HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/21/2006 Minutes - Regular MeetingCITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
MARCH 21, 2006
STUDY SESSION: Mayor Herrera called the Study Session to
order at 5:31 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District/Government Center, 21855 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
Present: Council Members Chang, Tanaka, Tye, Mayor
Pro Tem Zirbes and Mayor Herrera.
Also Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; David Doyle,
Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; David Liu, Public Works
Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Nancy Fong, Interim
Community Development Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Marsha
Roa, Public Information Manager; Sharon Gomez, Public Works Services
Manager; Ryan McLean, Senior Management Analyst; Ken Desforges, IS
Director, and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk.
�) Review Sports Field CIP — Lorbeer Field.
CSD/Rose reported that the City has $1,250,000 in the current fiscal year
Budget set aside to construct improvements such as install artificial turf on
the lower lighted football field and to build a restroom building at Lorbeer
Middle School. Since the Budget was approved, local organizations have
come forward asking for improvements to alternative facilities instead of
Lorbeer Middle School including installing lights at the D.B. Little League
Facility and YMCA. If the City were to light the alternative facilities it would
provide more flexibility and additional locations for organizations to
participate in youth sports activities. For example, instead of just a soccer
field the City would have a baseball field; girls softball could use the
YMCA facilities and by lighting those facilities it would take pressure off of
other facilities such as Peterson and Pantera Parks. Staff met with
Pomona Unified School District today and reached agreement that there
should be improvements made to the Lorbeer lower football field. Staff
and the School District officials also agreed that it would not be necessary
to install artificial turf in order to meet the needs of the lower football field.
As a result, there is a possibility of reaching an agreement to improve the
turf to a level of service available prior to the installation of lighting. This
compromise would render the field more playable and usable by the
community at a much lower cost. Terms of how the field would
consistently be maintained would need to be negotiated between staff and
the School District. Staff is seeking direction from the City Council to
pursue alternative options; including, consideration for Paul C. Grow and
Summitridge Parks, the pursuit of cost estimates, and reporting back to
Council the results of ongoing negotiations with the School District, Little
League and YMCA.
MPT/Zirbes said he was encouraged to hear that the Pomona Unified
School District was moving forward and agreed that the cost proposal for
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION
the field and restroom facility was high. He wanted assurance that if the
City invested money at Lorbeer, staff would be able to work out the
appropriate maintenance agreement with the School District. He asked if
staff could also research the feasibility, cost of lighting the upper field and
upgrading the track. He liked the idea of the City investing in lights for the
Little League field and at Paul C. Grow Park as long as staff was able to
reach a partnership agreement for those two facilities as well. He asked if
there was a timeline for moving forward.
CSD/Rose responded that staff was meeting again with the School District
next week.
CM/Lowry said that at the last meeting, prior to today, Pomona's attorney
was going to write up an agreement. At the end of the most recent
meeting, City staff was asked to begin the structure of an agreement. Staff
has assumed the lead on pushing the items forward and there seems to
be an eagerness to work toward a win-win plan for the District and the
City. Staff wants to also create a win-win with the Little League and the
YMCA to spread lighting across all fields.
MPT/Zirbes said he felt that it was a good way to proceed because it is a
good opportunity for the City to bring a lot more fields on-line.
MPT/Zirbes asked if the slope at Lorbeer that dropped down from the field
to the sidewalk along Golden Springs Drive could be considered part of
the field that would be improved.
CM/Lowry responded that Pomona, particularly wanted the lower part of
the field improved.
CSD/Rose said that Pomona was open to discussion and in particular, the
discussion about the football field and the track. Pomona was not
particularly interested in talking about the other field at this time because
they believed it would complicate the discussion and take focus away from
the field that was already lighted. During the meeting, staff brought up the
slope, but did not spend a lot of time discussing that particular area.
However, he felt it was a good point and deserved further assessment.
C/Tye asked if staff was moving away from artificial turf to grass.
CSD/Rose responded yes.
C/Tye asked if staff contemplated rubberizing the track.
CSD/Rose stated that staff would look at renovating the track, but not
rubberizing and that staff would be looking into a long-term approach to
improving the track once the drainage mitigation costs were determined.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION
C/Tanaka said he liked staff's approach to presenting alternatives
because it appeared that because the process had gone on for two years
the Board had grown to distrust the process even though they would have
first priority over the field. By spending less at Lorbeer and improving other
facilities it would offer greater field use by the youth groups.
C/Chang said that since the beginning, Pomona has failed to move
forward with discussions. He agreed with C/Tanaka that the Board was
skeptical and the Board Members who were initially involved in the
discussions were no longer in their positions or were no longer
communicating with D.B. staff. He felt it would be good for staff to have
another meeting with the Pomona School Board, lay all of the cards on the
table and let them respond and let them know that D.B. had no intention of
controlling the field at Lorbeer. The field belongs to the people and that
the City is attempting to improve the fields so that residents can use them.
C/Tye asked if there had been any confrontations between the City and
the School District since the lighting was installed at Lorbeer.
