The focus of the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department task force that is looking toward suppressing proliferating unlicensed marijuana cultivating facilities appears to be moving eastward.
On Thursday, April 29, sheriff’s personnel, including deputies, detectives, at least two sergeants and one lieutenant were heavily engaged in raids on five separate agricultural operations entailing large numbers of marijuana plants in Twentynine Palms and nearby Desert Heights.
The department assigned 11 deputies and detectives to do the heavy lifting and grunt work, while the sergeants and lieutenants monitored the results. In a six-and-a-half hour span, search warrants were served and all traces of marijuana cultivation, including over 2,300 marijuana plants were seized from a location within the 73500 block of Two Mile Road, property at Emerald Street and Pine Springs Avenue, one property at the intersection of Dunlap Road and Canyon Road, another property proximate to Dunlap Road and Canyon Road, and a site at the corner of Redhill Road and Bermuda Avenue.
While the deputies and detectives encountered some people known or suspected to have been involved in the cultivation activity during the course of the operations, those individuals were not arrested. Two men, Pai Sivilay, 67, and Somkhit Sivilay, 35, were cited for illegal cultivation of marijuana, but released.
The operation at Emerald Street and Pine Springs Avenue was the site of a previous raid on April 16, at which time 476 marijuana plants were seized. When deputies and detectives returned 13 days later, 466 new seedlings were well on their way to maturity.
Despite the vigor with which the sheriff’s department is carrying out its anti-marijuana cultivation operations, there is a question as to the program’s legitimacy in the face of shifting societal, attitudinal and legal standards. 1996’s Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use of Marijuana Act, legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes. Nevertheless, marijuana remained outlawed for recreational use. In San Bernardino County, in particular, local authorities in past decades made a public show of being officially opposed to the use of marijuana in any form. Collectively, they continued to disallow the sale or distribution of marijuana for medical use by denying permits to those seeking to establish dispensaries. This led to the intensification of a widespread underground marijuana distribution network, one which in any event had already existed prior to the passage of Proposition 215. That black market continued to flourish, at an even greater intensity than before, continuing to expose those below the age of majority to easy marijuana availability.
Corruption of local law enforcement persisted, with anywhere from a quarter to a third of police officers routinely carrying a quantity of the drug in their patrol cars to use as a pretext for detaining, citing, arresting or taking physical action against citizens encountered in the field.
In 2012, public officials in Needles, the county’s least populated and easternmost city with 4,900 residents on the shore of the Colorado River across from Arizona, elected to take advantage of its location at the gateway to California, becoming the first of the county’s 24 municipalities to bow to the new social reality, clearing the way for five licensed marijuana dispensaries to operate within its city limits.
In July 2014, San Bernardino City Attorney Gary Saenz, taking stock of the number of pot shops sprouting up in the county’s largest city, offered his view that the cost and difficulty of shutting down dispensaries made enforcement of the city’s ban on the enterprises “futile.”
In 2016, Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, was passed by California’s voters.
The City of Adelanto, which was not on the best of financial footing, moved rapidly to take advantage of the law, seeking to open the city to large scale marijuana cultivation operations as well as manufacturing concerns processing and wielding the plant into edibles and poultices for physical maladies, a strategy its elected officials said would generate substantial revenue for the city. It further legalized dispensaries and pot shops.
In Barstow, 39 miles north, Rich Harpole, had acceded to the elected position of city councilman after spending all of his adult working life once he left the military as a police officer. In his 24 years with the Barstow Police Department, Harpole had risen to the rank of lieutenant before retiring. A primary element of his assignment during his last decade-and-a-half with the police force was overseeing drug interdiction efforts. In the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, Harpole had participated directly or indirectly in the arrest of more than 2,000 marijuana law offenders.
After he retired, Harpole was elected to the Barstow City Council. With Proposition 64’s passage, Barstow like most of the other cities in San Bernardino County fell into a state of paralysis, stalling either deliberately or inadvertently in the face of the change in the law. By 2019, when the city got around to looking into updating its ordinances regarding both medical and recreational marijuana sales, Harpole was made chairman of an ad-hoc committee, which was to look at the ins and outs of allowing the cultivation, sale, distribution, and manufacturing of marijuana, cannabis or cannabis-based products in the city. Licensing of marijuana based operations, the committee determined, was to take place pursuant to a licensing or permitting regime, one that would entail requirements that such operations meet a set of criteria, be licensed as businesses within the city and be subject to a tax specifically levied on the growers of marijuana or the manufacturers and purveyors of cannabis or cannabis-based products. The bottom line was that the City of Barstow was going to make sure it got its cut of revenue to be made from the newfound tolerance of marijuana as an acceptable intoxicant. Harpole, who had spent the most productive years of his life as a crusader against marijuana, now had the opportunity to make sure his former employer, through whom he receives his $82,000 per year pension, brings in plenty of cannabis cash.
In April 2019, it became publicly known that Harpole was the architect of how at least 15 percent of the money from the sale of marijuana in Barstow would flow into the City of Barstow’s coffers. Overnight, Harpole had become the poster boy for hypocritical law enforcement officers ready to bust people at a moment’s notice for smoking a joint, while remaining simultaneously prepared to take in money from the sale of marijuana as long as it made its way into their pockets, the more the better.
It is the specter of Harpole, who never actually worked for the sheriff’s department but rather for Barstow PD, that is in part preventing the sheriff’s department from criminally charging those pursuing the enterprise of growing massive amounts of marijuana in the desert.
Indeed phenomenal numbers of plants are being germinated and grown, using both the desert sun and artificial lights.
In the face of California’s seismic cultural shift that was signaled by the passage of Proposition 64, San Bernardino County officials at virtually every level were stymied. The traditional stand they had uniformly, or almost uniformly, taken against the drug was compromised, and if they insisted on slamming the door on the would-be entrepreneurs looking to traffic in the substance now that it was legal, they ran a degree of risk. Still, the sheriff’s office in 2017, 2018, 2019, into 2020 and yet now is maintaining its traditional attitude which holds that the proliferation of cannabis runs contrary to an orderly community.
Only in Adelanto, where the political leadership was on the take and receiving sizable kickbacks from the marijuana entrepreneurs, did the sheriff’s department stand down. If the deep-pocketed cannabis industry moguls who were making large scale donations to the members of the city council had their operations intruded upon by the sheriff’s office, the political leadership in Adelanto could reverse the action a previous city council had taken in 2002, when the Adelanto Police Department was closed out and the sheriff’s department was contracted with to provide the city with law enforcement coverage. In order not to upset the pay-for-play deals in place in Adelanto, the sheriff’s department allowed, while the ruling coalition of Mayor Rich Kerr and councilmembers Jermaine Wright, John Woodard and later Councilwoman Joy Jeannette remained intact, virtually any cannabis-related undertaking within the city limits of Adelanto licensed or not alone.
Elsewhere, it was a different story.
Despite California’s passage of Proposition 64 and the enactment of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, under federal law marijuana remains a Schedule 1 narcotic considered as dangerous as heroin and cocaine and subject to very stiff federal penalties.
Since 1999, the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department had been participating in and receiving federal money for the Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program. Even in the aftermath of the voters’ 2016 passage of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, Sheriff John McMahon, with the consent of the board of supervisors, applied for and continued to receive those grants, which he then used to offset some, though not all, of his department’s costs in going after marijuana cultivators.
Given the ground rules under which that effort has proceeded, some people, including ones who favor the anti-marijuana crusade and those opposed to it, have come to wonder if McMahon isn’t himself smoking copious quantities of the product his deputies have been seizing.
Indeed, there is an undeniably schizophrenic quality to the sheriff’s department’s effort.
The task force has been prodigiously effective in eradicating the crops it has found. Along the way, it has identified hundreds of people involved in those operations, from the owners of the property where the farms exist, to the farmers themselves, to the investors putting up the capital to give the farmers the equipment and wherewithal to set up the operations, to the workers at the farms to the lower level operatives who then harvest, cure, package and move the product to market or the various middlemen and their customers. Yet very few of those identified as participating in these operations have been arrested, let alone prosecuted. Those arrested have been rapidly released from custody, and not charged by the district attorney’s office with any offense relating to unlicensed marijuana cultivation. In the relatively rare instances where arrests have occurred, it has generally been for crimes unrelated to the cultivation or marketing of marijuana, criminal offenses that in the course of the task force’s operations came to their attention.
The San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office, which has the authority to prosecute state law, is unwilling to prosecute those involved in marijuana cultivation, no matter how massive the operation, primarily because the Adult Use of Marijuana Act has so transformed the law with regard to marijuana. Where the growth of the drug is occurring, even without proper permits and licensing, the activity falls under the rubric of California civil law and the government code rather than the penal code, prosecutors contend. The district attorney’s office is doing nothing to interfere with the sheriff’s department’s operations; it is simply not assisting it in any follow-up with regard to those operations.
Curiously, even though it is using federal money to cover a portion of its costs in carrying out its energetic marijuana cultivation raids, the sheriff’s department either has not sent the casework pertaining to those raids to federal prosecutors or, if it has, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has not acted against the owners, operators or workers at those plantations.
Sheriff McMahon has not provided any sort of response to questions as to why he continues to devote a significant portion of his department’s resources to the marijuana eradication effort when doing so has resulted, over the course of more than four years, in so few prosecutions.
An issue is the ostensible versus actual success of the eradication effort. There is no doubt a substantial amount of marijuana has been seized and destroyed in the course of the department’s operations. Nevertheless, observers have a real sense that those whose activities have been foreclosed are the less sophisticated domestic cultivators and a statistical cross section of the massive number of foreign marijuana farm operators. Both statistical analysis of available information on the operations and anecdotal accounts indicate that American citizens who have a long time or in-depth understanding of the county, its institutions and its lay of the land, have been able, for the most part, to fly well under the radar of the sheriff’s department and its marijuana eradication task force. By removing their operations to areas where detection is difficult or impossible and by eliminating a reliance on traditional suppliers of the necessities of such operations such as electrical or water utilities, which will extend to law enforcement access to information on customer usage patterns, the more sophisticated operators carry out their cultivation without detection or even suspicion. It would appear that all, or most, of these more sophisticated operators are Americans or Canadians, with a very few being Mexican Nationals. A large number of the wave of unlicensed marijuana farm operators in San Bernardino County are Mexicans or Asians
Relying on the sheer expansiveness of 20,105-square mile San Bernardino County, these less sophisticated operators have set up enterprises indoors all over the county and in what are seemingly out-of-the-way places outdoors most frequently in the desert and mountains. The sheriff’s department, which has helicopters outfitted with visual scanners that employ spectrophotometers that can immediately detect the highly distinct color of even a single marijuana plant let alone a greenhouse packed with them, has had substantial success in finding cultivation operations. At present there are an estimated 2,500 to 3,000 marijuana cultivation operations in San Bernardino County set up by Asians alone. Given these raw numbers, over the last two years, the vast majority of those associated with marijuana cultivation operations caught by the sheriff’s department have been Asians, virtually none of whom have been naturalized.
Thus, practically speaking, the trend in San Bernardino County is that most unlicensed marijuana cultivation operations are ones being carried out by Asians relatively recently arrived in America.
Extrapolating on available data, the most profitable marijuana cultivation operations appear to be ones designed and operated by veterans of the illicit marijuana trade whose operations preexisted the advent of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act.
The sheriff’s department has not relented in its marijuana eradication effort in 2021.
On January 6 at 8:30 a.m., the sheriff’s Marijuana Enforcement Team served a search warrant in the 2600 block of Parkdale Road in Adelanto, where they found 19,998 marijuana plants along with 186 pounds of harvested and partially cured marijuana. Cited were Shihua Want, 70, of Adelanto; Shi Xin Jiang, 66, of Adelanto; Liyon Dong, 36, of Adelanto; Xin Zheng Guan, 38, of Adelanto; Mei Jin You, 49, of Adelanto; Chun Tao Lu, 41, of Adelanto; Xiaoqun Yu, 53, of Adelanto; Jian Feng Yu, 47, of Adelanto; Wan Huang Wu, 42, of Adelanto; Xing Qiang Li, 45, of Adelanto; Xihong Huang, 26, of Adelanto; and Guang Yi, 22, of El Monte.
On January 7, 2021, the task force conducted two raids, one in Lucerne Valley and one in Johnson Valley in which 1,903 marijuana plants and 306.5 pounds of harvested marijuana were seized on January 27. Arrested in conjunction with those cultivation operations were Basemen Hernandez-Cruz, 30, of Oxnard, and his brother, Gerardo Hernandez-Cruz, 21, of Santa Maria. They have since been released.
On February 2, a team of deputies and investigators, in possession of a search warrant and in response to reports that a massive unlicensed and illicit marijuana cultivation operation was in place on property in El Mirage, swooped onto the site 12.5 miles northwest of Adelanto. They found 12 people on or immediately proximate to the property, which featured greenhouses in which 18,884 plants were growing.
After a brief investigation into the circumstance, five of the dozen people at the site were arrested – Chen Guo Jin, 48, of Sanford, Florida; Johnny Chan, 39, of Los Angeles; Zhi Fei Qian, 57, of Apple Valley; Kefei Wang, 34, of Concord, California; and Zhen Williamson, 52, of Denham Springs, Louisiana.
All five were released shortly thereafter
With the progression of the task force’s focus moving eastward, by summer it is likely to encounter at least some of the more sophisticated and lucrative cultivation efforts, ones which are proximate to the Colorado River and thus make use of the plentiful water it provides. Those operations also utilize the sun as a light source during the day, augmented by artificial light at night to provide a relatively short four-month growing cycle for the plants.
The challenge the operators of these very sophisticated farms are to soon face will consist of being able to continue to camouflage the operations while being subjected to the extremely intense scrutiny the task force will bring to bear.
California law allows adults to engage in the growing of up to six marijuana plants. Authorities have in many cases chosen to look the other way with regard to gardens involving a dozen or more plantings.
The operations interesting the sheriff’s task force have been boldly large, in some cases rivaling or exceeding the size of industrial cannabis nurseries. Regulations layered into the law further disallow in most jurisdictions, as in the case of San Bernardino County, the growing of marijuana outdoors. Commercial cultivation of cannabis must take place indoors under such regulations. Moreover, such operations require a permit and licensing.
–Mark Gutglueck

