Public Comments Not On The Agenda 9/7

At tonight's City Council, three people spoke during the time allotted for Public Comments Not on the Agenda.

I spoke first and I am providing the script I used, below.

"I know you may not be able to comment regarding the lawsuit filed by Dr. Brophy that names all of you as Respondents and Real Parties in interest, even though I have yet to meet Mayor “Wolfowicz” and not all of your names appear on the ballot arguments against or the rebuttal of arguments in favor of Measure P.

But none of you are named in Mr. Lewis’s lawsuit as defendants, Respondents, or Real Parties in Interest and that lawsuit seems to seek a judge’s determination whether statements contained in the legal wording of the measure and or its arguments in favor or rebuttal of arguments against Measure P are true and not deceptive or misleading, and whether they are redundant, for the most part, compared to what you all approved within The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project.

I hope you agree that no matter what lawyers on all sides suggest, having a judge make a determination about matters contained in both lawsuits serves the voters of Rancho Palos Verdes better than what differing attorneys debate about.

What we may also find out by early tomorrow afternoon is what Marymount’s representatives might do should the judge’s rulings not go the way Dr. Brophy and others want them to go.
I am also wondering if and how many Yes on P signs might be found on public property on September 15 or 25, for that matter.

I continue to religiously support The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project but not The Marymount Plan and I am still waiting for representatives from Marymount College to state how religiously they support The Project for their College and whether they would use The Project’s elements to provide a 21st Century College experience to future students no matter what the vote tally is on November 3.

Thank you."

Next up was Dr. Michael Brophy who included in his introduction that he is Marymount's 6th President.

Dr. Brophy spoke about two upcoming events at the College that he had already provided written invitations to the five members of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council.

On September 15, Cardinal Roger Mahoney, the retired Archbishop of the Diocese of Los Angeles will say a mass at Marymount College in celebration of the College's new semester, one that now includes students studying for a Bachelor's Degree in one of three areas.

The mass is also meant to reconfirm the College's standing as a good Catholic College.

On September 25, Marymount is hosting a Scholarship fundraising event to provide funds to help less fortunate students, income wise. Dr. Brophy mentioned that there are local residents who are students at the College that need help financially and I am sure Dr. Brophy hopes that many contributors will pour funds into scholarship for students with financial hardships.

The third speaker was former Mayor Ann Shaw speaking on behalf of another former Mayor, Ken Dyda.

Marymount, in a letter sent to the five council members made some statements about finding names of known Measure P supporters on rosters of those who oppose Measure P.

Ms. Shaw also explained about the lack of information Save Our City III had on when yard signs had to contain information about where funds to have them made, came from.

The former Mayor stated to the council that all the matters of concern brought to the Council had been addressed ane remedied.

Mayor Shaw also made a comment, apparently from Mayor Dyda, in reference to Marymount's President's claim that he want to have everything remain on the "high road" and Mayor Dyda seemed to think that Marymount's "high road" meant making allegations prior to asking for and dealing with the facts. I got a chuckle out of that.

Mayor Shaw also straightened Dr. Brophy out about concerns he had with Mr. Jon Cartright's information about some representatives of some homeowners' groups and she confirmed that to the City Council members.

Going back to my comments and the fellow who followed. it seems to me that Dr. Brophy had a wonderful chance to deny, denounce, or even provide an answer or two to some of my points, all recorded, and all in front of the Council, some members of city staff, and the viewing audience.

Did Dr. Brophy state that he and others would support The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project? No he did not.

If Measure P fails to receive enough votes for approval, would Dr. Brophy continue to follow The Project's plans? I don't think Dr. Brophy will be around for any length of time should Measure P fail. This is just my opinion, but he did leave his last school after it had not gotten to the point of not finding approval to build on-campus students housing, if the information I have on file is correct.

I think Dr. Brophy is worried about what could happen Wednesday morning. I am not worried one bit.

If Dr. Brophy's lawsuit prevails, I don't lose and we may see The Marymount Plan costing taxpayers money, sooner than later. We could even see the election date canceled for November 2, but I highly doubt is will be.

If Mr. Lewis' lawsuit prevails, residents of Rancho Palos Verdes, including myself, win. We will have gained the right to finally view the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

But I have been informed that as I expect would happen should Dr. Brophy's side lose, his lawyers will ask for an emergency petition with the Court of Appeal.

If that happens, it will be a rare sight and one that usually does not prevail on the petitioner's behalf.

But Dr. Brophy may instruct his lawyers to ask a judge for an injunction against having the election on November 2, if things don't turn out his way.

Basically what it now appears that Dr. Brophy tried to do....again, is an end around ploy to get what he wants, even though it is probably not in the best interests of the residents of our city.

What actually happened when he telegraphed his move is that he was called on it by Mr. Lewis, a person probably more familiar with Marymount's Project and The Marymount Plan than Dr. Brophy possibly is.

Dr. Brohpy's bluff was called and if Judge Yaffe sees things Dr. Brophy's way, then some language may have to be changed in the Arguments Against and the Rebuttal or Arguments in Favor of Measure P. I have to be truthful about that because it is a fact.

But if Mr. Lewis' lawsuit prevails AND Judge Yaffe decides about the merits of the wording within The Marymount Plan and its Measure and he finds that Marymount overstated its potential powers and misstates portions of the Campus Specific Plan, then I bet all heck breaks loose.

If Marymount has to go to the City Council to have approvals granted so that an outside vendor or other outside businesses take over responsibilities Marymount College Administrators should maintain, there may be a drying up of the funding well for the Yes on P campaign.

Tomorrow is going to be a very interesting day and it should last into the evening.

Stay tuned, please.