Letter To The Editor

Mr. Bob Nelson is someone I do not know but his letter to the editor in Tuesday's South Bay Daily Breeze really deserves some comments from me that I am not willing to pass up.

As I sometimes do, I will make comments using a different color font to Mr. Nelson's comments:

"Ballot reveals Measure P truths

Rancho Palos Verdes Measure P's key sentence, as on your actual ballot, reads: "Supercede (sic) inconsistent provisions of the Municipal Code and prior city land use decisions regarding the campus."

What Mr. Nelson is not willing to let you know or does not know himself is that Marymount College was approved to have on-campus student housing for up to 200 students when the total student population was around 200 students and Marymount could not figure out a way to pay for construction of those dorms back then and voluntarily removed them from construction.

That is the reason for the "prior land use decisions" in which approval was granted for dorms for almost 100% of the student enrollment. Is Mr. Nelson now thinking Marymount should get dorm rooms for up to 793 students?

"That is, the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council's numerous "Vote No" signs really say our Rancho Palos Verdes council is not interested in correcting mistakes they permitted in their municipal code and land-use decisions on Marymount College!"

There were zero mistakes made! Mr. Nelson probably doesn't know that because as you will read later, he took 15 seconds to read the material before he voted.

The land use decisions that we in effect when Marymount found approval for dorms for up to 200 students have not been altered and are still consistent today as they were in 1978.

The Rancho Palos Verdes City Council had absolutely nothing to do with the "Vote No" signs and if Mr. Nelson doesn't know that, he is less informed than most voters, I believe. The City Council did not condone, administer, create, offer, mandate, or approve any signs about Measure P, The Marymount Plan with any attempt to sway any vote because we all know, as Mr. Nelson probably doesn't know, that would be a violation of the law.

"Read slowly. Our Rancho Palos Verdes council made errors they do not want to correct. That is what this ballot sentence says!"

No, Mr. Nelson. Read completely. Read the 51 pages of Measure P, The Marymount Plan. It is all there. The facts are present and the truth that with Measure P, The Marymount Plan, a new adaptation of an existing municipal code would be specifically created for Marymount College and only Marymount College and no other business or resident would fall under that new code.

Mr. Nelson could not possibly have read about 'errors' during the 15 seconds he claims was all he needed to decide his vote. That is because he didn't seem to read any reasoning or educate himself with the truth and learn that nothing was really an error and that The Marymount Plan seeks to do something never approved or intended during the first approval of student housing.

Mr. Nelson probably doesn't know or want to know the true fact that at one time on the Marymount campus, students lived on the campus while they attended school there.

Now, Mr. Nelson, just because female high school students lived on the campus of Marymount Catholic High School and approval was granted to have up to 200 students living on the campus of Marymount College, does that mean automatic approval of dorms for up to 250 students, some 21-year's and older must be allowed?

"Today we voted absentee - as probably 40percent of Rancho Palos Verdes has or shortly will do.

And we took time to read Rancho Palos Verdes' actual Measure P ballot statement. In 15 seconds, after months of polarizing foolishness, we read the three ballot sentences summarizing why Marymount College brought their initiative."

15 seconds should be considered by all, including supporters of Measure P, The Marymount Plan to be embarrassing, shameful, pitiful, and really a waste of time.

Taking 15 seconds on something this important to Rancho Palos Verdes is something I would never admit to doing had I taken only that very very tiny amount of time deciding how I would vote then encouraging others to take only 15 seconds.

"1.) Allow development of specified facility improvements, including dormitories " (Didn't most of us live in dorms the first year of college? Why not here?)"
Mr. Nelson and others, as you will read in a future post, the vast majority of Marymount students came from 'up to have of the 50 states' and '20 foreign countries' as stated by the former President of Marymount College on January 31, 2006.

Safety is why I believe that not only should freshmen live on the campus of Marymount, but also the now three other class levels that will eventually attend Marymount.

Why only the first year, Mr. Nelson, did you live in a dorm? Why did you move out? Why wouldn't Marymount Students move out after 'their first year' and then commute for the other three years, according to your statement?