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department is transferring a number of its senior personnel to different positions within the department’s command echelon.
Captain John Walker, who succeeded Darren Goodman as the commander of the Chino Hills Sheriff’s Station in 2018 when Goodman departed to become Upland police chief, spent nearly three years in that assignment. The sheriff’s department is now assigning him to oversee the West Valley Detention Center. West Valley, located in Rancho Cucamonga, houses 3,300 inmates. Engaged in their incarceration are some 1,100 employees, including sworn police officers, custody technicians, medical specialists, professionals, personnel engaged in security monitoring, food preparers, hygienists, groundskeepers, maintenance crew members and others.
Walker is to move into the position overseeing them effective May 8, tomorrow.
To move into the Chino Hills position in 2018, Walker was promoted from the rank of lieutenant and relieved of his previous billet as a shift operations commander at the Highland Sheriff’s Station.
The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, in addition to serving as the lead law enforcement agency in San Bernardino County and the roughly 19,099 unincorporated square miles of its 20,105 square mile confines, also provides contract law enforcement services to both of the county’s incorporated towns – Apple Valley and Yucca Valley – and 12 of its 22 incorporated cities – Chino Hills, Rancho Cucamonga, Grand Terrace, Loma Linda, Highland, Big Bear Lake, Yucaipa, Twentynine Palms, Needles, Hesperia, Victorville and Adelanto.
The Sheriff’s Department will replace Walker in Chino Hills with Captain Garth Goodell, who previously worked in Chino Hills as a patrol deputy and sergeant.
Captain John Billings is being moved out of his position as the commander of the sheriff’s department operations in Highland to replace Captain Mike Browne as the station commander in Hesperia. Browne came in to replace Captain Greg Wielenga two years ago. Wielenga was the replacement to Captain Miles Bentsen, who was hired away from the sheriff’s department in December 2015 to become Hesperia’s City Manager in January 2016, replacing former Hesperia City Manager Mike Podegracz.
Captain Casey Jiles, who was formerly the department’s spokesman, since late March has headed the Highland station. Jiles worked in the department’s administrative bureau previously, in the civil liabilities department, as well as a detective in the specialized investigations unit and homicide detail.
Jiles is assisted in this assignment by Lieutenant Matt Yost, who was previously employed in the department’s corrections division. Prior to that Yost worked in the department’s employee resource division, as a member of its special weapons and tactics team and as an investigator attached to the department’s command echelon and intelligence division. Historically, the department’s intelligence division works on heavy-duty criminal activity, such as that involving drug cartels and organized crime. It also involves itself in gathering political intelligence, including spying on the county’s elected officials and highest ranking staff employees.

A Hispanic woman was found slain at the intersection of Mountain and 18th Street in Upland on Thursday morning.
Upland police officers were summoned to the corner by a report phoned into police headquarters of a woman lying in the road in the upscale residential neighborhood around 7 a.m. May 6. The 18th Street intersection is 1,800 feet south of the I-10 Freeway and less than 1,000 feet west of Pepper Tree Elementary School.
Based on a preliminary examination, the woman appeared to have been stabbed to death.
She was pronounced dead at the scene.
A Hispanic man and a Hispanic woman who were near the scene were detained. Whether insinuations that the man and woman were in some measure responsible for the victim’s death or whether assertions that they were the perpetrators were interrogative tactics employed as a consequence of the investigators’ conjecture is unknown at this time. The couple’s proximity to the scene where the body was found and their shared ethnicity with the victim could have formed the basis of their detention and questioning. A Hispanic man was reported to have been seen leaving the intersection around the time the report of the prone woman was made.
Police officers are permitted by law to make misrepresentations to suspects of crimes, such as asserting that they are in possession of evidence indicating an individual’s guilt.

A 56-year-old Upland resident was killed on April 27 when he was struck by a Metrolink train while walking on the tracks.
Gregory Humphrey was hit by the train around 12:45 p.m., near the San Antonio Avenue at-grade crossing with the railroad tracks.
Metrolink personnel contacted the Upland Police Department regarding a pedestrian who was struck by the train.
Emergency crews responded and pronounced Humphrey dead at the scene.
That afternoon, Metrolink employees told a Sentinel delivery crew making its rounds in that area that the victim was a “trespasser” on the tracks.
The railroad tracks in Upland have proven deadly for many over the years. On June 13, 2013, a bike rider was killed in a collision with a Metrolink train near Benson Avenue.
On October 21, 1997, two sisters, three-year-old Alexes Elaine Robles and 22-month-old Deziree Andrea Soto, were playing on the track bed six feet above the street level near their apartment complex in east Upland when they were killed by a Metrolink train rounding a bend in the tracks.
More than 80 years ago, a member of the Ledig Family of local citrus ranching and steel fabrication note was killed by a train passing through Upland.
According to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s/Coroner’s Department, “On Tuesday, April 27, 2021, at 12:45 PM, officers with the Upland Police Department were contacted by Metrolink personnel regarding a pedestrian struck by the train near San Antonio Avenue in Upland. Emergency personnel responded and the pedestrian, Gregory Humphrey, a 56-year-old resident of Upland, was declared dead at 1:01 PM. The incident is being investigated by the Upland Police Department.”

Judge David Cohn’s ruling with regard to multiple points in a citizen group’s lawsuit contesting the Upland City Council’s approval of Bridge Development Partners’ distribution center for online retail behemoth Amazon, due to take place this afternoon, has been postponed until May 17.
In giving the project approval by a 4-to-1 margin on April 1, 2020, the Upland City Council used a less exacting mode of environmental certification, a mitigated negative declaration, for the 201,096-square foot building to be located north of Foothill Blvd. south of Cable Airport.
A citizen’s group calling itself Upland Community First formed and sued, seeking to have the project approval rescinded, and a comprehensive environmental impact report carried out in conjunction with the city council’s reconsideration of the project.
The city, supported by Bridge Development Partners, has asserted that the city and the developer fulfilled all of the requirements for project approval under the law, and that the project complies with all environmental regulations.
Upland Community First contends the testimony of several experts with regard to land use and environmental impacts put into the record at the April 1, 2020 meeting and previous planning commission meetings made it incumbent upon the city to consider specific elements of the project proposal and undertake a more comprehensive evaluation of the project or deny it outright.
Upland Community First, in submitting a transcript of the city council and planning commission hearings, asserted there was evidence to suggest Upland Director of Community Development Robert Dalquest knowingly provided the city council with erroneous information in favor of the project proposal.
An unspecified emergency required that Judge Cohn postpone today’s 1:30 p.m. hearing, according to the assistant clerk of the court.

In the crowning achievement of his more than three decades of public service in Chino. Planning Commissioner Walt Pocock on May 4 was named District 2 city councilman to replace the late Mark Hargrove.
With Mayor Eunice Ulloa not in attendance, the remaining members of the council – Marc Lucio, Karen Comstock and Christopher Flores – chose Pocock to fill the remainder of Hargrove’s term, due to elapse in 2022. Hargrove died on March 28, creating a vacancy that could be left vacant, filled by appointment or filled through a special election that the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters Office said would cost $250,000 to conduct.
The council deemed Pocock, 78, a 1960 Pomona High School graduate, best suited to the job. With his late wife, Dolores, whom he married in 1976, Pocock ran Palo Verde Landscape Management. He has long been active in the Kiwanis Club, of which he is now president. He served on the Chino Community Services Commission from 1994 to 2000, and has been on the planning commission for 21 years and four months. He is an Edwin Rhodes Community Service Award recipient.
A consideration in appointing Pocock was his declaration that he would not run to remain on the council in 2020, such that the appointment would not confer the advantage of incumbency on any of the candidates vying in the 2022 District 2 race.
He is to be sworn into office on May 18.

The following entity is doing business as COLLECTIVE X 4133 E ADDINGTON CIRCLE ANAHEIM, CA 92807: ELIAS CONTESSOTTO 4133 E ADDINGTON CIRCLE ANAHEIM, CA 92807
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
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/ ELIAS CONTESSOTTO
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/26/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 3/26, 4/2, 4.9 & 4/16, 2021

FBN 20210001984
The following entity is doing business as DTV LOYALTY PROMO 2661 SOUTH CARL PLACE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408: ELISHA JAVED 2661 SOUTH CARL PLACE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
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/ ELISHA JAVED
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/26/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 3/26, 4/2, 4.9 & 4/16, 2021

FBN 20210001982
The following entity is doing business as AMERICAN CAPITAL FUNDING 17211 PENACOVA ST CHINO HILLS, CA 91709: JOYCE ARCE 17211 PENACOVA ST CHINO HILLS, CA 91709
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
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/ JOYCE ARCE
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/26/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 3/26, 4/2, 4.9 & 4/16, 2021
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210003542
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Gearup Scuba, 14582 Pipeline Ave, Chino, CA 91710, The YSJL Corp, 1456 S Briar Ave, Ontario, CA 91762
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
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/ Joe Yong Ping Lin
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/06/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 03/30/2021
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/09/21, 04/16/2021, 04/23/21, 04/30/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210002449
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: La Bella Salon Suites, 5541 Arrow Hwy Suite A, Montclair, CA 91763, Toni Cummings, 461 Euclid Ave, Upland, CA 91786
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
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/ Toni Cummings
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/11/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 02/21/21
County Clerk, s/ D5511
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).
04/09/21, 04/16/2021, 04/23/21, 04/30/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210003230

The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Serrot Beauty Salon, 668 N. Mountain Avenue, Upland, CA 91786, Mailing Address: 390 Caliente Dr, Norco, CA 92860, Alfredo Torres, 390 Caliente Dr, Norco, CA 92860
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/ Alfredo Torres
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/29/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 03/17/2021
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/09/21, 04/16/2021, 04/23/21, 04/30/21

FBN 20210000017 The following person is doing business as BEL AIR BLVD 14762 SHADOW DRIVE FONTANA, CA 92337 JASMINE HENDERSON [and] JANAYA HENDERSON 14762 SHADOW DRIVE FONTANA, CA 92337, TAESHAWNA CLEMONS, 14762 SHADOW DRIVE, FONTANA, CA 92337 This Business is Conducted By: A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP 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/ JASMINE HENDERSON This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 1/04/2021 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: N/A County Clerk, Deputy D5511 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 1/29, 2/5, 2/12 & 2/19, 2021 & Corrected on 03/05/21, 03/12/21, 03/19/21, 03/26/21 & 04/09/21, 04/16/21, 04/23/21, 04/30/21

FBN 20210002262 The following person is doing business as FP CO 10622 BRYANT ST SPC 62 YUCAIPA, CA 92399: FREDERICO A. PALMA 10622 BRYANT ST SPC 62 YUCAIPA, CA 92399 [and] GIGLYOLLA P. PALMA 10622 BRYANT ST SPC 62 YUCAIPA, CA 92399 This Business is Conducted By: A MARRIED COUPLE 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/ FREDERICO A PALMA This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/4/2021 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: FEBRUARY 4, 2021 County Clerk, Deputy I137 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 therights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San

Bernardino County Sentinel on 3/5/ 3/12, 3/19 & 3/26, 2021 & Corrected on: 04/09/21, 04/16/21, 04/23/21, 04/30/21

ABANDONMENT OF AN FBN 20210003322
The following entity was doing business as GAMESTOP 3536 1883 N. CAMPUS AVENUE, SUITE B UPLAND, CA 91784: GAMESTOP, INC 625 WESTPORT PARKWAY GRAPEVINE, TEXAS 76051 State of Incorporation: MN Reg. No.: C1969245
Date of current filing: 11/16/2020
Previous FBN #: FBN20200010519
Mailing Address: 625 WESTPORT PARKWAY GRAPEVINE, TX 76051
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION
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/ GEORGE E. SHERMAN
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/30/2021 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: DECEMBER 15, 2005
County Clerk, Deputy I6733
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 April 16, 23, and 30 & May 7, 2021.

