At about 5:00 PM yesterday afternoon, the Marymount folks sent a letter to the City Council and City Staff and the public which was part of a 197-page document detailing many changes in the Resolutions Marymount was seeking at tonight's meeting.
I will admit that most of the changes were very minor and just entailed wording to make the Resolutions even better.
But the way Marymount's Land Use Attorney Mr. Don Davis offered those changes and several others he was seeking approval for demonstrated again to me, there is still something afoot that I feel is not in the best interests of the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.
The Council unanimously agreed to postpone the final votes on the two Resolutions that are the basis for going forward with The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project or "The Project" as I will refer to it as for the rest of this post.
There were a few changes that Mr. Davis brought up that do need to be incorporated into the final Resolutions. There are other changes proposed by Marymount that seem to make it look to me like they are attempting to change some of the approvals already voted on by the Council.
One of the very interesting things Mr. Davis was trying to tell Council Members about is the Construction Time Frame.
The Council approved a "36 month" Construction period that we all know will be done within an eight year period of time.
Mr. Davis seemed to now be calling for a term longer than the "36 months" Marymount College claims they can construction the Expansion Project in their Marymount Plan, which I will refer to as "The Plan" during the remainder of this post.
Mr. Davis feels that certain pre-construction activities should not be counted as being part of the "36 month" period.
Mr. Davis also advised the Council that 'normal' building practices allow for up to four years to complete a Project the size of both The Project and The Plan.
This seems odd to me because I have read, heard, seen, and have been exposed to a large number of written, spoken, and televised representations that The Marymount Plan will take "36 months" to complete.
I think I was hearing from Mr. Davis that that statement might no longer be true and perhaps it never was.
The presentation of the 197-page document with an eight page letter offering many changes to the Resolution was drafted after (I hope) the Staff Report that offered the two Resolutions that were placed on the Consent Calendar for tonight's meeting, was made public just last Thursday.
The Staff Report with its 258-pages offered both Resolutions and their language along with statement of facts supporting each part of each Resolution.
Ms. Lois Karp, the leader of Concerned Citizens' Coalition/Marymount College (CCC/ME) was only given the document earlier this afternoon.
She stated during the Council Meeting that she hadn't been able to read it or have her group digest it and offer any changes they would like to see to it and the Resolutions.
The Council instructed Staff to work with Marymount and CCC/ME to find common ground and provide to the Council two Resolutions that are found to be the best written possible and most factually based according to the approvals reached by the Council at its March 31 meeting that ended at 12:35 AM April 1, 2010.
I also heard Mr. Davis state something as fact to the Council that believe is not factual and was not represented correctly by him to the Council. The matter regards the removal of Residence Halls from consideration by the Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission.
This was also basically repeated to me by Dr. Michael Brophy, Marymount's President during a chat we had after the Council postponed the vote.
If I am remembering correctly, both Mr. Davis and Dr. Brophy claimed that Marymount was forced to remove Residence Halls from consideration by The Planning Commission because The Planning Commission rejected Residence Halls from The Project and Dr. Brophy claimed that The Planning Commission would not go forward with further consideration about The Project unless Residence Halls were removed by Marymount.
As I remember it, Marymount chose to remove Residence Halls from consideration or a legal vote by The Planning Commission BEFORE The Commission members were required to make a motion and vote to approve or reject Residence Halls from The Project and the Application.
There was a straw vote by Planning Commission members that had no basis in fact or legally required that did show that the majority of Commission Members were inclined to vote NO on any motion that could have allowed or rejected Residence Halls on the campus of Marymount College.
The statements made that suggest Marymount was forced to remove Residence Halls from Planning Commission consideration before a formal vote on the matter is not what I observed, read, or know to be the fact as I attended every meeting of The Planning Commission that dealt with their approvals and votes dealing with The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project.
Dr. Brophy is absolutely correct when he stated to me that the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council can still vote to approve The Marymount Plan even after it votes on The Project.
This is one of the two options the City Council MUST consider if and when the City Attorney and/or City Clerk certify that the proposed initiative created by Dr. Susan Soldoff, a Marymount Trustee qualifies to be come a ballot measure.
Now here is something I agree with Dr. Brophy with.
When Dr. Soldoff or others were told, possibly by someone employed by the city of Rancho Palos Verdes or representing that city in some legal capacity that, to qualify the proposed initiative, "2,700" valid signatures collected from registered voters residing in Rancho Palos Verdes must be verified to represent 10% of registered voters in the city, a mistake occurred.
Since the proposed initiative was subsequently deemed to be required to be a "Special Election" 15% of the registered voters residing in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes must have their signatures verified on petitions to qualify the measure for the ballot.
15% of the registered voters is about 4,400 residents of R.P.V.
A petition gatherer stated to me that Marymount would submit "5,000" signatures. Marymount officials actually submitted 4,876 signatures for validation.
There are always signatures that get rejected from petitions for one reason or another and it is expected that some of the signatures collected on Marymount's petitions will be ruled invalid.
The problem as I see it is IF the number of verified signatures falls below the 4,400 signature level established quite late in the petition signature gathering process, I feel Marymount must have the right to have an extension provided to them to attempt to collect more signatures.
Naturally I continue to request that no one sign the petition.
However, if the initiative doesn't qualify because there are fewer than the about 4,400 signatures it needs AND someone employed by or representing the city of Rancho Palos Verdes made a mistake, I think Marymount should get an added number of days to attempt to collect valid signatures equal to the number of days between the time any error was committed and the date Marymount presented the signatures for verification.
I have quite a bit more about my conversation with Dr. Brophy dealing with taxpayer funds requiring that they be used for BOTH The Project and The Marymount Plan, but I will wait a day or two before I deal with that.
I will state that I asked Dr. Brophy directly if he has found anything in this blog that is not factual and he said "NO"! He did state and I agree that I do assert things, but so do he and others supporting The Marymount Plan.
I was also frustrated to see no 'regular' supporters of The Marymount Plan attending and thanking the City Council, Staff, and others who have worked for over TEN YEARS with Marymount and THEIR Application and THEIR Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project.
I think it say volumes about how neighborly Marymount truly isn't when after a decade of work and countless hours spent by employees of Rancho Palos Verdes, many elected officials withing the city, and the members of The Planning Commission, especially Mr. Jeffrey Lewis, the Chair of the Planning Commission during most of their studies, meetings, deliberations and votes concerning The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project which MARYMOUNT supported until just before the final voting by Planning Commission members.
Even though Mr. Davis and Dr. Brophy are in agreement with CCC/ME, myself, City Staff, and our City Council that it is time for a final vote on The Project, nobody from that College bothered to really acknowledge the hard work, excessive time, and all the efforts made by everyone associated with the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, except for some kind comments from Mr. Don Davis.
This lack of thanks, recognition of the hard work done by so many for the benefit of Marymount College, and the appreciation I feel is owed to many, many people by everyone associated and supportive of Marymount College. strongly suggests to me that no matter what the Council votes on, The Project will not see one shovel turned or a new Library built. Yes, this is my assertion.
Without stating as much, Dr. Brophy and Mr. Davis, in my opinion, have once again signalled that it has always been and will always be about Residence Halls and everything else is nowhere near as important.
If that were not the case, I think Marymount would have offered more appreciation towards The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project which THEY applied for, THEY worked for over 9 years on, and THEY now want to make moot and have The Marymount Plan voted in that will just add Residence Halls but not the center median barrier approved with The Project.
When I spoke to Dr. Brophy about that, he did not and could not claim otherwise.
No comments:
Post a Comment