CSD/Rose said that no confrontation between the City and the School
District had occurred. In fact, today's discussion pointed out to all
participants that both entities were on the same side of the issue and were
negotiating in good faith to find the best and most appropriate community
use of the facility. The School Board members brought up issues of
residents assuming control by forcing the gates open and parking vehicles
out on the basketball courts and onto the fields as well as confronting
District staff when staff members asked residents to take their vehicles off
of the basketball court and turf. The City explained that it deals with the
same types of issues at the City parks and that staff wants to be able to
work with the School District to determine what type of control they want
over their facilities. Staff believes that there are methods for dealing with
these types of issues and agrees that ultimately the long term
maintenance of the facility once turf or grass is installed is the most
important issue that needs to be resolved.
CM/Lowry stated that CSD/Rose shared his expectations with the School
staff that the fields should be maintained like the City's park fields and he
was, in fact, offering that level of maintenance to the school field. When
CSD/Rose shared how he maintains the fields there was a sense of relief
that the City would actually take the fields out of use for a period of six
weeks to regenerate them. Her personal impression was that the District's
reaction to the City was that it wanted those fields 24/7, and once the City
was able to install artificial turf, nothing would stop D.B. from constant and
ongoing use. Based on their expectations, it is logical that they would drag
their feet on the matter of installing artificial turf.
MARCH 21, 2406 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION
CSD/Rose felt that the District was relieved to find out that the City would
not be using the State's model for a joint agreement, since the City was
not able to get State grant funds for field improvements.
CITye believed the public's perception was that the District thought that if
it could not be done for all of the middle schools it should not be done for
Lorbeer, which he felt was a preposterous position.
CM/Lowry felt the School District was surprised by this perception. In fact,
Pomona could increase the use of their resources if they would negotiate
with D.B. over the maintenance of Lorbeer fields and that there was a very
high potential for a win-win agreement and the Board was eager to show
progress.
MPT1Zirbes asked if CSD/Rose felt that the School District would allow the
City's contractors to do the maintenance.
CSD/Rose felt that they would not at this point and that was part of the
issue that they needed to discuss.
M/Herrera said she was glad that staff was moving toward some type of
agreement with the School District.
Council directed staff to continue negotiations with the School District and
present Council with a report on the amount needed to cure Lorbeer as
well as provide a proposal with costs to upgrade other fields as proposed.
Public Comments: None Offered.
2) Library Survey Results.
ACM/Doyle introduced Jonathan Brown with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin &
Associates who stated that the survey results were fairly straightforward.
Three quarters of likely voters favor a new library. However, when a
description of the funding mechanism is offered to them and a second
vote is taken 36% said they would vote for a new library, 34% said they
would not and 21 % were looking for more information or were undecided.
He said he would like to be able to offer more analysis but the questions
that were approved by the Council pretty much speak for themselves.
MPTIZirbes explained that the Council interpreted the survey results the
same as the Consultant. What the Council wanted to know was how
reliable the Survey results were and what portion of the 17% could be
expected to move into the "yes" category with more information. How
many "no' responses would move into the "yes" category with more
information, etc. and what was the likelihood that 47% could be increased
to 67% to ensure passage of a ballot measure? He asked Mr. Brown to
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION
comment based on his experience whether he believed based on the
survey results a ballot measure would be successful.
Mr. Brown responded to MPT/Zirbes that it would be very difficult to
answer his question. The original survey was designed to focus on all of
the individual aspects of the Library plan to see what would be more or
less popular with voters, what additional aspects of the measure could be
written in, such as a citizen's oversight committee or annual audits that
would provide public trust and make it more popular with voters. It is
conjecture on his part because the way that the survey was returned to
Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates did not follow the organization's
usual structure. When 46% say "yes" he would presume that those
individuals would definitely or probably vote "yes." These are people who
are pretty well convinced that with a minimal amount of information that
they are in agreement with the project. How strong the "no" vote is he
could not say.
He said ordinarily the survey included questions about whether people felt
overburdened by taxes or their personal economic situation with additional
questions measured on those "need more information voters" to see who
they were, what aspects of the Library would be most popular with them
and so forth. And with that information he would be better equipped to
extrapolate the information and go through a series of questions as more
information was presented to see how that information would ultimately
impact "yes" and "no" votes. With 46% of your likely voters saying they
would vote for this, he would not rule out that the number could increase
to a sufficient level to get the measure passed, but he could not tell the
Council based on the survey whether they would vote "yes" or what might
prompt them to do so.
C/Tanaka asked if a question about party affiliation was asked during the
survey.
Mr. Brown responded No. That information is from the voter file as it says
on the survey.
M/Herrera said that some people who were surveyed were asked that
question.
Mr. Brown responded that his firm conducts about 200 surveys a year and
this would be the first time that he had heard that statement.
M/Herrera asked where Mr. Brown's firm got the people who conducted
the survey.
Mr. Brown responded that his firm subcontracts to several phone banks
that specialize in doing surveys. He could not say what firm provided the
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION
service for the D.B. survey but said he would be able to provide the
information to ACM/Doyle.
M/Herrera asked if it was possible that the people who conducted the
survey were not located in California or even in the western part of the
United States.
Mr. Brown responded yes.
M/Herrera asked if it were possible the surveyors resided outside of the
United States.
Mr. Brown responded, "No".
M/Herrera said she would like to know where the surveyors were from.
Mr. Brown said his firm works with only four companies and has done so
on a continuing basis for 20 years. These are businesses with which his
firm has a very longstanding business relationship and he trusts them
implicitly to do the work on behalf of the firm.