ABANDONMENT OF AN FBN 20210003320
The following entity is doing business as GAMESTOP 1296 222 INLAND CENTER DRIVE SAN BERNARDINO CA 92408: GAMESTOP, INC 625 WESTPORT PARKWAY GRAPEVINE, TEXAS 76051 State of Incorporation: MN Reg. No.: C1969245
Mailing Address: 625 WESTPORT PARKWAY GRAPEVINE, TX 76051
Date of Current Filing: 11/16/2020
Previous FBN#: FBN20200010515
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION
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/ GEORGE E. SHERMAN
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/30/2021 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: JUNE 4, 1996
County Clerk, Deputy I6733
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 April 16, 23, and 30 & May 7, 2021.
INITIATIVE MEASURE
TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE VOTERS
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CIRCULATE PETITION
Notice is hereby given by the persons whose names appear hereon of their intention to circulate the petition within the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District for the purpose of repealing the special tax associated with Fire Protection Service Zone Five (FP-5). A statement of the reasons for the proposed action as contemplated in the petition is as follows: Vote “YES” to repeal the special tax associated with FP-5. The California Constitution states, “No local government may impose, extend, or increase any special tax unless and until that tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a two-thirds vote.” Despite this clear language, the FP-5 special tax was imposed by elected representatives on one million county residents without their consent. A “YES” vote will repeal the tax, leave money in your pocket, and send a message to politicians. Citizens must follow the law and so must their representatives!! See www.redbrennan.org for details.
/s/ Robert Cable
/s/ David Jarvi
/s/ Ruth Musser-Lopez
/s/ Charles Pruitt
/s/ Albert Vogler
FULL TEXT OF PROPOSED MEASURE TO IMPLEMENT THE INITIATIVE
Initiative to Repeal the Special Tax Associated With Fire protection Service Zone five (FP-5)
The people of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District do ordain as follows: SECTION 1. (a) Findings: (1) In 2006, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors, acting as “governing body” proposed, and just 1,022 voters in the community of Helendale approved, the creation of County Service Area 70, Improvement Zone FP-5 (hereafter FP-5). This imposed a yearly special tax of $117.00 per parcel with an annual inflationary increase of up to 3%, to finance fire and emergency services within the FP-5 boundaries. (2) In 2008, the County formed a “Fire Protection District” (hereafter, “Fire District”) and annexed the original FP-5, its boundaries, purpose and tax into said Fire District. (3) Thereafter, despite significant protest, the County added additional areas to FP-5 expanding the parcel tax burden without a vote of the people living in those add-on areas. In 2018, despite extraordinary protest, the County annexed “…all unincorporated territory…” along with additional incorporated areas into FP-5, imposing the parcel tax without the vote of the people residing in those areas. (4) Even though the Constitution of California prohibits taxation without two-thirds voter approval, in 2020, the Fire District Board of Directors, without voter approval, imposed a tax on every parcel in FP-5 set at $157.26 for the year 2020-2021. (5) The County’s sidestep of the provisions of the California Constitution has victimized property owners whose parcels have been annexed and who are now required to pay an ever increasing (up to 3% per year) annual parcel tax they didn’t vote on. Further, without a prohibition in place, additional victims and their properties will potentially be added to FP-5 and its tax without their vote of approval. (b) Purposes: (1) Article XIII C, Section 3 of the Constitution of California provides, in part, “Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution…the initiative power shall not be prohibited or otherwise limited in matters of reducing or repealing any local tax, assessment, fee or charge.” (2) The purpose of this measure is to repeal the special tax associated with Fire Protection Service Zone FP-5 in its entirety. This is in accordance with the express power of voters granted by Article XIII C, Section 3 of the Constitution of California. (3) Adoption of this initiative measure is essential to the preservation of the quality of life, property values, and the health, safety, and general welfare interests of the residents and property owners within the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. SECTION 2. REPEAL FP-5 SPECIAL TAX: The special tax for Service Zone FP-5, authorized in 2006 in the amount of $117 per parcel, per year with an annual 3% cost of living increase, and set yearly by the Board of Directors of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District via resolution, is hereby repealed.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel May 7, 2021
ABANDONMENT OF AN FBN 20210003326
The following entity is doing business as GAMESTOP 5047 2094 W, REDLANDS BOULEVAED, SUITE K REDLANDS, CA 92373: GAMESTOP, INC 625 WESTPORT PARKWAY GRAPEVINE, TEXAS 76051 State of Incorporation: MN Reg. No.: C1969245
Mailing Address: 625 WESTPORT PARKWAY GRAPEVINE, TX 76051
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION
Date of Current Filing: 11/16/20
Former FBN#: FBN20200010533
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/ GEORGE E. SHERMAN
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/30/2021 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: September 25, 2003
County Clerk, Deputy I6733
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 April 16, 23, and 30 & May 7, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: RICHARD SILVA HERNANDEZ
CASE NO. PROPS 2100387
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of RICHARD SILVA HERNANDEZ has been filed by SHAWNA HERNANDEZ in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that SHAWNA HERNANDEZ be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held MAY 25, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. No. S37 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
Kimberly Tilley, Deputy
APRIL 1, 2021
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Filed: APRIL 1, 2021
Attorney for the Shawna Hernandez:
R. SAM PRICE SBN 208603
PRICE LAW FIRM, APC
300 E STATE STREET SUITE 620
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(909) 475 8800
sam@pricelawfirm.com
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 4/23, 4/30 & 5/7, 2021.

NOTICE OF CONSERVATORSHIP OF THE ESTATE OF VERONICA WEBER aka VERONICA STONE
Case Number CONPS2000324
To any and all persons interested in the ESTATE of VERONICA WEBER aka VERONICA STONE;
Notice is hereby given that JENIFER FEJZIC, proposed conservator, has filed a PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT of PROBATE CONSERVATOR of the ESTATE of VERONICA WEBER aka VERONICA STONE, proposed conservatee
This notice is required by law. This notice does not require you to appear in court but you may attend the hearing if you wish.
A hearing on the matter will be held as follows:
June 8, 2021 10 a.m. Department S-36
The address of the court is Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
Attorney for the Petitioner: Jennifer M. Daniel, Esquire
220 Nordina St.
Redlands, CA 92373
Telephone No: (909) 792-9244 Fax No: (909) 235-4733
Email address: jennifer@lawofficeofjenniferdaniel.com
Attorney for JENIFER FEJZIC
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel April 16, 23, and 30 & May 7 and 14, 2021.

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20210003902
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: CJRL Capital Corp, 10535 E Foothill Blvd #460, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, CJRL Capital Corp, 10535 E Foothill Blvd #460, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/Jubilee Figueroa-Acosta
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/14/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 03/01/2021
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/16/2021, 04/23/21, 04/30/21, 05/07/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20210003026
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Mind Growers, 1035 Driftwood Street, Upland, CA 91784, Mailing Address: PO Box 1094, Claremont, CA 91711, Alejandro Segura-Mora, 1035 Driftwood Street, Upland, CA 91784
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/ Alejandro Segura-Mora
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/23/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 11/01/2006
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/16/2021, 04/23/21, 04/30/21, 05/07/21

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER CIVSB2105448
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: Richard Moore filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
Richard Richy Moore to Richard Moore
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: 05/22/21
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S17
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: February 19, 2021
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 04/16/21, 04/23/21, 04/30/21, 05/07/21
FBN 202100044494
The following entity is doing business as RESILIENT MARTIAL ARTS AND FITNESS 8654 BAY LAUREL STREET CHINO, CAL 91708: EXCELLENT ENGLISH EXPERIENCE, INC. 8654 BAY LAUREL STREET CHINO, CAL 91708
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION
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/ GYANGDI LIU
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 4/29/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: APRIL 23, 2021
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 4/30, 5/7, 5/14 & 5/21, 2021

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: JANICE LOUISE MANSELL
CASE NO. PROPS 2100420
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of JANICE LOUISE MANSELL
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by SANDRA MARIE MANSELL in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that SANDRA MARIE MANSELL be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held MAY 27, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. No. S36 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
Amy Gamez-Reyes, Deputy
APRIL 9, 2021
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Filed: DECEMBER 29, 2020
Attorney for the Sandra Marie Mansell:
R. SAM PRICE SBN 208603
PRICE LAW FIRM, APC
300 E STATE STREET SUITE 620
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(909) 328-7000
sam@pricelawfirm.com
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 4/23, 4/30 & 5/7, 2021.

FBN 20210003107
The following entity is doing business as RUSTIC ROOT DESIGNS 10259 DORSET STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730: BRIANDA MEEWIS MENDOZA 10259 DORSET STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
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/ BRIANDA MEEWIS MENDOZA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/25/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 4/23, 4/30, 5/7 & 5/14, 2021
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER CIVSB2107348
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: YILDA MARLENA CASTILLO filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
YILDA MARLENA CASTILLO to HILDA CASTILLO
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: 05/24/21
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S17
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: April 12, 2021
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 4/23, 4/30, 5/7 & 5/14, 2021

T.S. No.: NR-51507-CA Loan No. *****7224 APN: 0227-193-03-0-000 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 5/4/2018.  UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE.  IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier’s check drawn on a state or national bank, check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, or savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below.  The sale will be made, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below.  The amount may be greater on the day of sale. Trustor: Bryan Bradshaw and Lauren Bradshaw, husband and wife Duly Appointed Trustee: Nationwide Reconveyance, LLC Recorded 5/8/2018 as Instrument No. 2018-0165816 in book XX, page XX   of Official Records in the office of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, Date of Sale: 5/24/2021 at 1:00 PM Place of Sale: NEAR THE FRONT STEPS LEADING UP TO THE CITY OF CHINO CIVIC CENTER, 13220 CENTRAL AVENUE, CHINO, CA 91710 Amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $795,045.94 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 13345 Rogue River Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 A.P.N.: 0227-193-03-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above.  If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property.  NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call (714) 986-9342 or visit this Internet Web site www.superiordefault.com, using the file number assigned to this case NR-51507-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. For sales conducted after January 1, 2021: NOTICE TO TENANT: You may have a right to purchase this property after the trustee auction pursuant to Section 2924m of the California Civil Code. If you are an “eligible tenant buyer,” you can purchase the property if you match the last and highest bid placed at the trustee auction. If you are an “eligible bidder,” you may be able to purchase the property if you exceed the last and highest bid placed at the trustee auction. There are three steps to exercising this right of purchase. First, 48 hours after the date of the trustee sale, you can call (714) 986-9342, or visit this internet website www.superiordefault.com using the file number assigned to this case NR-51507-CA to find the date on which the trustee’s sale was held, the amount of the last and highest bid, and the address of the trustee. Second, you must send a written notice of intent to place a bid so that the trustee receives it no more than 15 days after the trustee’s sale. Third, you must submit a bid so that the trustee receives it no more than 45 days after the trustee’s sale. If you think you may qualify as an “eligible tenant buyer” or “eligible bidder,” you should consider contacting an attorney or appropriate real estate professional immediately for advice regarding this potential right to purchase. Date: 4/19/2021 Nationwide Reconveyance, LLC 5677 Oberlin Drive, Suite 210 San Diego, California 92121 Sale Line: (714) 986-9342 By: Rhonda Rorie, Trustee (4/30/21, 5/7/21, 5/14/21 TS# NR-51507-ca SDI-20865) Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on April 30, May 7 & May 14, 2021

T.S. No. 18-20970-SP-CA Title No. 180549201-CA-VOI A.P.N. 1011-415-27-0-000 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE. YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 11/17/2005. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, (cashier’s check(s) must be made payable to National Default Servicing Corporation), drawn on a state or national bank, a check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state; will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below. The sale will be made in an “as is” condition, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on the day of sale. Trustor: Junel J. Noriega and Claudia Noriega, husband and wife as joint tenants Duly Appointed Trustee: National Default Servicing Corporation Recorded 11/29/2005 as Instrument No. 2005-0889600 (or Book, Page) of the Official Records of San Bernardino County, CA. Date of Sale: 05/18/2021 at 1:00 PM Place of Sale: At the Main (South) Entrance to the City of Chino Civic Center, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA. 91710 Estimated amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $275,445.73 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 957 South Mountain Avenue #61 Ontario, CA 91762 A.P.N.: 1011-415-27-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale. If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be the return of monies paid to the Trustee, and the successful bidder shall have no further recourse. The requirements of California Civil Code Section 2923.5(b)/2923.55(c) were fulfilled when the Notice of Default was recorded. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property. NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call or visit this Internet Web site www.ndscorp.com/sales, using the file number assigned to this case 18-20970-SP-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. Date: 04/16/2021 National Default Servicing Corporation c/o Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., its agent, 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 820 San Diego, CA 92108 Toll Free Phone: 888-264-4010 Sales Line 855-219-8501; Sales Website: www.ndscorp.com By: Rachael Hamilton, Trustee Sales Representative CPP351027
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on April 30, May 7 & May 14, 2021.

