(November 23)  Chino Hills City Manager Mike Fleager was given an 18-month contract extension by the city council on November 13.
The action by the city council, taken on a 3-1 vote, extends Fleager’s contract, which was set to expire on May 31, 2018, to November 30, 2014.
Council members indicated they extended Fleager the added job security as a courtesy so he would not have to seek work elsewhere.
Mayor Art Bennett and councilmen Ed Graham and Peter Rogers approved the extension. Councilwoman Gwen Norton-Perry, who will leave office next month, opposed it. She said she thought it would be more appropriate it the full council that will be working with Fleager over the next two years made the determination.
The council is currently one member short, as a consequence of former councilman Bill Kruger’s resignation in September.
Norton-Perry will be replaced by Cynthia Moran, who was elected to the council on November 6. Kruger will not be replaced until a mail ballot is carried out in March.

(November 23)   By Gail Fry
Lake Arrowhead Community Services District, the agency that provides water and sewer services for the resort community of Lake Arrowhead, has been facing increasing scrutiny from the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board of late with regard to its sewage spills and failure to follow procedural requirements.
The majority of the sewage spills are the result of inflow and infiltration which occurs  when groundwater and/or storm water enter(s) the dedicated wastewater system to the point the system is overwhelmed. This results in sewage overflows, such that a portion of the effluent is not directed to a pumping station or treatment plant.
Mark Veysey is the interim general manager of the Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (LACSD). Veysey admitted the capacity of the district’s outfall line is 4-million gallons and in extreme rainstorms levels can rapidly reach 12-million gallons, resulting in excess sewage water spilling into an unnamed creek near its Grass Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant, then into Deep Creek, subsequently reaching the Mojave River. He said the problem has existed for about 30-years.
The Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan) attributed the high discharge to inflow/infiltration (I&I) while referring to past incidents where “significant discharges of raw and partially treated sewage from the collection and wastewater treatment systems to surface waters occurred and continue to occur.”
The problems with inflow and infiltration reached a critical point when during the winter of 2010/2011 approximately 9.5 million-gallons of partially treated wastewater was discharged into Grass Valley Creek, eventually dumping downstream into the Mojave River.
On December 7, 2011, Lahontan issued an investigative order demanding answers from LACSD. Lahontan’s investigative order required LACSD to submit two technical reports, one providing a detailed accounting of the district’s past inflow/infiltration reduction activities and an evaluation of their effectiveness and another providing the current status of implementing the inflow/infiltration elements of the district’s March 2008 wastewater facilities master plan and the current status of the district’s ability and mechanisms to fully finance the master plan’s inflow/infiltration abatement elements on schedule.
According to Lahontan, the substantial discharge was the result of I&I and “in spite of the district’s past efforts, significant discharges of raw and partially treated sewage from the collection system and wastewater treatment system to surface waters continue to occur.”
Lahontan credited the substantial I&I to “average annual rainfall of approximately 40 inches” with “a service area that ranges in elevation from 4,000 to 6,000 feet” above sea level coupled with “40 percent of the service area” on land that slopes greater than 30 percent. Lahontan also attributed the inflow and infiltration to “a limit of 4.0 million gallons per day of treated effluent that can be exported to the district’s Hesperia disposal area” and “a sewer collection system that can deliver up to 12 million gallons per day of untreated wastewater.”
In its investigative order Lahontan references several cease and desist orders it issued to Lake Arrowhead Community Services District related in part to “address excessive” inflow and infiltration conditions on May 12, 1983, September 8, 1983, January 12, 1984, July 13, 1984, May 13, 1993 and May 7, 1998.
Lahontan noted if the district implements the steps laid out in its 2008 master plan, the inflow and infiltration reduction activities “will reduce extreme wet weather flows from 12.0 million gallons per day (January 11, 2005 measurement) to 5.37 million gallons per day in 2030.”
Lahontan’s Cease and Desist Order No. 6-93-44 called for LACSD to submit progress reports summarizing accomplishments toward obtaining compliance with waste discharge requirements … until such time that compliance … is achieved.”
On February 21, 2012 LACSD experienced another sewage spill when 18,000-gallons of sewage entered Lake Arrowhead after a blockage of a sewage pipe resulted in backed-up  sewage overcoming a manhole, resulting in  the sewage entering Blue Jay Bay.
In responding to Lahontan on April 20, 2012, LACSD explained “under all but the most extreme wet weather conditions, the district’s collection system meets or exceeds USEPA and Regional Board standards” while admitting “under extreme wet weather conditions I&I in the district’s collection system does not always meet these standards.”
LACSD added “more specifically, emergency discharges from the district’s Grass Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant to Grass Valley Creek occurred during extreme wet weather conditions in 2010, 2008, 2005 and prior to that in 1998.”
LACSD explained, “Because these emergency discharges have only occurred during extreme and prolonged wet weather conditions, it is the district’s understanding that the potential adverse impacts to the environment are limited based on extensive monitoring, data collection and analysis of potential impacts to the environment that have been performed under the guidance and direction of regional board staff.”
