Police Investigating Alhambra Death

February 16, 2017 by · Leave a Comment 

A woman was found dead Wednesday in Alhambra, prompting an investigation by homicide detectives.

The death was reported about 12:40 p.m. at an apartment complex in the 1800 block of Garvey Avenue. The woman, who was not immediately identified, was pronounced dead at
the scene, according to Deputy Ryan Rouzan of the Sheriff’s Information Bureau.

She was believed to be in her 70s, according to a report from the scene.

Detectives with the Sheriff’s Homicide Bureau were dispatched to assist Alhambra police with the death investigation.

Woman Pleads No Contest to Package Theft

July 14, 2016 by · Leave a Comment 

A 20-year-old Montebello woman caught on video stealing packages from an Alhambra porch pleaded no contest Monday to felony burglary and theft charges.

Rianna Adrienne Medina was immediately sentenced to six months in jail and five years probation. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Cathryn Brougham also ordered Medina to complete 180 days of a live-in residential treatment program.

On the afternoon of May 10, a man arrived home to find Medina approaching the front of his house and picking up two packages left near the front door. The homeowner recorded Medina with his cellphone as he confronted her.

Medina tried to convince him that her mother lived at the house and the packages were hers. Police said when the homeowner threatened to call the police, Medina dropped the packages and ran.

Two days later, Medina used someone else’s identification to check into a motel in Rosemead. She was arrested the next day by officers acting on tips, social media and “old-fashioned police work,’’ according to the Alhambra Police Department.

Alhambra Police Testing Body Cams

May 18, 2015 by · Leave a Comment 

 Four Alhambra police officers are wearing body cameras as part of a three-week test, the department announced Wednesday.

Over the next several months, cameras from four different manufacturers will be tested to determine the pros and cons of each brand, said Sgt. Jerry Johnson of the Alhambra Police Department.

The idea is to see how the devices work when used for routine traffic stops, conducting interviews during investigations and making arrests, among other police encounters.

Officers will consider factors such as ease of use, comfort, officer safety issues, battery life, storage limits, functionality and overall performance.

Meanwhile, the police department’s technology specialists are becoming familiar with the technology to store and retrieve the data recorded by the officers in the field.

Policies will also be developed to ensure the best practices are utilized, Johnson said.

Residents Worried SR-710 Light Rail Would Burden East LA

April 16, 2015 by · 8 Comments 

East Los Angeles residents fear they will once again be forced to bare the brunt of efforts to relieve traffic in the region.

They remember all too well the disruption to businesses and residents extending the Gold Line east caused in their neighborhood.

Lea este artículo en Español: SR-710 Tren Ligero Podría Ser una Carga Para el Este de Los Ángeles

Those concerns were expressed Saturday during a public hearing at East Los Angeles College hosted by Metro and Caltrans to get feedback on the State Route 710 Study.

While a majority of people who spoke at the hearing appeared to support a freeway tunnel option, several eastside residents said support in other cities for a light rail train through their neighborhood has them worried.

A map viewing at East Los Angeles College Saturday allowed residents who live along the proposed SR-710 Freeway project to view the impact on their communities. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

A map viewing at East Los Angeles College Saturday allowed residents who live along the proposed SR-710 Freeway project to view the impact on their communities. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

More vocal communities along the route are getting all the attention, they complained.

In March, Metro and Caltrans released a Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS), which outlined five alternatives for closing the gap between the 710 and 210 freeways. The options include a traffic management system, a rapid bus line, a light rail, a freeway tunnel and the required “no build” option.

About 100 people from Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra, Monterey Park, El Sereno and East Los Angeles attended the hearing.

Many speakers supported the option to build a 2-way, 6.3 mile tunnel from Valley Boulevard in Alhambra to the connection with the 210/134 freeways in Pasadena.

The double decker option would have two lanes traveling in each direction and would run for 4.2 miles of bored tunnel. Vehicles carrying flammable or hazardous materials will be prohibited in the tunnel.

Residents from eastside communities and throughout the San Gabriel Valley spoke at the SR-710 Metro meeting, held at ELAC Saturday. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

Residents from eastside communities and throughout the San Gabriel Valley spoke at the SR-710 Metro meeting, held at ELAC Saturday. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

Several eastside residents claimed they “were left out of the conversation,” referring to the decision to include the Light Rail Train (LRT) alternative. They pointed out that some of the businesses hurt by construction of the Gold Line Eastside Extension in 2009 never recovered.