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210004013
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Bravo Burgers-Redlands, 1911 Redlands Blvd., Redlands, CA 92373, Mailing Address: 41847 Via Balderama, Temecula, CA 92592, Vnat Restaurants, Inc., 1911 Redlands Blvd, Redlands, CA 92373
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
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/Emmanuel Vitakis
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/19/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 01/01/2005
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21, 05/21/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210004082
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Mason Notary Excellence, 11369 Marfa St, Fontana, CA 92337, Mailing Address: 11369 Marfa St, Fontana, CA 92337, Darriell Mason, 11369 Marfa St, Fontana, CA 92337
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/Darriell Mason
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/20/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 11/20/2020
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21, 05/21/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210003903
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: S&S Digital Conversions, 7211 Haven Ave., Suite E122, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701, Sheldon S Smith, 5613 Carmello Court, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/Sheldon S Smith
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/14/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 04/04/2021
County Clerk, s/
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).
04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21, 05/21/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210003284
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Perkins Moving Company, 9353 19TH St, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701, John D. Perkins, 9353 19TH St, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/John D Perkins
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 03/30/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 03/23/2021
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21, 05/21/21
T.S. No. 18-20970-SP-CA Title No. 180549201-CA-VOI A.P.N. 1011-415-27-0-000 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE. YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 11/17/2005. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, (cashier’s check(s) must be made payable to National Default Servicing Corporation), drawn on a state or national bank, a check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state; will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below. The sale will be made in an “as is” condition, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on the day of sale. Trustor: Junel J. Noriega and Claudia Noriega, husband and wife as joint tenants Duly Appointed Trustee: National Default Servicing Corporation Recorded 11/29/2005 as Instrument No. 2005-0889600 (or Book, Page) of the Official Records of San Bernardino County, CA. Date of Sale: 05/18/2021 at 1:00 PM Place of Sale: At the Main (South) Entrance to the City of Chino Civic Center, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA. 91710 Estimated amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $275,445.73 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 957 South Mountain Avenue #61 Ontario, CA 91762 A.P.N.: 1011-415-27-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale. If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be the return of monies paid to the Trustee, and the successful bidder shall have no further recourse. The requirements of California Civil Code Section 2923.5(b)/2923.55(c) were fulfilled when the Notice of Default was recorded. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property. NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call or visit this Internet Web site www.ndscorp.com/sales, using the file number assigned to this case 18-20970-SP-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. Date: 04/16/2021 National Default Servicing Corporation c/o Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., its agent, 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 820 San Diego, CA 92108 Toll Free Phone: 888-264-4010 Sales Line 855-219-8501; Sales Website: www.ndscorp.com By: Rachael Hamilton, Trustee Sales Representative CPP351027
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:
JAMES CARRITUE
NO. PROPS 2100519
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of JAMES CARRITUE
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by MARC E. GROSSMAN in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that MARC E. GROSSMAN be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held in Dept. No. S37 at 9 a.m. on JUNE 16, 2021 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
Filed: MARCH 10, 2021
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Attorney for the Petitioner: James Lee, Esquire
100 N. Euclide Avenue, Second Floor
Upland, CA 91786
Telephone No: (909) 608-7426
Email address: mail@wefight4you.com
Attorney for Fred Edward Carlson
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel April 30, May 7 & May 14 2, 2021.
CASE NUMBER: (Numero del Caso): 37-2020-00000926
ON FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT SUMMONS
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: (AVISO AL DEMANDADO): CHU-JAN CHENG, an individual, HSIANG-MAN CHENG, an individual, PAUL CHENG, an individual, and DOES 1 – 10, inclusive.
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: (LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): TAN-HUI LIN A.K.A. KATY LIN, an individual.
NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more infor-mation at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court’s lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case. AVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a continuacion.
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO despues de que le entreguen esta citacion y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta corte y hacer que se entregue una copia al demandante. Una carta o una llamada telefonica no lo protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar en formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta. Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y mas informacion en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov) en la biblioteca de leyes de su condado o en la corte que le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentacion, pida al secretario de la corte que le de un formulario de exencion de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corte le podra quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de remision a abogados. Si no puede pagar a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos de un programa de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services, (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov) o poniendose en contacto con la corte o el colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre cualquier recuperacion de $10,000 o mas de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesion de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar el gravamen de la corte antes de que la corte pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y direccion de la corte es): SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO – CENTRAL DISTRICT, 330 West Broadway, San Diego, California 92101
The name, address and telephone number of plaintiff’s attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney is: (El nombre, la direccion y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es): MONISHA A. COELHO, ALVARADOSMITH, APC, 633 West Fifth St., Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90071 (213) 229-2400
Date: (Fecha) OCT 15, 2020
Clerk (Secretario)
By: M. MC CLURE, Deputy (Adjunto)
CN976760 CHENG Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 4/30, 5/7, 5/14 & 5/21, 2021

CASE NUMBER: (Numero del Caso): CIVDS2000458
ON FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT SUMMONS
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: (AVISO AL DEMANDADO): CHU-JAN CHENG, an individual, HSIANG-MAN CHENG, an individual, PAUL CHENG, an individual, and DOES 1 – 10, inclusive.
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: (LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): YTS DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a California Limited Liability Corporation.
NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more infor-mation at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court’s lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case. AVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a continuacion.
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO despues de que le entreguen esta citacion y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta corte y hacer que se entregue una copia al demandante. Una carta o una llamada telefonica no lo protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar en formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta. Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y mas informacion en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov) en la biblioteca de leyes de su condado o en la corte que le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentacion, pida al secretario de la corte que le de un formulario de exencion de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corte le podra quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de remision a abogados. Si no puede pagar a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos de un programa de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services, (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov) o poniendose en contacto con la corte o el colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre cualquier recuperacion de $10,000 o mas de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesion de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar el gravamen de la corte antes de que la corte pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y direccion de la corte es): SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO – CIVIL DIVISION, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210
The name, address and telephone number of plaintiff’s attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney is: (El nombre, la direccion y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es): MONISHA A. COELHO, ALVARADOSMITH, APC, 633 West Fifth St., Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90071 (213) 229-2400
Date: (Fecha) OCT 28, 2020
Clerk (Secretario)
By: SANDRA ORTEGA, Deputy (Adjunto)
CN976759 LMXC3
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 4/30, 5/7, 5/14 & 5/21, 2021

CASE NUMBER: (Numero del Caso): 37-2020-00000926
ON FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT SUMMONS
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: (AVISO AL DEMANDADO): CHU-JAN CHENG, an individual, HSIANG-MAN CHENG, an individual, PAUL CHENG, an individual, and DOES 1 – 10, inclusive.
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: (LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): TAN-HUI LIN A.K.A. KATY LIN, an individual.
NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more infor-mation at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court’s lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case. AVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a continuacion.
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO despues de que le entreguen esta citacion y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta corte y hacer que se entregue una copia al demandante. Una carta o una llamada telefonica no lo protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar en formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta. Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y mas informacion en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov) en la biblioteca de leyes de su condado o en la corte que le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentacion, pida al secretario de la corte que le de un formulario de exencion de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corte le podra quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de remision a abogados. Si no puede pagar a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos de un programa de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services, (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov) o poniendose en contacto con la corte o el colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre cualquier recuperacion de $10,000 o mas de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesion de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar el gravamen de la corte antes de que la corte pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y direccion de la corte es): SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO – CENTRAL DISTRICT, 330 West Broadway, San Diego, California 92101
The name, address and telephone number of plaintiff’s attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney is: (El nombre, la direccion y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es): MONISHA A. COELHO, ALVARADOSMITH, APC, 633 West Fifth St., Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90071 (213) 229-2400
Date: (Fecha) OCT 15, 2020
Clerk (Secretario)
By: M. MC CLURE, Deputy (Adjunto)
CN976760 CHENG

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER CIVSB2108532
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: JAMES FLANNIGAN IV filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
JAMES FLANNIGAN IV to Flannigan IV, James
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: 06/03/21
Time: 9:00 a.m.
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, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: April 20, 2021
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21 & 05/21/21

FBN 20210004194
The following entity is doing business as MONTCLAIR PLAZA DENTAL GROUP 8660 CENTRAL AVE. STE A, MONTCLAIR, CA 91763: S. DAVE SRIKUREJA, DDS, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 25802 HUDSON CT. LOMA LINDA, CA 92354
A California Corporation  C4258718
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION
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.
SUTHEEP DAVE SRIKUREJA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 4/22/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21 & 05/21/21
FBN 20210004013
The following entity is doing business as BRAVO BURGERS-REDLANDS 1911 REDLANDS BLVD. REDLANDS, CA 92373: VNAT RESTAURANTS, INC. 1911 REDLANDS BLVD. REDLANDS, CA 92373
Mailing Address: 41847 BALDERAMA TEMECULA, CA 92952
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION A California Corporation  C2455163
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.
EMMANUEL VITAKIS
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 4/19/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
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 04/30/21, 05/07/21, 05/14/21 & 05/21/21
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:
JAMES CARRITUE
NO. PROPS 2100519
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons
who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of JAMES
CARRITUE
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by MARC E.
GROSSMAN in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that MARC E.
GROSSMAN be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Adlninistration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good
cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held in Dept. No. S37 at 9 a.m. on JUNE 16, 2021 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
Filed: MARCH 10, 2021
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the
court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 5 8(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in
California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Attorney for the Petitioner: James Lee, Esquire
100 N. Euclid Avenue, Second Floor
Upland, CA 91786
Telephone No: (909) 608-7426
Email address: mail@wefight4you.com
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel May 7, May 14 & May 21, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:
BARBARA J. SUMMERVILLE
NO. PROPS 2100557
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of BARBARA J. SUMMERVILLE
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by BERL G. SUMMERVILLE in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that BERL G. SUMMERVILLE be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held in Dept. No. S37 at 9 a.m. on JUNE 24, 2021 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Filed: April 26, 2021
Attorney for the Petitioner: Jennifer M. Daniel, Esquire
220 Nordina St.
Redlands, CA 92373
Telephone No: (909) 792-9244 Fax No: (909) 235-4733
Email address: jennifer@lawofficeofjenniferdaniel.com
Attorney for Berl Summerville
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel May 7, 14 & 21, 2021.
SUMMONS – (CITACION JUDICIAL)
CASE NUMBER (NUMERO DEL CASO) CIVDS2022567
NOTICE TO DEFENDANTS (AVISO DEMANDADO): F.S.G.M. MEDICAL CLINIC, INC., a California corporation; COUNTY OF ORANGE, a local public entity; ARTURO RUIZ, an individual; JOHN. H. BUCKNER, an individual; CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a local public entity; STATE OF CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD, an agency of the state of California; COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a local public entity; PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, L.L.C, a Delaware limited liability company; ALL PERSONS UNKNOWN CLAIMING ANY LEGAL OR EQUITABLE RIGHT, TITLE, ESTATE, LIEN OR INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE COMPLAINT ADVERSE TO PLAINTIFF’S TITLE, OR ANY CLOUD UPON PLAINTIFF’S TILE THERETO and DOES 1 -20, INCLUSIVE.
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF (LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE):
GILBERT SANDOVAL
NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons is served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more information at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court’s lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
¡AVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a continuacion
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO después de que le entreguen esta citación y papeles legales para presentar una repuesta por escrito en esta corte y hacer que se entreque una copia al demandante. Una carta o una llamada telefonica no le protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar on formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulano que usted puede usar para su respuesta. Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y mas información en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov), en la biblioteca de leyes de su condado o en la corte que le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentación, pida si secretario de la corta que le de un formulario de exencion de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corta le podrá quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conace a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de referencia a abogados. Si no peude pagar a un a un abogado, es posible que cumpia con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratu de un programa de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services, (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov), o poniendoso en contacto con la corte o el colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos gravamen sobre cualquier recuperación da $10,000 o mas de vaior recibida mediante un aceurdo o una concesión de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar el gravamen de la corta antes de que la corta pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y la direccion de la corte es):
SAN BERNARDINO JUSTICE CENTER
247 West 3rd Street
San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210
The name, address and telephone number of plaintiff’s attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is: (El nombre, la direccion y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demendante que no tiene abogado, es):
R. SAM PRICE SBN 208603
PRICE LAW FIRM, APC
300 E STATE STREET SUITE 620
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(909) 328-7000
sam@pricelawfirm.com
DATE (Fecha): 10/13/2020
Clerk (Secretario), by Sylvia Guajardo, Deputy (Adjunto)
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on: 5/07, 5/14, 5/21 & 5/28, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF BARBARA A. GILLESPIE
Case No. PROPS2100476
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both, of BARBARA A. GILLESPIE
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by Patricia Ybarra in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that Patricia Ybarra be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A HEARING on the petition will be held on June 1, 2021 at 9:00 AM in Dept. No. S36 located at 247 W. Third St., San Bernardino, CA 92415.
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Attorney for petitioner:
MAUREEN MURATORE ESQ SBN 155156
LAW OFFICE OF
MAUREEN MURATORE
10700 CIVIC CENTER DR
STE 200
RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730
CN977531 GILLESPIE May 7,14,21, 2021