A report on LACSD I&I activities from 2008 through 2011 provided to Lahontan showed LACSD has spent $9,131,000 on completing inflow and infiltration elements of its March 2008 wastewater facilities master plan.
LACSD spent the $9,131,000 on developing an Infosewer hydraulic model of the LACSD collection system, conducting a temporary monitoring of sewer flow, installing three rain gauges to measure rainfall, conducting 486,807 feet of closed circuit video inspection of its sewer, sealing and inspection of 5,575 manholes, repairing 217 manholes, smoke testing 48,420 feet of the collection system, completing 20 cured-in-place pipeline inner liner repairs, conducting 1,329 feet of pipe repairs, slip lining 30,840 linear feet of sewer pipe, rehabilitating 162 manholes and reinstalling 246 laterals.
Ongoing I&I activities shown in LACSD’s April 20, 2012 report to Lahontan indicate LACSD budgeted for and conducted sewer flow monitoring system-wide, analyzing flow data, identifying target sub-basins to focus future efforts to reduce I&I, and planning a system-wide hydraulic model calibration/cost effectiveness analysis, which is pending due to limitations and technology advancements.
With regard to LACSD’s response to Lahontan’s investigative order, Lahontan found the district’s response did not comply in that it did not provide a clear path toward fixing its inflow and infiltration issues in a timely manner or provide how the repairs would be paid for.
Veysey in his capacity as LACSD’s interim general manager conducted a series of meetings with Lahontan during August through September in order to assure Lahontan of its intent to address its ongoing inflow and infiltration problems and reach a consensus on what actions would be satisfactory to Lahontan.  He reported, “They were concerned that we were not complying with their rules and they were ready to go into enforcement on this district.”
Driving the point home to LACSD was Lahontan’s  imposition of an administrative civil liability in the amount of $700,000 on Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority in September 2012 for two unauthorized wastewater discharges from its wastewater treatment facility occurring on June 18, 2010 and August 22-28, 2010 as well as three additional unauthorized wastewater discharges from its sanitary sewer collection system on December 7, 2010, December 22, 2010 and December 27, 2010.
Lahontan provided LACSD with a deadline of October 1 in its August 21 letter to submit an addendum to its April 20, 2012 letter where it submitted its 2008 Wastewater Facilities Master Plan Status Report and Past Inflow/Infiltration Activities Report.
On July 18, Lahontan conducted an inspection of the Lake Arrowhead Community Services District’s sanitary sewer system.
On September 30, LACSD submitted its addendum to Lahontan acknowledging in extreme wet weather events they experience a significant rise in flows to its treatment plants caused by storm water entering its sewer system through cracks in pipes and damaged private lateral connections to the main line.
In its inflow remediation plan submitted to Lahontan with its September 30 letter, LACSD acknowledged there were only two solutions to remedy the problem of peak flows, which consisted of  “add[ing] a retention pond for peak storage or eliminat[ing] the sources of the inflow” while noting “new large sewage retention ponds are not an acceptable solution in the mountains.”
LACSD identified its Grass Valley Basin as the area where a majority of the inflow and infiltration was occurring and proposed deploying monitoring stations at key points in the 325,000 feet of sewer line and where approximately 2,200 sewer connections lead to its sewer collection system.
LACSD’s initial plan is to place twelve flow monitoring devices in locations at the downstream of individual collection basins. These will be in use for approximately six months, and as leaks are found they will be repaired.
On September 19, Lahontan issued a notice of violation to LACSD for not reporting its sanitary sewer overflows into private buildings, not conducting annual staff training on its overflow emergency response plan and eliminating its fats, oils and grease program.
According to documents, an overview of the areas evaluated during the inspection indicated LACSD’s sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) history, its SSO reporting and documentation, its overflow emergency response plan and its fats, oils and grease (FOG) program are all unsatisfactory.
With regard to LACSD’s SSO history, Lahontan provided that “on five occasions between July 18, 2011 through July 17, 2012, untreated wastewater was discharged from the collection system to waters of the United States.”
Additionally Lahontan found LACSD had not reported SSO’s that discharged to buildings/residences, failed to train its staff annually on the overflow emergency response plan and failed to implement its FOG control program calling for inspections of food serving establishments.

(November 23)   Joel Klink has displaced John Cole as the victorious incumbent in the Twentynine Palms city council race.
Initial polling results that came in election night showed newcomer Cora Heiser besting both Cole and Klink. As late as the following morning, Cole was still ahead of Klink. At that point Heiser had 1,579 votes, Cole had 1,563 and Klink trailed Cole by just two votes, with 1,561. But with the tallying of 628 more votes, that order changed. Cole received 291 more votes, Heiser 335 and Klink captured 316, boosting him to a 23 vote margin of victory over Cole.
The most recent available figures from the race show Heiser in the lead with 1,914 votes or 33.91 percent; Klink in second place with 1,877 votes or 33.25 percent and Cole with 1,854 votes or 32.84 percent.
The Sentinel, in its election week coverage, reported that Cole had hung onto his council position and Klink had lost his in the desert city of 25,048 residents.

