(May 3) TWENTYNINE PALMS — The city of Twentynine Palms has settled on bringing in Joe Guzzetta, the former city manager of Desert Hot Springs and the current general manager of the Joshua Basin Water District, to replace recently departed city manager Richard Warne.
Guzzetta will officially begin with the city June 1.
After a short but intensive search for Warne’s replacement, the city council at a specially scheduled meeting on April 30 voted unanimously to hire Guzzetta, providing him with a $184,000 salary and a $6,000 per year contribution to his retirement fund.
Under the contract extended to Guzzetta, who currently lives in Riverside, he will be required to take up residence in Twentynine Palms by March 1, 2014.
For the last nine years Guzzetta has been the general manager of The Joshua Basin Water District, while that entity has carried out capital improvements, infrastructure replacement, a groundwater recharge program and the facilitation of a wastewater treatment plant partnership with the Hi-Desert Medical Center in Joshua Tree.
In addition to managing Desert Hot Springs, Guzzetta was the city manager for periods in both Hemet and Corte Madera.

(May 3) In 2012, then-incumbent 43rd Congressional District Congressman Joe Baca chose to seek reelection in California’s newly redrawn 35th Congressional District, which had been formed pursuant to the state redistricting that took place after the 2010 Census.  Baca actually lived within the confines of the newly drawn 31st Congressional District, but was not required to run there as the residency requirements for members of Congress specify that they must merely be a resident of the state in which the district they represent is located.
While voter registration in both the 31st and 35th districts favored Democrats, Baca calculated he had a far better chance of maintaining his incumbency in the 35th District. In the 35th, registered Democrats overwhelmingly outnumbered registered Republicans 114,641 to 65,521. In the 31st, the margin was 119,964 Democrats to 103,904 Republicans. A factor that influenced his decision to run in the 35th was that another incumbent, Republican Gary Miller, who had represented California’s 42nd District, was purposed to seek election in the 31st District as a consequence of redistricting.
Given Republicans’ greater voter turnout propensity and Miller’s strong fundraising capability, Baca elected to run in the 35th.  In 2012, California put into place open primary elections. In the 35th, Baca faced a challenge by Gloria Negrete-McLeod, who had been a member of the California Senate since 2006, having previously served in the Assembly from 2000 to 2006. Of note, in winning her state senate seat for the first time in 2006, Negrete-McLeod had defeated Joe Baca’s son, Joe Baca, Jr.
Given his incumbency and perceived fundraising advantage over all other challengers, including Negrete-McLeod, Baca in 2012 appeared to have a leg up on the competition. And indeed, in the June open primary polling, Baca bested Negrete-McLeod by what seemed a more-than-comfortable margin, 12,619 votes or 47.7 percent to 9,078 or 33.93 percent. A third candidate in the race, Anthony Vieyra polled 5,058 votes or 18.9 percent. Thus, Baca and Negrete-McLeod, both Democrats, qualified for a head-to-head battle in the November general election, one Baca seemed destined to win handily.
In the final weeks before the general election on November 6, Negrete-McLeod’s campaign was infused with $3.8 million in donations from a political action committee controlled by Republican New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, which paid for a $2.3 million television advertising blitz during the last week of the campaign. Baca, who throughout most of the campaign had been complacent, was caught flatfooted and saw the election slip away, with Negrete-McLeod capturing 61,065 votes or 54.35 percent to his 51,281 votes or 45.65 percent.
Baca, now 66, is unwilling to accept political retirement. He indicated relatively early on that he intended to run for Congress yet again. He hinted, and most of those listening assumed, he had his sights set on a rematch with Negrete-McLeod, who will not be able to rely upon Bloomberg’s largesse in 2014, and whom Baca will no longer take lightly.
More recently, however, Baca rethought his future political strategy and concluded that he will run in the 31st District, challenging Miller.
Already, however, Baca’s road back to Capitol Hill has complexified. Ideally,  the 13-year veteran of Congress had hoped to engineer his political comeback by simply standing up to challenge Miller in the 31st District, which sprawls across San Bernardino County from Rancho Cucamonga to Redlands, covering all or parts of Fontana, Rialto, Colton, San Bernardino, and Redlands and consists of a population that is  29.7% White, 11.0% Black, 7.2% Asian, and 49.4% Hispanic. Given the district’s current 119,964 to 103,904 registered voter advantage of Democrats over Republicans, Baca was looking for an uneventful primary battle that would result in a match-up against the Republican Miller, the same battle he had avoided last year when he chose to run in the 35th.
It is a painful irony to Baca, a Democrat who has never lost to a Republican, that those who have vanquished him have been Democrats. And as the election of 2014 looms closer, it appears that Baca’s toughest opponents, the ones who may prevent him from returning to Washington, D.C. or prevent him even from getting into a one-on-one contest with Miller, are his fellow Democrats.
Already, three stalwart Democrats have declared their candidacies in the 31st in 2014.
Pete Aguilar, the mayor of Redlands, who ran unsuccessfully in the primary in the 31st last year, is making a return engagement.  Also running is Eloise Gomez Reyes, a first-time candidate who has been active in supporting other Democratic candidates in the past, and San Bernardino School Board Member Danny Tillman. And the field is by no means closed, as other potential Democrats have more than a year-and-a-half to declare their candidacies. Nevertheless, the troika of Aguilar, Reyes and Tillman are in themselves troubling enough for Baca.