A light rail will destroy “one of the nicest corridors” and the East LA Civic Center on Third and Mednik Streets, they complained.

“We do not need the rail,” Martha Hernandez told Metro. “We can get to Pasadena on the Gold Line,” she said, adding that eastside residents can already get to Cal State LA by taking Metro’s Silver Line. There is also an express shuttle from ELACC.

Liz Sanchez lives one block from Mednik Street where a station could be built if a light rail is chosen. She told EGP a train would add to parking problems in her neighborhood because there’s no plan to provide public parking for rail passengers.

“I have a disability and even now it is hard to find parking… I don’t want to be selfish, but this is not a good option,” she lamented.

Clara Solis asked Metro and Caltrans to explain why East LA residents should bare the burden of other cities’ transportation problems. “Fifteen of our precious businesses that are walking distance from residences will be removed,” she said.

Yolanda Duarte, advisory chairperson for the Maravilla Community Center, said Metro 710 project spokespersons had gone to the eastside Center to give the community and businesses more information about the project.

Yolanda Duarte, an East Los Angeles resident, told Metro officials her concerns with the rail alternative. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

Yolanda Duarte, an East Los Angeles resident, told Metro officials her concerns with the rail alternative. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

“On two occasions questions were asked if businesses or residences will be taken, the answer [by Metro] was no. [Now] The EIR states 15 businesses will be targeted” to make room for rail stations, she said, visibly frustrated. The businesses are on Mednik, south of the I-60/at Third Street: One home and a businesses on East Cesar Chavez could also be taken.

People were able to review maps and other visual materials pertaining to the five alternatives and ask Metro engineers questions before the public hearing got under way.

Metro planners explained that if the light rail is chosen, it would travel 7.5 miles, divided into 3 miles of aerial track and 4.5 miles submerged approximately 6-stories underground.

The rail line would run from south of Valley Boulevard, with the first aerial station on Mednik Avenue adjacent to the East LA Civic Center Station, and two more aerial stations on Floral Drive and at Cal State LA. It would then go underground with stations in Alhambra, Huntington Drive, South Pasadena and to the Fillmore Station in Pasadena where it would connect with the Gold Line.

Many eastside residents have long resented Metro opting to build the Eastside Gold Line above ground while  approving preferred but costlier underground subway options for other communities.

Several people said the eastside is once again getting the short end of the stick, complaining that the proposed rail line would run above ground through East LA, but then go underground through the more affluent communities north of Cal State LA.

“Why don’t we get a tunnel” like they do in Pasadena, one speaker demanded to know.

“Take out this project, do not even consider it,” said Gilbert Hernandez.

How to fill the 4.5-mile gap between the 710’s terminus in Alhambra and the Foothill (210) Freeway in Pasadena is a debate that has raged on for more than six decades. If a route is eventually selected, a revenue source to cover the hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of dollars needed to build it would still have to be found. The project could take three to five years to complete if the light rail is chosen.

L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis represents East Los Angeles and other areas impacted by the SR-710. She told EGP via email it is imperative to reduce congestion, improve air quality and enhance mobility for all residents, however, she does not yet see “any option as a natural choice” due to the many pros and cons.

“For example, the light rail alternative threatens the highest number of businesses and homes while the tunnel options could become a bottomless money pit. A combination of alternatives may end up being the way to get the most for our money,” she stated, adding that her staff is studying the various options and will hold community input meetings in addition to those scheduled by Metro.

“The communities I represent deserve a solution that absolutely improves their quality of life and environment … while improving mobility and using transportation to foster economic growth,” she said.

Metro and Caltrans have scheduled two more public hearings:

—Wednesday, May 6 at La Cañada High School auditorium, with a map viewing from 5-6 p.m. and public hearing at 6 p.m.

—Thursday, May 7 at the Los Angeles Christian Presbyterian Church, map viewing 5-6 p.m. and public hearing at 6 p.m.