(November 16)   San Bernardino County’s in-house lawyers are analyzing the legal issues pertaining to Third District supervisor-elect James Ramos’s pending assumption of office, including a host of conflict-of-interest issues that at least two credible legal authorities say could prevent him from serving in the capacity to which he was elected.
James Ramos made history last week, becoming the first Native American in San Bernardino County history to be elected county supervisor, defeating incumbent Third District Supervisor Neil Derry convincingly, 59 percent to 41 percent. But questions are emerging as to whether Ramos will even be sworn in to office, and if he is, how long he will be able to remain in that position.
The Sentinel has learned that the office of San Bernardino County Counsel, led by Jean-Rene Basle, is exploring the California Government Code, case law, a slew of state Attorney General’s opinions and previous quo warranto proceedings to determine if James’ Ramos’s personal holdings together with his interest in the holdings, contracts and actions of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians entail conflicts of interest that rise to a level that could not be cured by Ramos selectively abstaining from votes that would impact those holdings and interests. A quo warranto proceeding is one in which an individual’s legal right to hold an office or governmental privilege is challenged.
At issue is whether Ramos’s  duties as supervisor will come into conflict with his material financial interests in the San Manuel government and gaming operations.
Until earlier this year, Ramos was chairman of the tribal council for the 167-member San Manuel Band, which exists as an independent sovereign Indian nation and owns and operates the San Manuel Casino in Highland, generating an estimated $400 million in revenue per year. Ramos derives roughly $1.5 million in income from his share of the casino operation and has a further interest in investments the tribe has made within the county, particularly within the Third District, which he was elected to represent.
Under California law, an elected official can involve himself in the governmental decision making process if his interests to be impacted by those decisions are deemed remote. With regard to Ramos and the Third District, however, Ramos’s interests are not remote, but material as the law specifies. As such, any decision affecting the wealth of the tribe impacts Ramos’ interests.
San Manuel has millions of dollars in non-competitively bid contracts with the county for the sheriff to provide law enforcement patrols on the reservation and the district attorney for the review of criminal cases involving casino patrons and the tribe’s own Native American members.
For example, a contract executed August 10, 2010, and expiring on June 30, 2013, has the tribe paying $1,048,909 to the county for the services of the district attorney. Ramos, as then-tribal chairman, personally signed the agreement.
Also present within the Third District is the Inland Valley Development Agency (IVDA) and San Bernardino International Airport Authority (SBIAA). Both those entities are charged with utilizing isolated property tax for the civilian reuse and redevelopment of the former Norton Air Force Base, as well as the vast area surrounding the base, which is now being converted into San Bernardino International Airport through a joint powers arrangement involving the county of San Bernardino and the cities of San Bernardino, Highland, Colton and Loma Linda, under the auspices of IVDA and SBIAA.  Traditionally, the Third District supervisor, in whose district the airport is located, has served as chairman or co-chairman of both IVDA and SBIAA.
Intrinsic to the potential conflict  is the convergence of the San Manuel Tribe’s real estate holdings and the authority of IVDA and SBIAA.
As an example, the tribe now owns the areas of the one-time military installation that were used for on-base housing and the facility and property occupied by the U.S. Air Force Combat Camera Operation.
The tribe further is currently party to an agreement with Majestic Realty, a Ramos campaign supporter, to develop the former base housing property.
The Third District supervisor also is appointed to the Indian Gaming Local Benefit Committee, which was established for the purpose of doling out funds paid by local tribes in an effort to offset their gambling casinos’ impacts on the local community.
There are currently efforts under way to establish Indian gaming establishments in Barstow and Yucca Valley, both of which lie within the Third District. Ramos would potentially be impacted financially if these competing gaming interests found approval. His membership on the board of supervisors during the county’s processing of these casino proposals, even if he abstains from consideration of them, could form the basis of lawsuits contesting the denial of those applications if they are in fact denied.
Two law firms, Sacramento-based DLA Piper and Los Angeles-based  Prata & Daley, have composed briefs that assert Ramos’s duties in office will bring him head-on into a clash with the California Government Code, specifically Government Code sections 1090 and 1092.
According to DLA Piper and Prata & Daley, given the degree to which the prospects for the growth in the valuation or viability of the tribes assets and holdings are subject to the direct or indirect control of local, i.e., county, governmental regulatory oversight, most notably land use and permitting processes, Ramos has an unequivocal conflict given the degree to which his material financial interests can be impacted by his decisions in office. These conflicts are so substantial, according to Prata & Daley and DLA Piper, that they are incapable of being cured by either recusal or abstention. The only way the conflicts can be resolved is for Ramos to divest himself of his holdings and affiliation with the tribe altogether or resign from office, according to the two law firms. There is precedent for the resignation cure. A similar dilemma beset former San Bernardino City Councilman Jason Desjardins, who owned a tow company that was subject to city regulation and franchising. That conflict was so pervasive, lawyers concluded, that Desjardins would be afoul of the law even if he recused himself on votes relating to the city’s several tow franchises, including his own. Rather than sell his business, Desjardins chose to resign his council position.
