A Statement About A Threat By A Marymount Representative.

The following is on the Agenda of the Closed Session of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council to be held on Tuesday April 6, 2010.

"Potential Litigation:
G.C. 54956.9(b)

A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Council on the advice of its legal counsel, based on the below-described facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City:

Based on a threat of litigation made by Marymount College Attorney Don Davis at the March 30, 2010 City Council Meeting.

Number of Potential Cases (1)"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now for the life of me, I thought the folks at Marymount considered themselves to be great neighbors and large contributors to our city.

Now come to find out, our City Council has made a judgement that, according to the City Attorney, Marymount's legal counsel may create litigation against our city. And by 'our city' I mean our residents and our government and our taxpayers and our city's funds.

It certainly sounds to me like Marymount's administration and supporters are not very good neighbors after all, are they?

Of course everyone associated with Marymount wants at least 5,000 registered voters living in Rancho Palos Verdes to sign the petition to qualify a measure that seeks to change basically just one thing on a project that has already seen the necessary preliminary votes of approval by our City Council.

Perhaps and hopefully, our residents will take a look at the threat of lawsuits and discover that Marymount doesn't deserve even the minimum number of signatures required to qualify their initiative on the November ballot.

Marymount's attorney threatens to sue out of one side of his mouth while out of the other side of his mouth comes pleas to sign the petition. What part of "NO" might Mr. Davis not understand?

The shamefulness of Dr. Brophy and supporters of the initiative looks like it is growing every day. He still won't state that Marymount must have on-campus housing for the College to remain open and I hope you all notice that he never denies it, either.

Really, are our residents not allowed to know the whole truth behind Marymount supporters' attempt to secure on-campus residence halls?

I continue to wonder that what Marymount is doing would be more understandable if a secular college attempted to do what Marymount's administration is attempting.

Oh well, I guess trust in religious institutions continues to come under fire so why should I think Marymount is any different or any better.

But heck folks, they really should be.

Please do not sign the petition.