Sheriff’s Department Says Apple Valley Home Was Producing Marijuana By The Ton

A report disbelieved by virtually everyone who has heard it holds that the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department on Tuesday, June 3 interrupted a marijuana cultivation operation being run out of a home in Apple Valley in which an astonishing 10,000 plants were growing.
According to those familiar with the situation, residents in the Apple Valley neighborhood that included a portion of the 13300 block of Tioga Road, the 27000 blocks of Eyota and the 13300 block of Iroquois noted last month a heavy aroma of unburnt marijuana. After the sheriff’s department, which serves as the contract police department in Apple Valley was alerted, the source of the smell was localized to the four-bedroom, 2 bathroom, 2,398 square foot single family residence that self-contains a three-car garage at 13350 Tioga Road.
Investigators connected seven individuals as being associated with the property, those being Gracie Grey, age unknown; 38-year-old Jeremy Elwell; 80-year-old Ali Moein; 37-year-old Bianca Evans; 71-year-old Bruce Evans; 69-year-old Francesca Evans; 33-year-old Jonathan Evans; 75-year-old Leonard J Megliola JR; 36-year-old Marissa M Robbins; and 37-year-old Shane Grey.
On the strength of an affidavit that relied upon information provided by nearby residents, referred to as “informants,” and sheriff’s detectives, a search warrant was issued.
According to the sheriff’s department, “On Tuesday, June 3, 2025, detectives from Apple Valley Police Department and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Marijuana Enforcement Team served a search warrant at a residence in the 13300 block of Tioga Road in the Town of Apple Valley. During the search warrant service, a large marijuana grow was located along with an operation for sales of marijuana. Large amounts of illegal marijuana were seized, to include over 10,000 plants, 286 illegal THC vapes, 716 grams of concentrated marijuana wax and 91 pounds of processed marijuana. Continue reading

Phillosophically Speaking

Some Reflection On
American Elections

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.”
–-attributed to Edmund Burke, English statesman and philosopher in the 1700s

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good people keep voting for the lesser of the two.” –-Phill Courtney