Aguilar has made clear he is ready to undercut Baca with members of their party. He recently sought to capture the Democratic Party base in the 31st, launching a broadside against Baca by reminding voters that Baca had endorsed the Republican Miller in his election bid last year. Upon her announcement, Reyes picked up the endorsements of a number of prominent Democrats, including that of Colton Mayor Sarah Zamora. And Tillman’s presence in the field is particularly galling to Baca. Tillman is a political ally of former Rialto mayor, assemblyman and county supervisor Jerry Eaves. Eaves, likewise a Democrat, was Baca’s major nemesis at the beginning of his political career. Baca lost three straight election campaigns for Assembly against Eaves in 1986, 1988 and 1990. It was not until Eaves voluntarily left the Assembly in favor of a successful bid for county supervisor in 1992 and sought unsuccessfully to have his place in Sacramento assumed by another of his allies, John Longville, that Baca was finally able to get elected to state office.
Now, to achieve the match-up with Miller, Baca must endure what could be a bruising internecine struggle within his own party. And Aguilar, as the most serious of the Democratic contenders against Miller last year, has already secured crucial Democratic Party backing for his 2014 run. Thus, Baca’s desired strategy of engaging in energetic fundraising and building a substantial political war chest and simply entering the race a year-and-a-half hence, while surviving the primary and husbanding his financial resources to heavily engage Miller in the November 2014  General Election does not appear viable. He will need to spend a considerable amount of money in the June 2014 Primary to ensure that he can outdistance Aguilar, thus weakening his campaigning capability against Miller for November 2014.
Indeed, the well-financed Miller has already proven that he can exploit the Democrats’ tendency to field an abundance of candidates during the primaries.
Last year, Aguilar was joined by three other Democrats  –  Justin Kim, Rita Ramirez-Dean,  and Renea Wickman in the primary. Another Republican – former California Senate Republican Leader Bob Dutton – was in the race along with Miller. Despite the Democrats’ registration advantage in the district, the splitting of the Democratic vote among twice as many candidates as the Republicans offered resulted in Miller and Dutton being the top vote-getters in June. Thus, no Democrats qualified for the November run-off. Miller and Dutton stood against each other in November and Miller proved victorious.

(May 3) VICTORVILLE—The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department has begun arresting panhandlers in this city of 115,903.
On April 27, deputies with the Victorville station took to the commercial districts and most heavily travelled streets of Victorville  to arrest those who both passively and more aggressively begged passersby and motorists for money.
In some of the cases, those holding signs at street corners or  entrances to or exits from the freeway or shopping centers were arrested and cited. Others who approached cars while on foot or sent their children to cars to receive money were taken into custody.
The action comes after numerous complaints by citizens relating to panhandling have been registered with authorities. Officials say they have concern with regard to public safety and the traffic hazards of pedestrians moving into the roadway.
Under California  Penal Code § 647c, which pertains to “disorderly conduct” anyone “Who accosts other persons in any public place or in any place open to the public for the purpose of begging or soliciting alms” is “guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Penal Code § 647c is rarely enforced.
Fifteen such arrests were made on Saturday in Victorville.

(May 3) YUCCA VALLEY—Declaring they are intent on “taking back our town,” a group of Yucca Valley residents have launched a recall effort targeting town councilmen George Huntington and Robert Lombardo. Huntington was served with a notice of intent to recall  early on April 30 and petitioners delivered papers to Lombardo at that evening’s town council meeting.
Dissatisfaction with Town Hall among a growing contingent of Yucca Valley residents has been seething for some time. This was exacerbated most recently when the council endorsed town manager Mark Nuaimi’s  17 percent reduction in the town’s workforce, from 41 to 34 full time employees, including laying off the town’s associate planner and Yucca Valley’s two recreation coordinators and forcing the retirements of the town clerk, community services director,  museum supervisor, a museum assistant, an animal shelter administrative assistant as well as a code compliance technician while moving to defund the operation of the only public swimming pool in town, the museum, the Fourth of July fireworks celebration and concerts in the park. Nuaimi justified the cost cutting moves as action that  will save $300,000 in the town’s upcoming fiscal year as the retirement incentives are cashed out, and $725,000 per year thereafter.
But Nuaimi’s economies came just two months after the town council conferred upon him a raise and guaranteed contract with the city through 2016 that pushed his total compensation package to $300,840 by 2015. At present he is receiving $190,000 per year in base salary and $103,339 in deferred compensation and benefits per year.
This has not sat well with many residents in the desert city of 20,700 in which the mean household income is $38,500 per year. According to their office-filing documents, four of the council’s five members live in Sky Harbor, the town’s most affluent residential neighborhood. There is a perception that the council, which of late is dominated by the four- member Sky Harbor ruling coalition, is out of touch with much of the community.
The grounds cited in the intent to recall notices for Huntington and Lombardo referenced the three-year extension of Nuaimi’s contract at nearly $300,000 annually and further cited their acceptance of  a cost on the town’s new animal shelter without having funding available, utilizing $100,000 in public money to promote the failed Measure U tax measure and soliciting money for the Measure U campaign from town vendors and contractors; persisting in seeking another tax measure in the aftermath of Measure U’s failure; and electing to appoint council members in the aftermath of resignations as opposed to holding elections to fill those vacancies.
Petitioners circulating the petitions for recall must obtain the valid signatures of 25 percent of the city’s registered voters within 90 days to qualify the recall question for the ballot. The petitions presented to the voters must contain the grounds upon which the recall is being sought and must accommodate a rebuttal statement of  up to 200 words if the  recall target provides one.
