Expected And Somewhat Pleasantly Surprising

Marymount College officials delivered to the city of Rancho Palos Verdes 4,876 signatures on petitions dedicated to qualifying The Marymount Plan initiative for either being approved by the City Council exactly as written or mandating that the Council call for a vote by the registered voters of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Many of us at least fairly knowledgeable with the issues fully expected and were even provided comments that the signatures would be turned in by the close of business on April 27. Turning the signatures in to be validated as being from residents of Rancho Palos Verdes qualified to sign them on that date pretty much guarantees that the measure will be on the General Election ballot at the November 2, 2010 Election Day.

I was personally informed by one of the paid petition gatherers that he was told that Marymount College expansion plan supporters and college officials wanted to turn in 'at least 5,000' signatures to be able to go well over the minimum number of about 2,700 valid signatures that would be needed to have the Council act on either of the two directives they must vote on within 30 days of the City Clerk or Election Officials certify that enough valid signatures had been gathered.

What I saw in this morning's The Daily Breeze item on the turning in of the signatures is that the number of signatures turned in by Marymount was 4,876 signatures with associated names and addresses.

So it appears to me and hopefully others that Marymount's goal of turning in "5,000" signatures fell a little short of that goal.

Now, what might that indicate after ALL of those commercials on the television during the time the local area commercials are shown on cable television channels?

First I think, it means that no matter how much Marymount's contributors spent on the flashy mailers, advertisements, DVDs and other media, there still was a shortfall in the number of signatures the contributors wanted and a number Dr. Brophy, Marymount's President may even have guaranteed to those who shelled out the dollars for all that media.

I am not saying Dr. Brophy or others at Marymount stated as fact they would get 5,000 signatures, but they may have offered a much rosier picture that what actually happened.

I can understand that many of us opposed to having residence halls built on the Palos Verdes Drive East campus of the college would be somewhat surprised and not unhappy that Marymount may have failed to attract at least 5,000 folks in a city of about 27,000 registered voters to sign their petition.

It means they could not persuade even 18.5% of the registered voters to sign a petition.

I am encouraged that there may be a crack in their armor they have placed to have the electorate approve the one item that is different than what the City Council will eventually approve by May 28.

I will recite the difference countless times before November 2. I will continue to repost the fact that Marymount officials removed consideration of residence halls from the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project voluntarily, by the Planning Commission. With residence halls out of the hands and votes by the Planning Commission, the City Council never took up the matter of residence halls on March 31, 2010 when they basically and with one exception completely approved just about each and every wish and item Marymount officials wanted.

As a matter of fact, there is still the issue of the placement of the soccer field on Marymount's campus and I am very confident that our City Council may demand a bit more mitigation in order to allow the soccer field to be built on the west side of the campus.

I hope at least one voter at a time learns the real facts and the truth that Marymount College officials and supporters, along with Dr. Susan Soldoff created The Marymount Plan for what can only be considered as the single biggest demand an strongest issue concerning Marymount College and that issue revolves around residence halls on the campus.

Now I also expect Staff members of the city, along with the City Attorney will draft a report that will finally detail the taxpayer expenses that will be needed just to add the initiative to the November ballot and the followup processes during that election cycle.

During the campaign that will move forward to oppose the initiative once it qualifies for the ballot and the City Council votes to call for the vote, I will again post the taxpayer costs associated with what would be required if The Marymount Plan's initiative is successful and stands up through the lawsuits that would be filed IF it is passed.

The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project, when it is finally and completely approved of by the City Council is a Project I support and I hope it can be done, if Marymount finds the money to complete it as eventually approved.

After the issues of the placement of the soccer field is complete, I seem to be one of (I hope) many, many residents of Rancho Palos Verdes supporting The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project.

For safety reasons I have published on this blog several times and I will repeat an unknown number of times between now and November 2, I oppose construction of any on-campus housing for students and/or staff of the college.

By May 30 I am very confident that the ONLY DIFFERENCE between the approved Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project and The Marymount Plan are the residence halls.

I now have to state that there are technical differences between the two and language in The Marymount Plan would see that the Specific Plan Zone for the college would allow Marymount's rules and many codes supersede municipal law and that the city of Rancho Palos Verdes would have to deal with very little oversight with Marymount's elements outweighing city codes and laws.

The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project's approval does carry instructions that the roof height of the gym be a bit different than what The Marymount Plan wants.

Every other element besides those listed above are in both The Project and The Plan that has basically already been approved for construction.

So, because so much of the two are so similar, Marymount officials have caused yet another delay in implementation of The Project because of their wish to see The Plan voted on.