ACM/Doyle asked if such a question would have been in the script given
to the survey company.
Mr. Brown responded No. It was a check to make sure that the calls were
being done properly. The surveyor has the name of the person as well as
their voter registration information, which includes gender and it says
"gender by observation" so his firm uses that as a double check and a
safeguard that the calls are being made as promised.
MPT/Zirbes referred Mr. Brown to question #1. When people were asked
how often they used the Library 37% said "often" or "sometimes," fit%
"rarely" and "never." He wondered if rarely and never would feel compelled
to vote "yes" for this type of ballot initiative.
Mr. Brown said that clearly, 75% in the next question say they favor a new
library and that is essentially the entire group that responded "often"
.,sometimes" or "rarely." Some people may pop into the Library once in a
blue moon but they may also be aware of the need for a new library and
are interested in pursuing it.
ACM/Doyle explained that the survey consultant said that when people
respond "rarely' or "never' it is still not clear whether those individuals
would be going to some other library instead of using the D.B. library
because it might be inadequate for their needs.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION
Mr. Brown agreed and stated that when his firm presents these types of
questions it tries to avoid adjectives and be more specific. For example,
his firm would ask "do you use the Library once a month, several times a
year, only in very rare circumstances or never and provide an option for
folks who use public libraries and not just D.B. public libraries. Re said he
did not know what "often" "sometimes" "rarely" and "never' really meant to
people because those were very general terms. People who visit the
Library the same number of times might answer the question "often" or
"rarely" depending on their individual perception of the question.
MPT/Zirbes asked if Mr. Brown's firm would have any voting outcome data
on prior surveys with numbers similar to this survey regarding libraries in
other communities.
Mr. Brown said he would provide the data to the Council. The difficulty is
that in every other library survey his firm has conducted the questions
were asked in a different manner. There would be some level of
comparison that could be made but it would not be an apples -to -apples
comparison.
MPT/Zirbes said he would be reluctant to put something on the ballot
without having a strong feeling for its successful outcome.
Mr. Brown said his firm attempted to present a survey that would have
come a lot closer to answering those questions.
C/Tanaka asked the timeframe to get this issue on the November ballot.
ACM/Doyle said that the drop -dead date would be about August 12 to 14.
C/Tanaka was concerned that it was getting too late to do an adequate
educational campaign that would influence the survey numbers.
ACM/Doyle responded to M/Herrera that she was correct that there was a
State measure on the June ballot for $600 million for library improvements
similar to the last bond issue for $350 million. The downgrading of the D.B.
application involved a number of different areas including public
transportation, which was a requirement of the prior bond act. The only
certainty at this time was that there would be a bond act measure on the
June ballot that would either be passed or defeated and if passed, a
committee would be appointed to create the rules or guidelines for
distributing the funds. Further, it is unknown at this time whether D.B.
would be able to use its same application or have to completely revise its
application.
ACM/Doyle stated that the legislation written for the June bond measure
provided that consideration would be given to applications that made it to
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 8 CC STUDY SESSION
the third round and that there could be no less than $20 million or so
associated with each application. There was no indication, however, that
those applications would be given a higher priority or higher preference.
Originally it was believed that those in the third round would be a shoe -in,
but that was not the way the legislation was passed.
MPTIZirbes said that the Committee could decide to give priority to the
third round applicants.
AGM/Doyle agreed that they could but that the legislation did not address
that eventuality.
Public Comments:
Clyde Hennessee said he was tired of the City's money being spent on
this Library issue. 50% of the population of D.B. said they would not pay
for this Library and he wanted to know at what point the issue would die.
Marnie Shay felt the City should go out on a limb and move forward with
the process because if you look at the number of people who are willing to
pay for a Library and those that would like information the numbers add up
to almost the 67%. People who know nothing about the proposed new
1 -library would probably say "No" but if everyone worked together it could
provide the education necessary for the citizens to make a solid decision
and do the right thing. A library is more than just a place for books it is a
place to bring members of the community together to communicate.
Kathleen Newe felt that Mrs. Shay made an excellent statement when she
said the Library would bring the community together and be a focal point
for the City. In her opinion, it was up to everyone to pull together to help
the citizens make an informed decision. If the Council puts the measure
on the ballot and launches an educational process to inform the
community the measure would have a chance to pass.
Marsha Hawkins said she believed that 75% meant a strong "yes" for the
new Library. She felt that the prospects were extremely good for an
educational campaign. The Council had an opportunity to do that with this
survey but chose not to do it. Otherwise, the City would have clear
answers now so that instead of dragging feet, the community could move
forward.
Allen Wilson said it was great to educate the community about what it
wanted to do and what it did not want to do. During the last City Council
meeting a number of students came forward to say they wanted a place to
"hang out" and he was not going to pay property taxes to turn a library into
a nanny state. There are enough computers in a lot of households in this
community. It's a highly educated community and the parents are highly
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 9 CC STUDY SESSION
educated and the kids are highly educated. But he was stili concerned
about the results of question 3 with 46% saying they wanted (a new
library) and 34% saying they did not want (a new library). Ultimately, it is
the "No" responses the City has to be concerned about. There is no way
that two-thirds of this City will approve a new Library. Some of us have
had it — especially after the last City Council meeting where we saw all of
these kids coming up to speak. It's great if they want it when they don't
have to put their money where their mouth is and they say we might as
well pay for it. When he started the Community Foundation, it was an
effort to raise money as a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that told the City
what it wanted to do and the Foundation was doing all it could to raise the
necessary funds but it takes a lot of effort.