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210004058
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: 101 Cinema Club, 15101 Fairfield Ranch Rd, 7111, Chino Hills, CA 91709, Mailing Address: 15101 Fairfield Ranch Rd, 7111, Chino Hills, CA 91709, Skyler A. Malone, 15101 Fairfield Ranch Rd, 7111, Chino Hills, CA 91709, Jessica A. Dixon, 15101 Fairfield Ranch Rd, 7111, Chino Hills, CA 91709
Business is Conducted By: A General Partnership
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/Jessica A. Dixon
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/20/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 04/11/2021
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
05/07/21, 05/14/21, 05/21/21, 05/27/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210004416
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Hungry Dog, 11462 Vale Dr, Fontana, CA 92337, Jesus M. Veloz, 11462 Vale Dr, Fontana, CA 92337
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
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/Jesus M Veloz
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/28/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, s/ I1327
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).
05/07/21, 05/14/21, 05/21/21, 05/27/21

NOTICE OF SALE OF AUTOMOBILE
Notice is hereby given pursuant to
Sections 3071 of the Civil Code of the
State of California the undersigned will
sell the following vehicle(s) at lien sale at
said address below on: 05/21/21 09:00 AM
Year of Car / Make of Car / Vehicle ID No. / License No. (State)
16 VNL780 1UYVS2533GU6219151  4SK3415 CA
To be sold by PRIME TRUCK AND TRAILER REPAIR 9978 CHERRY AVE FONTANA CA 92335
Said sale is for the purpose of satisfying
lien for together with costs of advertising
and expenses of sale.
Published on 05/07/21

NOTICE OF SALE OF AUTOMOBILE
Notice is hereby given pursuant to
Sections 3071 of the Civil Code of the
State of California the undersigned will
sell the following vehicle(s) at lien sale at
said address below on: 05/21/21 09:00 AM
Year of Car / Make of Car / Vehicle ID No. / License No. (State)
15 VNL780 4V4NC9EJ3FN908087  4QFH848 CA
To be sold by PRIME TRUCK AND TRAILER REPAIR 9978 CHERRY AVE FONTANA CA 92335
Said sale is for the purpose of satisfying
lien for together with costs of advertising
and expenses of sale.
Published on 05/07/21
FBN 20210004394
The following person is doing business as: PLAZA 7 3654 HIGHLAND AVE. SUITE 13 HIGHLAND, CA 92346 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO ); [ MAILING ADDRESS 16516 SAN BERNARDINIO AVE. FONTANA, CA 92335]; FADI MAHER 16516 SAN BERNARDINO AVE. FONTANA, CA 92335
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ FADI MAHER, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/27/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202101IR

FBN 20210004399
The following person is doing business as: GONZALEZ TRANSPORT 2137 CHRYSLER DR APT #4 MODESTO, CA 95350 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO ); JULIO A MATOS GONZALEZ 2137 CHRYSLER DR APT #4 MODESTO, CA 95350
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ JULIO A MATOS GONZALEZ, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/27/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202102MT

FBN 20210004398
The following person is doing business as: J&J ROAD SERVICE 6803 CORIANDER DR OAK HILLS, CA 92344 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO ); JUAN V CORONA 6803 CORIANDER DR OAK HILLS, CA 92344
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ JUAN V. CORONA, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/27/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202103MT

FBN 20210004345
The following person is doing business as: LB CAR SALES 12627 ILONA ST VICTORVILLE, CA 92392 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO );[ MAILING ADDRESS 311 W CIVIC CENTER DR SANTA ANA, CA 92701]; CHRISTIAN O VERDUZCO-VILLASENOR 12627 ILONA ST VICTORVILLE, CA 92392
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ CHRISTIAN O VERDUZCO-VILLASENOR, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/27/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202104CV
FBN 20210003871
The following person is doing business as: ACTIVEINK 11250 RAMONA AVE #815 MONTCLAIR, CA 91763 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO );[ MAILING ADDRESS 311 W CIVIC CENTER DR SANTA ANA, CA 92701]; EDUARDO CARDENAS VILLAESCUELA 11250 RAMONA AVE #815 MONTCLAIR, CA 91763
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: MARCH 28, 2021
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ EDUARDO CARDENAS VILLAESCUELA, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/14/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202105CV

FBN 20210004413
The following person is doing business as: DTLA ENTERPRISE; FIT & CLAM; CALIFORNIA IMMIGRATION SERVICES 12562 CENRAL AVE # A CHINO, CA 91710 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO );[ MAILING ADDRESS 1110202 BLACKWOOD ST FONTANA, CA 92337]; DTLA ENTERPRISE 440 S. BROAD WAY ST. G-8 LOS ANGELES, CA 90013
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ KELLEM Y. POLANCO, SECRETARY Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/28/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202106MT

FBN 20210004376
The following person is doing business as: IE FUNNEL CAKES 122 HARTZEL AVE REDLANDS, CA 92374 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO ); JENNIFER M MADRIGAL 122 HARTZELL AVE REDLANDS, CA 92374; DAVID VALENTIN SOTELO 122 HARTZELL AVE REDLANDS, CA 92374
The business is conducted by: A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ JENNIFER M. MADRIGAL, GENERAL PARTNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/27/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202107MT

FBN 20210004406
The following person is doing business as: ROMEROS NURSERY 13645 FOOTHILL BLVD FONTANA, CA 92335 ( COUNTY OF PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO );[ MAILING ADDRESS 13763 NEWCASTLE CT FONTANA, CA 92335]; ERIC ROMERO 13645 FOOTHILL BLVD FONTANA, CA 925335
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, 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 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ ERIC ROMERO, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/28/2021
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious 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 business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 05/07/2021, 05/12/2021, 05/21/2021, 05/28/2021 CNBB18202108MT

By Clicking on the blue portal below, you can download a PDF of the April 30 edition of the San Bernardino County Sentinel.

