"Making sure the college remains a vital city asset is at the heart of the Marymount Plan. We appreciate the deep support the people of Rancho Palos Verdes." (Oops! It looks like we found our first problem on the inside of the cover. Now back to the writing.) "The modernization of Marymount will be achieved at no taxpayer expense and will benefit everyone. After ten years of study and refinement, the Marymount Plan is ready to move forward."
Now let me think for a moment. O.K., I have now considered that a brochure from an institution of higher learning which recently was granted four-year status could have found at least one individual who could have done a better edit.
It's just more fodder.
It appears also that the modernization of Marymount can't take place until the petition drive is successful, so even the costs associated with the brochure, petition drive and voting, if the measure qualifies, can also be considered part of their plan.
Please look for the post below and consider whether Marymount should be required to fund the potential and literal voting of any measure relating to Marymoun't plan on this November's ballot.
"New parking facilities to take students and faculty parking off residential streets"
That's the first bullet under "The Marymount Plan consists of:"
Now since it has been shown, for so many of the past ten years, that students and faculty choose to park on residential streets rather than using available parking spaces already at the campus, why should we believe that practice would change?
Also it is worth repeating that Marymount's Plan continues to call for fewer parking spaces that the minimum number of parking spaces mandated in the municipal code of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes.
"New on-campus housing for students and adult supervisors that will reduce traffic"
Well, according to the Environmental Impact Report, traffic will actually increase and it will be traffic up to 24 hours a day, seven days a week, something not seen at Marymount College in the last ten years.
How many residents of Rancho Palos Verdes have ever been on the campus of Marymount College? What programs has the administration of the college announced would be included for residents of Rancho Palos Verdes that would be more beneficial that what is already provided?
"Marymount will not increase its enrollment cap of 793" Oh really?
Marymount called for on-campus housing before it voluntarily removed them from consideration, before they called for it again, with a ballot measure.
So, if the Marymount Plan ultimately comes to fruition, how would the all the work and new facilities be paid for? Would tuition for the up to 793 students rise to become too expensive to pay or will the administration soon claim that they can't pay for the plan without support from a higher student total?
What have we all heard throughout the years concerning things that seem too good to be true?
If you don't know already, apparently neither do the folks who produced the brochure.
I also think one copy of the brochure to each residence would have been enough. Not only did I get mailed a brochure, so did Terri. How much might Marymount's supporters be paying for sending brochures to all registered voters instead of one per household?
If they are willing to spend these types of monies, what might that also say about their fiscal responsibility?
I happen to believe that having traffic 24 hours a day, seven days a week, on mornings and evenings where fog is a problem, and driving being done by younger students who are not as necessarily familiar with driving in the L.A. area, is a safety problem.
I would also like to see proof that every single one of the students who drives to and from the campus, every single faculty and staff member who drive to and from the campus, park in the campus' parking lots for a period of time to prove that they won't voluntarily park on public streets.
I never again wish to read about the tragedy that occurred when a Marymount student lost his life by being drunk and driving near the campus. That must NEVER happen again!
Having students living on the campus increases the chances that what must never happen again, will happen again.
If Marymount's supporters are spending so much money to get approximately 2,700 to sign the qualifying petition, how much will they spend on trying to get a bad measure passed if it qualifies for the November ballot?
The bottom line is that Marymount must have dorms on its campus to survive. With that and not other issues revolving around the quality of education the college actually offers, perhaps it should be allowed to fail again and begin anew in another location.
Please do not sign the petition.
No comments:
Post a Comment