The full study is available at  http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist07/resources/envdocs/docs/710study/draft_eir-eis and can be viewed at the Caltrans District Office, 100 S. Main St., Los Angeles, CA 90012 and public libraries listed here:  http://www.metro.net/projects/sr- 710-conversations.

Comments will be accepted by mail through July 6: Mail to Garret Damrath, Caltrans Division 7, Division of Environmental Planning, 100 South Main Street MS-16, Los Angeles CA 90012.

To read more about the SR-710, go to www.EGPNews.com.

—-

Twitter @jackiereporter

jgarcia@egpnews.com
Updated 2;50 p.m.

Alhambra Woman Dies of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

April 9, 2015 by · Leave a Comment 

A 25-year-old woman found unconscious on the floor of her Alhambra residence may have died of carbon monoxide poisoning, police said Tuesday.

Police and paramedics were called to the 3100 block of Norwich Avenue at 12:10 p.m. Monday after the woman’s mother came home from a two-hour shopping trip and found her daughter unresponsive on the floor of their residence, said Sgt. Jerry Johnson of the Alhambra Police Department.

Monique Rivera was pronounced dead at the scene, said coroner’s Chief Craig Harvey. An autopsy was pending to determine the cause of death, he said.

The woman’s dog also died at the scene, according to Johnson, who said investigators were working to determine if a natural gas water heater in the kitchen may not have been vented properly, causing carbon monoxide fumes to be released into the home.

Foro Examina el Estudio SR-710

April 2, 2015 by · 1 Comment 

Un foro que tomó lugar en la Universidad Estatal de California Los Ángeles para discutir si  “¿Extender o no extender?” la Autopista 710, se convirtió más en un entretenido debate que bien pudo haber sido apropiadamente llamado “¿Metro o Túnel?”

En un esfuerzo por completar el proyecto que se enfoca en el tramo de 4.5 millas entre la Autopista (210) Foothill de Pasadena y el final de la Autopista (710) Long Beach en Alhambra ha creado debates encendidos, protestas públicas y demandas, deteniendo el proyecto por casi seis décadas.

Read this article in English: Forum Takes Closer Look at SR-710

Caltrans y Metro publicaron en Marzo el primer borrador del tan esperado proyecto de estudio ambiental que incluye el borrador del informe de impacto/declaración de impacto ambiental (DIR/DEIS) con las cinco alternativas propuestas que varían en costo. Las agencias de transporte han dicho en el pasado que ellos toman una vista regional hacia el impacto en cada una de las alternativas y así mismo al impacto directo a las comunidades a lo largo del corredor de la 710 a la 210.

El foro, organizado conjuntamente por el Instituto Edmund G. Pat Brown de Asuntos Públicos de CSULA y la Liga de Mujeres Votantes de Pasadena, presento a cuatro panelistas de ciudades cercanas donde se ubica el proyecto regional y expertos en el tema. Ellos fueron los Concejales Bárbara Messina (Ciudad de Alhambra), John Fasana (Ciudad de Duarte), Ara Najarian (Ciudad de Glendale) y Michael Cacciotti (Ciudad de South Pasadena).

Raphael Sonenshein, director ejecutivo del Instituto Pat Brown y moderador del foro, dijo que los panelistas fueron escogidos después de que el instituto investigó el polémico proyecto. “Cuatro nombres continuaban resurgiendo … y todos aceptaron en venir”, explicó Sonenshein.

“Supongo que la mayoría de ustedes han leído el informe”, Sonenshein preguntó en tono de broma. El público respondió con risas debido a que el informe y las enmiendas tienen un total de 26,000 páginas.

Las cinco alternativas incluyen un sistema de gestión del tráfico, una línea de autobús rápido, un tren ligero (metro), una autopista en un túnel y la opción requerida de “no construir”.

El lunes, la autopista en un túnel—que extendería la autopista 710 Norte como una carretera de alta velocidad con acceso limitado—y el tren ligero—que proporcionaría un servicio ferroviario dirigido a proporcionar transporte desde el Este de Los Ángeles a Pasadena—fueron los más debatidos.

Los panelistas del foro fueron elegidos debido a su experiencia en el tema. (EGP foto por Nancy Martínez)

Los panelistas del foro fueron elegidos debido a su experiencia en el tema. (EGP foto por Nancy Martínez)

Messina le dijo a la audiencia que apoya firmemente el túnel, ya que aliviaría un “asunto regional”.