In his initial response, Huntington noted that he has been “a citizen of this community for over 39 years, continually serving in some capacity of town government for 19 of those years. I find it extremely distressing that a group has come forward with a recall effort when the town and this council are doing everything in its power to continue services and programs during these stressful economic times. I consider this intent to circulate a recall petition potentially expensive, disruptive and very disheartening.”
Huntington intimated that seeking his ouster was counterproductive, since he is well qualified to serve as a town councilman. “I bring my education and life experiences to the council’s decision-making processes to help make Yucca Valley a better place to live,” he said.
At press time, Lombardo had not yet circulated his response.

(May 3) The Arrowhead Lake Association Board of Directors has removed Allan Keller from that panel, based upon his failure to attend three consecutive board meetings.
The Arrowhead Lake Association manages and maintains Lake Arrowhead and Arrowhead Woods. Membership is voluntary and by application.
The board effected Keller’s removal at a specially-called emergency meeting on April 12, at which directors Samantha Allen-Newman and Tom Olhasso remotely participated by conference call. The board voted unanimously to declare Keller’s post –  At-Large Office B – vacant. The seat will now be filled by appointment.
Interested parties have until 5 p.m. today to submit an application to the association, at 870 North State Highway 173.
The board anticipates interviewing candidates at its May 18 regular board meeting with an appointment to soon follow.

(April 26) VICTORVILLE—The city of Victorville has retained the services of the Arent Fox law firm to represent it with regard to further investigation and potential legal action by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The city, its city council, its former redevelopment agency, its city attorney and some of its employees, contractors and consultants have been under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s scrutiny for nearly three years.
At the basis of that investigation are questions as to whether the city, its former redevelopment agency, its airport authority and its rail authority diverted bond money from the stated purposes for which those bonds were issued to other programs, whether city attorney/redevelopment agency attorney Andre de Bortnowsky purposefully misled investors with regard to the actual and eventual use of the bond money, whether documentation created by the city implicates city officials individually or collectively in fraud, and whether conflicts of interest existed with regard to the various outside entities, i.e., contractors and consultants, whose actions and representations formed the basis for the expenditure of at least a portion of the bond money.
What was described in June of 2010 as a “non-public, fact-finding inquiry” relating to less than $40 million in bonds issued by the city mushroomed, in August 2010, into a full-blown investigation on how the city had spent some $480 million received from bond offerings. At that point in the investigation, the  Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) obtained subpoenas for over 77,000 pages of documentation on how the city marketed its bonds and then spent those bond proceeds. By February 2012, the scope of the investigation had extended to $700 million worth of bonds issued by the city and its redevelopment agency, involving subpoenas for another 40,000 documents.
Federal investigators and an auditing firm hired by the city four years ago, Mayer Hoffman McCann, have documented that proceeds from bonds issued for redevelopment purposes as well as the civilian makeover of the former George Air Force Base into the Southern California Logistics Airport were diverted to other purposes.
An audit by Mayer Hoffman McCann begun in 2007 but not released until March of 2011 indicated “substantial doubt about the city’s ability to continue as a going concern.”  Mayer Hoffman McCann questioned whether Victorville can remain solvent, and uncovered tens of millions of dollars in internal loans that were never approved, three funds that were $180 million in the hole and dwindling cash reserves. Mayer Hoffman McCann said that as of March 2011 the city’s utility fund was $78 million upside down and that cash in the water district had dropped from $15 million in 2009 to $8 million as of June 30, 2010, despite a $20 million loan made to the district from the Southern California Logistics Airport Authority.
In 2004, the city earnestly set about to construct the 14-megawatt capacity Foxborough Power Station on east Nisquali Road, committing to completing the project on a $22 million budget, consisting of money to be appropriated out of the redevelopment agency’s operating fund. The intent was to generate electricity that would bypass the state power grid and be sold directly to businesses setting up shop in the Foxborough Industrial Park. The project failed to meet its April 2006 target opening date and in October 2006 the price tag for the project had escalated to over $54 million. Further construction delays ensued and with state mandated changes to the project that resulted in already purchased gas-fired combustion turbines being jettisoned for even more costly generators capable of running on biodiesel, its cost shot up further. In 2007, the city began borrowing from its general fund to shore up the project and then, as quietly as it could get away with, issued $90 million in bonds to cover the entire cost of Foxborough.
In April 2008, after all of the bond money had been eaten up by the Foxborough power plant project and another $5 million beyond that was consumed, city officials declared their intention to connect the plant to the state power grid, in absolute contravention to the original concept for the plant, which was to bypass the grid and thereby avoid the surcharge the state levies on electricity carried over its system so that low-cost energy could be sold to manufacturers to attract industry and jobs to the city’s industrial parks. Ultimately, the city failed to see that project through to fruition and the city council abandoned it altogether after having sunk $126 million into it.
More than $80 million of the $300 million in outstanding bonds floated specifically for airport operations actually funded city of Victorville operations or projects off Southern California Logistics Airport property, including $1.8 million utilized to acquire land for a city library. According to Mayer Hoffman McCann, at least $21.8 million was not spent in accordance with the bond covenants. Other airport money was used to further work on a 563-megawatt power plant the city was pursuing. The city also loaned $20 million in 2007 airport bond proceeds to the water district to help build a wastewater treatment plant. Those expenditures were made without informing or getting the consent of the bonds’ insurer, Radian.
By 2011, the Southern California Logistics Airport Authority (SCLAA) had accumulated debt of $102 million, twice the burden it had in 2009-10.