Carolyn Anderson asked permission to speak on another topic and said
that Waste Management was proudly serving the residents of D.B. At the
end of their contract, they hoped the City would grant an extension. Waste
Management intends to put four new clean -air vehicles into service in the
City of D.B. in the month of April. In addition, her firm is working with staff
to implement a recycling plan in the City's offices and is developing new
educational pieces. It is true that the company divested the Inland
Empire's 'Waste Management of the Desert", but the Los Angeles market
area is strong and there are no plans for further divestiture.
C/Chang said that the Library had been on the City's agenda for several
years, and that this was a good project and a good investment for the
community and that is why the City has spent time talking about a new
library. He did not agree with those people who were speaking so
negatively about the community. This is a good project for the community,
and he asked residents not to paint a negative picture. Since the City was
not able to obtain the grant funds, it is now time to decide whether to move
forward. If the Council decided to move forward, it would be time to leave
it to the voters to decide. Although he has never encountered such a
survey with only three questions formulated like this survey, he agreed
with Council to move forward with the survey, and the survey does not
indicate that the City should drop the project. Even without a good
educational program a good percentage of the residents sent a strong
message that they want to have a good library. He felt the Council should
place the matter on the ballot and launch an educational campaign so that
the residents could decide. This could drag on and on if the City keeps
waiting for grant money. In order to control the City's destiny this matter
should be placed on the ballot so that the people can once and for all
decide whether they want to build a new library. In his opinion, the Library
would be a good place for kids to "hang out."
M/Herrera said she was not ready to abandon the City's grant application
because the City had invested $200,000 toward acquiring grant funds,
especially when the City might have another chance to obtain funds to
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 10 CC STUDY SESSION
build the facility. She felt that the voters and residents deserved every
good effort that the City could make to afford them services they would
like to have. She had concerns about the residents being willing to pay for
a new library, so she would like to explore an application.
MPTIZirbes stated that the Council had until August to put the matter on
the November ballot and by that time the June ballot would have been
decided. In addition, the Council asked for additional information about
the data from the consultant. If the City were successful in getting $10
million in grant funds toward the construction of a new library it would of
course be the best option. He also agreed that the people should decide,
but he did not believe tonight was the night to make that decision because
there was time between now and August to make a determination. In the
meantime the Council has an opportunity to gather more information and
see what happens with the June ballot. During discussion of an
educational campaign he wondered who would do it and who would pay
for it. And, if the City was expected to pay for the educational campaign
where would the money come from? If the Council continues to discuss
this issue and get more information at each of its subsequent meetings, it
would be better prepared to arrive at a good decision that everyone would
feel comfortable about. If the ballot fails in June the City would have little
choice but to place the measure on the November ballot.
C/Chang said that even if the bond passed, it would not guarantee that the
City would receive grant funds. Assuming passage, the earliest the City
would possibly get an answer would be in 2008.
CITanaka asked if the bond application and the Council's decision to place
this matter on the November ballot were mutually exclusive, or could the
City move forward with an educational campaign.
M/Herrera responded that ACM/Doyle indicated the City would probably'
not get a judgment by August. If the ballot measure passed in June, it
could take another six months for the Legislature to figure out who would
decide the rules of the disbursements. Therefore, the two items were
independent of one another.
ACM/Doyle responded that there was nothing in the legislation to preclude
the City from placing the matter on the November ballot and moving
forward with an educational program. Specifically, the legislation says that
if cities spend any money toward construction it would be ineligible for
bond money.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City
Council, MlHerrera adjourned the Study Session at 6:35 p.m.
1
1
1
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 11 CC STUDY SESSION
9
Tommy6 Cribbins, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 4th
2006.
CAROL HERRERA, Mayor
day of April
1
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MARCH 21, 2006
STUDY SESSION: 5:31 p.m., Room CC -8, AQMDIGovernment
Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
No. Review Sports Field CIP — Lorbeer Field
► Library Survey
M/Herrera adjourned the Study Session at 6:35 p.m. to the Regular City Council
Meeting.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Herrera called the Regular City Council
meeting to order at 6:44 p.m. in AQMDIGovernment Center Auditorium, 21865
Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
MlHerrera reported that during the Study Session, Council discussed
Sports Field Improvements at Lorbeer Middle School and the Library Survey
results. The City Council will continue to discuss these two issues at future study
sessions.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MlHerrera led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INVOCATION: Ian DeOrio, Pastor, Young Adults Diamond
Canyon Christian Church gave the Invocation.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Tanaka, Tye, Mayor Pro
Tem Zirbes and Mayor Herrera.