Last year I don’t recall having been that down about a presidential election since my first vote for president in 1972, when teenagers could participate for the first time, and I watched in utter disbelief as millions of Americans, exercising their apparent inability to judge character (or perhaps even care about it), handed Richard Nixon, one of the least honest men to occupy the White House, a historic landslide over George McGovern, one of the most.
Less than two years later, after he’d resigned before being impeached (in the days when Republicans would actually convict a criminal heading their party), it was difficult to find anyone who’d voted for Nixon. Then, in 1977, during interviews with English journalist David Frost, Nixon uttered one of his most memorable lines: “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.”
Sadly, after Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon, saying that our “long national nightmare is over” (actually, Ford was only extending the nightmare as the Supreme Court now has), since then Nixon’s comment has proven quite prescient, as the Trump era continues to put Nixon’s assertion on steroids.
Of course, many presidents from both ruling parties have often violated both international and national laws with absolutely no accountability, from George’s W.’s massive war crimes, to the most egregious recent example: Biden’s continued funding of the Gazan genocide, and one reason I’ve remained with the Green party is because it always opposes these parties when they back atrocities.
So, the question remains: how to change course? In 1998 and 2002, I ran for Congress in Riverside County not because I thought I could win and change that course (I may be idealistic, but I’m not delusional), but because we need choices. If we’re going to claim that we have a “representational democracy,” then we need officeholders in our nation’s capital with other values represented, and not just brushed aside by a two-party duopoly fine-tuned to dismiss them.
After Lincoln’s election, the two major parties solidified this “lock” on power which continues to this day, with absolutely no countervailing forces able to check them. And what’s been the result? An ability to continue committing crime after crime, with, for me, the most disturbing being the war crimes that the U.S. government has committed basically since our founding. And for those who might need it, here’s a quick refresher course on some of those crimes, starting in the 1960s:
Lyndon Johnson (Democrat) and the war in Vietnam, with millions of civilian deaths and a landscape drenched in deadly, defoliant chemicals that continue to take a toll even today. Then Richard Nixon (Republican) continuing the war to satisfy his thirst for power, followed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) and his many war crimes in Latin America committed in concert with various despots. George H. W. Bush (Republican) with the war crimes of his Gulf War, some of the worst being the incineration of some 400 civilians in a Baghdad bomb shelter, and the massive slaughter of Iraqi troops trying to retreat on the “Highway of Death.”
Next came Bill (“I feel your pain”) Clinton (Democrat) with his war crimes in Bosnia and elsewhere. Then the crimes of the second President Bush (Republican) and his illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, along with torture; an occupation which Barack Obama (Democrat) kept in place, while also allowing some torture, of, among others, the whistleblower Chelsea Manning, and launched more predator drone missile than W., killing, in some cases, not just terrorists, but entire wedding parties.
Finally, and more recently, we’ve had the massive war crime of genocide committed in Gaza by Israel, funded in large part by the Biden administration, an atrocity which has been bookended by the two separate terms of Trump, who has also continued that funding, with yet more civilians bombed during his virtual “side show” in Yemen; deaths which have mostly gone unnoticed by many Americans.
So, there’s a quick review of a horrible history—a review which actually just scratches the surface of what’s gone on—all enabled by the two-party duopoly, which has either thwarted almost all attempts by other voices who speak out, for instance, in behalf of international laws and the U.N. charter, yet remain unable to enter the halls of power, or, when they do from time to time, have been either silenced or marginalized.
Right now, the U.S. also suffers from a two-party chokehold not only on elections, but on those who can get elected, with a federal body composed primarily of the rich—by the rich—and for the rich—(Trump’s two cabinets have basically been filled with billionaires)—because, as Bernie Sanders points out, many American work paycheck to paycheck and who can afford to run for office unless you already have a secure financial foundation for your run because campaigns don’t earn you, but cost you money—unless you win.
By now it’s become abundantly clear that we need far more people in Congress who work for a living—people who understand the problems of everyday Americans because they are everyday American. Unfortunately, these are the same people who can’t get elected because they don’t have the money—and until we have publicly financed elections to elect people whom we say should be public servants, corruption will remain baked into the system.
Of course, at this point I can hear the objections of many (including my wife), who say: yes Phill, all of this makes sense and should happen, but the way you’re doing it is just too slow. In other words: it’s too little and too late. We need ways to stop what’s happening now—right now! We can’t afford the slow incrementalism of electoral reform. And to them I say (including my wife): you’re right.
But I’ve also said this: that there is a way to change all of this virtually overnight if people simply refused to vote for the corrupt two-parties and began to support alternatives. There’s no reason why that can’t happen, except we’ve seen that it hasn’t, with perhaps the “closest call” being the campaign of Ross Perot in 1992 (yes, another billionaire), who might have made it if only he hadn’t been given to conspiratorial thinking and paranoia.
Another case in point was when I ran for Congress twice in 1998 and 2002 with the Green party (putting my feet where my mouth was) against my fellow Corona High Class of ’71 grad, Republican Ken Calvert, who first took office in 1993 and continues a corrupt grip on his congressional district to this day, where he now functions as a reliable “rubber stamp” for Trump and all his crimes.
Again, citizens in that district could have elected an honest man (and I know him quite well, since it’s me) but instead chose to continue “rubber stamping” Ken’s runs, in another example of the multi-faceted power of the incumbency; the two-party duopoly; and the overwhelming influence of corporate cash shoveled to candidates they approve of.
So, the question remains: how to stop this? Well, one way is what I’ve been working on for years with an organization called Californians for Electoral Reform with our push for instant run-off voting to eliminate the “spoiler” effect of the “lesser of two evils” system.
Despite the skeptics, it’s now being used in a number of other countries and in many American cities, as well as the entire states of Maine and Alaska, where it spared us the return of Sarah Palin. For more details on how it works, check out the entry about instant run-off voting on Wikipedia.
If that sounds appealing to you, please see Californians for Electoral Reform, or some of the many other electoral reform organizations on the internet for further details. In the meantime, while I recognize the realities of our current system and will continue to vote accordingly, that doesn’t mean that I’m giving up. True democracy needs all the help it can get.
Phill continued teaching high school English during both times he ran for Congress. His email is: pjcourtney1311@gmail.com

 

June 6 SBC Sentinel Legal Notices

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE
NUMBER CIV SB 2512455
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: ELIZABETH ANCHONDO filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows: ELIZABETH ANCHONDO to CONNIE BANUELOS
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: 06/24/2025, Time: 08:30 AM, Department: S 30
The address of the court is Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District-Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: 05/01/2025
Judge of the Superior Court: Gilbert G. Ochoa
Attorney for Elizabeth Anchondo:
Mark John Tundis, Esquire State Bar No: 101464
1425 W. Foothill Blvd, Suite 240
Upland, CA 91786
Phone (909) 985-9643 Fax: (909) 985-3381
assistant@tundislaw.com
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on May 16, 23 & 30 and June 6, 2025.