One issue repeatedly raised by Mayer Hoffman McCann was that staff had not properly documented and sought city council approval for its numerous interfund loans. The city had nearly $90 million in outstanding interfund loans as of June 2010. But only $30 million in loans had been formally approved by the council, according to the audit report.
Mayer Hoffman McCann reported staff did not properly document $20 million loaned between the city’s development impact fee funds, representing the city’s road developer impact fee account as having more than $20 million cash when essentially all of that money was spent through the public buildings developer impact fee account to carry out construction at City Hall and the Green Tree Clubhouse. When SCLAA ended 2009-10 with an $11 million cash overdraft, Victorville brought the cash balance to zero by borrowing money “for a term greater than one year” from its solid waste, rail authority and storm drain and street lighting funds, according to Mayer Hoffman McCann. The city’s redevelopment authority, which was decommissioned by state action in 2011, also loaned the airport more than $11 million to keep that enterprise going.
On December 1, 2011 a $10.6 million interest and principal payment on eight separate bond issuances made between 2005 and 2008 came due. The city defaulted on that payment.
On July 1, 2012, the San Bernardino County Grand Jury, after investigating Victorville’s operations for three years running, delivered a report indicating Victorville violated state laws transferring redevelopment money and property taxes dedicated to its sanitation department to its general fund budget, while squandering at least $116 million on never-realized efforts to develop electrical generating projects since 2005.
Initially, city attorney Andre de Bortnowsky, who characterized the SEC investigation as “a fishing expedition,” assumed a primary role in dealing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. Based upon the SEC’s examination of subpoenaed documents as well as interviews with city officials, de Bortnowsky has become a focus of the investigation. At issue is action taken by the city upon his advice as city attorney as well as while acting in his capacity of counsel for the redevelopment agency and Southern California Logistics Airport Authority. Investigators are examining very closely several conflicts of interest that existed as a consequence of de Bornowsky acting in the dual and triple capacities of city attorney, redevelopment attorney and bond counsel. According to information provided to the Sentinel by those with knowledge of the SEC investigation, employees with Mayer Hoffman McCann as well as with Kinsell, Newcomb & De Dios, a Carlsbad, California–based firm which provided bond-issuing assistance and underwriting to Victorville related to several of its bond transactions throughout the 2000s, provided information to both the FBI and Securities & Exchange Commission which has made de Bortnowsky’s continued representation of Victorville before the SEC untenable.
Accordingly, the city has now retained Los Angeles-based Arent Fox to handle any further interchanges between city officials and SEC investigators prior to the filing of any actual enforcement action against Victorville or its officials, including de Bortnowsky.  Arent Fox has assigned one of its partners, Terree Bowers, to the Victorville matter. Bowers, the former U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, heads Arent Fox’s national white collar crime unit.
Arent Fox has represented a number of public officials or high profile personages in San Bernardino County who have had legal challenges in the form of being subject to criminal or procedural investigations or criminal charges filed against them. Arent Fox represented former Upland police chief Steve Adams when he was on extended leave from his position and questions were swirling about him over his alleged hiding of a police report pertaining to alleged criminal action by then-Upland city manager Robb Quincey. Adams retired, retaining his full pension and benefits. Arent Fox now represents Quincey, against whom the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office has filed felony misappropriation of public funds, gaining personal benefit from an official contract, and perjury charges. Arent Fox also represents Rancho Cucamonga developer Jeff Burum, who is accused by the county district attorney and state attorney general with conspiracy and abetting former San Bernardino County supervisors Bill Postmus and Paul Biane in the receipt of bribes.
While with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Bowers created and led the Financial Institutions Fraud Task Force for the Los Angeles area.

(April 26) Even before the Upland City Council gave final approval to its new administrative citation ordinance on April 22, one city resident was challenging City Hall on whether the escalation of the city’s enforcement efforts and the increase in its fining authority would be reasonably applied.
The ordinance gives the city the ability to cite residents or businesses for code violations, subject them to a hearing process that utilizes city-paid and controlled hearing officers who are empowered to impose fines of up to $1,000 per day until the violation is redressed.
Robert Sparks, an Upland resident, said he was opposed to the city’s newly acquired authority and that the city has already abused the power it formerly possessed. He said that the complaint-driven nature of the city code enforcement function allowed city code enforcement officers to be used as a cat’s paw by vindictive neighbors against neighbors.
Sparks’ home in the 1400 block of Juanita Court stands out from others in his neighborhood.
“I take pride in the ownership of my house,” Sparks said. Indeed, over the years he has invested approaching $100,000 in improvements to the  home. Nevertheless, despite and actually because of his efforts at maintaining his property, the city’s code enforcement division has made life miserable for him.