También le preocupa que si se aprueba el tren ligero, este podría causar más daño que bien.

“Se van a destruir demasiados negocios y residencias”, dijo Messina, lo que provocó las risas de la audiencia puesto que el túnel haría lo mismo.

Por otro lado, Najarian dijo que él apoya firmemente el tren ligero, ya que sería más barato para construir, $2.4 billones en comparación con los $5.650 billones que costaría construir el túnel.

La discusión se encendió cuando los panelistas difirieron en cuanto a seguridad puesto que el túnel no tendría salidas, a excepción de la entrada y salida.

Messina dijo que es “muy tonto” pensar que un túnel es peligroso, ya que han existido durante cientos de años.

Fasana, quien favorece la construcción del túnel, dijo a la audiencia que este es seguro, pero “la pregunta es si se debería permitir el paso a los camiones”.

Tampoco está claro si se permitirá que los camiones utilicen el túnel, un problema de seguridad que preocupa a muchos tomando en cuenta que este sería un túnel continuo y se debe saber que hacer en caso de una emergencia.

“Si algo sucede, usted está atascado ahí”, señaló Najarian.

La posibilidad de un peaje para compensar los gastos de mantenimiento aún no se ha abordado.

Sin embargo Najarian dice que es muy probable que un túnel cause un cobro de peaje, lo que tendría que recurrir a que conductores de camiones paguen la cuota.

“Una mamá de fútbol que viaja en ese autopista no va a pagar ese peaje”, dijo.

Fasana argumentó que la mayoría de los camiones viajan al este, y que el movimiento de mercancías parece estar dirigido en una dirección que no requeriría que los camiones viajaran al norte y al sur.

Cacciotti, quien apoya la alternativa del tren ligero, dijo que la mejor opción es proporcionar más transporte público en la zona noreste. Él duda que el tráfico mejore con la creación del túnel.

“Muchos de estos vehículos son locales, no van a salir de las calles”, dijo.

Messina recomendó que lo que la cuenca de Los Ángeles necesita es más autopistas y carreteras. “La gente no se va a salir de sus autos”, dijo. “Tenemos que invertir en nuestro sistema de transporte”.

Messina agregó que otro ferrocarril que se extendería desde el Este de Los Ángeles a Pasadena en última instancia, devastaría la mayoría de el Este de Los Ángeles.

Por otra parte, la construcción de un túnel podría traer hasta 40.000 puestos de trabajo a la zona, una razón por la cual los sindicatos favorecen la alternativa, dijo Messina.

Pero, con la misma cantidad de dinero utilizado para el túnel, puede haber tres o cuatro trenes de metro ligero, dijo Cacciotti.

Mientras que muchos participantes quedaron satisfechos con la información presentada, algunos cuantos dijeron que estaban decepcionados de que no tuvieron representación de sus ciudades y vecindarios que son afectados por el estudio, el cual cubre gran parte del Valle de San Gabriel, y el Este y Noreste de Los Ángeles.

Melissa Preciado, 35, residente de El Sereno le dijo a EGP que el foro debería esforzarse por tener una representación equitativa de todas las comunidades.

“La próxima vez me gustaría ver al Concejal [José] Huizar y representantes de Monterey Park porque también serán afectados por este proyecto”, dijo Preciado.

La residente de Monterey Park Elizabeth López le dijo a EPG que llegó al foro apoyando fuertemente la alternativa del túnel y después de escuchar el debate “estaba feliz de saber que los argumentos se acoplaron con hechos”, dijo López. “Al final me sentí muy bien informada”.

Blanca Espinoza, presidenta de la Cámara de Comercio del Este de Los Ángeles le dijo a EGP que algunas personas en su comunidad han perdido interés en el tema, porque sienten que a pesar de que ofrecen su punto de vista, sus decisiones no se toman en serio.

Recordó cuando Metro comenzó las discusiones sobre la Extensión de la Línea Dorada del Metro, cuya construcción se inició en 2004. Los residentes asistieron a las reuniones y expresaron sus preocupaciones, “pero a largo plazo, [Metro] decidió qué hacer al final”, dijo.