The Sentinel has learned that the discussion of Ramos’s conflicted status has advanced to the point that county chief administrative officer Greg Devereaux has taken an active part in at least a portion of the discussions. Devereaux expressed particular interest in the impact Ramos’s seating on the board would have on the county’s various contracts with the San Manuel Tribe, contracts that provide more than $3 million in revenue to the county per year. At one point, Devereaux proffered the solution of terminating the county’s contracts with the tribe, only to be informed that this would create an equally thorny legal problem, that of the county making illegal gifts of public funds to the tribe.
Inquiries made at an official level by the Sentinel did not churn up much in the way of substantive information.
“I’m not aware of any potential conflict or an inquiry or opinion by county counsel,” county spokesman David Wert said.

(November 16)   Colton police detective Wesley Bruhn, the police union boss whose power in Colton’s 67-member police department once rivaled that of the police chief and the eleven other officers in the department who outranked him, has slipped from his pinnacle of power and now stands charged with having embezzled more than $165,000 from the union he once headed.
On November 9, the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office filed five counts of felony grand theft and one felony charge of forgery against Bruhn and obtained an arrest warrant against him from Judge William Jefferson Powell.
Bruhn was not in custody at the time and was categorized as a fugitive. On November 14, Bruhn  surrendered to authorities at the San Bernardino County sheriff’s headquarters, and was promply arrested. According to the district attorney’s office, Bruhn began appropriating for his own use union funds beginning in July 2008.
Bruhn was formerly the president of the Colton Police Officers Association. More recently, he was that organization’s treasurer.
According to information available to the Sentinel, Bruhn, 45, engaged in the thefts while he was serving first in the capacity of union president and later as treasurer. The thefts continued through July of this year when the current union president, Rich Randolph, was alerted to what were described as anomalies in the union’s accounts.
Randolph arranged for an independent audit of the union’s funds, which until that point were under Bruhn’s control.
That audit quickly determined there was money missing and Bruhn was suspended as treasurer. In August Bruhn was put on paid administrative leave by the police department after discrepancies in the union’s accounts were confirmed and the matter was turned over to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department for investigation.
Bruhn’s run as union leader was a controversial and rocky one.
He battled with former councilman Richard De La Rosa, himself a corrections officer, over policy decisions made by the city council and what Bruhn complained was “micromanaging” of the police department by the city’s political leadership.
In September 2007, Bruhn filed a claim against the city and Councilman De La Rosa, alleging that De La Rosa maliciously made false and defamatory accusations against him. Bruhn maintained De La Rosa filed a “completely bogus” harassment complaint against Bruhn over his unwillingness to go along with De La Rosa’s dictates as a council member.
Earlier in 2007, as president of the Colton Police Officers Association, Bruhn led the charge against then-police chief Ken Rulon, charging his boss with having  created a hostile work environment, misusing his position to make personal discount purchases with department vendors, having instituted citation and arrest quotas that were charted on a bulletin board on the wall of the police department headquarters and engaging in intimidation of the men under his command as well as sexual harassment of female employees. Rulon  maintained that Bruhn had acted against him because he had been passed over for promotion to sergeant. Nevertheless, in the test of will and power between the two men, Bruhn prevailed, obtaining a no-confidence vote against Rulon by more than ninety percent of the Colton Police Officers Association’s 67 members and seeing Rulon ignominiously fired, and his badge and gun taken from him before he was unceremoniously escorted by armed officers from his office.
Bruhn can no longer employ that position power as he has been relieved of his role as union treasurer and kicked out of the association altogether.

(November 16)   A series of a cost saving measures approved by the Upland City Council last week are merely short term fixes that will not redress the city’s looming financial crisis, which will require a far more radical austerity program to cure, city manager Stephen Dunn has told the Sentinel.
Because employee payroll and benefit costs represent the lion’s share of city expenses, Dunn said, he will be seeking concessions from employees in all of the city’s divisions and departments with regard to current and future contracts, including downward adjustments on salaries and benefits. He will also explore new forms of revenue, including citizen approval of a city-wide sales tax and increasing the cost of municipal services.
If sufficient cost savings cannot be obtained or adequate revenues brought in, Dunn said, he will be forced into contemplating ever more draconian options which will include dissolving the city’s police, fire, engineering and inspection departments and contracting for those services with outside agencies such as the county, the California Division of Forestry or the city of Ontario.
Informed that the city’s general fund reserves, which were earlier projected at $4.2 million, have dwindled to $932,000, the council readily bought into two short-term measures Dunn offered them during a special meeting called last week, including cutting $229,000 from various elements of general government operations, as well as within Dunn’s office and that of the city’s development services division.
The council also gave Dunn permission to transfer $250,000 from the city’s gas tax fund, normally utilized for street and road improvements and required by law to be deposited in a separate bank account, to the city’s general fund, if the general fund becomes depleted. The general fund is used to pay for the city’s day-to-day operations.
According to Dunn, the city is no longer adhering to its policy of salting away 10 percent of its revenues, and it is running a deficit in its animal services department. Slated expenditures for capital improvements are outrunning revenue available for public works undertakings, and the city, which does not purchase liability insurance but instead indemnifies itself with its own available funds, is one lawsuit loss away from being pushed into bankruptcy.