Staff Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; David Doyle,
Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; David Liu, Public Works
Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance
Director; Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director; Ken Desforges,
Information Systems Director; Ryan McLean, Senior Management Analyst;
Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Sharon Gomez, Public Works Services
Manager; and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 C/Tanaka presented a City Tile to outgoing Planning Commissioner
Ruth Low; MPT/Zirbes presented a City Tile to outgoing Planning
Commissioner Dan Nolan; Jody Roberto on behalf of Assemblyman
Bob Huff s Office presented Certificates of Recognition to Dan Nolan
and Ruth Low. MlHerrera congratulated Ling -Ling Chang on her
appointment to the Walnut Valley Water Board and Nancy Lyons on
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
her appointment to the Walnut Valley Unified School District Board; CITye
presented a City Tile to outgoing Parks and Recreation Commissioner Ling -
Ling Chang; C/Chang presented a City Tile to outgoing Parks and Recreation
Commissioner Nancy Lyons. Jody Roberto, on behalf of Assemblyman Bob
Huffs office, presented Certificates of Recognition to Ling -Ling Chang,
stating that Ms. Chang had just been named "Woman of the Year', and to
Nancy Lyons.
MlHerrera recognized Arun Virginkar, outgoing Traffic and Transportation
Commissioner who was not present and informed the audience that a City
Tile would be mailed to him. Ms. Roberto also gave a Certificate on behalf of
Assemblyman Huffs office to Mr. Virginkar.
1.2 MlHerrera presented Certificates of Recognition to the Diamond
Ranch High School Girls Basketball Team for winning the CIF
Basketball Championship. Jody Roberto, Assemblyman Bob Huff's
office also presented certificates to the team members.
1.3 MPTIZirbes proclaimed March 2006 American Red Cross month.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
2.1 Presentation of "Working Together for Traffic Solutions" the City's
information video on why the SR57/60 interchange needs to be fixed.
ACM/Doyle stated that the City Council has played a lead role in
addressing many traffic and transportation issues that plague D.B. as
well as the entire region. MlHerrera sits on the Four Corners
Transportation Policy Group as well as a number of other
transportation related agencies. The City is working with Pomona,
Brea and Chino Hills to develop a Four Corners Transportation
Coalition that would take the projects it identified as the top four
priority projects of the Four Corners Policy Group and work with
private sector companies and other cities within the Region to provide
funds to lobby for construction of those projects. D.B.'s number one
priority and one of the top four projects for the Transportation
Coalition is the 57160 interchange final fix. In anticipation of the
creation of the coalition, D.B. has created an informational video that
would provide other cities, private sector businesses and State and
Federal legislators information that would lead to the funding of this
project in future years. The City is currently developing an initial study
for interchange alternatives in partnership with MTA and the City of
Industry. The results of the Study should be available in about a year.
At that time additional funds would be required to move forward to
complete the design work and ultimately obtain Federal funds for
construction. The video presentation followed. ACM/Doyle referred
Council to Agenda Item 6.14 for Council Consideration, which is a
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
resolution approving in concept the Four Corners Transportation Coalition,
appointing M/Herrera as the Council's representative and appropriating
funds for membership dues.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Irene Wang, D.B. Librarian, invited
residents to a Citizenship Application Workshop on Tuesday, March 28 at
7:30 p.m. The program is open to all legal permanent residents of all ethnic
backgrounds throughout the San Gabriel Valley area. During the workshop
the following free services will be provided: Assistance in verifying eligibility
for citizenship, help for individuals to complete their citizenship applications,
the taking of application photographs, and sending of the applications to the
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Office. In addition, study aids will be
provided to help prepare individuals for their citizenship interview and
examination. The only required fee is the $400 filing and fingerprint fee. The
fee for individuals aged 75 and above is $330.
Irene Wang also spoke about the library's adult and young adult seminar
called "A Roadmap to College." Due to the success of the Princeton Review
seminar the Library has decided to hold several additional seminars and
workshops in conjunction with college applications. For instance, this
Saturday there will be a free SAT practice test at the Library. Unfortunately,
only 56 students are able to attend and there are 30 students on the waiting
list. The Library hopes to accommodate the waiting list this Summer. In April
the students will be able to review their scores. Ms. Wang stated that there
are many programs at the Library including free story time for young children,
babies and toddlers. The weekly programs are very popular and the average
attendance has grown to 60-70 children and adults.
Clyde Hennessee said that according to the Library Survey data 46% of the
residents were not willing to pay additional taxes for the next 30 years to
support a new library. An individual suggested that more information be
provided for the residents. He reiterated that he was tired of hearing about
the Library and tired of the City spending money on any type of private and
commercial advertising forthe Library. The people who want the Library have
the funds to build it and they can pay for the advertising. He said he did not
want the City, its officials and staff spending any more time and money on
the Library issue.
Larry Smith said he has resided in D.B. since 1979 and was very proud of
the community including the worldwide recognition of its excellent education
of its young people. If D.B. wants to continue being known for its excellent
education and for its good values that have been fostered through good
educational opportunities it must continue to grow. In his opinion, a world-
class library was an important part of any community and particularly one
that was based on education. He noted that the City of San Marino recently
spent $13 million to build a library. Libraries evolve and a D.B. Library would
provide opportunities for kids to learn on-line and have textbooks on file from
the local schools. He said he has heard people talk about the school
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
population shrinking and that there would not be enough kids to support a
new library in the future and that because property values are increasing it
becomes increasingly difficult for young families to live in D.B. He said he
could not believe that the demographics would be much different between
the two cities and if the City of San Marino believed a new library was
valuable to the citizens, would it not also be true of D.B. Studies show that
libraries enhanced community property values. If 46% of the people said they
would vote to support a new library 30% said they would not, that means that
70% plus would actually support a new library. Because there were so many
people undecided at this point, the reasonable thing for the City to do would
be to place the matter on the ballot.
