goods produced or sold upon the property upon which the sign(s) is placed.

A sign which advertises a brand name, trade name, product or service only incidental to the businesses or services conducted or operating at the Mall shall not be permitted. Goods, products or services are incidental if they do not make up a significant portion of the business”.

1) How does Scott Malsin justify billboards that do not advertise the business conducted or service rendered or goods produced or sold upon the property?

2) How do the 3 TV shows currently advertised meet the Design for Development? How do movie ads?

3) Does Scott Malsin justify the blatant violation because the former Redevelopment Agency receives money and a potently cut of the advertising revenue?

He said at the 3/1/2012 Gateway Candidate Forum, "I'm really proud of the signs…", "they weren't my idea…", "they were proposed to us…" "When I talked with them(Westfield) about those signs I said, I can't imagine supporting them, unless you split the profit with us, us, here, us taxpayers in the City of Culver City.'

From the 05/11/2009 RDA Agenda, "The sole purpose of the additional sign area is to enhance revenues for the freeway oriented mall signs which will be shared between Westfield and the Agency. Westfield indicates that the increased signage is justified because that was the sign area upon which their original sign revenue projections were based."

Pursuant to the OPA, the Agency receives a guaranteed base payment of $225,000 and an additional payment in an amount equal to 50% of the gross sign revenue received by Westfield during each calendar year. The additional payment occurs after Westfield receives a base payment of $2.2 million in revenue per calendar year. Additional sign revenue could increase revenue sharing to the Agency.

So this is how Scott Malsin justifies billboards that do NOT advertise the business conducted or service rendered or goods produced or sold upon the property!

He is allowing the blatant violation for us taxpayers.

Sinning by silence. It’s not smart, it’s not brave… it’s just cowardly.

Cary Anderson

Culver City Homeowner for 25 years