I can consider that had Marymount accepted The Project instead of creating The Plan, they might have started getting permits to begin phase one during this summer.

Now, no matter what the outcome of the election might be, Marymount officials created what just could be a one-year delay in getting started between this summer and next summer.

Back to admissions of consideration and thought.

Since The Plan is The Project plus residence halls, and that is now without debate or discussion necessary, everyone can now see that residence halls has always been, for the entire life of The Project, the singularly most important item for Marymount.

When you saw the illustration of the library, gym, and other illustrations and then a quick shot of one residence hall, you were supposed to believe that those other items were at least more important than dorm on campus.

It was a marketing ploy I feel, for the commercial to rush by the dorms and seemingly place other academic or physical fitness items above the dorms. Sadly, there were far too many registered voters living near Western Avenue who bought the lines, ads, and statements by Marymount petition gatherers.

Along with my unorganized opposition to the initiative and the portion of The Marymount Plan dealing with dorms, Concerned Citizens Coalition/Marymount Expansion (CCC/ME), the original opposition group to The Project and The Plan, there is now Save Our City III (SOCIII).

SOCIII was founded by one of the first mayors of the city and there will be a fairly good number of former mayors in that group, I believe.

When Marymount trots out two former mayors who approve of having dorms built at Marymount, SOCIII will offer many other former mayors who served our city well and oppose the notion of a private entity using the ballot box to create a single beneficiary business that is provided what they want at the expense of too many residents and the usurpation by Marymount of some city codes and municipal laws, I feel.

Tomorrow is a new day and it is one day closer to November 2. So much more to come.

Random Odds And Ends

This blog was never intended to be a one-issue blog. I know it seems like all I write about is Marymount, Marymount, Marymount. But there is so much more going on on the eastern side of The Hill that folks living in the Miraleste and Eastview areas might be more interested in than Marymount.

Asaka Grill Express has its informal opening last Friday and its Grand Opening was last Saturday.

Have I mentioned yet that no sushi is on the menu at that brand new restaurant?

Click over image to enlarge.

I was only able to scan the outer piece of the menu before my scanner decided it was done scanning for perhaps the rest of eternity.

The menu is very interesting starting from the Soy Bean appetizer and Sweet Potato Fries to the most expensive item on the menu which is the Salmon Teriyaki for just $8.95.

I feel it is only fair to offer a real review of Asaka Grill Express after it has been open for several months so the bugs have a chance to be completely worked out.

I will offer some comments from our first trip there just last evening (Monday).

What I found shocking is that the menu contains no mention of sushi or sashimi! If you head over to Asaka Grill Express hoping to sample a California Roll or some other sushi products you can certainly do so by walking about 75 yards north to Kobe Grill where there are many sushi pieces on their menu.

The photos of the items as Asaka Grill Express make the food look inviting. There is a variety of chicken, beef, pork, and fish dishes. Terri selected the chicken teriyaki burger for $3.75 and a side of sweet potato fries for $1.95.

I stuck with my usual chicken bowl with steamed rice/no vegetables because having that allows me to compare similar dishes from different restaurants.

Asaka Grill Express is just about midway between Kobe Grill and Maui Chicken in the Western Plaza shopping area.

The wait staff was very friendly and we waited what seemed to be an overly long time for our food to arrive which I expected because the restaurant hadn't been open for very long.

The booth at the restaurant have very high backs and the seats are so high I can't put my feet on the floor when I am sitting at a booth. There are also a few tables and chairs.

I think anyone who knows where Asaka Grill Express is knows that the restaurant has a very huge strike against it because of the almost non-existent parking in the lot due to Denny's being so popular and directly next door.

We watched as the left turn pocket on northbound Western overfilled with cars either being turned into The Terraces or attempting a U-turn so folks had a chance to find parking in the two lots on each side of Denny's.

We went around 5:00, walking there of course. The two parking lots were jammed for Denny's/Asaka Grill Express and there were plenty of parking spaces available at Marie Calender's.

At this point I have warm fuzzies for Asaka Grill Express and I hope they can survive the crush from Denny's patrons.

No, the drive-thru lane for Asaka Grill Express is not open and though the owners hope they can get it open one day, there is no timetable for that for reasons they didn't give me.

For those who may not remember, after Penguin Freeze was torn down at that location, Colonel Sander's Kentucky Fried Chicken was a long time business at that address and that is why there was a drive-thru in the first place.

A drive-thru spaghetti restaurant that served small portions of cold spaghetti and probably the worst garlic bread in the western hemisphere, P'Sketti was the immediate past occupant of that space and I still marvel at how long it lasted.