Allen Wilson requested a correction on the Consent Calendar Item 6.1.1 to
read "aging" population rather than an "Asian" population. During the Study
Session the Library issue was once again discussed. If it is something the
City wants, the question is whether the citizens are willing to be taxed in
order to pay for a new library. He for one will not pay for it. He encouraged
everyone to attend the Wine Soiree this Sunday at the Diamond Bar Center
to help raise funds for a new library. He said that individuals could also write
a check to the non-profit Diamond Bar Community Foundation if theywanted
to donate to the Library. It appears that the students who spoke at the last
City Council meeting want a place to hang out and he does not pay for a
place for someone to hang out. People go to the library to get information for
careers, research for school projects or personal enjoyment. Question #3 (of
the Library Survey) was "are you in favor of the Library"; 46% said "Yes" —
34% said "No" and 34% is the figure he is very concerned about. He does
not want the City to spend $80,000 on an election with money the City does
not have. The City should take the conservative approach. There is an
application pending through the Library Bond and the City should wait to see
what happens with that Bond and hope for miracles. In the process, if the
residents roll up their sleeves and put their money where their mouths are,
the residents do not have to go into debt and can make a contribution with
tax benefits. He felt it was not fair to tax the children.
George Wei felt that most people would access the Internet at their homes
and not at the Library. Young kids use the Internet more than they would use
a new library. If D.B. wanted to build anew library it should have done it 10
years ago because it is already too late. The information infrastructure has
changed from a library to a more accessible Internet. He recommended that
the City promote itself to be a wireless City instead of spending so much
money to build a library that would be outdated as soon as it was finished.
He also felt the location of the proposed facility would not be accessible
because younger kids would not go to the Library when they could get the
information at home.
Osman Wei said the more he hears about the library and the video rerun
from the last Council meeting the more questions he has. The subject is full
of controversy. He wanted to know who was asked (through the survey)
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL
M/Herrera explained that if the City moved toward a ballot measure more
specific plans would be shared with the residents.
ACM/Doyle further stated that the library was designed based on the
requirements of the Bond issue. There is no guarantee or commitment that it
would be the library that would be built although the Council has moved
forward on that premise.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — March 23, 2006 — 7:00
p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865
Copley Dr.
5.2 Diamond Bar Friends of the Library Wine Soiree — March 26, 2006 —
4:00 -7:00 p.m., Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand Ave.
5.3 Planning Commission Meeting — March 28, 2006 — 7:00 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
whether they would be willing to build a library and be taxed to build it
because if the person being surveyed was not a homeowner he would surely
respond "yes." As a homeowner he and 30 of his neighbors who own their
homes were never surveyed. D.B. has 30,000 voters and 15,000 properties.
The property owners should be asked if they approve of the property owners
paying for a new library — do they believe it is fair? In his opinion, the survey
should be thrown out. During the last City Council meeting several young
people asked the City Council for a place to hang out. The City has the
obligation to supply a good library but the City has no obligation to be
babysitting the kids after school if they just want a place to hang out. People
who do not live in D.B. are telling the residents they need a library that would
benefit the citizens who live in neighboring cities. He said that there was a lot
more information he would need before he could decide on whether the
residents should spend $13 million to build a new library. What would it look
like, what does it mean that it would be three times larger— larger than what,
the current facility? The City of Cerritos spent $65 million to build a library
and performing arts center and they are now facing a crisis because each
year the City has to find $10.5 million to maintain the facility. Fortunately,
Cerritos has 27 car dealerships that provide $1 million each in tax revenue to
the City. D.B. does not have that kind of income stream. He asked the City
Council to please reconsider the issue.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS:
ACM/Doyle explained that as
part of the application process for the last Library Bond issue, the City
compiled profile drawings for the proposed library and created a 3-
dimensional computer animation that has been played on DBTV.
M/Herrera explained that if the City moved toward a ballot measure more
specific plans would be shared with the residents.
ACM/Doyle further stated that the library was designed based on the
requirements of the Bond issue. There is no guarantee or commitment that it
would be the library that would be built although the Council has moved
forward on that premise.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — March 23, 2006 — 7:00
p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865
Copley Dr.
5.2 Diamond Bar Friends of the Library Wine Soiree — March 26, 2006 —
4:00 -7:00 p.m., Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand Ave.
5.3 Planning Commission Meeting — March 28, 2006 — 7:00 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL
5.4 City Council Meeting — April 4, 2006 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium,
AQMDIGovernment Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Tanaka requested corrections to Item 6.1.2,
specifically, corrections in the spelling of names of two of the speakers
during Public Comments. C/Chang moved, CITye seconded to approve the
Consent Calendar as presented including corrections to Items 6.1.1 and
6.1.2. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes,
M/Herrera
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
6.1 APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES:
6.1.1 Study Session of February 21, 2006 —as corrected.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting of February 21, 2006 —as corrected.
6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES —
Regular Meeting of February 14, 2006.
6.3 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER — Ratifying check register containing
checks dated March 9 and March 16, 2006 in an amount totaling
$666,591.38.
6.4 DENIED CLAIMS:
6.4.1 Filed by Sid Sarnobat on January 9, 2006.
6.4.2 Filed by Enrique De La Rosa on February 15, 2006.
6.5 APPROVED LETTER AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-17:
URGING CONGRESS TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM IN THE
FISCAL YEAR 2007 FEDERAL BUDGET.
