FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME NOTICE
FBN 20220009392
The following person(s) is(are) doing business in SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY as:
ASHE 44 NORTH H STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 ASHE SOCIETY SB LLC 390 WEST FIFTH STREET #638 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410
Business is Conducted By: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY registered with the State of California as 201814110807
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ ELAINE LU, Manager
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of SAN BERNARDINO on: 10/11/2022
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: February 22, 2022.
County Clerk, G8420
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/28, 11/04, 11/11 & 11/18, 2022.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE
NUMBER CIV SB 2220825
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: EJIDIRAN TAIWO filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
EJIDIRAN TAIWO to TAI EJIDIRAN TAIWO THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 12/13/2022
Time: 08:30 AM
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino San Bernardino District-Civil Division 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the San Bernardino City News in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: 10/25/2022
Judge of the Superior Court: JOHN M. PACHECO
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/28/2022, 11/04/2022, 11/11/2022, 11/18/2022 Continue reading →

The 2022 election cycle has seen the further progression of Jeff Burum toward what he sees as his rightful position as the preeminent political patron in San Bernardino County. Easily recognizable were a dozen political campaigns that he had a prominent, indeed what in several was by some measures the most prominent, role in advancing. Of note is that in all but one of those, the measure or candidate he backed won.
Burum and Dan Richards were two of and the most dynamic of the four managing principals in the original 21 investors in the Colonies Partners, which developed 440 acres of what had formerly been water recharge and flood control property owned by the San Antonio Water Company in northeast Upland. In undertaking that project, Burum and Richards boldly asserted themselves and the entity they headed as the most prolific political donors in San Bernardino County in the early 2000s, donating in excess of $1 million to a variety of political candidates and political causes in a four-year time span. Continue reading →

The large-scale revolt of Big Bear Lake’s residents against its political establishment that was anticipated to occur with this week’s election did not materialize, the tallying of the votes cast at the mountain city’s polls has revealed.
Based upon a number of indicators over the last two years, a cultural war in the rustic paradise hidden away in the northeast corner of the San Bernardino Mountains seemed to be playing out, one between those who live in what is the county’s second smallest municipality population-wise and third smallest city geographically and the entrepreneurs who run the community’s booming tourist industry.
A skiing mecca in the winter and early spring, a co-claimant with Lake Arrowhead as the boating capital of San Bernardino County from spring until mid-fall, a major swimming venue in the summer, a place where hiking, camping and fishing are ongoing year round and the spot for upland game bird and California mule deer hunting in season, Big Bear has as many or more outsiders breathing its rarefied,1.277-mile-high oxygen-thin atmosphere on a daily basis than natives who call it home. Continue reading →

The latest effort by the pro-development Redlands City Council to counteract or otherwise neutralize the efforts of a well-organized and energetic group of city residents intent on controlling the intensity of growth in the 36.13-square mile city was untracked with the city’s voters’ rejection on Tuesday of Measure F.
Measure F was originally drafted by former Redlands Mayor Bill Cunningham and his associates as a strict limitation on the height of buildings to be permitted in Redlands.
The initiative was intended to counter the city’s commitment in recent years to the so-called Transit Villages Concept.
The transit villages plan calls for high density residential uses in multi-story structures to be built within walking distance of train stations located near Redlands University, Downtown Redlands and in the New York Avenue, Alabama Street and California Street districts. Those projects involve constructing tenements that will entail as many as 100 units per acre. The transit villages concept taps into a trend in urban planning in recent years which emphasizes the need to facilitate heavier use of public transportation, including commuter rail systems. Thus, city officials indicated they were ready to embrace having clusters of high-rise apartment buildings in what was envisioned as five densely packed neighborhoods throughout the city where previously commercial development or far lower density housing existed. Continue reading →