And now, without further ado, here is the semi-nude house in Rancho Palos Verdes!

There are plenty of cities and communities that have semi-nudes on the interior of a building, but Rancho Palos Verdes can boast of having a real semi-nude on the exterior.

This house, built in 195o needed a great deal of repairs when the owner first began removing a decaying wooden fence on his way to an entire remodel.

Times got tough and it appears the owner has abandoned the remodel after living in the house in its present condition for an unknown number of months.

If you want to enlarge the photos or even download them and try to zoom in on the side of the profile or under the living room window, you should see some of the original wallboards used in the construction of all 215 houses in the Western View tract of homes.

The wallboards that look a little like drywall but have plaster oozing out through holes in them are called button boards.

I think it was a pretty new material used in the tract instead of traditional lathe and plaster and it was probably less expensive than the wood for the lathes.

The kitchen cabinets in the houses were steel and I considered them to be leftover materials from WWII, along with the steel window frames that were originally at the houses.

You can see with the profile that the under drawers of the semi-nude are also visible.

I can imagine that this was one of the model homes used when folks started buying houses and moving in around May, 1950.

The house is located on the corner of Trudie Drive and Highmore Ave.(?) and is in the first tract of homes constructed west of Western Avenue in the then unincorporated area of Los Angeles County.

If you have a good eye, this next picture depicts where that house was as part of the brand new Western View Homes.
I have this photo along with the associated article published in the San Pedro News Pilot from May, 1950.

The buildings at the bottom of the photo are of the Channel Heights apartment complex. It was built as 'temporary' housing for shipyard workers and/or military during WWII/

The large building in the lower left is the Channel Heights market. By the time this photo was taken the apartment complex which was much larger than this picture shows was a project for lower income residents.

The market sits about where In and Out Burger now stands.

The canyon to the left of the market burned at least once every summer and we grew up knowing when we smelled the smoke, we knew pretty much where it was coming from.

The top of the photo shows homes in the Miraleste area. Those homes were also part of unincorporated Los Angeles County until about the time in 1973 or so when Rancho Palos Verdes became a city and the original city fathers wanted the higher-income residents of Miraleste in their city, while they seemingly held their noses at the other tracts that completed the Eastview section by 1975.

It wasn't until a vote by the registered voters in the Eastview area along with the other register voters in R.P.V. allowed for the Eastview section to become "somewhat" part of Rancho Palos Verdes.

What should be obvious to folks who are familiar with this part of town is that the homes around the Crestwood area and the housing tract named Mira Costa Terrace hadn't been started by May, 1950. Those two areas would become the second and third tracts of housing and the area just to the left (south) of Western Veiw Homes may be the actual site of the original Eastview or East View tract of homes. I haven't found confirmation of that yet but I know the names of all the other single-family housing tracts in that area so it may just take a process of elimination to figure out where the first Eastview is/was.

The most original looking house in the Western View Homes area is the 3-bedroom "Keenan" family home and it is very easily found and viewed by hundreds if not a thousand every day.

The "Keenan" family home is located at the northern end of Bayend Drive on Trudie. it is a yellow house with white trim and it is one of only a very, very few homes that still have the original window screens still on their frames.

Western View Homes consisted of 215 houses. 200 of them were two-bedroom, one-bath houses with attached single car garages.

15 of the houses were three-bedroom houses with a detached two-car garage.

I think there are still almost half of the 15-three bedroom houses still left in the tract.

With the two-bedroom houses, there were three different floor plans with obverse and reverse plans for each of the three.

My dad selected our house because it was the largest of the three basic floor plans for the two-bedroom model. in 1964 he added a third bedroom, 3/4 bath and walk-in closet.

I first arrived at the house viewed in the photo having yellow lines outlining the placement of my backyard on May 4, 1955. I was brought over the front door sill at the age of one-day old.

Across the street and one house down if the home of Mr. and Mrs. Graham. Mr. Graham was a merchant seaman from Scotland during WWII and when his ship made a call on San Pedro, he felt he was home and he brought his bride Lizbeth over from Scotland and they may be the only two original residents of the Western View Homes tract that were the original owners.

For those of you who don't know about my blog dealing with the Ponte Vista condominium development project, I post a weekly "Odds and Ends" post dealing with many things along Western Avenue in eastern R.P.V. and northwest San Pedro.

You are most welcome to follow that blog at: www.pontevista.blogspot.com. Now that a newer version of the old financial team is purportedly running the project, there may be some movement on that project that was considered to be a condo project of at least 1,950 condos in its last lifetime.

