A Meeting Without ...............Me

I guess it will be a bit of good news for Dr. Michael Brophy, the President of Marymount College when I miss the upcoming Rancho Palos Verdes City Council meeting where I expect the resolution creating the Resolution to oppose the Marymount Plan's initiative will have its wording completed and approved so voters can go to the polls on November 2, 2010 and vote "NO" on the measure in percentages much higher than 51%, I believe.

Terri won tickets to a touring company performance of the Broadway musical, "In the Heights" the 2008 Tony winner for a musical.

We attended a radio segment where four members of the cast performed on KOST between 8:00 and 8:30 AM and my clapping hands should have been heard on the radio.

The full performance will be this coming Tuesday beginning about an hour after the City Council meeting begins.

What I am sure many folks will do is get up and speak on the wording of the Resolution and why voters must turn back Marymount's attempts to gain power and authority over the representatives the voters of Rancho Palos Verdes chose to represent them by being members of the City Council.

Mayor Pro Tem Tom Long believes the issue is about land use and he is correct.

The land use part of The Marymount Plan seeks to set the College apart from the rest of the neighborhood and create a Specific Plan Zone that only Marymount needs to follow, over and above what other land owners in the area are allowed to do and also set Marymount apart from the low density residential properties to become a high density property.

The Marymount Plan, if approved, would also alter the city's General Plan because building residence halls on the Palos Verdes Drive East campus would violate the General Plan in place. That play has worked well for the highest percentage of Rancho Palos Verdes residents and as of today and without a variance from the City Council, all properties must conform to the city's General Plan.

Marymount doesn't want that for anyone other than Marymount.

But I suggest it is much more than just a land use issue.

There are credibility issues Marymount officials have, as yet, not been willing to address.

There are marketing practices Rancho Palos Verdes residents had shoved down their mail slots that have statements I have demonstrated simply are not completely true.

The biggest issue for me in opposing the construction of residence halls on the campus is one of safety.

In one Marymount ad, there was a printed statement about students living in Marymount's off-campus housing needing to drive their vehicles to and from the campus each day and a negative safety mention because of dorm students driving to and from the campus during the semesters recently and in the past.

The actual facts are that there are shuttle buses that have scheduled trips between the off campus housing sites and the campus and Marymount's administration has always discouraged residents of the off campus housing from driving to and from Marymount by using the shuttles, with trained drivers piloting them, in the journeys to and from the campus.

If every one of the approximately 416 students that lived in off-campus housing during the 2009-2010 school year had driven their own cars to and from the campus, the parking lot and all the streets would have been crowded with cars.

As it was and probably will be, there was hardly ever an hour in which classes were being conducted that at least several spaces in the Marymount parking lot were empty.

So, even the Environmental Impact Report paid for by Marymount proved that many, if not most of those living in the two off-campus housing areas Marymount owned, did not bring their vehicles to and from the college.

While I do not share Mr. Jeffrey Lewis' claim that perhaps Ponte Vista developers might want to have an initiative about Ponte Vista on an R.P.V. ballot, I do agree with he and others about the possibility that should the initiative pass, others with other issues they are not happy with our City Council opposing, might float ballot measures to keep those we elected, from using the authority we gave them to represent us.

Money and the possible secrecy by Marymount as to how it would finance its Marymount Plan is also a very important issue to think about.

If Marymount wins in November, we could possibly see a third-party entity pay for and build on-campus housing and the authority Marymount has over actions by students living on campus, would be handed off to another entity that might not follow standard most folks expect from a religion-owned college.

Yes, it is land use. But I think that is just one huge bit of a really humongous puzzle and we won't see daylight until the initiative goes down in a blazing defeat.

I and others also find it smug for Dr. Brophy to get up and speak before the City Council and state, as a matter of fact, that Rancho Palos Verdes will vote to support The Marymount Plan.

I used to hear speeches like that coming from one, Robert. H. Bisno and now, how's that Ponte Vista and bankruptcy thing working for you these days, Bob?

What I would love to ask Dr. Brophy on November 3, 2010 is how is that vote working for you this morning, Dr. Brophy? I would love even more to know that the initiative was turned back by voters of Rancho Palos Verdes.