“I built a deck in my backyard fourteen years ago, primarily as a playhouse for my kids,” Sparks said, noting he had obtained permits at that time for its construction. “Termites started to get into some of the structure, so I took off the detached bar where they [the termites] were primarily housed, and dissected the wood and found where they were and spot treated it.  My next door neighbor, who never liked the deck and thought of it as an intrusion into her privacy, called code enforcement.  The city cited me with a stop work order and sent out Luis Texiera from building and safety.  He was concerned primarily with finding out whether I was doing new construction, which would have to be permitted, or repairing something preexisting. I showed him what I was doing and his attitude was I was just doing normal maintenance on something that was already permitted and had been there for 14 years.  He said he was not sure what the complaint was about, but said, ‘You still have to go down to City Hall and explain.’ So I took off work and went down to building and safety and explained that I was just doing spot maintenance and was not building anything new. Carlos at the front counter said there was no issue with that and for me to go ahead.  So, I was releveling the surface and covering it with new fiberglass and putting in a sunscreen and two months later I get another stop work notice and was told to go to building and safety again, where I met with Mark Morton, the senior city building official. I explained to him what I was doing. He said that if it was extensive repairs and I was upgrading the side rail, there was a new code established in 2008 that required that it be 42 inches rather than 36 inches. That would require a new permit, a plot plan, and an engineer’s drawing, which would cost thousands of dollars. I said, ‘This is ridiculous.  If I do maintenance, I’m out of compliance. If I let it go, I’m in compliance.’ Mark said he would send Luis out there to look at it again and he left it up to him.  I called Luis and never heard back from him. I went ahead and finished all of the maintenance on the deck and got the sun screen up. Lo and behold, in April [2012] I get a notice from one of the code enforcement officers, Rachel Jarvis, that I didn’t follow through and replace the railing. And she says, ‘By the way, the columns in front of your house appear to be higher than three-and-a-half feet and I’m citing you for that.’ I responded back to her and to the city manager, Stephen Dunn, who I thought would be a voice of reason. What I got back was I was being threatened with prosecution for maintaining the home I have lived in for 26 years.  My neighbor to the east, who has video cameras pointed at my property throughout her backyard, has resented me having a deck in my own backyard for 14 years because she felt it was intruding on her privacy. She complained as soon as I started maintenance work on my deck. She used code enforcement to make a personal attack on me.  So the next thing is I have two code enforcement officers, a building inspector and two police cruisers show up at my house and they state that the columns on the front of my home appear to be higher than three-and-a-half feet. I measured the columns, which are light posts, myself.  They were not higher than three-and-a-half feet.  What I noticed was that the roots from the city-planted trees were causing displacement of the sidewalk so it looked from a certain perspective that the posts were higher up than they were. So, Luis goes and measures the columns and he determines they are less than three-and-a-half feet. At that point, they had been putting me through this for months. They were using the code enforcement department to carry out a vendetta for someone else. Because a code enforcement officer left her tape measure back at the office, I was declared guilty of a violation and had to prove my innocence.  They are issuing citations that say it  ‘appears’ a violation has taken  place and then using their department to intimidate and harass citizens without just cause and threaten them with prosecution if they don’t come down to their office in 10 days.  They are looking for anything to pick a fight over.”
Sparks wrote a letter to Dunn, decrying the city’s action. “I suggest you drop this personal vendetta you are pursuing and put our tax dollars to better use,” he wrote. “Don’t use me for your job justification.”
In response, the city went over Spark’s property with a fine-toothed comb once more, at which point city inspectors found that there were electrical lines in the columns for the lights set into them. They cited him for not having a permit for the electrical wiring. Sparks paid $250 for the permit, justifying the interminable code enforcement effort that had been carried out against him.
“Is that what all of this is about – turning neighbors against neighbors?” Sparks asked. “Regarding the columns’ height, I make every effort to make my home not only look attractive, but also follow city codes regarding height and placement.  I would invite anyone to come onto my street and look at my house. It is an oasis in a neighborhood of mediocrity. What I have done is overbuilt my property in comparison to what is around it. There are two columns placed on either side of the sidewalk leading to the entry. The column on the right is a perfect 42” high, per code. The column on the left is level to the one on the right. The city trees at the curb have roots that have altered the height of the sidewalk such that it slopes downward from right to left. I doubt that the city would or should spend the time and money to make the sidewalk level. Regarding the deck railing issue, the maintenance I performed was on an existing permitted and engineered structure. The structure over time needed some repair and I repaired those areas that needed it. I did not enlarge it, restructure it, or repurpose it, I simply put it back the way it was originally permitted, much as you would replace the tread on a step or repaint. The city has spent an inordinate amount of time trying to establish petty violations and this is especially obvious when I observe more blatant violations around town that clearly have not been addressed. It is my hope that as the city receives ‘complaints’ regarding my efforts to improve my property, the city will finally view them as simply neighbor retaliation on unrelated matters rather than affronts against city safety.”
That, however, does not appear to be the case. At present the city is pursuing another case against Sparks, maintaining that after Jarvis carried out research on his property going back 40 years, she could not find a permit for the cover over Spark’s patio.
At the April 22 council meeting just before the city council voted 3-2 to give final passage to the administrative citation ordinance, Dunn said, “We’re not through with Mr. Sparks yet.”
Under the ordinance passed by the city council this week, which was opposed by Sparks and six others during the public hearing, the city now has the authority to fine him a maximum of $1,000 per day until he comes into compliance with their demand that he deconstruct and remove his patio cover.
City manager Stephen Dunn told the Sentinel the city felt it had justification in pursuing both code enforcement and building and safety inspections on Sparks’ property.
“He was able to give everyone his side of the story for four minutes at tonight’s council meeting,” Dunn said on April 22. “You haven’t heard our side yet.”
Asked by the Sentinel to present the city’s case against Sparks, Dunn responded, “I don’t think I’m in a position to do that. Building and safety determined he didn’t have a permit for the lighting posts. What does that tell you?”

(April 26) The county of San Bernardino this week moved to change the operator of its landfills, breaking the relationship it has had with Burrtec Waste Industries over the past 12 years in favor of a ten-year arrangement with Arakelian Enterprises, Inc., which will do business in San Bernardino County as Athens Services.
