Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Two More Letters to the Editor

In both yesterday's and today's Daily Breeze, there appeared two letters to the editor concerning Marymount College's Measure P, The Marymount Plan.

Here is the one that appeared in Tuesday's edition.

"Marymount ramps up campaign

During detailed presentations by Marymount College and the public to the Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission and then the City Council, Dr. Michael Brophy, president of Marymount, and his officials steadfastly supported mitigations to the Marymount Expansion Project (MMEP) Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission approved the MMEP with the exclusion of dormitories, which they had decreed inappropriate in the single-family residential community surrounding the college. The City Council also approved the MMEP with the exclusion of dormitories.

However, Dr. Brophy announced that Marymount would pursue a ballot initiative to present the MMEP as originally conceived without many of the mitigation changes agreed to by Marymount, including dormitories. A total of 48 changes and seven additions to the EIR are proposed by Marymount! Marymount added the stipulation that their property would be considered a separate district of the city, not subject to the city development code, with a change of zoning and approval to allow commercial elements.

In pursuit of this ballot initiative, Marymount spent a total of $542,000 through June 2010 - hiring lobbyists, public relations agencies and law firms - bombarding residents of Rancho Palos Verdes with slick pamphlets, a DVD, TV ads and newspaper advertisements with misleading and false statements regarding the proposed initiative.

During this time, Dr. Brophy proclaimed that the campaign needed to be maintained at a high level so that one could retain a peaceful relationship after the November election. Meanwhile, Marymount sued Rancho Palos Verdes city councilmen with allegations and breach of ethics, violation of the Brown Act and opposition to the wording of the "con" argument against the ballot initiative. In response, the League of Women Voters, the Rancho Palos Verdes Council of Homeowners, and Save Our City III, organized by Ken Dyda (the founding mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes), have openly opposed the ballot initiative. The campaign slogan "No On P ... RPV is not for sale" is the creation of SOC III.

- Kenneth Goldman"

*I do not know Mr. Goldman personally and I have heard his named mentioned by several individuals.

Here is a letter published in today's paper:

"Measure P imperils RPV's future

Today, we enjoy results from tireless efforts by Rancho Palos Verdes' founders. The primary incorporation issue was control of high-density development. Unfortunately, Marymount poses an insidious threat to our beautiful community by attempting to bypass city oversight.

The first bullet point in the most recent Marymount flier tells us to vote "yes" to a new athletic facility, pool, playing fields and library. Sadly, they do not mention that the city has already approved these facilities.

Marymount's published core values include "openness and integrity." Yet they still have not bothered to be forthright on this issue.

Dormitories for 250 students and gutting the city's development code are what this election is really about. Marymount wants us to think that the initiative process is a routine alternative to the city review process. In fact, initiatives at the local level are extraordinary measures. They're used when citizens want redress for an unresponsive or out-of-control legislative body. Interestingly, Marymount never presented their dormitory proposal to the city.

Marymount can spend as much money as they desire to win. The city, however, is prohibited by state law from spending money on this campaign. Developers love this approach.

While Marymount was going through the city review process, they circulated a petition to circumvent city oversight. Talk about disrespect for the community and its values.

Marymount will be a part of our community after Measure P is history. It is very difficult to trust an organization that ignores its values and engages in deception to pass an initiative. Please, Marymount, don't be a classic developer clad in Catholic clothing.

The stakes are high. It's not just dormitories; it's about future effectiveness of Rancho Palos Verdes governance and ability to control high density. You can bet South Bay developers with huge money chests are watching this closely.

- Len Wood"

*I do not know Len Wood personally, either and I do not believe that Len and I have spoken about Marymount.

HOWEVER, if I could take Len's exact wording, changing nothing, and posting it up all over Rancho Palos Verdes, there is probably no better illustration of why voters must vote "No" on Measure P, The Marymount Plan, than I could imagine.

Thank you, Len Wood.

No comments:

Post a Comment