Sentinel 04-30-21

By Mark Gutglueck
West Valley Water District Board President Channing Hawkins blocked his agency’s effort to ensure that safeguards to protect the Mid-Valley water table were incorporated into the plans ultimately approved by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors for a truck stop now being built in Bloomington, information obtained by the Sentinel indicates.
Permitting the tainted water from the run-off from the truck stop to drain into the groundwater will create a circumstance, water professionals say, that will compromise local water quality in such a way that within the next 40 to 50 years water drawn from wells within the same watershed as the truck stop will become undrinkable, requiring a cleanup effort that will cost future generations hundreds of millions of dollars to redress.
A primary consideration in Hawkins’ move to short-circuit the district’s examination of the impact the development project would have on water quality was that the project’s proponent was Nachhattar Singh Chandi, a major campaign donor to Hawkins’ employer, San Bernardino County Supervisor Joe Baca, Jr.
The project in question, the Bloomington Commercial Center, is a truck servicing facility now being built at 10951 Cedar Avenue at the southeast corner of Cedar and Santa Ana Avenue in the unincorporated county community of Bloomington, three-quarters of a mile south of the I-10 Freeway.
In some measure because of Singh’s propensity and reputation for making generous contributions to the elected political leadership in the jurisdictions in which he pursues development projects, he has been able to in effect purchase lax application of development standards that prevent exacting environmental protection standards from being applied to projects pursued and completed by his various companies and limited liability corporations functioning under the umbrella of the major corporate entity he controls, Chandi Group USA.
Singh obtained a job at a gas station at the age of 21 shortly after arriving in the United State from India in 1991. Through hard work, leverage and risk, he acquired a Black Gold gas station in 1994. Having caught on to the way in which business is transacted and the development/governmental regulation system in Riverside County plays out, he parlayed that single gas station into the acquisition of a series of gas station franchises, greasing his way from one project approval to another with generous political donations. At present he has expanded his, his wife Susana’s and Chandi Group USA’s holdings to include 49 businesses with over 370 employees, including 21 ARCO AM-PM locations, eight Express Tunnel car washes, as well as multiple Del Taco, Subway, Starbucks, Dairy Queen, Burger King, Dunkin’ Donuts, and Denny’s franchises. Chandi Group owns the Mecca Travel Center in Mecca in Riverside County, the major business office business complex in Indio, where Chandi Group USA is headquartered, and he has constructed a residential compound in Rancho Mirage that cost some $30 million to build and for which he has now reportedly been offered $48 million.
A major element of Chandi’s success is his willingness to provide extensive amounts of money to politicians, in particular incumbent politicians. He makes his contributions both directly to those candidates’ campaign funds, as well as to so-called “Super PACs,” political action committees, which bankroll the campaigns for favored candidates and cover the cost of attacks on disfavored candidates. Chandi put up over half of a million dollars for one such Super PAC dedicated to candidates for national office, which included $275,000 earmarked to support President Donald Trump in his 2020 reelection campaign. He was also involved in making direct contributions to U.S. Congressional candidates, particularly those in California and Southern California. He was also a major contributor to a political action committee devoted to candidates for state and local office in California. Singh in recent years has become one of the top three donors to elected officials in Riverside County, where the lion’s share of Chandi Group USA’s development and business activity takes place and most of its investments are lodged. In Indio, the geographical center of Chandi Group USA’s empire, Nachhattar Singh Chandi practically owns the Indio City Council, after having made more than $100,000 in donations to the political war chests of its members.
Chandi started out in life as the son of farmers in the impoverished northern India state of Uttar Pradesh. He resolved, at the age of 20, to come to the United States to make his way in the world. At this point, after spending three-fifths of his life in California, he has come to understand implicitly and explicitly that American politicians are for sale, and that those elected officials will clear the path for virtually any businessman who will provide them with the mother’s milk of politics – money – to keep them in office.
More than three years ago, it came to Chandi’s attention that the pay-to-play ethos is inculcated into the political culture of San Bernardino County even more than it is in Riverside County. By shifting a portion of his business and developmental focus northward and applying the same tactics of buying off the politicians there, Chandi is looking to substantially expand his financial empire. One of his first sallies across the Riverside County/San Bernardino County line was a proposal to develop what was represented as an upscale commercial project in the unincorporated community of Bloomington, what was historically an agricultural community which lies immediately adjacent to and just north of the Riverside County border and south of the cities of Rialto and Fontana.
In the 1870s, David Colton, the one-time sheriff of Siskiyou County, took on the enterprise of constructing the westernmost span of what was to be the second continental rail line into California, the Southern Pacific Railroad. Colton made the decision to build that railroad from Los Angeles on a straight line straight out toward Arizona rather than curving it up into downtown San Bernardino. Consequently, the rail line passed through what is today Bloomington. Similarly, when the Interstate 10 Freeway was laid out in 1956, it too was routed through Bloomington. Due west from Bloomington is Ontario International Airport. In addition to the freeway, four substantial east-west boulevards or roadways run through Bloomington – Valley Boulevard, Slover Avenue, Santa Ana Avenue and Jurupa Avenue. As a consequence, over the last 60 years, gradually at first and then with greater rapidity, Bloomington has lost its agricultural identity and has become much more strongly identified with the transportation and trucking industries. The 6.01-square mile community had a population of 25,482 as of July 1, 2020. As an unincorporated county community, Bloomington is larger population-wise than six of San Bernardino County’s incorporated cities and towns – Needles, Big Bear Lake, Grand Terrace, Yucca Valley, Loma Linda and Barstow. Bloomington is inhabited by a relatively unsophisticated and largely impoverished populace. The median household income is $34,106 and the median family income is $35,936. About 19.8 percent of families and 25.3 percent of the population in Bloomington live below the poverty line. Ethnically, 64.4 percent of Bloomington’s inhabitants are Hispanic. The ultimate land use authority over Bloomington resides with the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors, all of the the members of which do not reside in Bloomington and who are strongly influenced driven in their decision-making by the application of political donations.
Given all of those factors, Singh perceived Bloomington as an ideal launching ground for his expansion into San Bernardino County. Initially, he obscured the consideration that the project he was proposing was a truck stop. He represented it rather as a commercial project that would be centered around what the company’s agents said would be an upscale restaurant. The center would involve retail shops, two fast-food operations and a gas station, they said. In that form, the project initially garnered support and no opposition to speak of. Over time, the project changed. The gas station became a fueling station. The retail shops became a convenience store. The fueling station became a truck servicing operation. Ultimately, the restaurant component was dropped entirely. In its final form the commercial center had transformed into a truck stop.
The general lack of sophistication of the Bloomington population and the ultimate land use authority residing with the board of supervisors conferred on Chandi Group USA two advantages which would allow it to obtain an entitlement to proceed with the project while being bound by the least cost possible in addressing its environmental impacts.
Truck stops or truck servicing facilities involve intense activity which has serious environmental implications. Indeed, typically at such facilities a number of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contamination is present, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, petroleum oil, solvents, volatile organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, chemicals, asbestos and lead. Exposure to the types of contaminants present, or potentially present, at trucking facilities threatens the public health, safety or welfare of a community in which it is located and neighboring communities.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act, development projects are subject to environmental certification. Unless a development is determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, known by its acronym CEQA, all projects in California must undergo an examination as to their impacts as part of the approval process. Agencies with land use authority – meaning the state, counties or cities – have a degree of latitude in how intensive that examination of environmental impacts and the attendant mitigations of those impacts are going to be.
The most comprehensive examination of those impacts is a full-blown environmental impact report, an involved study of the project site prior to development, an inventory of the project site’s contents and configuration including biological and botanical resources, the project proposal, the potential and actual impacts the project will have on the site and surrounding area in terms of all conceivable issues, including land use, water use, air quality, potential contamination, noise, traffic, and biological and cultural resources. It outlines alternatives to the project, an analyses of taking no action in developing the property and specifies in detail what measures can, will and must be carried out to offset those impacts if the project is approved and the development proceeds.
There are less intensive forms of environmental certification, which include environmental statements, environmental studies and various forms of declarations.
As the Bloomington Commercial Center project was wending its way through the planning process at the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Division, Chandi went to work at compromising the political masters of the personnel in that department. He conferred substantial political contributions on the members of the board of supervisors.
Prior to his election to the board of supervisors in 2020, First District Supervisor Paul Cook was a congressman. In 2018, Nachattar Chandi provided his congressional election campaign with $2,700. Chandi’s wife, Susana, likewise that year gave Cook’s congressional campaign $2,700.
In 2019, during the run-up for her election to the board of supervisors, Dawn Rowe, who had been appointed Third District supervisor in 2018, was provided with $2,000 by Susana Chandi.
Most importantly, Nachhattar Chandi targeted the Fifth District Supervisor, since Bloomington lies entirely within San Bernardino County’s Fifth Supervisorial District. As 2020 dawned, then-Fifth District Supervisor Josie Gonzales, who had been supervisor since 2004, was on her way out, as the term limits members of the board of supervisors had been subjected to since the passage of Measure P in 2006 from that point forward limited board members to three four-year terms. Chandi took no chances. He provided $4,700, the maximum amount he could under San Bernardino County’s rules with regard to contribution limits, to Dan Flores, Gonzales’s chief of staff, who was running with Gonzales’s endorsement to succeed her as supervisor. Chandi made another $2,000 contribution to then-Fontana City Councilman Jesse Armendarez, who was also running for Fifth District supervisor. In addition, he contributed $4,700 to then-Rialto Councilman Joe Baca, Jr., who was in the race, as well. Chandi’s motivation had nothing to do with getting behind the one candidate he considered to be best qualified to serve as San Bernardino County’s Fifth District supervisor but rather to ensure that whoever won, he would stand in good stead with him.
After Flores was eliminated from the running by finishing third in the balloting that took place in conjunction with the March 3, 2020 California Presidential Primary, Armendarez and Baca went head-to-head in the November 3, 2020 election. Baca prevailed, and was sworn in on December 7, 2020.
Ultimately, under pressure from the board of supervisors, the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Division used the least exacting size-up of environmental issues pertaining to the Bloomington Commercial Center project, a mitigated negative declaration, to give Chandi Group USA clearance to proceed. In a mitigated negative declaration, the panel entrusted with a community’s ultimate land use authority, in this case the board of supervisors, undertakes an essentially cursory examination of the project before declaring that any untoward adverse environmental impacts from the project will be mitigated, or offset, by the conditions of approval of the project imposed upon the developer.
Of note is that the documents prepared for the Chandi truck stop project relating to the impact on the water table beneath the project in the weeks and months before the board of supervisors met to vote on the project on April 6 were withheld from the public. County land use services employees, asserting that the county did not own the documents and that they were the proprietary product of the consultant retained by Chandi Group USA to compile them, kept them under lock and key in a file considered off limits to anyone other than select land use services division employees. Efforts by members of the public to see those documents were rebuffed.
With the date for the board’s consideration of the project approaching, West Valley Water District Board Member Greg Young familiarized himself with the initial study for the project, noting it did not provide any detail with regard to how mitigation of polluted groundwater contaminated by tainted stormwater runoff was to occur. In January, he undertook what he described as a “two-month odyssey” in an effort to find out what treatment that stormwater runoff was going to be subjected to. The initial study made no reference to any sort of water quality assurance strategy. Young examined the county’s MS4 permit, which pertains to the county’s overall and generalized strategy for dealing with stormwater discharge. From this, he learned that a water quality mitigation plan would be a required part of the permitting of the project. His request to see that plan was denied.
The West Valley Water District serves 93,000 residents in roughly 23,000 households as well as commercial and industrial customers in large portions of Fontana and Rialto along with all of Bloomington. Young, as the representative of the Bloomington subdivision within the district, insisted that his elected position with the district entitled him to make an examination of any issues that pertained to the quality of water provided to the West Valley Water District’s customers. Met with further resistance, Young persisted, sending a series of three emails, the last of which he said was “rather strident,” to county officials demanding access to the water quality mitigation plan relating to how stormwater that would wash over the truck stop was to be diverted and treated.
At that point, Young was permitted to view the documentation under highly restrictive conditions which required that he come to the county land use services office alone and without a cellphone or any device with a camera so that he could not photograph the documents, copy them or attempt to reproduce them in any way, and that he be monitored by a land use services staff member the entire time he was perusing the documents.
Young’s examination of the water quality mitigation plan revealed that the county had allowed Chandi Group USA to utilize the least intensive and least expensive methodology to arrest the flow of pollutants that will emanate from the site once it is has been converted to a truck stop. Contained in the water quality mitigation plan was, according to Young, an inventory setting forth the types of pollutants that were anticipated to come off the project site once it was operating as a truck servicing facility, those contaminants being fuel spillage, both gasoline and diesel, petroleum products, solvents or the byproducts therefrom borne by rainwater runoff washing over the vehicles and the pavement as well as the equipment, machinery, fuel tanks, barrels, pipes, troughs and other containers and conveyances at the site. The methodology for handling that runoff was to, in Young’s words, “let the native soil” do all the work in terms of stormwater dispersal instead of more stringent mitigation options. The way in which rainwater is to be dealt with, according to the document, will involve collecting that runoff into an infiltration chamber and then simply allowing it to merge into the soil. The water in the chamber, permeated with grease, oil, solvents, gasoline, diesel fuel, radiator fluid, transmission fluid and a host of noxious chemicals that are to to get washed into the system are not to be treated.
According to Young, a consultant working for Chandi confidently declared that the water table would remain safe using that methodology, based on the theory that the ground would serve as a filter through which the water would pass but the contaminants would be caught. The consultant, Young said, maintained that “as the run-off goes through all these layers of sand, the contaminants would get captured. This method was proposed quite cavalierly, despite a long history of water contamination in the region from man-made products and chemicals.”
At that point, Young said, it was clear to him why the documentation was being hidden.
Young went to West Valley Water District headquarters, where he alerted staff to what the county was on the verge of approving. Staff members appeared to take what he was saying seriously, expressing concern about the potential the untreated stormwater runoff from the project would have on the long-term viability of the water table beneath Bloomington as a source of domestic water. Young importuned his fellow board member, Kyle Crowther, who served with him on the district’s Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee, and the district’s acting general manager, Shamindra “Ricky” Manbahal, to consider what action the district could take to ensure more responsible handling of that runoff.
Manbahal acted. On Thursday, March 25, 2021, Manbahal scheduled for the following day, March 26 at 4:30 p.m., a special meeting of the Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee. The agenda for that meeting included an item that called for the committee to “consider requesting [the] County of San Bernardino to implement additional pre-treatment practices for storm/ground water.”
To complement that meeting agenda, Manbahal authored a staff report in which he noted that the district had previous issues with regard to the contamination of the district’s water supply by perchlorate, an oxidizer in rocket propellants and fireworks first detected in some of the district’s wells in 1997. By 1998, Manbahal noted, the district “shut down several wells to avoid exposure to the drinking water supply. The West Valley Water District started to install ion exchange treatment systems in 2005, a fluidized bed bioreactor treatment plant in 2011, and a fixed bed reactor treatment plant in 2016. To date, the West Valley Water District owns and operates eight water treatment plants, six of which are for perchlorate treatment.”
Manbahal further noted that “In 2019, the West Valley Water District shut down one well in the Lytle Creek groundwater basin after discovering methyl tertiary butyl ether, a fuel oxygenate exclusively used as a fuel additive, and two wells in the Rialto-Colton basin after discovering 1,2,3-trichloropropane, an impurity in certain pesticides. No other contaminants have been detected above the maximum contaminant levels set by the State Water Resources Control Board.”
With regard to the threat posed to the district’s water sources by the insufficient treatment of the stormwater runoff from the Bloomington Commercial Center, Manbahal wrote, “A typical watershed scale stormwater management approach is using a multi-best management practices (BMP) approach to managing the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff. The BMP sequence starts with pollution prevention and progresses through source control, on-site treatment, and regional treatment before the runoff water is discharged.”
Manbahal’s report stated that “Each multi-best management practices utilizes one or more components that work together to remove pollutants utilizing combinations of processes. The multi-best management practice(s) selected can minimize the rate of runoff by utilizing a hydraulic process, remove bulk solids by utilizing a physical process, remove settleable solids and floatables by utilizing a physical process, remove suspended and colloidal solids by utilizing a physical, biological or chemical process, and remove colloidal, dissolved, volatile, and pathogens by using a biological or chemical process.”
The committee had three options, Manbahal noted, those being “1) Take no action; 2) Request [the] county to implement additional pre-treatment measures; and 3) Determine if there’s nexus to the county.”
In his report’s conclusion, Manbahal wrote, “Staff recommends that this item be submitted for consideration, and that the board of directors approve this item and authorize the acting general manager to execute the necessary documents.”
In further preparation for the specially-called March 26 Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee meeting, staff obtained a copy of the initial study for the project. Zeroing in on that portion of the study relating hydrology and water quality, an analysis of certain conclusions in the study were made. Highlighted for discussion by the committee was the assertion in the initial study that that there would be “less than significant impacts” from the completion of the project or that it would entail “any violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements” or otherwise “substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.” Staff’s highlighting of passages within the document further brought into question language in the initial study that there was to be less than significant impact on the environment in terms of whether it would “decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.”