For all of you reading this that also travel along Western Avenue, I have a sour feeling that the problems now occurring with the left turn pocket on northbound Western at The Terraces will continue to get worse and there will be many accidents to further clog up traffic that usually is at a standstill from about 2:30 every weekday afternoon until at least 7:00 PM in the evening.

Please be very careful and slow down because there will be crazy folks who want to flip a U-turn thinking they have plenty of time and space but didn't figure that time and space would run out sooner than they had guessed.

Western Avenue is a State Highway so anything that needs to be studied or done with trying to mitigate the situation has to go through Caltrans. I think our Council let me know at one of their meetings I spoke about the problem at that they don't want to touch it with a ten-foot pole and I should go to Caltrans for help.

Have you been to the Terrace Cinema yet. Tuesday's and Thursdays all 2D movies are just $4.00 admission any time, any show. 3D movies are two dollars more than whatever the regular admission is. No ticket is more expensive than $9.00 or $11.00 for 3D and most of us got two for one coupons and free tiny popcorn coupons. Both of them expire on June 30 and I expect that since so much money was spent to place all new seats in every theatre, have digital projection in every theatre, and a remodeled lobby and concession stand, that on July 1, the admission prices may just go up at least somewhat.

The spectre of having a 200-foot wide, up to 500-foot deep hole dug somewhere along Western Avenue still cannot be let go.

The Clearwater Program of the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts is slowly ramping up to have a replacement Joint Outfall tunnel system built for the two existing outfall system tunnels that run basically far under and along the path of Western Avenue to the ocean off of Royal Palms.

More than 99% of knowledgeable folks surveyed about where they want to see the giant hole for the placement of tunneling equipment and the removal of dirt and the drop off site for the materials used to build the tunnels want that giant structure built on Terminal Island, away from residential areas.

There were about 16 sites selected in the scoping process for further study and selection for the location of the Outfall System above ground construction site.

Besides Terminal Island, Eastview Park, an R.P.V. managed park near the intersection of Western and Westmont, and on land owned by the Sanitation Districts is one of the sites.

So too on land near the intersection of Western Avenue at Palos Verdes Drive North inside the Defense Fuel Supply Point.

Peck Park is also in the running as are Averill Park, Royal Palms, the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur (Angels Gate Cultural Center). Ken Malloy Park/Harbor Lake, and some others that would also cause chaos for at least eight years.

Through an information source, the Terminal Island site has become somewhat out of favor, replaced by somewhere closer to the route the two existing tunnels have. That means closer to Western Avenue.

The newest Outfall System tunnel was built in 1957. For what seems like an eternity work has been done on a replacement pumping station on Western at Avenida Aprenda. Residents living near there have been told that the fence may be gone within several months, but that has been said many times over a very long period.

Now some useless trivia:

"The Monster", Seaport Luxury Homes, the new multi-story structure on Fitness Drive is NOT part of Ponte Vista and was built having 136 units to be for sale condos. No major zoning changes were necessary because the area was zoned for commercial when the tennis club was located there. It is now not yet completely filled with folks who lease or rent.

If you ever travel along Gaffey Street, south of Capitol, the big area of land having grading and dirt work done there is planned to have 134 'patio-style" condos built there after all the contaminated soil from the old petroleum storage facility is gone and the lawsuit filed by Y and S Auto if over with.

Western Avenue was and still may be the longest continuous Avenue in the world. It begins at its intersection with Paseo Del Mar, by Royal Palms and it continues to a curve where the asphalt becomes Los Feliz near on of the entrances to Griffith Park.

Western Avenue is also found north of Griffith Park near the Burbank area.

Rancho Palos Verdes is home to the fastest moving roadways in the Western Hemisphere.

The 0.8 mile Portuguese Bend slide area sees constant movement of Palos Verdes Drive South and what remains of Cherry Hill Lane.

Older and even some current maps show Cherry Hill Lane north of Palos Verdes Drive South. Now that same lane is south of Palos Verdes Drive South.

The taxpayers of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes are responsible for the continuous repair of the roadbed.

Two of the now four large supermarkets in the city of Rancho Palos Verdes are located along Western Avenue. Trader Joe's and Smart and Final ar the two.

The two other large markets in the city are the Ralph's Fresh Faire on Hawthorne and the brand new Trader Joe's on Hawthorne just by its intersection with Palos Verdes Drive West.

Palos Verdes Drive South becomes Palos Verdes Drive West at a point on the curve at Point Vicente.

Technically, all four corners of the intersection of Trudie Drive/Capitol and Western are in the city of Los Angeles, but only a very few feet on the west side of Western Avenue.