6.6 APPROVED LETTER AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-18:
OPPOSING LOS ANGELES MAYOR ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA'S
REQUEST FOR FUNDING FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE RED LINE
SUBWAY.
6.7 APPROVED LICENSE AGREEMENTS WITH NEW CINGULAR
WIRELESS, PCS, LLC, NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, T -MOBILE,
USA, AND LOS ANGELES SMSA PARTNERSHIP DBA VERIZON
WIRELESS TO CO -DEVELOP TWO WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS SITES AT SUMMITRIDGE PARK.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL
6.8 APPROPRIATED $17,590 FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES TO
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET; AWARDED
DESIGN SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE WASHINGTON
STREET CUL-DE-SAC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO DMS
CONSULTANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,590; AND, AUTHORIZED
A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR CHANGE ORDER TO
BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR A TOTAL
AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $17,590.
6.9 APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$50,000 WITH MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING RESOURCES (M.E.R.)
FOR CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR A TOTAL
AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $90,000.
6.10 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-19: APPROVING JOINT
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL;
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES
COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 21; BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT
VALLEY WATER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 3; AND BOARD
OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT VALLEY WATER
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 APPROVING AND ACCEPTING
THE NEGOTIATED EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUES
RESULTING FROM ANNEXATION OF TRACT NO. 31850 (1985, 22
SFR BY DB DEVELOPMENT CORP., ON LEYLAND DRIVE
BETWEEN BENFIELD PLACE AND WYNNEWOOD DRIVE)TRACT
NO. 42564 (1992 74 SFR BY BRAMALEA, INC., ON LEYLAND
DRIVE, NEWBURY WAY, AND BENEFIELD PLACE), PARCEL MAP
NO. 18722 (COUNTRY HILLS TOWNE CENTER, 2797 DIAMOND
BAR BOULEVARD) L 077-1 (1992, 55 CONDOMINIUMS AT 800
GRAND AVENUE), L 086-9,(1971, ST. DENIS CATHOLIC CHURCH,
2151 DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD) AND L 119-7 (DIAMOND BAR
VILLAGE APARTMENTS, 1750-2000 DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD
BETWEEN ACACIA HILL ROAD AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL WAY)
TO COUNTY LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006.
1
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL
6.11 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-20: APPROVING JOINT
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL;
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES
COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 21; BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT; AND, BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
WALNUT VALLEY WATER IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 APPROVING
AND ACEPTING THE NEGOTIATED EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY
TAX REVENUES RESULTING FROM ANNEXATION OF L 034-99
(LA FITNESS, 20801 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AND DIAMOND
PLAZA, 20855 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE) TO COUNTY LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006.
6.12 (a) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-21: GRANTING CONSENT
AND JURISDICTION TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN THE
MATTER OF COUNTY LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006
AND COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA -1, DIAMOND BAR ZONE,
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, L 062-2005 (ORIENTAIL NURSERY, 1035
BANNING WAY AND BANNING WAY PLAZA, 20655 GOLDEN
SPRINGS DRIVE) AND PARCEL MAP 22987 (BEST WESTERN
HOTEL, 259 GENTLE SPRINGS LANE)
(b) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-22: APPROVING JOINT
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL;
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES
COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 21; BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT; AND, BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
WALNUT VALLEY WATER IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 APPROVING
AND ACCEPTING THE NEGOTIATED EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY
TAX REVENUES RESULTING FROM ANNEXATION OF L 062-2005
(ORIENTAL NURSERY, 1035 BANNING WAY AND BANNING WAY
PLAZA, 20655 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE) TO COUNTY LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL
(c) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-23: APPROVING JOINT
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL;
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES
COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 21; BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT; AND, BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
WALNUT VALLEY WATER IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 APPROVING
AND ACCEPTING THE NEGOTIATED EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY
TAX REVENUES RESULTING FROM ANNEXATION OF PARCEL
MAP 22987 (BEST WESTERN HOTEL 259 GENTLE SPRINGS
LANE) TO COUNTY LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006.
6.13 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-24: ESTABLISHING A
REIMBURSEMENT POLICY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 53232.2 AND 53232.3 (AB1234).
6.14 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2006-25: AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO
JOIN THE FOUR CORNERS TRANSPORTATION COALITION,
DESIGNATED THE MAYOR AND/OR HER DESIGNEE AS THE
CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE, AND APPROPRIATED $10,000
FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES.
M/Herrera said that with respect to Item 6.14 D.B., was the first City to act
and she was very proud of D.B. for taking a leadership role.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: None.
9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
MPT/Zirbes said he would withhold his comments until the next meeting and
thanked everyone for their presence this evening.
MPT/Zirbes left the dais at approximately 8:00 p.m.