You and others will also read in future posts the facts stated by MORE THAN ONE Maryount President that dorms are needed to fund the other improvements sought for the College. You and others will read and possibly see former Marymount President McFadden state during a public meeting that dorms are basically the funding machine and unless dorms are approved, the College could not afford to provide the other elements.

But you won't hear or see that in print these days, will you?

"2.) Govern the operation of the campus " (In Rancho Palos Verdes this must be clearly stated, though it makes obvious sense.)"
No, Mr. Nelson, you have this issue completely misstated, deceptive, misleading, and characteristic of what the P.R. machine at Marymount is hammering out.

First it is not obvious because the new municipal code written about in Ballot Measure P, The Marymount Plan, was not part of the former approval of dorms on the campus that were approved.

Second, the new proposed code would allow Marymount officials vast power no other business or any resident would have in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes and it would, as a Superior Court Judge has decided, supersede existing municipal codes to the benefit of only Marymount College and no other entity.

Since Rancho Palos Verdes has welcomed a fine College WITH on campus housing for decades, not even that College would receive rights, authorities, and privileges Marymount seeks.

"3.) Correct the Rancho Palos Verdes council's code and land use inconsistencies regarding Marymount as stated above."
I've already stated what I stated above.

"Come on, voters. Your long-time politicians demand your "no" vote so they don't have to correct their mistakes. Pure and simple. Vote "yes" to correct our council's ballot-admitted Marymount municipal code and land-use errors. But before you vote, and after a decade of Rancho Palos Verdes political shabbiness, take 15 seconds and read Measure P on your ballot!"

Mr. Nelson, no Rancho Palos Verdes politician kept Measure P from being on the ballot.

No Rancho Palos Verdes elected politician was given the chance to vote on dorms BECAUSE MARYMOUNT DID NOT BRING UP DORMS TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2010!

Bob Nelson, you are blaming 'politicians' when you have clearly demonstrated you lack of a real education about Measure P, The Marymount plan and what I believe is some ignorance on your part about how the Measure came to be and why it is on the ballot.

The Rancho Palos Verdes City Council has only two choices, BY LAW, when enough signatures were brought to them:

Accept every word of The Marymount Plan as written, WITHOUT DEBATE, or call for the Special Election Mr. Nelson already voted on.

The 'shabbiness' I read is that Mr. Nelson took all of 15 seconds and he wrote that as if he may be proud he only considered the vote for 15 seconds, which I am sure he was already ready, willing, and able to vote "Yes" on.

Now for some record keeping, Mr. Nelson and others:

The vast majority of delays in the processes over the decade was caused by and as the result of actions by Marymount College officials and this is documented very well.

The delay also includes a one-month delay caused when Marymount's President was in Cuba.

Marymount caused about a 9 month delay in 2009/2010 when it surprised everyone and asked to become a four-year institution. Multiple study delays caused by Marymount added years to the decade.

One the 'politicians' (The Rancho Palos Verdes City Council) finally got The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project before them, they actually did not cause any delay on their part but were stymied by Marymount's application to become a four-year institution AFTER the Planning Commission sent The Project to the City Council for consideration.

But wait, wait, there is more. For whatever reasons Marymount claims, its officials REMOVED FROM CONSIDERATION, any vote by the Planning Commission and the City Council regarding any on-campus housing EVEN WHEN Marymount had every right to bring to the City Council's table on-campus housing for debate and vote.

Just because something was approved to be smaller more than two decades ago doesn't mean it should be approved in a city that has physically grown in size, population, and elements.

The compelling reasons Marymount seeks on-campus housing is to generate more revenue to the College and to gain almost complete control of its physical plant and the uses Marymount may choose to use at the expense of the surrounding neighborhoods.

The majority of students that attend Marymount do not come from the local area and they are attending what one former employee claims is a remedial school or a school for students who would not have necessarily qualified for admission to other schools in their home State or home Country.

Are residents of Rancho Palos Verdes supposed to be college student sitters while Marymount reaps rewards at the expense to the overall community? I don't think so but that is not my main reason for opposing Measure P, The Marymount Plan.

Please Vote "No" on Measure P, The Marymount Plan.

Safety. Everyone. Everywhere. Every hour.