Also highlighted was that efforts to control water runoff to prevent groundwater contamination specified in the report were only temporary ones that would be in place during the construction phase.
That highlighted text was “All individual projects implemented under the county’s general plan would comply with applicable federal, state, and local water quality regulations. Currently, the County of San Bernardino follows state standards for water quality and does not have their own specific standards. During construction, the proposed project would be required to obtain coverage under the state’s General Permit for Construction Activities that is administered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Storm water management measures would be required to be identified and implemented that would effectively control erosion and sedimentation and other construction-based pollutants during construction.”
Handwritten in the margin was “Post Construction?” That suggested water district staff believed there would be inadequate monitoring and safeguards once the project is completed.
Further highlighted for the committee’s review was language in the initial study relating to the county’s MS4 permit. An MS4 permit is a document issued by the federal government to a state, city, town, village, or other public entity which allows that jurisdiction to run a series of surface water or stormwater handling conveyances or conveyance systems to discharge that water either into the ground or into a stream, river or body of water. An MS4 permit is issued generally to the governmental jurisdiction for all of its discharge activity rather than any single release of water in a limited or circumscribed geographical area.
The language in the initial study stated, “Compliance with the county’s low impact development (LID) ordinance and the San Bernardino County MS4 permit requires capture and treatment of the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event. As part of the project’s final design review, the project would be required to submit a water quality maintenance plan demonstrating adequate stormwater retention using infiltration basins, bioretention areas, capture and controlled release tanks, or another best management practice. Such best management practices would slow the velocity of water and allow sediment and debris to settle out of the water column, thereby minimizing the potential for downstream flooding, erosion/siltation, or exceedances of stormwater drainage system capacity. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map, the project site is located in Zone X, a designation that is used for areas where there is minimal flood hazard. Given that the project would implement best management practices to capture and retain stormwater on-site, as described above for compliance with the county’s low impact development ordinance and MS4 permit requirements, potential impacts related to the alteration of the site’s drainage pattern would be less than significant.” Noted in handwriting in staff’s copy of the initial study was “Chemicals going into the ground!”
Staff’s copy of the initial study contained this highlighted passage: “As described above, the project would implement on-site storage of stormwater runoff, as required pursuant to the county’s low impact development ordinance, providing an opportunity for debris, sediment, and sediment-bound pollutants to settle out of the water column prior to discharge downstream. The requirements of the county’s low impact development ordinance and the applicable MS4 permit are intended to protect water quality and support attainment of water quality standards in downstream receiving water bodies. The project does not involve use of septic systems, pet parks, agricultural land or other land uses commonly associated with high concentrations of nutrients, indicator bacteria, or chemical toxicity. Neither construction nor operation of the proposed project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impact would occur. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.” Handwritten into the document at that point was, “What!?”
Indications were that the district’s staff was preparing a case to support the West Valley Water District’s board of directors if the Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee recommended that the district request the county to implement additional pre-treatment measures, and the full board indeed elected to follow that recommendation.
Upon learning that the Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee and members of staff were contemplating having the district second-guess the county with regard to its land use decision on Chandi’s proposed truck stop project, Hawkins, who is employed in Baca’s supervisorial office as his special advisor, in the words of one West Valley Water District employee, “went ballistic.”
Interrupting Chandi’s developmental intent in Bloomington or San Bernardino County was contrary to Hawkins’ personal interest on multiple levels.
An immediate consideration for Hawkins is that his employment contract with Baca’s office provides him with total annual compensation of $187,271, consisting of a salary of $115,086 and benefits of $72,185. If the agency he heads as an elected board member/appointed president – the West Valley Water District – brought into question the environmental safeguards relating to the Bloomington Commercial Center, that action carried with it the potential of blocking or delaying approval of the project or resulting in Chandi Group USA being required to augment the project with an expensive set of water treatment systems to allow the stormwater to be discharged into the local water table. Such a requirement could tack on added costs of a half million dollars or more that Chandi Group USA would have to bear. Crossing up Chandi, one of Baca’s major political benefactors, in that way could very well be seen as an act of disloyalty on Hawkins’s part, or at least a sign that he was insufficiently committed to Baca’s agenda and was putting a higher priority on his own interests at the water district. As Hawkins serves at the pleasure of Baca, he would run the risk of losing his job if the district took action to complicate the approval of the Bloomington Commercial Center.
A longer-term consideration for Hawkins is the mutual, indeed intertwined, political interest he has with Baca in staying on the good side of the deep-pocketed Chandi. After graduating from Howard University in 2001, Hawkins went to work as a field representative for Joe Baca, Sr., who was a Congressman from 1999 until 2013, representing first the 42nd Congressional District and then the 43rd Congressional District. It is widely assumed that Joe Baca, Jr. has aspirations of replicating at least some if not all of the political ground covered by his father. Joe Baca, Sr., prior to becoming a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, was both a California State Senator and an Assemblyman. It is further assumed that upon leaving the board of supervisors for higher office, Joe Baca, Jr., who served as a member of the California State Assembly for a single two-year term from 2004 through 2006 and is yet eligible to serve ten more years in the California Legislature, will look, perhaps, toward a return to Sacramento. His name recognition and established political career would also make him, at some point, a logical eventual candidate for Congress. Baca is very likely to endorse Hawkins as his successor as supervisor, should he seek higher office. Baca’s chief of staff, Ed Chavez, is not a resident of the Fifth District and is therefore not eligible, at present, to succeed Baca. In a circumstance in which Baca makes an effort to take on a legislative role in Sacramento or Washington, D.C. and Hawkins vies for supervisor, Chandi’s financial support and that of his employees at Chandi Group USA could be crucial to both of those electoral efforts.
Thus, the contemplated move by the West Valley Water District to at the very least complicate Chandi Group USA’s effort to get an entitlement for the Bloomington Commercial Center to proceed carried with it a potential negative political implication for Hawkins he ultimately acted to circumvent.
The Sentinel is informed that Hawkins vectored maximum force toward Mandahal, upbraiding him for indulging Young in his move, which involved Board Member Kyle Crowther, in making an issue of the fashion in which the stormwater runoff at the project was to be dealt with.
Manbahal, who was hired as the district’s chief financial and administrative officer in August 2019, in December 2019 moved into the role of de facto general manager of the district after 16 of the district’s department heads alleged mismanagement and favoritism on the part of then-General Manager Clarence Mansell, and Mansell became a virtual recluse in his own office for the next ten months. Mansell went out on paid leave in October 2020, at which point Manbahal officially moved into the role of interim district general manager. Indications are that Manbahal was and is looking toward succeeding Mansell in the role of full-fledged general manager. Hawkins threatened to dash that prospect forthwith upon learning of the specially-called March 26 Operations and Planning Committee meeting, the Sentinel was told, accompanied by intimations that any other staff that embraced the call for having the district request that the county implement additional pre-treatment measures of the runoff of that water before it is injected into the local water table were likewise risking losing their positions with West Valley.
Manbahal, with Hawkins gunning for him if he did not prevent the Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee inquiry from metastasizing into an interruption of the Bloomington Commercial Center’s approval, obtained from Joanne Chan, the district’s operations manager, a statement in an email that “The county’s measures are in compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act.”
The county, Chan indicated in the email, as the permit holder was to “monitor discharges and comply with all regulated water quality standards and submit required reports to the Regional Water Quality Control Board.” In addition, Chan stated that the “Stormwater pollution prevention plan lists all activities and conditions at the site that could cause water pollution and lists detailed steps the facility will take to prevent the discharge of any unpermitted pollution.”
Furthermore, Chan noted that the county was the MS4 permit holder and that county staff should be relied upon to “inspect the site for stormwater compliance. The risk level is determined by many factors, including the type of business activity, the Standard Industrial Classification Code, applicable state permits, hazardous material use, and other factors. The San Bernardino County Department of Public Works determines the risk level for the business based on the following factors, including, but not limited to: hazardous materials used on site, the potential for pollutant discharges, ongoing efforts to implement effective best management practices, site size and location, including proximity to rivers and streams.”
Chan said of the water quality management plan for the project, “As required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, this plan is intended to provide information related to the project’s generation and mitigation of water quality pollutants and assessment of hydrological impacts.”
At that point, the Sentinel is informed, Greg Young, who was the most passionate advocate of the district taking a stand and holding the county to account, and Crowther, who also had expressed concern about the disposition of the stormwater runoff from the project, elected to drop the matter, given their impression that pressing it might result in Hawkins terminating Manbahal and any other staff members who defied his wishes. The committee tabled the issue.
On April 6, the board of supervisors met and unanimously approved allowing the Bloomington Commercial Center to proceed. The board pushed ahead with granting the project a mitigated negative declaration, glossing over what was for the county’s planning professionals an embarrassing, indeed mortifying, moment when the documentation for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act to justify that declaration was examined. To those paying attention, it was clear the Chandi Group USA’s consultant had used material that was copied and pasted from a previous document for a different project in Sun Valley, in Riverside County. The board of supervisors ignored that faux pas, doing nothing to have the documentation corrected or examined for integrity, accepting an inapplicable reference as the justification for the action it took.
In the aftermath of the board’s vote, the Sentinel initiated inquiries with both Baca and Hawkins relating to the environmental implication of the Chandi Group USA’s Bloomington truck stop project.
The Sentinel sought from each whether they believed the collection of the contaminant-laden strormwater run-off from the Chandi truck stop into an infiltration chamber and then injecting that unfiltered and unscreened water into the water table is a safe and acceptable methodology for dealing with stormwater at that site.
The Sentinel asked both Baca and Hawkins if they were concerned with the impact the long-term accumulation of contaminants emanating from the Chandi truck stop will have on the viability of the Mid-Valley aquifer as a future water source.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins if he believe it proper for the board of supervisors to have allowed the environmental certification of the Chandi truck stop project to have taken place by means of a mitigated negative declaration rather than a full-blown environmental impact report.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins if he was in any way alarmed or concerned at the way in which the county withheld the documents relating to the environmental certification of this project, most particularly with regard to water quality impacts, from the public.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins if he perhaps did not fully understand or appreciate the potential that the Chandi truck stop will have on water quality in the Mid-Valley.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins why he had sought to prevent the district or one of its divisions or committees from looking into the water treatment methodology that is to be used at the Chandi truck stop, and if he was in some fashion requested or ordered by Supervisor Baca to take the action that he did in his capacity as board president to prevent the West Valley Water District from making an inquiry into the water treatment methodology that is to be used at the Chandi Group USA truck stop. The Sentinel asked if Hawkins on his own, out of concern that allowing the West Valley Water Board or one of its divisions or committees to carry out such an inquiry might result in his termination with Supervisor Baca’s office, acted to prevent an inquiry into the water treatment methodology that is to be used at the Chandi Group USA truck stop.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins for his response to those who have suggested that he betrayed the confidence and trust of those who elected him to the West Valley Water District board by preventing an inquiry into the water treatment methodology that is to be used at the Chandi truck stop. The Sentinel asked Hawkins why he had not stood up for his constituents and ensured that there were adequate safeguards put in place to protect the groundwater beneath the Mid-Valley in the face of the challenge represented to it by the advent of the Chandi truck stop.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins if he had quantified, in monetary terms, the amount of savings that Chandi Group USA realized by not having to create a system to purge the contaminants in the stormwater run-off to be collected in the infiltration chamber before that water is injected into the water table.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins if Nachhattar Singh Chandi’s status as one of Joe Baca, Jr.’s primary political donors had any impact on his or the district’s stance with regard to the Chandi Group USA’s truck stop project. The Sentinel asked Hawkins if he was counting upon the financial support of Nachhattar Singh Chandi in any of his future political endeavors.
The Sentinel asked Hawkins if there was some benign reason for the West Valley Water District not carrying out an inquiry into the water treatment methodology that is to be used at the Chandi truck stop and if he could express why the district rejected the concept of reviewing the county’s action in approving the Chandi truck stop project.
Neither Baca nor Hawkins responded to to the Sentinel’s inquiries.
On April 20, Naseem Farooqi, the West Valley Water District’s public affairs manager, who had been detailed to field the questions asked of Hawkins, responded.
“Although in our normal course of business we would not be involved in stormwater management of municipal discharge issues, our staff attempted to acknowledge a question posed by a board member. This is not our field of expertise and it is not the agency’s role to permit or prohibit these issues,” Farooqi stated.
Through other means, those affiliated with the district sought to unofficially convey to the Sentinel that the West Valley Water District does not involve itself in land use decisions made by the county, even when those decisions relate to property that overlaps the district’s jurisdiction. It was made clear to the Sentinel that the West Valley Water District does not apply for nor issue separate MS4 stormwater or sewer system permits, and that it does not have the role or staffing to analyze if a potential stormwater discharge complies with existing laws and regulations. Responsibility for the Chandi Development project resided with the County of San Bernardino, those sources speaking to the Sentinel on background insisted. It was pointed out that county staff members inspect both commercial and industrial sites for stormwater discharge compliance. The only stormwater discharge permit the West Valley Water District maintains, the Sentinel was informed, is a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board to ensure that the district’s water treatment discharges are in compliance with provisions of the Clean Water Act.
Board Member Greg Young, while acknowledging that the district does not have land use authority within its jurisdiction and that in this case the methodology for offsetting any impacts upon water quality were overseen by the county, nevertheless pointed out that the West Valley Water District staff, in preparing its report for the March 26 Engineering, Operations and Planning Committee meeting, had circled in on a crucial shortcoming in how the county is planning to deal with the stormwater runoff at the Chandi truck stop site.
“Infiltration chambers are a best management practice, but are ones that should be used in conjunction with other best management practices to ensure maximum containment of pollutants,” Young said. “The county’s practice of using infiltration alone is the exact opposite of what Ricky Manbahal, the district’s general manager, described in his staff report. My entire premise is if you are going to use infiltration, it needs to be in conjunction with other types of pre-treatment as Ricky is describing in his report.”
The Sentinel pressed forward with seeking to get from both Channing and some of the district’s senior staff members whether they felt, irrespective of what the county’s authority and decision was, that using a mitigated negative declaration to do the environmental certification for the Chandi Truck Stop project was advisable.
The Sentinel also inquired of West Valley Water District Acting General Manager Shamindra Manbahal, Operations Manager Joanne Chan and Water Quality Supervisor Janet Harmon, all of whom are steeped in knowledge and expertise about water, its sourcing and quality in ways in which the members of the county board of supervisors are not, whether they considered using an infiltration tank to collect the stormwater runoff from the project and then injecting it into the water table without first screening out the oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, solvents, petroleum products or their byproducts or other chemicals is an acceptable methodology of dealing with that stormwater.
This provoked Farooqi, who suggested the Sentinel was acting unethically in seeking to have Hawkins, Manbahal and Chan respond to the original questions asked of them which they had chosen to not answer.
Emphasizing the contention that the district did not have land use or water quality permitting authority within its jurisdiction, Farooqi said the Sentinel’s presentation of information in the emails containing those questions was “incredibly inaccurate and misleading. On multiple occasions, the West Valley Water District provided you with detailed and factual information by our licensed engineers regarding our scope of responsibility and authority. Your statement regarding the opinion of the professionals within our water district is inaccurate. As I shared in my previous email, the committee (G. Young, Crowther) decided to take no action. Any further allegations fall very far from the truth.”
Farooqi then added a statement attributed to Kyle Crowther, who is the West Valley Water Board’s vice president, worded as follows: “In March, we met with staff on this issue and our staff recommended no action needed to be taken based on the fact that the West Valley Water District does not oversee, permit or prohibit municipal discharges. Understanding that these issues are not within our agency’s field of expertise or role, Director Greg Young and I accepted this recommendation.”
This was followed by this statement attributed to Hawkins: “This issue was discussed at the Engineering, Operations, and Planning Committee. However, the committee did not elect to forward this item to the full board; therefore, neither I or the full board have been involved whatsoever.”
Young said, “As I became aware of the issues and what the county was doing, I reached out to my colleague and fellow Engineering and Planning Committee member, Kyle Crowther. We jointly decided to call a special meeting to discuss the possibility of issuing a letter of concern to the county. However, it was very clear that there was a lot of anxiety from the staff about getting involved into the business of the county even if it may affect us in the future. Since there was so much anxiety about speaking out to the county on a matter entirely in their jurisdiction, I decided to not push staff and my fellow board members any further on the subject and instead decided to pursue my existing efforts with the Coalition for a Better Bloomington and the board of supervisors.”
Young added, “I will continue to speak out against any agency large or small engaged in practices that expose our valuable water resources to potential contamination. I would always welcome any of my colleagues in the entire water industry and West Valley to join me in such efforts to advocate for protecting our groundwater from preventable contamination. The county’s lowest common denominator approach to protecting our water should not be allowed to continue without the raising of concern, and we as leaders in our community should be willing to stand up to such a lax practice. I would warmly welcome them to stand with me. This is about more than just Bloomington. This could hurt many communities throughout the county if this continues.”