From Palos Verdes Drive North and to the north of that and all the way to Summerland Avenue, Caltrans is responsible for the intersections that have signals.

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) controls the signalized intersections of Western Avenue begining at 1st Street to 25th Street.

Approximately 80% of the school age children residing in the Eastview section of R.P.V. attend Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District schools while the two Los Angeles Unified School District schools located within the city of Rancho Palos Verdes have the remaining approximately 20% of elementary and intermediate school age students.

About 600 students are bussed every school day to and from Dodson Intermediate School from communities including Wilmington.

Dodson has a performing arts magnet program so students from other communities including Lomita and Harbor City can attend.

Only ONE metro bus route runs along Western Avenue. It is Line 205 and its northernmost terminus along the Harbor Freeway at the Imperial Metro Station of the 'Century' Freeway.

There technically is no "Century" freeway in the Los Angeles basin. The 105 freeway is the Glenn M. Anderson Freeway named after a long serving Congressman who sought money for the multi-decade project.

O.K. Now you see what it is like to have the author of this blog on Phentermine to help me lose weight. I usually write almost endlessly. Now on what is really an 'upper' I truly write endlessly.

Where oh where is there an editor for me?

Open Letter To Dr. Brophy

Dr. Brophy,

I hope this post finds you and your family well.

Given recent events, I certainly expect the City Council to allow us, the public, to comment on these matter in a appropriate place and at an appropriate time.

I feel the "Catholic institution" (your words, not mine) needs to rise to the occasion and set the tone for civil debate.

Unfortunately Dr. Brophy, the many mailings, television commercial and signature gathering discussions has provided from your institution, far too many half-truths, incomplete information, and what can be considered by some as misrepresentation of the facts.

When we swear as a witness in a trial, aren't we compelled to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Is that a standard that the "Catholic institution', again your words, is not obliged to keep as we basically conduct a trial concerning the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project and/or The Marymount Plan?

Why do you still condone the statement that The Marymount Plan will be accomplished "at no taxpayer expense" when you and others representing the College know full well that The Marymount Plan can not be fully accomplished without an as yet unknown amount of taxpayer-funded dollars for some community elements required in both the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project and The Marymount Plan?

Also, every statement made in all the advertisements revolving around the construction time of The Marymount Plan is a half-truth at best and it may be considered by many as deceptive and misrepresentative.

Sir, we had this discussion in the hall outside the Council Chambers and then as it is now, you still have not denied that I may be absolutely correct about this.

All I have to do is remind you that when City Council members, during the March 31, 2010 meeting, discussed the issues, several of them asked you and/or your legal counsel Mr. Davis whether you two thought the Project could be completed within six years and both of you stated, on the record, that you did not believe The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project could be complete in even as little as SIX YEARS.

Since you and I both know that The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project was approved for an eight year time frame and that Project does not include the residence halls that were removed from consideration at the request of Marymount's officials, the residence halls included in The Marymount Plan will add additional time to the overall time frame. Why do you still not allow potential voters the information that is most correct, truthful, and honest as easily as they are provided marketing elements sponsored by Marymount?

Are you, or the marketing component of The Marymount Plan, ever going to publicize the similarities between The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project and The Marymount Plan? Potential voters would have the opportunity to learn what has already been approved within the scope of The Marymount Plan by the approvals given to the bulk of the elements Marymount requested with The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project. The public which include the registered voters you hope would vote to approve the initiative sponsored by Marynount would find out that the only major difference between the two are the residence halls and associated construction necessary for students and supervisorial staff to be accomodated. Might you not trust the voters with the most complete information possible to allow them to vote having all the facts?

Also, why must the Specific Plan zoning sought within the proposed initiative have wording that would allow that zoning to supersede current and possibly future municipal codes?

The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project was approved to include the variance in the number of parking spaces that are planned for even though that number still fall short of the minimum number of parking spaces according to the city's municipal code. You don't need to have the element within The Marymount Plan that you want that states that the municipal code for the number of parking spaces required on the campus would not apply for Marymount College and only for Marymount College, and no other business or institution, Catholic or not.

It is so unfortunate that an institution you head, a religious institution for higher learning, has offered Emails that appear sanctimonious and disingenuous, I feel.

I believe if you truly wish to live up to what you are advertising as being a good neighbor in our community, you have the moral duty, business responsibility, and should have just plain common sense to address all issues using truth over half-truths, admissions of true purposes over seeming misleading statements, and honor above all else to your institution, your church, your community, and everyone associated with Marymount College.

Regards,

Mark Wells

aka M Richards

A Pause To Review and Confirm

Last night I began considering that I should provide information about my position and affiliations I have and do not have regarding the issues surrounding Marymount College. So here goes.