FBN20250004583
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
3M LIQUOR AND MARKET INC 8679 BASE LINE RD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730: 3M LIQUOR AND MARKET INC 8679 BASE LINE RD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
Business Mailing Address: 8679 BASE LINE RD RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION registered with the State of California.
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/ MARIO ATTAR, Secretary
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 05/16/2025
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 k5932
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 it-self 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 on May 16, 23 & 30 and June 6, 2025.

Continue reading

Trump Administration Tells Dicus, Anderson, Hagman & The Rest Of The Lot: It Is Time To Decide Whether You Are Mexicans Or Whether You Are Americans

By Richard Hernandez
San Bernardino County, its politicians and its residents missed out on an opportunity to reap a huge financial windfall in the form of federal special program augmentation funding earlier this year when its highest-ranking officials – virtually all of whom are Republicans – elected to back Sacramento rather than the Trump Administration with regard to stepped up immigration law enforcement.
Top administration officials up to and including President Donald Trump himself were banking on and had indeed taken for granted that the political leadership in far-flung San Bernardino County, one of the last bastions of Republicanism in what Donald Trump considers to be off-the-charts liberal California and a gateway to more moderately political Arizona and Nevada, would fall in line with his efforts to aggressively remove unregistered and undocumented foreigners from the country. The president took it as a personal betrayal when the sheriff, who by tradition and wide reputation is the most powerful political figure in San Bernardino County, in the words of one federal official “pussed out” when the governor and leading members of the state legislature began pushing local and county officials to somewhat gratuitously declare their intent to comply with a nearly eight-year-old law that had been put in place during the first Donald Trump administration to undermine federal immigration control efforts then.
For president Trump and several of his top aides overseeing national security and immigration issues, there was immense disappointment when the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors – of which four of five members are Republicans – backed the sheriff in saying the county could be counted upon to abide by the Golden State’s unregistered alien sanctuary policy. That was interpreted by the recently installed second Trump Administration as an unmistakable signal that the governmental and law enforcement institutions in San Bernardino County would not be going along with what was at that point a three-quarters-gestated strategy to dismantle, county-by-county, California’s sanctuary status.
While statistics available to the government and the private sector are inexact, the incoming Trump Administration was function on an estimate that there were 127,681 illegal immigrants – that is to say undocumented aliens – in San Bernardino County in the weeks just prior to Donald Trump’s second inauguration. Of those, roughly 71.8 percent, or 91,675, were from Mexico, while 6.1 percent or 7,789 were from El Salvador and 4.3 percent or 5,490 were from Guatemala and just a tad under 11 percent (10.9938 percent) or 14,037 were from Asia. Continue reading

Joshua Tree Residents Sue County Over Lovemore Ranch Project Approval

A coalition of Joshua Tree residents has sued San Bernardino County over the approval of a 64-home project in the midst of that 6,767-population rustic community, asserting the board of supervisors merely rubberstamped the development without doing an adequate environmental analysis.
On January 23 the San Bernardino County Planning Commission approved the 64-unit Lovemore Ranch residential subdivision on 18.4 acres on Alta Loma Drive between Hillview Drive and Sunset Road in Joshua Tree.
More than 60 local residents, contending that neither the project proponents, Axel Cramer and Dane Hollar, nor the county gave proper notice to the owners of land that falls within a distance of 300 feet of a project site. Residents who are to be impacted by the project therefore did not have an opportunity to weigh in with regard to it before its approval, they maintained, and they appealed the planning commission’s decision to the board of supervisors.
The board of supervisors, citing California’s Housing Affordability Act, rejected the appeal, giving go-ahead to the project on April 8. Those officials said state mandates calling on local jurisdictions to approve housing projects to ease the California’s housing crisis tied their hands, such that they had to approve the project.
Residents in Joshua Tree, including those living or owning property at the periphery of Lovemore Ranch and others living both proximate to the site and at a further distance banded together, functioning under the aegis of both the Morongo Basin Conservation Association and Joshua Tree Village Neighbors.  They retained San Luis Obispo-based attorney Babak Naficy. Nacify specializes in that province of the law relating to land use, the California Environmental Quality Act and environmental public policy issues. Continue reading