While Burrtec and its owner, Cole Burr, had developed a strong bond with county politicians over the years, becoming the fourth largest provider of political donations to elected officials throughout the county over the last decade, the cost differential on the combination of the bids and revenue the county will realize from tipping fees on refuse brought in from outside the county substantially favored Arakelian.
Gerry Newcome, the county’s director of public works, recommended that the county switch to Arakelian. On April 23, the board of supervisors voted to enter into a contract with Arakelian running from July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2023, at an initial base annual cost of $16,686,700 to be adjusted pursuant to the contract for additional services.
Three companies – Arakelian, Burrtec and Waste Management, Inc.  – made bids on the contract. At issue in those bids was more than the cost those companies would charge to operate, manage and maintain the county’s waste disposal system, consisting of five active landfills and nine transfer stations. Also considered under the county’s analysis was the amount of revenue each of those companies could generate into the county in the form of tipping fees at the landfills. All three are trash haulers and, as such, have a need to dispose of the refuse they collect.
Burrtec is San Bernardino County’s largest trash hauler, serving 16 of the county’s 24 incorporated cities – Adelanto, Apple Valley, Barstow, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Highland, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, San Bernardino, Twentynine Palms, Upland, Victorville, Yucca Valley and Yucaipa – as well as dozens of its unincorporated communities, including Amboy, Angeles Oaks, Baker, Barton Flats, Bloomington, Cima, Crestline, Daggett, Del Rosa, Devore, Dumont Dunes, East Highlands, El Rancho Verde, Forest Falls, Fort Irwin, Halloran, Helendale, Hinkley, Kelso, Lake Arrowhead, Landers, Lenwood, Lucerne Valley, Ludlow, Mentone, Mountain Pass, Mt. Baldy, Newberry Springs, Nipton, Oak Glen, Running Springs, San Antonio Heights, Silver Lakes and Yermo. For that reason, Burrtec appeared to be in a favorable position in terms of being able to renew its contract with the county to run its landfills.
Arakelian, however, operating as Athens Services, hauls trash in Los Angeles, Orange and Riverside counties, including the cities of Altadena, Azusa, Bell Gardens, Commerce, Covina, Glendora, Irwindale, La Canada-Flintridge, Lake Forest, Los Angeles, Monrovia,  Mission Viejo, Montebello, Monterey Park, Palos Verdes Estates, Pasadena, Placentia, Pomona, Redondo Beach, Riverside, Rosemead, San Fernando, San Gabriel, San  Marino, Santa Ana, Sierra Madre, South El Monte, South Pasadena, Temple City, Villa Park, West Covina, and West Hollywood.
According to Newcombe, by November Arakelian can make arrangements to deposit a significant portion of the trash it picks up in those three counties into San Bernardino County’s landfills, bringing with that trash tipping fees that will in large part offset the cost it will charge for running the landfills and transfer stations.
“Athens is proposing to import 800,000 tons of solid waste per year during the term of the contract, which will bring gross revenue to the county in the amount of approximately $14.8 million for Fiscal Year 13/14 and approximately $22.3 million per year thereafter,” Newcombe told the board of supervisors.
Arakelian, Burrtec and Waste Management submitted by the November 14, 2012 deadline set by the county their proposals to operate the county’s landfills. The county then formed an evaluation committee, consisting of representatives from the county’s solid waste management division, the county administrative office, the Riverside County Waste Management Department, and the city of Big Bear Lake to review and evaluate the proposals. Interviews with all three bidders were conducted on December 19, 2012. After those oral interviews, the evaluation committee requested additional information from all three, including tonnage importation volume commitments. “The evaluation committee completed their evaluation of the proposals, and ranked the three proposals considering overall best value to the county based on the evaluation criteria set forth in the request for proposals,” according to Newcombe. “After thoroughly and fully considering all information submitted by the proposers, the net annual cost to the county, including import tonnage commitments [is]  a net annual cost of $6 million for Athens the first year and $362,000 each year thereafter, a net annual cost of $9.5 million for Burrtec and a net annual cost of $12.7 million for Waste Management. Athens is proposing to import 800,000 tons of municipal solid waste and processed green material per year during the 10-year term of the contract, which will bring gross revenue to the county in the amount of approximately $22 million per year, making the net annual cost of their contract approximately $362,370.”
Newcombe, alluding to the consideration that Burrtec is a proven entity in terms of operating the county’s landfills, expressed confidence that Arakelian/Athens will be able to handle the job once in place.
“Athens is a fourth generation family owned company that has been in business for more than fifty years providing recycling and waste collection services,” Newcombe said. “Athens presently operates several transfer station and material recycling facilities. While Athens does not presently operate any landfills, its management team has extensive experience in managing, permitting and operating landfills and transfer stations, possessing over 92 years of combined management experience with a history of responsibility for nine landfills in Los Angeles, Ventura, Riverside and Kings Counties as well as five large transfer stations in Los Angeles County. Athens has assembled a well-qualified team fully capable of meeting or exceeding the county’s standards. The solid waste management division assessed the effect on the county’s solid waste system of receiving additional waste from an out-of-county source and determined it would be beneficial to the county’s solid waste system to receive such additional waste given the significant decline in tonnage and resulting decrease in revenue experienced over the past several years. The division also reviewed the request in light of the county’s goal to carefully manage the waste stream and the acceptance of solid waste generated outside of the county in order to achieve optimum life of the disposal sites within the county’s solid waste disposal system. The division has determined that allowing the acceptance of solid waste imported by Athens will not adversely impact the solid waste management division’s ability to handle the county’s current and projected future solid waste stream. The Mid-Valley Landfill has a current excess capacity of approximately 55,000,000 cubic yards of airspace beyond the permit closure date of 2033. After accepting the import from Athens during the contract term, there will still be enough capacity to January 2084. Additionally, the revenue from this waste will help offset current losses that follow the reduction in tonnage being received at the county’s disposal sites.