I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of Concerned Citizens' Coalition/Marymount Expansion (CCC/ME).

I do communicate with several of that group's members when I offer them facts and opinions and I am provided with fact-checking and documentation I seek from their vast files that have been growing for ten years now.

I did not support the Appeal of The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project and I was pleased that the City Council also almost completely denied the Appeal and approved the elements of The Project currently approved that is fairly identical to what Marymount College's representatives have been seeking.

I also continue to challenge their stance on The Living Campus/Academic Campus Alternative the group supports but which was also not approved of by the City Council on March 31.

I am not now, nor will I ever be a member of or have affiliation with "Save Our City III". (SOC III).

That new group will not take a position on support or opposition of both The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project and The Marymount Plan.

The group is opposed to the particular initiative and seems to be opposed to the initiative process that focuses on only city-wide initiatives and/or business-created initiatives that benefit only the business or organization sponsoring the initiative.

I hold stakeholder status in all three of the Neighborhood Councils within the San Pedro area.

I was a Board member of The Mira Vista Homeowners' Association however, that organization has basically been disolved.

I was and still hold Board Member status with R Neighborhoods Are 1, the main opposition group to past plans for Ponte Vista at San Pedro condominium project.

I do have some affiliations with the Rolling Hills Riviera HOA which has the highest membership of the HOAs on the east side of The Hill.

I am a frequent volunteer at the Miraleste Intermediate School Library where I spend many hours assisting Terri, my wife and Melanie, her co-worker and helping to provide to the students the best library and textbook supplies possible.

I volunteer with two theatre companies providing set construction and stagehand support for a number of past, current, and future productions.

I continue to hold firmly that on-campus housing for students and staff at Marymount College must not be allowed or approved because of safety issues which I find cannot be overcome and I do not believe students, faculty, staff, visitors, residents, and others should be subjected to potential well-being concerns having on-campus housing along Palos Verdes Drive East would create.

I also have enough documentation, opinions, facts, and reasons to clearly feel that too many representatives of Marymount College and their supporters are not willing or able to discuss the many issues of both The Project and The Plan in a completely open, honest, and forthright manner. I can also point to a number of practices I believe can be viewed as deceptions by Marymount representatives seeking to achieve something they are not honestly presenting and for which they, in my opinion, are doing some harm to the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Again to state my opinion that:

Unless Marymount representatives find a means and funds to build on-campus housing to attract a high percentage of out of state and out of country students of wealthier families to attend their programs, the college will fail again and will close its doors within the next 2-3 years.

I also feel strongly that Dr. Brophy, Mr. Davis, Dr. Soldoff, and others are not willing to be forthright enough to provide complete and open information to and consideration by the registered voters of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes concerning all aspects of The Marymount Plan and its associated initiative process.

I support reasonable, realistic, responsible and respectful development of residential housing and businesses and I consider myself a champion for Western Avenue in San Pedro and Rancho Palos Verdes.

Administrative Bulletin #34, The Good, The Bad, The Ugly And The Pot Calling The Kettle Black

I have to agree with much of the outrage over the Administrative Bulletin the coordinator of our city's Neighborhood Watch sent out to all the Block Captains with instructions to provide the information contained in it to all the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Ms. Gail Lorenzen, instead of sending the information out simply as a resident of our city, she used her position within the city to offer her stance. This was completely unacceptable, in my view and I hope she was asked to resign from her position very early this morning.

As to the content of the bulletin, I found some of it poorly worded and inaccurate while a portion of it I found truthful and important.

Until 1:00 PM today, you could have viewed the Administrative Bulletin #34 on this blog. I have temporarily removed it from view and I have not decided whether I will republish it on any of my blogs.

I was also provided the letter/Email written by Dr. Michael Brophy, the President of Marymount College who wrote to many individuals with Rancho Palos Verdes government and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

At this time I also choose not to publish it but I have some serious problems with it.

Now I am going to opine on the good, the bad, the ugly, and the pot calling the kettle black.

Although Ms. Lorenzen should have written what she wrote as being from a city resident and not as the coordinator for a city-sponsored program, much of her opinion found agreement in me.

The good:

Ms. Lorenzen was correct in my opinion, to offer her training and experiences as ways to confirm some credibility in her writing.

Ms. Lorenzen stated some opinions I strongly agree with and I feel are important for residents to learn about and understand. Perhaps I will use these opinions in a separate post.

The bad:

Ms. Lorenzen opined some issues that seem far too strong and derogatory to college students. She used ill concieved generalizations in a manner that suggested to me she was overly angry as she wrote the bulletin.