Dunn, who was the city’s finance director before he was elevated to the city manager post, said the city needs to get an infusion of roughly $8 million to put its financial house fully in order and return to normalcy. If the city can dogpaddle furiously enough to generate $2 million more per year in revenue or achieve that sum through a combination of revenue and savings, it can keep its head above water, he said.
“Basically, what we are doing is we adopted short term measures to shore up the general fund reserve,” Dunn said.  “The city council directed me to return on November 26 with a whole matrix of items I can recommend to achieve cost savings, improve services and avoid the degradation of public safety. We are going to have to make cuts in certain areas or enhance revenues, perhaps by increasing taxes. We are taking a look in all directions and all methods of delivering services, police fire, animal control, library, engineering, information technology, and inspections. If we cannot enhance our position on the revenue side, we have to do something on the expenditure side.  I will be recommending selling the fire department’s ladder truck and converting Fire Station #2 to a paramedic team by going from a three-man to a two-man crew. We are considering periodic shutdowns of one fire station to drive down overtime. And we will look into renegotiating the existing contract for the city’s air ambulance.”
Dunn continued, “We are evaluating existing fees and new fees to enhance revenue. I will ask the council to consider increasing the business license fees. Another option will be increasing taxes. We may ask the voters to approve some form of tax, a sales tax or a parcel tax for the library. I mentioned that. I am not recommending the tax. However, if the council is not willing to make the cuts, we have to raise revenues.”
Dunn said the city is also considering leasing communication towers to cellular phone companies and selling off certain assets for one-time revenue. “We are already evaluating what properties we have and what could be sold off to shore up our reserves,” he said. “We could rent cell towers.”
Dunn emphasized that at present “We are not looking at layoffs.” He said, though, that he will be seeking concessions from all seven of the city’s employee bargaining groups on their labor contracts.
At issue is the city’s assumption of many employees’ contributions toward their retirement funds. In years past, during brighter economic times, the city, while providing what was designated as its part of that contribution toward employees’ pensions, also agreed to pay that portion of the pension fund that was put up by the employees themselves. At present, the city is paying $1.6 million per year in covering what would otherwise be the employees’ burden. If the seven employee bargaining groups would make that concession alone, Dunn indicated he is reasonably sure that layoffs will be avoided for at least the next two years.
Without either concessions, other savings or new revenue, far less palatable measures will have to be taken, Dunn said.
“One of the things we are looking at is outsourcing,” Dunn said. In practical terms, that means disbanding the police department and contracting with either the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department or the Ontario Police Department for law enforcement service, likewise dissolving the fire department and contracting with the Ontario Fire Department, the San Bernardino County Fire Department or the California Division of Forestry for fire service. Dunn is also poised to consider contracting with Ontario for engineering and public works services as well as building and code compliance inspections.
One member of the city council, Gino Filippi, is adamantly opposed to outsourcing of police and fire services.
“I understand that if we cannot find $2 million annually, then we will be looking at outsourcing,” Filippi said. “I think to be responsible, we have to show that nothing is off the table and we have to look at all opportunities to balance the city’s budget. But until I receive additional information to contradict what I have been told, my position is that the most crucial and vital services to Upland are public safety, which are essential services to protect our city, the police, fire and paramedics and public works. I know for a fact that public works has experienced the brunt of the reduction in the last two years. In addition, our police force has been reduced 20  officers since 2005. We had 90 sworn officers then and now we are down to 70. I don’t think it responsible to allow reductions in our police service. Since then we have seen the addition of the 210 Freeway, the Colonies commercial center and the residential area. We have rising crime throughout our city. We have break-ins and burglaries in areas where that was uncommon before. We have pockets of homeless, including at Memorial Park. That is of great concern to me. I would be against looking to move our police service away from Upland. I know the firefighters union is providing alternatives that would be more in line with keeping our services and looking at having nearby cities that have deep resources assist us rather than outsourcing to the county or other agencies like the California Division of Forestry. I think we need to get a clearer picture before we try to solve our problems piecemeal or eliminate whole departments. If we unwind those [the police department and fire department] and then try to go back in and regroup, we are going to have a problem. We have to think this through clearly before we reach for the knife.”
Filippi said he hopes the city’s employee bargaining units can be convinced to simply give back the city’s pick-up of the employee contributions toward retirement funding.
“I understand that if they are willing to come back to the table and if all of the employee groups provide their own contributions, that gets us to $1.6 million in savings annually. I am hopeful. That is certainly a place to start. That was one of the area’s most important to me during my campaign for mayor, to take them back to the negotiating table. Some of the groups have already agreed to do that. I am not at liberty to say which ones. This is a positive step. We are moving in the right direction. We are moving toward a responsible budget.”
Another member of the council, Brendan Brandt, indicated that the dissolution of either or both the police and fire departments would likely prove irrevocable, given the cost that would be entailed in reinitiating them. Once the police and fire departments are shuttered, he said, “we will never bring them back. I just know that,” Brandt said.
For that reason, Brandt said, “I would not make those kind of decisions without having all the information possible.”