Jeremiah Brosowske’s political career, which less than three years ago initiated with a resounding bang, this week is on the brink of drawing to a close with little more than a whimper.
Judge David Cohn ruled on Tuesday that Brosowske’s removal from the Hesperia City Council in 2019 on non-residency grounds was warranted.
In 2018, at the age 27, Brosowske seemed poised to transform himself into an unstoppable political juggernaut destined for San Bernardino, Sacramento and Washington, D.C.
Having established himself four years before as a dynamic Republican Party political operative, Brosowske with the May 2018 death of Hesperia Mayor Russ Blewett appeared to have been handed a golden opportunity, one that put him on the fast track for seeming political glory. Events, some of his own creation, have now overtaken him.
Homegrown in the Victor Valley, Brosowske graduated from Granite Hills High School in Apple Valley and he enrolled at Victor Valley College, where he was elected to the Associated Student Body Council and Senate, serving in the post of parliamentarian and ultimately rising to the position of ASB vice president. He became thoroughly involved in campus politics at Victor Valley College and from there was drawn into what has been a continual life in politics, Republican politics specifically.
In 2013, Curt Hagman, who was about to be termed out from the California Assembly, orchestrated a silent coup to move then-San Bernardino County Republican Party Chairman Robert Rego out of the county party’s top spot and assume it himself. This better positioned Hagman to make a run for San Bernardino County Fourth District supervisor in 2014. Once he had acceded to the county party chairmanship, Hagman had repeated contact with the then-22-year-old Brosowske, who exhibited an uncommon enthusiasm and energetic intensity in his involvement on behalf of the party. Under Hagman’s tutelage, Brosowske was given one challenging assignment after another, which he dutifully fulfilled. According to Hagman, all 14 of the Republican candidates Brosowske worked on behalf of in 2014 won their races. Consequently, Hagman hired Brosowske at the age of 23 into the post of executive director of the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee.
Meanwhile, Bill Postmus, who had once been the Republican Party chairman and chairman of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors before he was felled by political scandal which resulted in a conviction on 14 public office corruption charges that prevented him from ever holding elected office in California again, was looking to get back into the political game. Though he could not be a politician/officeholder himself, Postmus was nevertheless looking to create a political machine that could be used for kingmaking. No longer able to hold the scepter, Postmus set about recreating himself as the power behind the thrown.
Postmus did so by going to Wyoming and starting a corporation – Mountain States Consulting Group. He then set up operations in Victorville under the name of Mountain States Consulting. He offered those seeking or holding political office assistance that extended to running or assisting in running campaigns along with fundraising.
Having been laid low because of sloppy bribetaking and engaging in quid pro quos in which the favors he was doing as an elected official in exchange for the money being supplied to him by those with business before the county had become blatantly obvious, Postmus learned from his errors. Mountain States Consulting was set up as a political money laundering operation in which those seeking to influence elected officials to have them use their power as county or city officials or legislators and take action to benefit them by approving their projects or awarding them governmental contracts or franchises did not need to make direct contributions to those politicians. Instead, they would hire Mountain States consulting to find a way to deliver that money to the politicians for them. Mountain States, of course, would make sure the politicians understood where the money had originated, but Mountain States serving as the cut out provided distance or insulation between the donor and the politician. In that way, the money that made its way to the politician did not look like a bribe.
One of the first people Postmus employed with Mountain States Consulting was Brosowske.
Two politicians Postmus had assisted through Mountain States Consulting were Paul Russ, who successfully vied for the Hesperia City Council in 2014 and Rebekah Swanson, who was elected to the Hesperia City Council in 2016.
With the opening created on the Hesperia City Council with Blewett’s passing, and Postmus looking to vicariously get back into office through Brosowske, he called upon Russ and Swanson to look favorably on Brosowske’s application to replace Blewett. Postmus was also able to get Bill Holland, who was on the Hesperia City Council and who had been immediately elevated to replace Blewett as mayor, to go along with appointing Brosowske. Postmus could achieve this because the stridently pro-development Holland drew his electioneering support from the development community, which was a major source of the money provided to Postmus for his political money laundering endeavors carried out through Mountain States Consulting.
The one hitch was that Brosowske did not actually live in Hesperia. That was taken care of easily enough, however. Postmus convinced one of his longtime political allies, former Hesperia City Councilman/Mayor Bill Jensen, to allow Brosowske to claim residence at his Hesperia home. Brosowske filled out the paperwork to apply for consideration as Blewett’s replacement, competing against Brigit Bennington, Victoria Dove, Russell Harris, Linda Holder, Robert Nelson, Anthony Rhoades, Veronica Rios and Chester Watts. Led by Holland, both Russ and Swanson voted to appoint Brosowske to the council in July 2018. Larry Bird, like Brosowske, Holland, Russ and Swanson a Republican, nevertheless was far less comfortable with the unquestioning loyalty his council colleagues had toward the building industry, and he was not willing to put Brosowske, beholden as he was to developers through his association with Postmus, on the council. He dissented in the vote.
In the fall of 2018, Hesperia was to hold the first by-district election in its then-30-year history. Those who had been due for reelection were Holland, Russ and Blewett. Thus, Brosowske’s appointment was good for just a little more than four months, and he was obliged to run in the November 2018 election if he was to remain on the council. Moreover, his claimed residence was at Jensen’s home. To vie in the race, he would need to find digs in District 2 and run against Holland, or in District 3 and run against Russ or in District 4. As it would be rather poor form to run against either Russ or Holland, who had just voted to appoint him to the council, Brosowske opted to take up residence in District 4. On August 31, 2018, he rented Unit 7 at the Sultana Mulberry Apartment Complex at 16784 Sultana Street in Hesperia after providing a security deposit of $1,000 and agreeing to pay $875 per month for a full year.
As luck and timing would have it, with the election approaching, one of the first votes Brosowske was called upon to participate in as a councilman related to the city covering the road construction costs for a subdivision in Hesperia being built by Frontier Homes and its principal, James Previti. Holland, who was unabashedly pro-development and whose political career to that point had been bankrolled by developmental interests, at that particular moment, less than two months before the election, did not want to give any of his four electoral opponents an opening to attack him for making taxpayer money giveaways to developers. He voted against having the city cover roughly $2 million worth of the costs for roads to be built to the Frontier Homes project. Meanwhile, both Brosowske and Russ had no qualms about voting to defray the cost of infrastructure that Previti, one of their major donors, would otherwise have to pay for.
At that point, more than a month before the election, there was a break between Brosowske and Holland. Though they had started the campaign season endorsing one another, before it was over they were advocating against the election of each other. Ultimately, in the November 2018 election, Brosowske posted a narrow victory over Brigit Bennington in the Fourth District; Holland outdistanced his three opponents, beating the closest one to him by ten percent; and Russ was ousted by 28-year-old Cameron Gregg.
The Hesperia City Council remained a solidly Republican body, as all five of its members – Bird, Brosowske, Gregg, Holland and Swanson – were members of the GOP. But overnight, the strident pro-development character of the panel had changed. Young Gregg is the son of Kelly Gregg, a close friend of controlled-growth advocate Al Vogler, the widower of former Hesperia Mayor/Councilwoman Rita Vogler. Vogler’s mantra calls for making the development community financially responsible for providing the infrastructure new development will require. Bird is likewise adamant developers and not taxpayers should pay for the public improvements needed to accommodate new development.
Previti, who put up substantial money to support the candidacies of Brosowske and Russ and who spent money in an effort to keep Holland from being elected in the November 2018 race, doubled down a few months later, paying for an effort to have the just-reelected Holland recalled from office. Holland, who was once the model of what the development community wanted in an officeholder, reflexively supporting any development project that came before him, found himself at odds with Previti, and suddenly in the camp of the slow-growth advocates. Ultimately, the Previti-sponsored effort to recall Holland failed. Along the way, Brosowske, beholden to Postmus, the development community and Previti, found himself in the position of having to support the recall effort. The enmity between Holland and Brosowske deepened.
There was still some talk of Brosowske’s bright political future. As one of Postmus’s protégés, he had access to the money that Mountain States Consulting Group was bringing in and the political machinery that Postmus was amassing. Postmus in his day had been the boy wonder of San Bernardino County politics, having been elected to the board of supervisors at the age of 29 in 2000. There was yet hope that Brosowske might come close to replicating that, and would prove a successful candidate for First District county supervisor in 2000. But that was based on the assumption that the foundation Brosowske had – being a member of the Hesperia City Council – remained intact.
In short order, things were no longer holding together for Brosowske and were starting to starting to fall apart.
His Achilles heel had always been Bill Jensen. Jensen had provided him with the ostensible residency he needed to be able to seek the Hesperia council appointment in 2018 that gave him his status as an incumbent, a power base from which he successfully ran for election in November 2018. It is unknown what prompted Jensen to turn on Brosowske. Perhaps it was his support of the Holland recall. Maybe it was Brosowske’s youthful arrogance, the way in which he conveyed a sense of entitlement to his political primacy. Perhaps Jensen had a falling out with Postmus. Whatever the reason, by the summer of 2019, Jensen was talking, and what he was saying was not favorable to Brosowske. Brosowske, Jensen charged, had never lived at his home, and Brosowske’s claim of residence there to qualify himself for appointment to the council was fraudulent. What was more, Jensen said, he did not believe that Brosowske was actually living at the Sultana Mulberry Apartments either.
Thereafter, Kelly Gregg, Cameron Gregg’s father and the owner of a security company, took it upon himself to set up video surveillance at the unit Brosowske was supposed to be living in at the apartment complex at 16784 Sultana Street. Brosowske’s coming and goings were monitored, including where he went after the city council meetings concluded and where he drove to after leaving his workplace at the West Valley Water District in Rialto. It appeared that he was living with his rather attractive girlfriend in Rancho Cucamonga.
A case was put together that Brosowske was not living in Hesperia, and in September 2019, the city council voted 3-to-2, with Larry Bird, Cameron Gregg and Bill Holland prevailing and Jeremiah Brosowske and Rebekah Swanson dissenting, to remove Brosowske from the council on non-residency grounds. The following month, the council, with Swanson dissenting, voted to replace Brosowske with Brigit Bennington.
Brosowske, represented by attorney Chad Morgan, sued the city and city council, seeking to be reinstated. He vowed to “fight for the citizens of Hesperia who elected me in the Fourth District.”
Morgan marshaled evidence that entailed proof, he said, that Brosowske lived at Apartment 7 at 6784 Sultana Street, including Southern California Edison and Southwest Gas bills beginning in September 2018, and Spectrum phone, internet and television bills that began later. Also included were texts between Brosowske and Jensen in the summer of 2018 which suggested that Brosowske might have indeed taken up residence at Jensen’s home.
The matter was considered by San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge David Cohn. Cohn, considering all of the evidence came to the conclusion that both sides in the case met the burden of proof that Brosowske “was and was not domiciled” in Hesperia, including at Unit 7 at 6784 Sultana Street in Hesperia.
A key aspect of the case was timing, according to Judge Cohn. Based upon Jensen’s testimony and sworn declarations, as well as the rental lease Morgan presented, Cohn found Brosowske was not in residence in Hesperia’s District 4 when he took out the nomination papers on July 25, 2018.
-Mark Gutglueck