The additional revenue will make the division’s enterprise fund solvent for the next 10 years, avoid closing desert landfills and transfer stations, avoid significant rate increases, make up for the loss of San Bernardino City waste, and allow funds to be set aside to address currently unfunded liabilities and corrective actions.”
Arakelian/Athens will charge $16,686,700 per year to operate the landfills and transfer stations. Newcombe told the Sentinel this week, “Burrtec proposed charging something less than that, $15.8 million, and Waste Management slightly more, $17.2 million. But neither Waste Management nor Burtec could offer as much imported waste. Athens will bring in 800,000 tons per year beginning in November. Burrtec would have brought in 380,000 tons. Waste Management estimated 200,000 tons. Athens will pay us $26.75 per ton to bury that waste at our landfills When you considered the revenue into the county, the overall net total to have Athens manage our system is significantly lower than the other proposers.”
Burrtec’s contract with San Bernardino County for landfill management was set to expire on June 30, 2012 and was extended for one year to allow the just-concluded bidding process to proceed. Burrtec on July 1, 2001, was given an 11-year county contract to manage the county’s trash-disposal sites in the aftermath of a far-reaching scandal involving high ranking county officials and the prior landfill operator, Norcal.
Norcal was given an $18 million per year contract in 1989 to manage some of the county’s landfills upon the recommendation of then county administrative officer Harry Mays. In 1995, after Mays had left the employ of the county and was working as a consultant for Norcal, the county entered into a $40 million per year contract with Norcal to manage all of its landfills.  Subsequently, Norcal Vice President Kenneth James Walsh, Mays and Mays’ successor as county administrative officer James Hlawek were indicted and convicted of engaging in a bribery and kickback conspiracy in which Mays, who was paid more than $4 million for his services to Norcal, provided Hlawek cash and in-kind payments between $4,500 and $5,400 on eight occasions and payments of $650 to $1,300 on at least 20 occasions. Hlawek, in turn, had steered the landfill management contract to Norcal.

(April 26) Upon the recommendation of Patrick Petrie, the director of the county hospital, the board of supervisors this week authorized the expenditure of $64,409,217 to cover  a portion of the upcoming continuing operations as well as the provision of supplies and services at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center.
The county will spend $60 million to purchase pharmaceuticals over the next two years; $2,663,217 for the provision of Nurse Registry Services for the next six months and $1,746,000 for non-emergency medical transportation services over the next three years.
The board approved a master blanket purchase order agreement with Cardinal Health for pharmaceuticals, in the amount of $30 million per year, from May 1, 2013 through April 30, 2015, for a total amount of $60 million over two years. The outlay will come from state Medi-Cal, federal Medicare, and private insurances. According to Petre, the bulk purchase agreement with Cardinal Health will make the county eligible for a rebate of $63,660 during 2013-14.
Since 2008, the county has participated in a group purchasing strategy with University HealthSystem Consortium/Novation to place large volume purchases with various vendors. Under that arrangement, in August 2009 the board of supervisors approved the issuance of a purchase order with Cardinal Health to provide the county hospital, also known as Arrowhead Regional Medical Center, with pharmaceuticals for the period of August 11, 2009 through April 30, 2013 with two one-year options to extend. According to Petre, “The transition to Cardinal Health has resulted in estimated savings of $200,000 per year.”
In 2012, Arrowhead Regional Medical Center established the ArrowCare program to provide comprehensive medical services for low-income county citizens and legal permanent residents who are not eligible for Medi-Cal. The addition of ArrowCare patients and the increase in the uninsured has increased patient volume and need for pharmaceuticals.
The prior amendments extending the agreement with Cardinal Health referenced a “base agreement” which the county later determined it was not a party to. This base agreement is an agreement between Cardinal and University HealthCare System/Novation, the group purchasing organization. This week, Arrowhead Regional Medical Center asked for and received permission to enter into a new agreement with Cardinal Health for two years instead of triggering the extensions to allow the county hospital to continue purchasing pharmaceuticals at a lower rate based on patient volume, resulting in an overall cost savings. The competitive solicitation will be completed through Novation within the scope of the general purchase order.
At Petre’s request, the board authorized the county’s purchasing agent to issue master blanket purchase orders in the aggregate amount of $2,663,217 for the provision of Nurse Registry Services, for the period of January 1, 2013 through September 30, 2013 from  AllStar Staffing;  Certified Nursing Registry, Inc.; Healthcare Pros, Inc.;  HRN Services, Inc.; Juno Healthcare Registry, Inc.; Med-Link Nursing Services, Inc.; MedStaff Healthcare Solutions; Medical Staff Network (MSN); Platinum Healthcare Staffing; PRN Funding, LLC, doing business as Simply the Best Healthcare; Procel Temporary Services; Pro-Tem Personnel; Readylink Healthcare; Star Nursing; and Tempus, LLC, doing business as Emerald Health Services.
The use of registry nurses at the county hospital has long been practiced.