Among the economizing approaches open to Dunn and the council short of outsourcing is laying off up to a third of the police and fire department personnel and then reframing the next contract, in which officers and firefighters would be classified not as hourly personnel but rather as salaried employees, extending contracts only to those individuals willing to work to carry out their assignments, even in the event that it takes 50 hours per week to complete them.
Michael McGill, an attorney with the law firm of Lackie, Dammeier, McGill & Ethir, which represents the Upland Police Officers Association, told the Sentinel, “I don’t see the option of working 50 hours per week as being legally permissible.  Federal wage and hour laws would not allow an employer to work an employee at that level without paying them overtime.  This is the case whether you classify them as salaried or hourly, exempt or non exempt.  And whether the unions agreed to it or not, the union cannot legally waive the wage and hour rights of any member.  Thus, the union could agree to it but any member could legally challenge it and would surely prevail.”
McGill did however, indicate that concessions of some order on the part of the city’s employee bargaining units may be unavoidable.
“All employees should have an appreciation of and commitment to an employer’s solvency,” McGill said. “Without an employer, there is no employee.  If cuts are necessary to maintain solvency, the city has to prioritize those cuts, and then make them where appropriate.  My personal philosophy is that cutting public safety should be a last resort.  If taking measured and necessary cuts, at a time where they are without a doubt needed, works to save the entire department, I would personally be okay with them.”

(November 16)   By Gail Fry
Two failed developments located in the San Bernardino Mountains are costing the taxpayers of San Bernardino County about a million dollars.
At its October 23 meeting, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors approved a recommendation by the county’s public works director, Gerry Newcombe, to “initiate performance & maintenance securities foreclosure” on a project in Lake Arrowhead known as Mill Pond.
The Mill Pond Project originally approved by the board of supervisors on November 3, 1998 included 67 parcels that were to be developed into custom homes.  In the conditions for approval, the developer agreed to indemnify the county taxpayers against any legal fees or court costs incurred if any action were taken against the county in approving the project.
To date, sixteen lawsuits have been filed as a result of the Mill Pond Project.  Notably, none of the lawsuits involved the county of San Bernardino as a party.  The majority of the lawsuits involved payment of its subcontractors.  One lawsuit was brought for quiet title purposes, that is, to end dispute over ownership of the land and development, while another was brought with regard to the removal of trees from the property.
The Arrowhead Lake Association brought a lawsuit with regard to the erosion and silt that ended up in Lake Arrowhead due to the development.
The state of California, under the authority of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board,  filed for an injunction against Mill Pond Partners on December 18, 2008, in order to force the developer to comply with its cleanup and abatement order issued December 31, 2007.  The cleanup and abatement order issued by Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan) pertained to storm water erosion originating from the site entering Orchard and Cumberland Creeks and entering into Lake Arrowhead.
On January 8, 2010, the case filed against Mill Pond Partners by the state of California was dismissed when a stipulated judgment was reached with the developer.
Lahontan supervising water resources control engineer Chuck Curtis told the Sentinel that Lahontan “has never been paid for enforcement” of its cleanup and abatement order and a demand letter was sent out to the developer.  Curtis explained his agency is currently “evaluating options” while acknowledging that the developer hasn’t “done all the work to stabilize the site.”
Curtis said the next step is to collect on its judgment and require stabilization of the site.  Curtis explained that it will depend on the current owner, and Lahontan plans to impose its requirements on the new owner.
According to property ownership records from the San Bernardino County Recorder’s Office, on February 7, 2012, the lender PME Mortgage Fund, Inc. foreclosed on the property, becoming the current owner of the Mill Pond Project.
The action authorized by the San Bernardino County supervisors at their October 23, 2012 meeting, allows county counsel to initiate foreclosure proceedings against the developer and/or surety “to collect sufficient monies (total estimated construction costs:  road and drainage – $125,245, water – $17,540 and sewer – $12,500) to complete the required improvements for Tract 15740.”
San Bernardino County public works staff analyst/public information officer Roni Eddis told the Sentinel this will allow the county to collect sufficient money from the developer, its bondholder or the present owner in order to “finish up what needs to be done to make the development safe.”
Eddis explained, “Now it’s just a legal issue between county counsel and them,” referring to the developer, its bond holder or the present owner.  Eddis informed the Sentinel that the county has been unable “to get a hold of them” and “We haven’t heard from them.”
The report/recommendation submitted to the board of supervisors shows the project’s required road and drainage improvements have not been completed and the developer is in default under the terms of its agreement with the county.  The report/recommendation also indicates that the bondholder, Western Insurance Company, has filed for insolvency and is being liquidated, and further provides “the county has not “received any funds from Western.”
Western Insurance Company’s insolvency and liquidation appears to leave the county of San Bernardino holding the bag for the cost of completing the project’s improvements, which total $155,285.
Peter Jorris, representative for San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society,  told the Sentinel that his group did not get involved in the Mill Pond Development Project because the project was surrounded by development, but that he perceived problems that cropped up at the development to be exemplary of the county not monitoring projects or enforcing its own general plan or laws.