López también expresó su decepción porque no vio a más vecinos de Monterey Park.

“Pensé que al menos los funcionarios elegidos estarían aquí”, dijo.

Metro y Caltrans están programando tres audiencias públicas donde los residentes pueden hacer preguntas y comentarios:

-Sábado 11 de abril, en el Auditorio Ingalls Roscoe C. en el campus del Colegio del Este de Los Ángeles, con la revisión del mapa de 10-11am y una audiencia pública 11-4pm; y

-Martes, 14 de abril, en el Centro de Convenciones de Pasadena, con una revisión del mapa de 5-6pm y una audiencia pública de 7-9pm.

-Miercoles, 6 de mayo, en el auditorio de La Cañada High School, con una revisión del mapa de 5-6pm y una audiencia pública de 6-9pm.

-Jueves, 7 de mayo, en la iglesia Los Angeles Christian Presbyterian, con una revisión de mapa 5-6pm y una audiencia pública de 6-9pm.

El estudio completo está disponible en: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist07/resources/envdocs/docs/710study/draft_eir-eis

El documento completo se puede ver en la Oficina de Caltrans District, 100 S. Main St., Los Ángeles, CA 90012. También hay copias disponibles en las bibliotecas públicas enumeradas aquí: http://www.metro.net/projects/sr- 710-conversations

Se aceptarán comentarios hasta el 6 de julio.

[Actualización 3 de abril de 2015: Dos foros públicos se anunciaron para el mes de mayo.]

—-

Twitter @jackieguzman

@nancyreporting

jgarcia@egpnews.com

nmartinez@egpnews.com

Forum Takes Closer Look at SR-710 Debate

April 2, 2015 by · 1 Comment 

A forum Monday at Cal State Los Angeles billed as a discussion on whether to “Extend or Nor Extend?” the 710 Freeway, turned into a lively debate that could have appropriately been re-titled

“Rail or Tunnel?”

Approximately 200 people attended the forum co-hosted by the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs at Cal State LA and the League of Women Voters of Pasadena.

Lea este artículo en español: Foro Examina el Estudio SR-710

Efforts to fill the 4.5-mile gap between the 710’s terminus in Alhambra and the Foothill (210) Freeway in Pasadena, has drawn heated debate, public protests and lawsuits, halting the project for nearly six decades.

Caltrans and Metro in March released the draft impact report/environmental impact statement (DIR/DEIS) on the five proposed alternatives, which vary in cost. The transportation agencies have in the past said they are taking a regional view of the impact each of the alternatives will have, as well as looking at the direct impact to communities along the 710 to 210 corridor.

A woman reads a Metro pamphlet on the SR-710 North study during a forum at CSULA Monday. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

A woman reads a Metro pamphlet on the SR-710 North study during a forum at CSULA Monday. (EGP photo by Nancy Martinez)

The forum featured an informative and engaging discussion between four city council members —Barbara Messina (Alhambra), John Fasana (Duarte), Ara Najarian (Glendale) and Michael Cacciotti (South Pasadena) — whose names kept coming up as experts on the alternatives and history of the controversial project, according to Raphael Sonenshein, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute and forum moderator.

“I assume most of you have read the report,” Sonenshein jokingly asked, drawing laughter from the audience, aware that the report, including all studies and amendments, is 26,000 pages long.

The five alternatives include a traffic management system, a rapid bus line, a light rail, a freeway tunnel and the required “no build” option.

On Monday, the freeway tunnel – which would extend the 710 north as a high-speed with limited access roadway – and the light rail transit – which would provide a rail service directed to provide transportation from East Los Angeles to Pasadena – were the most debated.

Messina told the audience she strongly supports the freeway tunnel because it would alleviate a “regional issue.”

She worries that if the light rail is approved, it would cause more damage than good.

“It will destroy too many businesses and residences,” she said, prompting laughter from members of the audience who have the same concerns about the tunnel.

On the other hand, Najarian said he strongly supports a light rail train because at $2.4 billion it will be cheaper to build then the $5.65 billion estimated cost to build a freeway tunnel.

The discussion grew heated as panelists disagreed over whether a nearly five-mile tunnel, with no outlets except at its entrance and exit, would be safe.

