Montebello Mayor Joins Metrolink Board

December 15, 2017 by · Leave a Comment 

Mayor Vivian Romero is “truly excited” to be the newest member of the Metrolink Board of Directors, after being appointed Dec. 8 by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Chairman Mayor Eric Garcetti to serve as the alternate for L.A, county Supervisor Hilda Solis.

Metrolink is a Southern California regional commuter rail service governed by The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), a joint powers authority made up of an 11-member board representing the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties. The transportation system included seven routes that run through 6 counties. It is the second largest commuter rail system in Southern California, (Metro is the largest), and third largest in the county, according Metrolink’s announcement of Romero’s appointment.

“I am pleased to welcome Mayor Romero on behalf of the Metrolink Board,” said Board Chair Andrew Kotyuk in the announcement. “She is dedicated to addressing the mobility needs of her constituents in Montebello and the San Gabriel Valley as well as the entire diverse Southern California region.”

Montebello Mayor Vivian Romero

Montebello Mayor Vivian Romero

Romero is the first LGBTQ elected official to serve as mayor of Montebello, a position appointed by a vote of the members of the City Council. She is the founder of a boutique entertainment group focusing on management, licensing, publishing and contract negotiation.

Attending her first official meeting last week, Romero thanked Solis for facilitating the appointment and “her confidence and faith” in her.

“Based on my experience as recent past President of the Independent Cities Association and the current Chair of Metro’s San Gabriel Valley Service Council, I am prepared to work collaboratively and contribute toward improving regional mobility in Southern California,” Romero said.

“I will also continue my work advocating for the critical investments required to meet our region’s infrastructure and transportation needs that indispensably keep our communities and its residents safely moving and thriving.”


Judge Rejects Lawsuit Challenging Measure M Language

September 6, 2016 by · Leave a Comment 

A judge Tuesday rejected a petition filed on behalf of Commerce and 7 other cities seeking significant changes in the ballot language for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s proposed half-cent county sales tax measure, saying there was no evidence the wording was confusing to voters.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mary H. Strobel said Measure M is not an initiative and therefore did not require the ballot language specifics sought in the action filed last week by the cities of Carson, Commerce, Norwalk, Torrance, Santa Fe Springs, Ranchos Palos Verdes and Signal Hill.

The petition alleged that the ballot label for Measure M did not include the actual 1 percent total rate of the tax to be imposed. The petitioners also claimed the ballot label for Measure M does not state that the proposed tax would be permanent.

Carson Mayor Albert Robles said after the hearing that he and the other coalition members were disappointed with the ruling and are considering an appeal. He said Metro’s argument that the coalition was required to seek help from the Legislature was not an option because it would have been too late to do so in time for the November election.

“All we are seeking is transparency,” Robles said, adding, “The voters shouldn’t be misled and confused.”

Signal Hill City Councilman Larry Forester said many residents of the southern part of Los Angeles County do not have access to computers in order to read background material on Measure M.

“It’s a sad day for voters,” Forester said.

The petitioners said the ballot measure leads voters to believe that there will be an equal distribution of projects. In reality, projects in the western and northern of the regions of the county will take priority, while southern Los Angeles County regions will not see any benefits until 2039-2040, according to the petitioners.

“The plaintiffs attempted to mislead the voters with a politically motivated lawsuit, but the court ruled today that there was no evidence the wording is confusing to voters,” said Yusef Robb of the campaign on behalf of Measure M in response to the judge’s decision.

“Measure M is clear on what it will do: ease congestion and make transportation improvements Countywide and in each of L.A. County’s 88 cities … The plaintiffs should stop interfering with the voters’ right to make their own judgment on Measure M.” Robb said in written statement.

Copyright © 2019 Eastern Group Publications/EGPNews, Inc. ·