Another development project located in the San Bernardino Mountains known as the Hawarden Project, again in the community of Lake Arrowhead, has resulted in the county of San Bernardino paying legal fees in the amount of $757,451.
The Hawarden Development Project was approved by the San Bernardino County Planning Commission on August 18, 2005 and consisted of 63 lots that were to be developed into 57 custom homes.
The developer, Blue Ridge Development, Inc., agreed to indemnify the county taxpayers against any legal fees or court costs incurred if any action were taken against the county in approving the project.
On December 15, 2005, the Center for Biological Diversity, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, Save Our Forest Association and the Sierra Club filed a writ of mandate against San Bernardino County and Hawarden Development Company for violations of the California Environmental Quality Act.
On November 30, 2006, Judge John Wade declined to grant a writ on the issue of water supply as well as on the issue of waste water, denied the writ with regard to the developer’s mitigation with regard to the Southern Rubber Boa and other environmental impacts while granting the writ with regard to its fire safety plan.
The major issue with regard to the fire safety plan involved the lack of evacuation routes without the completion of Cumberland Road from Cedar Glen to State Highway 18.
On January 31, 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, Save Our Forest Association and the Sierra Club filed a notice of appeal to the Fourth District Appellate Court.
On October 27, 2008, the Fourth District Appellate Court upheld Judge Wade’s decision with regard to its fire safety plan while ruling against Judge Wade’s decision with regard to the issue of water supply, California Environmental Quality Act issues and the Southern Rubber Boa.
Specifically, with regard to the fire safety plan the appellate court found, “By approving the Blue Ridge Project tentative tract map and conditional use permit without requiring completion of Cumberland Road, [the] county violated the express requirements of its general plan.”
With regard to the issue of water supply, the court found the environmental impact report “does not comport with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act because the document does not identify a source of water for the project or discuss the environmental impact of obtaining water from each of the various sources.”
With regard to the Southern Rubber Boa, the appellate court found, “the environmental impact report  conclusions regarding the SRB (Southern Rubber Boa) habitat located on the project site are not supported by substantial evidence and therefore the environmental impact report fails to set out adequate mitigation measures, in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act.”
A press release dated September 20, 2010, issued by the Center for Biological Diversity, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, Save Our Forest Association and the Sierra Club clarified that a 2009 ruling by San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Donald Alvarez had “arbitrarily minimized the fee award” and that an appeal to the state appeals court directed that “attorney fees awarded to the four plaintiff organizations be supplemented to provide a higher award.”
On September 14, 2011, the San Bernardino Superior Court held a hearing with regard a motion brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, Save Our Forest Association and the Sierra Club to the awarding of attorney fees.
On September 26, 2011, San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Gafkowski found the Center for Biological Diversity, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, Save Our Forest Association and the Sierra Club were entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $757,451.
By the time the court made its award for attorneys fees, Hawarden Development Company had gone out of business and was unavailable to pay the attorneys fees as it had promised in its indemnity agreement with the county.
Peter Jorris, speaking on behalf of the San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, told the Sentinel that in cases where citizens uphold the California Environmental quality Act and serve in the capacity of a private attorney general that the parties were entitled to their legal fees.
Jorris said if the judge decides “the government overstepped its bounds egregiously then you can have a multiplier applied to the legal fees,” as in this case.  Jorris suggested the award was a “lesson to the county to listen to its citizens when they make reasonable arguments” and  that “it was a resounding victory after six years.”
According to records from the San Bernardino County Recorder’s Office, Provident Savings Bank foreclosed on the property slated for the Hawarden Project on March 7, 2012.

(November 16)   MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE—The Mojave Cross has been re-erected at Sunrise Rock in the Mojave National Preserve, where it stood for 67 years to honor those American soldiers slain in what was once known as the Great War, now referred to as World War I.
The Christian symbol was taken down after Frank Buono, a National Park Service employee, with the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union, filed suit in March 2001 against the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, the National Park Service, and the superintendent of the preserve to have the cross removed from public land. Buono, a Catholic Vietnam War Veteran, was offended at the National Park Service’s denial, on separation of church and state grounds, of a request by Buddhists to establish a dome-shaped Buddhist shrine on a rock outcropping at a trailhead located near the cross in 1999.  The district court concluded that the presence of the cross in the preserve violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, that portion of the First Amendment which prohibits one religion from having too much influence. In July 2002, the court entered a permanent injunction ordering that the “defendants, their employees, agents, and those in active concert with defendants, are hereby permanently restrained and enjoined from permitting display of the Latin cross in the area of Sunrise Rock in the Mojave National Preserve.”
After an appeal to a higher federal court upheld the removal of the cross, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2010 ruled that a property exchange, by which the land around the cross was deeded over to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, a non-governmental entity, could take place and provide a constitutionally acceptable means by which the cross could be resurrected.
On Veterans Day, November 11, nine days after the acre upon which the cross previously stood and now stands was formally exchanged for land owned by Henry and Wanda Sandoz located elsewhere in the desert, California Veterans of Foreign Wars Commander Earl Fulk formally rededicated a new seven-foot-tall iron cross at the same spot the original Mojave Cross occupied.