Messina said it is “very lame” to think that a tunnel is dangerous because they have existed for hundreds of years.

Fasana also favors the tunnel alternative, but said the real question is whether trucks should be allowed.

It’s not clear if trucks would be allowed and that raises concerns about what happens if a big rig overturns or if there is a fire in the tunnel. Emergency response could become an issue, said Najarian.

“If something happens, you are stuck there,” Najarian pointed out.

The tunnel’s high price tag has raised the specter of a toll charge to make up for costly maintenance, which has yet to be addressed.

A tunnel will most definitely mean a toll, Najarian said firmly. “A soccer mom traveling on that freeway will not pay that toll,” so it’s going to be the truckers who will be on the hook for toll charges, Najarian said.

Concerns about a large number of trucks traveling through the tunnel are unfounded, Fasana argued. Most trucks travel east because that’s the direction goods are moving, not north and south, he argued.

Cacciotti sees more benefit in building a light rail system through the area. The best traffic solution is to provide more public transportation options in the northeast area, he said. Cacciotti doubts that a tunnel will improve local traffic as it’s supporters claim.

“Many of these cars are local, they won’t move off the streets,” he said.

The L.A. basin needs more freeways and highways, Messina countered. “People are not going to get out of their car,” she said. “We need to invest in our transportation system.”

Messina said adding a light rail line between East Los Angeles and Pasadena would ultimately devastate East Los Angeles the most.

On the other hand, a tunnel could bring up to 40,000 jobs to the area, said Messina, adding it’s the reason labor unions favor the tunnel option.

But with the same amount of money it would cost to construct the tunnel you could build three or four light rail lines, argued Cacciotti.

While many in the audience following the forum said they appreciated the clarity of the information presented, a few people said that they were disappointed there were not representatives from some of the cities and neighborhoods in the study area, which covers much of the San Gabriel Valley as well as portions of unincorporated East Los Angeles and the city of Los Angeles.

Forums such as this should strive to have equal representation from all communities, said El Sereno resident Melissa Preciado.

“Next time, I would like to see Councilmember Huizar and representatives from Monterey Park because they will be just as much affected by this project,” Preciado said.

Monterey Park resident Elizabeth Lopez, however, told EGP that when she went into the forum she was already a big supporter of the tunnel, but the panelists did done a good job of clarifying the various points of views.

“I was happy to hear arguments were coupled with facts,” Lopez said. “At the end, I felt very well informed.”

East Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce President Blanca Espinoza told EGP that some people in her community have lost interest in the issue because they don’t feel Metro takes their point of view seriously.

She recalled when Metro began discussions over the Eastside Gold Line Extension, which began construction in 2004. Residents would attend meetings and voice their concerns, “but in the long run, [it was Metro] that decided what to do,” she said.

Lopez also expressed disappointment that she did not see more of her Monterey Park neighbors.

“I thought at least the elected officials would be here,” she said.

Metro and Caltrans are scheduling three public hearings where residents can ask questions and submit comments:

—Saturday, April 11, at the Roscoe C. Ingalls Auditorium on the campus of East Los Angeles College, with a map viewing from 10-11 a.m. and a public hearing from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.; and

—Tuesday, April 14, at the Pasadena Convention Center, with a map viewing from 5-6 p.m. and a public hearing from 7-9 p.m.

–Wednesday, May 6 at La Cañada High School auditorium, with a map viewing 5-6p.m. and public hearing from 6-9p.m.

–Thursday, May 7 at the Los Angeles Christian Presbyterian Church, map viewing 5-6 p.m. and public hearing 6-p.m.

The full study is available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist07/resources/envdocs/docs/710study/draft_eir-eis

The full document can also be viewed at the Caltrans District Office, 100 S. Main St., Los Angeles, CA 90012. Copies are also available at public libraries listed here: http://www.metro.net/projects/sr-710-conversations/.

Comments will be accepted through July 6.

[Update April 3, 2015 : Two public forums announced in the month of May.]  

—-

Twitter @jackiereporter

@nancyreporting

jgarcia@egpnews.com

nmartinez@egpnews.com

Copyright © 2017 Eastern Group Publications/EGPNews, Inc. ·