It's Confusing And That Is What One Party Seems To Want.

A Ph.D. pleads with the City Council to extend Phase 1 so that there would be 'no confusion'.

The Ph.D. states his pleadings while addressing the Council in front of a slide show in which every projected slide states, in the lower right corner; "Marymount California University".

Repeatedly, the Ph.D. describes what would happen at "the college" if the extension was not granted. He stated that supporters of "the college" could be confused if the extension was not granted to allow for the construction of the 'revised athletic field'.

The Ph.D. seemed very sly in not admitting that the 'revised athletic field' has absolutely nothing to do with the extension of Phase 1, even though he pleaded for an extension for 'the college'.

The Ph.D. also stated that the City Council had to extend the time for Phase 1 to affirm its support for the athletic field...you know, the one he is not willing to build.

The Ph.D. wanted to get 'affirmation' from the City Council that it supported the 'revised' athletic field and not the athletic field the City Council repeatedly affirmed for the college.

I have to give the Ph.D. great credit for confusing the issue enough to get at least two City Council members to call for the extension to September 30, 2013 partly because it is an election year.

I hope somebody tells the member of the City Council that when the Ph.D. comes back for another extension of Phase one, on or about September 30, 2013, they acknowledge that the date is closer to the actual election date than May 7, 2013 is.

Remember when, back in 2010, the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council approved for Phase 1 of the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project 6 elements of construction to be part of Phase 1?

Well, of the three, make that three, oh yes, the Ph.D. stated that there are now three approved elements, he claims he will finish all three, not six, by September 30, 2013, possible.

Now of those six, I mean three, let's review.

The Utilitiess: Yes, most of that element is done. However, revisions to the plans for them ultimately placed a transformer and distribution panels where a building was approved to be. So, whatever happens in the future will require more study and changes IF the plans for a new athletic building go forward.

The Parking Lot: After TWO, yes two, make that 1+1 time extensions, the parking lot is still NOT COMPLETED!

The Athletic Field: This is where it all gets very confusing and why extending Phase 1, while some on the Council called it a "moot point" is a bad idea (even though there was a 5-0 vote to extend Phase 1 until September 30, 2013).

Phase 1 has an approved athletic field as a element the Ph.D. still won't say would be built if the 'revised' field is not approved, by the City Council.

The Ph.D. seems to contend that the 'revised' athletic field is part of Phase 1 and must remain that way to avoid confusion. Again, he talked about the "college" in front of slides that stated "University".

City Staff and Council Members seem to be in accord with the fact that the 'revised' field must be studied and considered separate and apart from Phase 1.

Here's a bit of trivia-stop: Unless I am incorrect, the California Secretary of State must certify the change of the name of an institution of higher learning, such as a college or a university.

As far as I know, no name change to any institution of higher learning has been granted, as of this date.

Yes, this is an election year for two seats on the Council. Had the Council voted the way of the Staff recommendation, they would not be now in a position to have to deal with yet another extension request, closer to the election date.

Also, I do think I heard a veiled lawsuit threat from the lawyer representing the institution the Ph.D. is the President of. Okay, if you really want to slow development down, bring a lawsuit.

Here's another analogy I thought of, concerning what comedy I watched Tuesday night:

Five members of the Board of the White Star Line debated, in 1913, the second voyage of the RMS Titanic. I guess nobody told them the ship sank in 1912. But that's another moot point.

Extending Phase 1 on May 7, just about insures that at least one more extension will be requested and most likely granted on or near September 30, 2013. At least two Council members admitted that dealing with the issues in an 'election year' could be risky and nobody told them that September is closer to November than May is, I guess.

No, Mr. Ph.D., the residents and governors of the city do not need to affirm an athletic field you don't even have studies done to see whether it can be built safely, in the first place.

You have not built anything on time or by the approved Project and you don't intend to, either.

With the 'revised' athletic field, should it be approved, will require many changes to the remaining Phases due to the fact that many items of construction can't be built because of the grading for the 'revised' field. Almost the entirety of Phases 2 and 3 would have to be changed.

What happened on Tuesday evening, as far as extending Phase 1 goes, was nothing more than painting a target on the feet of the Council members so they have the most accurate path to shoot themselves in the foot, again. This is my opinion.

I guess most of you missed the slide from the Lakeside Campus showing two coeds in front of a blue banner with white lettering welcoming "Marymount College" on a slide having Marymount California University on it.

The Ph.D. derides the 'confusion' then spends the bulk of his speaking confusing everyone about what he is actually the President of. I know the differences between a college and a university and Marymount is no 'University' in form or certified fact.

Marketing, donor support, donations. Three words that the Ph.D. needs to keep at the forefront of his expansion plans. It doesn't seem to matter about the facts about the elements of the expansion. It seems to matter most that whatever language works to bring in the most dollars will be used to do just that.

I firmly believe that the City Council has a duty to the residents of the city to consider their opinions, requests and needs rather that continuing to support a marketing ploy that the Ph.D. and other continue to place on everyone.

Acrimony. I saw and heard some of it at the meeting. I thought that four conservatives and one liberal would not make such an acrimonious group, (mainly by the conservatives) but it was fascinating to watch, after my recent absences.