Diamond Bar Group Hails Action on Cityhood Vote

Relations between county officials and advocates of cityhood for this community of 70,000 have turned from acrimonious to harmonious after a meeting last week between Diamond Bar community leaders and Supervisor Pete Schabarum.

In recent weeks, cityhood proponents had angrily questioned whether the county was dragging its feet in processing Diamond Bar’s application for incorporation in order to delay a vote on cityhood from November to next April. The suspicion was that county officials, including Schabarum, wanted the additional five months to wield land-use authority over Diamond Bar.

Although some disagreement over the boundaries of the proposed city of Diamond Bar exists, the mood of incorporation proponents has become upbeat.

“We don’t know where to hang the sword and the shield,” said Dexter McBride, a member of the Diamond Bar Improvement Assn. and the Incorporation ’88 Committee. “It’s such a pleasure to put them on the rack. Those responsible for the processing (of the cityhood application) seem to be doing an excellent job.”

During the meeting, Schabarum pledged that he would try to expedite processing of the incorporation application by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), of which he is a member.

Schabarum would prefer that Diamond Bar voters decide the cityhood question during the presidential election, which would generate a higher turnout and cost less than a special election next spring, aide Judy Hammond said.

“He hasn’t taken a position on incorporation itself, but he assured them he wants (the cityhood measure) before the greatest number of voters, and he wants to avoid the costs of a special election,” Hammond said.

Schabarum made that desire known to Ruth Benell, executive director of LAFCO, Hammond said. On Monday, Benell announced that the commission would hold a public hearing on Diamond Bar incorporation July 13.

Approval Expected

Cityhood proponents, who had complained because LAFCO had not set a date for the hearing, said they now think that their application will be approved by the commission and the Board of Supervisors by Aug. 11, the deadline for the supervisors to place a cityhood measure on the November ballot.

“A July hearing date was on our schedule in order for us to make the November ballot,” said Gary Werner, chairman of the Incorporation ’88 committee. “As long as there aren’t any glitches, we should make it.”

Michi Takahashi, administrative assistant for LAFCO, said the hearing date was not set until Monday because Benell did not have the information she needed to prepare the fiscal feasibility report on Diamond Bar, which must be released at least five days before the hearing. On the previous Friday, LAFCO was notified by the State Board of Equalization that the information would be forthcoming.

Sales Tax Doubles

“I tried to explain to (cityhood proponents) that we were not delaying on setting the hearing,” Takahashi said. “We just don’t set a hearing date until we are reasonably certain we will have all the information we’ll need to do the staff report.”

Phyllis Papen, president of the Diamond Bar Improvement Assn., said information from the state indicates annual sales-tax revenue for Diamond Bar of $1.8 million, almost double the sales-tax revenue reported in 1983. That year, LAFCO found that Diamond Bar could support itself as a city, but voters rejected incorporation by a margin of 230 votes out of 6,696 cast.

“We have seen substantial growth in our commercial areas in the last five years, and we have felt that the report would be highly favorable as far as revenues to support our services,” Papen said. “Of course, we’re also supporting more residents, so we’ll just have to see how the numbers work out.”

Takahashi said there is no certainty that the incorporation application will be approved by the election deadline, noting that the commission can continue the public hearing for up to 70 days after July 13.

‘Realm of Possibility”

“A hearing date has been set. Beyond that, it’s anybody’s guess,” Takahashi said. “We really can’t anticipate what the commission itself is going to do on July 13. . . . You can’t expect them to rush it through just to meet an election date.”

The likelihood of a Diamond Bar cityhood measure making the ballot really hasn’t changed, Takahashi said, adding: “It was always in the realm of possibility.

“If they miss (the November ballot), it’s not like it’ll be the end of the world for them.”

However, cityhood proponents argue that the voters should decide the incorporation question in November because of the much higher turnout for a presidential election. Incorporation committee members also fear that they might lose the support generated during the recent signature-gathering campaign if the vote is not held this year.

“It would destroy the momentum,” McBride said.

Check Boundaries

Commission members will also scrutinize the boundaries of the proposed city. Two areas included in the boundaries suggested by the Incorporation ’88 Committee were excluded from the proposed city by LAFCO in 1983 at the request of Schabarum.

The larger of the two is a neighborhood adjoining the Pomona Freeway and west of Brea Canyon Road. Cityhood backers wanted the neighborhood considered part of Diamond Bar five years ago, but Schabarum argued that the area was really in Rowland Heights, a position the supervisor still holds, Hammond said.

However, Papen said the neighborhood was included in the proposed city boundaries at the request of residents there.

Desire to Be Included

“That was in the interest of the people who live in that area who have continued to demonstrate their desire to be part of the city of Diamond Bar proper,” Papen said.

But the question of boundaries should not be a sticking point in the cityhood bid, Papen said. If Diamond Bar is incorporated, residents in the neighborhood can request that their area be annexed.

If they can get their proposition on the ballot, members of the incorporation committee said, there is no doubt that voters will accept cityhood this time around. McBride said he conducted an informal survey while circulating cityhood petitions, and all but seven of the 197 registered voters he talked to supported incorporation.

Residents gave a variety of reasons for wanting cityhood, including desire for local control over development and waste management and concern that Pomona or the City of Industry might try to annex sections of the community, McBride said.

County Approval Needed

But before Diamond Bar residents can express their views on cityhood at the polls, the county must first give its approval. After months of circulating petitions, members of the incorporation committee must sit and wait for a couple of additional months.

“Once we turned in the signatures, it’s out of our hands,” Werner said. “There’s really nothing we can do until we get to the public hearing.”

Added McBride: “We’re spectators until July 13, but we’re reassured spectators. We’re pleased with the county, and we’re very pleased that we’re right where we should be at this point.”

MP, GEORGE CAREY / Los Angeles Times