C/Tanaka reported that on March 12 he attended the Eagle Scout Court of
Honor for Ryan Perez; Tuesday March 14 he attended the Pomona Unified
School District Board meeting, a very extensive meeting that was also
attended by CSD/Rose to discuss improvements to the Lorbeer Middle
School football field and alternative options; March 17 he attended Senator
Gloria Romero's seminar on prescription drug programs and Medicare. As a
member of the D.B. Senior Citizens Club there are a lot of questions that
arise as to the options on part D that are coming up and some of the other
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL
plans that individuals can take for prescription drugs and other options. It
was a very well attended seminar and portions were also presented in
Spanish. Saturday March 18 he attended the 58tt' Annual California Parks
and Recreations Society Awards and Installation Banquet that was also
attended by many staff members during which D.B. received an award for
excellence in facilities design for a medium sized city (50,000-100,000). He
participated in the National League of Cities conference call on the Youth
Master Plan and listened to five other cities and how they are progressing in
their plans. He had an opportunity to share in D.B.'s plans and their progress
in that process. He attended the Legislative Subcommittee meeting with
M/Herrera and SMA/McLean. He had an opportunity to review Assembly and
Senate bills and discuss potential impacts and make recommendations to
either oppose or support those kinds of legislations. March 25 the Miss
Diamond Bar Pageant will take place at 7:00 p.m. at Mt. SAC. He reminded
residents about the Wine Soiree on Sunday March 26 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00
p,m.
C/Chang received telephone calls from residents who were concerned about
the trees that were removed from the Grand Ave. median at Golden Springs
Dr. He reminded residents that the Council voted to remove the aged and
unhealthy trees from the median and replace them with a better variety. D.B.
is a Tree City and is very concerned about the look of its medians. He was
pleased that residents living near Summitridge Park would soon enjoy
improved cell phone reception with the installation of two towers. The Brea
Canyon Rd. exit is open and he asked PWD/Liu to request Caltrans to put up
a sign to help drivers realize they are approaching the exit as well as to
remain in the proper lane to continue on the SR 57 toward Brea. C/Chang
commented on the speaker's comments regarding the Library. In terms of
the library being outdated and that the Internet would replace a library, the
numbers do not lie. The Internet has been in use for almost 10 years. The
attendance at the library and the book checkout rate has not declined during
that period. In fact, the attendance and checkout rate has increased and
those facts are not in dispute. CalPoly-Pomona is expanding their library
because the usage is heavy and the library is popular. Regarding the
proposal for D.B. to be a wireless City, that scenario is already on the
drawing board and D.B. is moving in that direction thanks to staff and
especially to ISD/Ken Desforges and the IS Department.
ISD/Desforges reported that the City had received preliminary approval from
SoCal Edison to mount WiFi assets to their light poles, subject to negotiation
of a contract at market rates.
C/Chang said he hated to have residents beating down the young people by
accusing them of wanting a hangout." The young people stated many
reasons they wanted a library and he believed that the term "hangout" was
taken out of context. He said he did not believe the young people intended to
use the Library as a "hangout" nor would they be allowed to do so.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL
C/Tye thanked ACM/Doyle for his excellent presentation on "Working
Together for Traffic Solutions." It was his privilege to travel to Sacramento in
January and present such a fine quality production to the Legislators to let
them know what D.B., the Region and the Country need to get the problem
fixed. It was his privilege to represent the City at the National League of
Cities last weekend and be able to visit the offices of Senator Boxer, Senator
Feinstein and Congressman Miller and pass along this information to let
them know that this problem goes far beyond the City and affects the State
and the Country as well. He felt that anyone who could do so should attend
the Miss Diamond Bar Pageant. He hoped that he would see everyone at the
Wine Soiree on Sunday and he offered to meet with residents on Saturday at
"It's a Grind" at 1223 South Diamond Bar Boulevard about 9:00 a.m.
M/Herrera congratulated tonight's award recipients and congratulated the
Diamond Ranch High School Girls Basketball team on their wonderful
accomplishment. In the recent past the High School had no seniors and has
now grown in power and strength. The School and its students do the City of
D.B. proud! She congratulated the outgoing Commissioners and wished
them success in their future ventures. She was in Washington D.C. last week
and commented on Congressmen who felt that transportation issues are a
"California problem." Part of the challenge is to convince them that what is
happening in California affects the entire nation. Forty percent of the goods
that travel by truck through the San Gabriel Valley travel through to the
eastern region and as areas of California become blocked and clogged it
affects the delivery of goods throughout the nation. Every minute, hour and
day of delay costs money. With all of the inherent challenges, goods still
move at a faster pace out of the Southern California ports than they do out of
other regions. The San Gabriel Valley contingent visited Congressman David
Drier who is key to making appropriations; the office of Senator Barbara
Boxer is a great supporter of Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority
which many in the east are calling a project of "national significance"
because they understand that grade separation and rail crossing
improvements move freight quicker and lessen the negative impact to air
quality. The contingency also visited the office of Jim Tymon, staff member
for Congressman Young. She also met with Arthur Chan, Highway Policy
Director, for the Subcommittee on Highways, Transit and Pipelines House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and Bill Richard with the Office
of Congressman Jim Oberstar. All of these individuals are key people who
can influence the granting of monies to Southern California and its projects.
D.B. is looking for money for the 57/60 interchange final fix and other four -
corner improvements that will improve mobility and air quality for the ultimate
benefit of the entire Country. She believed that the contingent created a
positive impression. And said she was proud of staff for putting together the
coalition and providing the tools to assist the coalition in its effort to obtain
funding.
MARCH 21, 2006 PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Herrera adjourned the
Regular City Council meeting at 8:20 p.m.
}
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 4th day of tri , 2006.
CAROL HERRERA, MAYOR