More than a hundred people, most of them veterans themselves or their family members, came to Sunrise Rock, which is 12 miles off Interstate 15 about halfway between Barstow and Las Vegas, for the dedication.
Several crosses that had previously graced the site were vandalized or stolen. Henry Sandoz, of Yucca Valley, committed to serving as a caretaker of the Mojave Cross in 1983 when he made a promise to that effect to Riley Bembry, one of the WWI veterans who erected the cross in 1934, on Bembry’s deathbed.
Buono, who was in 2001 the assistant superintendent of the preserve, despite his own religious faith objected to the presence of the cross on public land, saying he did not think it proper for any religious symbol to be displayed on government property if symbols of all faiths were not to be tolerated.
Buono’s case cut a tortuous path through federal courts, where it was twice ordered that the cross be removed. Shortly after a federal court ordered the removal of the cross the first time, Congressman Jerry Lewis, in an effort to circumvent the court’s authority, arranged a land transfer in legislation he had passed in 2003, by which the five acres of privately owned property was delivered to the federal government in exchange for the acre beneath and surrounding the cross being given to the Veterans of Foreign Wars. That legislative solution was indistinguishable from the land exchange that was formalized this week but was not previously actuated after a federal appellate court nixed it, ruling that a transfer of the land upon which the cross stood to the Veterans of Foreign Wars in the middle of the 1.6 million acre federal preserve “will do nothing to minimize the impermissible governmental endorsement” of a religious symbol.
The 2010 Supreme Court decision that allowed the return of the cross to its original spot was a sharply divided one, with the go-ahead given in a 5-4 decision. “The goal of avoiding governmental (religious) endorsement does not require eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority.
Hiram Sasser, an attorney with the Texas-based Liberty Institute, who is credited with carrying out most of the legal battle that led to the reestablishment of the shrine, said “It rises once more.”
The Veterans of Foreign Wars have placed a plaque into Sunrise Rock, demarking the cross as a memorial for all U.S. war veterans. They have also put a fence around the site, but have left entrances for visitors.
In the coming weeks, Sandoz and other volunteers will return to fill the hollow iron cross with concrete to make it more difficult to cart off.
While there are signs that say the shrine site is private land, in the spirit of openness, anyone can come onto the property, leaving it vulnerable to vandals and thieves, part of the reality and paradox of freedom.

(November 16)   The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, commonly known as the Border Patrol, has exercised its option to terminate a contract it had with San Bernardino County for training at the Sheriff’s Emergency Vehicle Operations Center.
The Border Patrol entered into a contract with the county in May 2010 for the sheriff’s department to provide its Emergency Vehicle Operations Center (EVOC) in support of the Border Patrol’s training. Under the terms of the contract, the department provided use of its EVOC facilities in Devore, including the driving track, skid pan, classroom space, Offensive Driving Technique (ODT) vehicles, and support staff. The Border Patrol provided its own instructors, curriculum and vehicles for training (other than ODT vehicles).
The course instructed drivers on how to identify, avoid, and recover from various types of skids; the practice of defensive driving techniques; the use of vehicle dynamics for advantage in a pursuit situation, precision vehicle placement at slow and high speeds; safe driving techniques under adverse driving conditions; and the use and control of various types of  collisions in a law enforcement context. The contract was amended five previous times, most recently on June 5, 2012 to increase the contract amount by $1,356,018.44 and extend the term through June 8, 2013.
On September 27, 2012, the sheriff’s department was notified verbally that due to budget cuts, the Border Patrol was exercising its option to terminate the agreement. Amendment No. 6 to the contract approved by the board of supervisors last week was deemed acceptance of the written notice of termination, effective October 1, 2012.

(November 16)   The federal government has provided San Bernardino County with $941,715 for reimbursement of a portion of the costs to incarcerate undocumented criminal aliens in county detention facilities between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011.
That reimbursement represents pennies on the dollar of what the actual costs were, according to sheriff Rod Hoops.
Just before the money was electronically wired into a county account, Hoops’ designated liaison to the board of supervisors, captain Steve Higgins, told the board, “The sheriff’s department estimates its cost to incarcerate undocumented criminal aliens in Fiscal Year 2010-11 was $17.3 million. This State Criminal Alien Assistance Program award, in the amount of $941,715, will reimburse only 5.4% of these costs.”
The U.S. Department of Justice, through its Bureau of Justice Assistance and its State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, annually makes funds available nationwide for the reimbursement of detention costs associated with the incarceration of undocumented criminal aliens who were in custody for four or more consecutive days and convicted of a felony or second misdemeanor.
The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program does not fully reimburse actual cost; instead, data received by all applicants is combined to determine each applicant’s relative percentage of the total program allocation.
On June 26, 2012, the board of supervisors approved an application for the reimbursement of a portion of the costs to incarcerate undocumented criminal aliens for the period of July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011. The county’s application was successful and funding in the amount of $941,715 has been awarded, resulting in a total of $15.8 million received over the past fifteen years.
Under the terms of the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, funds awarded must be used for correctional purposes only.