I think she went way overboard in attempting to cite all college students rather than signaling out the few who create most of the problems.

The ugly:

Ms. Lorenzen seemingly used her city position to offer what can be read as the city's stance on The Marymount Plan which the city does not have a stance on.

Nowhere has the City Council voted to endorse or oppose "The Marymount Plan". The City Council has voted to approve almost the complete bulk of what Marymount's supporters are seeking when they voted approvals of The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project which is almost identical to The Marymount Plan, save for one major item.

It was very ugly for Ms. Lorenzen to place burdens on city government and organizations they must now work to clear and they should not have been placed in these positions because of Ms. Lorenzen's writings.

The pot calling the kettle black is Dr. Brophy's letter/Email he sent out this morning.

It is perfectly reasonable and warranted for Dr. Brophy to use harsh wording and call for immediate action from the leaders of the city, it should also be perfectly reasonable and warranted to expect from Dr. Brophy and others representing Marymount, the same level of action called for by Dr. Brophy.

Dr. Brophy, in my opinion, mounted his high horse to condemn the administrative bulletin, its author and then demand immediate action from city governors when, for so many years and on so many issues, Dr. Brophy and others representing Marymount have not been willing to provide equivalent actions requested by city government, city staff, and residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.

While Dr. Brophy's letter/Email demanded retraction of the administrative bulletin, no one representing Marymount has been willing to offer what I refer to as 'the whole truth' concerning so many aspects of "The Marymount Plan" and prior to that, The Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project.

I feel if Dr. Brophy demands actions and answers from Rancho Palos Verdes government and its residents, it should be the reasonable conclusion that Dr. Brophy and/or others provide truthful and complete actions and answers to a number of questions and points offered as reasons to support "The Marymount Plan".

I do not feel it is reasonable and respectful to demand from others what you yourself are not willing to provide.

While there is far too much dishonesty in Ms. Lorenzen's Administrative Bulletin #34, it is equally matched and in some ways far surpassed by the written advertisements, television commercials and frequent mailings dealing with the purposed initiative.

I hope and expect that our Mayor and City Council members will correctly distance themselves from Ms. Lorenzen's bulletin because it must not reflect any position by the city of Rancho Palos Verdes.

None of us needed this bump in the road when Marymount's supporters are trying their darndest to eliminate city government oversight to what they want at the campus. This only adds fuel to their fire.

I found Dr. Brophy's letter/Email completely over the top compared to his willingness to provide honest communication he demands from the city and folks not inclined to support his wishes.

Be An R.P.V. Council Member For One Day

That's right folks! Have you ever dreamed of sitting behind the arching desks inside the Chambers at Hesse Park and making determinations as to the future of our city?

Well now you can, courtesy of Marymount College and it supporters.

Just think, you can make law that benefits just one private entity that is not only a religious organization, but also exempt from paying most taxes that go into the funds that protect you, serve you, and provide all with reasonable infrastructure.

With Marymount's most recent mailer, you also have the chance to determine something that the current City Council has already approved or will approve by May 20!

Gee, just dream of listening to all the misstatements about how a 36-month construction will be accomplished. But you will do this knowing that it will take up to eight years or longer to see the project to completion.

Consider that you will get to vote on something that Marymount claims will be built at no expense to taxpayers other than those taxpayer funds required to have the measure voted on in the first place, funding mandated to provide a new set of traffic signals, street signage with striping, and the redesign and rebuilding of a heavily traveled intersection overlooking the blue Pacific.

Marymount wants you to play at being a Council Member for just about everything they want that has already been approved of by the current City Council!

Are you anxious with desire to do something that has already been done? Marymount hopes you are.

The mailer delivered today to my house (yes again, two mailers for one dwelling. Can you spell "wasteful spending"?) was all about the improvement sought for the athletic facilities at Marymount.

Oh, how nice. These improvements are really such a good idea that our City Council has already made initial approvals for the indoor athletic facilities, pool, and tennis courts.

It is going to take until probably May 20 or so for the Council to approve the placement of the soccer field on the west side of the campus, just like Marymount wants. But rest assured, they may require some additional mitigation, but the soccer field will eventually be approved where Marymount wants it while you are still encouraged to vote on something that will have been decided for several months.

Did you notice what was missing from the mailer? Sure you did. But now, with your new chance to vote on a package that will have found approval for all but one piece, you can be redundant and doesn't that make you feel special? I knew it would.

How many times must it take to remind everyone that The Marymount Plan is all and only really about residence halls on campus?

This is now a proven fact because the City Council has already approved almost everything in The Marymount Plan except residence halls.