On March 4, 2008, the board approved sixteen countywide agreements for temporary help services, some of which included nurses, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $9 million from March 1, 2008 through February 28, 2011.  In January 2009, the board approved ten nurse registry contracts at a cost of $1,500,000 per year, from January 27, 2009 through June 30, 2012. In March 2009, the board approved eleven additional nurse registry contracts with a $1.5 million expenditure limit, through June 30, 2012. In June 2009, the board approved ten additional nurse registry contracts, again with a $1.5 million expenditure limit through June 30, 2012. In March 2012, the board approved amendments with 8 of the 31 contracts, increasing the not-to-exceed amount by $6,882,041, from $1,500,000 to $8,382,041 through June 30, 2012. In August 2012, the board approved amendments with 14 of the 31 contracts, increasing the not-to-exceed amount by $3,000,000, from $8,382,041 to $11,382,041, and extending the termination date from June 30, 2012 to December 31, 2012.
In October 2012, a request for proposals for temporary help nurse registry services at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center was issued, prompting fourteen proposals from interested vendors. The review process took longer than expected and the existing contracts expired on December 31, 2012. On March 14, 2013, the evaluation committee recommended awards with nine vendors. Three appeals were received. In order to address vendor concerns and ensure the opportunity for all interested vendors to participate, the purchasing department has recommended a new solicitation. In the meantime, the county has expended $259,079 on registry nurse services and will continue paying for these critical services until the new bid for medical temporary help including nurses, therapists and other medical technicians is completed.
Nurse registry services, in particular are vital to maintain nurse-to-patient ratios required by Assembly Bill 394. Ratios in acute care hospitals and psychiatric hospitals reflect the maximum number of patients that may be assigned to a registered nurse during one shift. The purchase order approved Tuesday will ensure nurses are on hand through September 30.
Petre also convinced the board of supervisors to approve agreements with Goodfaith Medical Transportation Company, Inc., GW Transport, Inc., and Premier Medical Transportation, Inc. for non-emergency medical transportation services in the annual aggregate amount of $582,000 for a total aggregate amount of $1,746,000 for the period of April 23, 2013 through April 22, 2016. This will be funded by state Medi-Cal, federal Medicare, and private insurances.
State and federal law mandates specialized healthcare facilities (e.g. skilled nursing care, inpatient rehabilitation therapy, radiation therapy, etc.) accept a patient with higher or specialized level of care needs upon the request of an admitting hospital that is unable to provide the necessary care. Arrowhead is financially responsible for the patient until the patient has been received by the identified facility. In order to facilitate the transfer of the patient, Arrowhead Regional Medical Center contracts with medical transportation companies to ensure a smooth transition of the patient to the identified facility.

(April 26) SAN BERNARDINO –Unable to wring from the San Bernardino County Public Attorneys Union voluntary contract concessions similar to those made by other county employee bargaining units, the county board of supervisors last week voted to unanimously impose on deputy district attorneys and deputy public defenders arbitrator-endorsed salary and benefit terms.
In response, the president of the attorneys’ labor association, John Thomas, told the board “a long road of lawsuits” challenging the unilaterally-imposed working conditions is likely in the offing and that a strike that would bring criminal justice processes in the county to a halt is also possible. “We’re willing to go down that road. This isn’t a threat,” Thomas told the board, saying he recognized that a work stoppage by prosecutors and public defenders would compromise public safety.
Thomas complained that San Bernardino County’s lawyers, who are being paid $11,693 per month or $140,316 per year, make $1,000 per month less than their counterparts in neighboring Riverside County.
The soonest Thomas can make good on his litigative or strike commitments will be on May 8, when the union’s board next meets.
David Wert, the county’s public information officer, said the board had imposed “fair contract terms” and that the action was “saving taxpayers an estimated $3.6 million over the next 14 months and avoiding potential reductions in public service. The county negotiated in good faith with the union for more than two years, even though most labor agreements are reached within six months. The process included independent arbitration requested by the union, which concluded the county’s offer was the best option for both sides and for the taxpayers.”
Beginning in 2011, county chief executive officer Greg Devereaux began seeking across-the-board contract concessions from all of the county’s employee bargaining units to offset skyrocketing governmental operating costs and end what he termed an “institutional structural deficit” plaguing the county. Several of the county employee unions came to terms with Devereaux, though not all were ready to accept the economies he proposed.
Devereaux achieved a major breakthrough when he convinced the county firefighters union to agree to pick up the 7 percent  the county had been paying into the firefighters’ retirement accounts and decrease their annual promotional increases from 5 percent to 2.5 percent. But the firefighters’ union had made those concessions conditional upon the other bargaining groups making concessions. Devereaux made some headway with all of the unions except the Public Attorneys Association, which refused to voluntarily accept the downward pay scale and benefit adjustments. Upon being what it considered pressured to do so, the association in July 2011 filed a complaint with the Public Employment Relations Board.
Thomas and the union board have sought to make an issue of what was characterized as generous pay and benefit packages for Devereaux, the third highest paid county administrator in the state, and the board of supervisors, the members of which receive salary and benefits that are comparable to or exceed those of supervisors in most other counties.
At the same time, the public attorneys in San Bernardino County have salaries that are competitive with most other California counties and actually receive $1,400 per month more than deputy defenders and prosecutors in San Diego County.
Wert said the lawyers’ union and its members were simply unwilling to participate in absorbing the negative impact of financial challenges facing the county that other county employees had, and that led to the imposition of the terms.
“The union would not agree to bear the same sacrifices accepted by all other county employees during the current negotiating cycle to help avoid layoffs and preserve public service during the economic downturn,” Wert said.