Culver City Observer -

Dear Editor,

My parents always taught me that when you’re angry about something, you have to take a step back, sleep on it, and decide if you are still angry enough to say what you wanted to say. It’s something I have followed all my life and it’s why I have waited to write about my thoughts and feelings regarding the June 25th City Council meeting. I have read the comments on Facebook, talked to some friends about what happened, and I am finally at the point where I am no longer angry, but I am disappointed.

Maybe my expectations for City Council Members are too high, but I have always felt that the City Council’s job is to represent the entirety of the City and to be so plainly told at the June 25th council meeting that anyone who disagrees with the new Council will just be ignored is disheartening for a multitude of reasons, but mostly because when we lose the ability to have a healthy debate, we lose the ability to learn both sides of an issue and further our own understanding.

Ms. Sahli-Wells said that she couldn’t support Mr. Eriksson being Mayor because he didn’t support the SB 54 vote on February 27, 2017. So, I talked to Mr. Eriksson and watched the video from that night to find out why and his answer was simple. He didn’t feel this was a Culver City issue and the SB 54 language nor the police impact were clear. Furthermore, Mr. Erickson’s statements at the February 27, 2017 meeting were about his path to citizenship as someone who immigrated legally, the questions about what may or may not change with SB 54, and what effect this bill and any changes to its language may have on our police. People really need to remember that this bill was not passed until September of 2017. At the time that this vote took place, there was still a lot that could have changed and Mr. Eriksson along with Former Mayor Cooper, felt that there was too much left unknown at that time. Even Mr. Small had commented saying that he wished there was more information at the time of the vote. But ultimately, I am left with this question, if the vote to support SB 54 was so important to Ms. Sahli-Wells and Mr. Small, why would they have voted to elect Mr. Cooper to be Mayor? Why was it okay for him, but not for Mr. Eriksson? Obviously, this is a personal and manipulative move that didn’t actually have anything to do with the SB 54 vote.

Not only that, but to hear Ms. Sahli-Wells comments at the council meeting on June 25th, she really makes it seem like our police department is filled with racists who are going around deporting people for sport, which couldn’t be further from the truth. I went to the discussion regarding CCPD’s policy update to reflect the City’s Sanctuary City Policy and here’s what I found out; No one has been deported or been detained by CCPD for immigration issues. Not one. We are so blessed to have such a well-educated and diverse police department, but people seem to forget that ALL. THE. TIME. The men and women of our police department deserve a lot more credit and respect from our City Council and I for one am glad that Mr. Eriksson takes time to understand their issues and makes them a priority.

So, here’s my question, can we please get back to city matters? The City Council’s first priority should be OUR CITY. Crazy, I know. Let’s focus on our city and its preservation, let’s support our Police and Fire Departments, let’s work on making sure our city is both business and family friendly, let’s work with and support our Chamber of Commerce, and let’s make sure all voices are heard and considered, rather than just listening to an echo chamber. Is that too much to ask?

Heather Goodrich

Culver City

Editor’s Note: Ms. Goodrich’s letter was more than double our recommended limit of 300 words. In editing the letter down some of the thoughts of hers were not correctly communicated. We are reprinting her letter in it’s entirety as a correction and clarification. The Culver City Observer regrets the confusion.