And you truly know that Marymount's representatives were the ones who removed on-campus student housing from consideration by the Planning Commission. Since the Planning Commission wasn't allowed by Marymount to vote on whether residence halls would be built at Marymount, our City Council Members chose to go along with the certifications and recommendations of the Planning Commission almost to the letter.

But you now have the chance to be a repetitive as I have to be. I like joiners. You will most likely have the opportunity to repeat what the City Council has already done and your tax dollars will fund the redundancy. Now are you happy?

So, according to Marymount's wishes, on the first Tuesday in November you get to be an R.P.V. City Council member for that single day and you won't have any of the responsibilities voters gave Council Members to worry about.

You won't have to deal with the whole truth and a great number of facts that Marymount doesn't want you to know.

You will be able to remain anonymous as you cast a vote that could mean tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars collected from residents living in Rancho Palos Verdes going to benefit a single private organization.

But wait! There's more! You can also consider yourself fortunate in that, again according to Marymount folks, you will be able to take in all the public activities The Marymount Plan advertises.

Naturally, college officials offered those exact same public benefits during the real Council's deliberations and the Council still went ahead and approved those, too!

Now be honest. How many of you out there have attended events and other things at Marymount since it first opened or first reopened after it failed?

I think you are getting the picture about what it will be like to be a Council Member for a day. I hope you will all be able to sleep nights when we are closer to November.

This is so exciting, isn't it? You get the chance to do something that will already be done months before you vote.

If presented the chance to be a Council Member for a day in early November, I will take that assignment seriously. I don't feel I need to vote 'yes' or 'aye' on something that has already been decided by folks our residents chose to represent me and others in Rancho Palos Verdes. So I will vote 'No' or "Nay" but that is still a vote from a Council Member for a day!

Point By Point: A Quick Read

I am quoting the button points I found on The Marymount's Plan Web site to illustrate what I think is good or should be opposed and why I personally fell that.

• "New parking facilities to take student, faculty and visitor parking off residential streets"
• The would be a good idea if the college actually was willing to provide on-campus parking spaces that the municipal calls for. Unfortunately not only have their been cars parking on public streets when there were and are parking spaces always available on the campus, but Marymount has no intention of providing the number of parking spaces on their campus that would meet the municipal code of the city. Marymount seeks to remove city over site from most of the project by creating a Specific Plan Zone where they can do pretty much what they want to do without City Council approval.
• "New on-campus housing for students and adult supervisors to reduce commuter traffic"
• I oppose on-campus student housing for safety reasons and only safety reasons. I am still waiting for anyone to discuss and debate me about the safety of having students living at Marymount's campus.
• "New state-of-the-art library (William H. Hannon Library) and lecture hall"
• This is absolutely fantastic, worthy, realistic, responsible and reasonable!
• "New indoor athletic facility and pool"
• I would not object in any way and I fully support Marymount's plan for a new indoor athletic facility, pool, and I now can support the building of a soccer field on the west side of the campus if the retractable netting is raised to 30 feet and a solid center median is constructed throughout the curve of Palos Verdes Drive South, adjacent to the campus.
• "Relocation of existing athletic facilities and a Student Union building to enhance the student bookstore and create a faculty dining area"
• This is another good idea that should be supported by everyone even if our city can't receive funds from Marymount being a tax-exempt institution.
• "New art studio and maintenance building"
• As a volunteer for two different theatre companies and someone who support the maintenance of campus, how could not be a good thing?
• "Improved administration building"
• I can't see anything wrong with improving the administration building. How might you oppose it?
• "Upgrades of existing academic buildings"
• I wish this was a higher priority than having on-campus housing.
• "New, environmentally responsible landscaping and greening of the property"
• This is simply a must and we should all be concerned about our environment and protecting our area.
• "68% of the 25 acres will remain open space"
• This is also a good idea, I feel. There are more acreage on the steep hill that could be used for building, but it is good thing to keep so much of the campus open.

All of the upgrades I support and approve of are in both the Marymount College Facilities Expansion Project which continues to find almost total approval of by our City Council and The Marymount Plan the proposed initiative addresses.

I do understand and I can live with the City Council allowing a variance of municipal code for the number of parking spaces that are about equal between The Project and The Plan.

I strongly feel that the petition drive for the proposed initiative opens the doors for potential harm to come to residents of Rancho Palos Verdes because it could lead to a qualified measure on the November ballot that could allow others to attempt to find approval for a private entity seeking a unique approval of plans that really do not help our city's residents and could lead to some harmful outcomes that might cause real problems to our taxpayers and our City Council and City Government.

Please do not sign the petition.