In near lockstep, city officials in Rancho Cucamonga, Upland and Chino are ushering their residents toward incorporating electoral districts into their governmental processes.
Both 77,983-population Chino and 73,732-population Upland have the option, because of their status as under-100,000 population municipalities, of simply imposing the ward system on their residents without subjecting the matter to the electoral process. Chino has elected to do just that, bypassing the expense and uncertainty of an election. Upland will hold a vote on the issue.
In the case of Rancho Cucamonga, which is San Bernardino County’s third-largest city population-wise at 165,269, state law mandates that residents must literally elect to put an electoral ward system in place.
The three cities were prompted to their actions by a boilerplate letter that was sent out to more than a dozen cities in Southern California by Malibu-based attorney Kevin Shenkman in December using the letterhead of his firm, Shenkman & Hughes. In those letters, Shenkman noted the cities “relie[d] upon at-large election system[s] for electing candidates to [their] city council[s]” and charged that “voting within [those cities] is racially polarized, resulting in minority vote dilution, and therefore [those cities’] at large elections are violative of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001. It is our belief [those cities’] at-large system[s] dilute the ability of minority residents – particularly Latinos (a “protected class”) – to elect candidates of their choice or otherwise influence the outcome of [those cities’] council elections.” In those letters, Shenkman threatened to sue the cities “on behalf of residents” if those cities’ at-large council systems were not replaced by ones based on district representation.
To emphasize his point and raise the level of intimidation, Shenkman wrote, “As you may be aware, in 2012, we sued the City of Palmdale for violating the California Voting Rights Act. After an eight-day trial, we prevailed. After spending millions of dollar, a district-based remedy is ultimately being imposed upon the Palmdale city council (sic), with districts that combine all incumbents into one of four districts.”
In Chino, city attorney Jimmy Gutierrez bowed to the pressure. The city hired two separate consultants, Marguerite Leoni, an attorney, and Douglas Johnson of National Demographics Corporation.
Leoni, essentially, put together a case to support Gutierrez’s assessment that the city would run both a financial and legal risk to take a stand against Shenkman, and should rather simply knuckle under and create the districts. Leoni, in her presentation to the Chino City Council, cited the example of the City of Whittier, which was sued over allegations of California Voting Rights Act violations even though the city council moved to place on the ballot a measure allowing voters to choose whether district-based council races should be put in place and Whittier’s voters approved that measure. The case against Whittier was dismissed, giving the city what would normally be considered a victory in the matter. But the law firm that had brought the suit filed a motion to recover its fees – determined to be $900,000 – and the city was obliged to cover those costs. Leoni pointed out that the California Voting Rights Act suspends the normal cost-coverage dynamic of litigation in that plaintiffs filing suit under the act are entitled to recover their costs upon winning but defendants who prevail are prohibited from recovering their legal fees and costs from an unsuccessful plaintiff.
In presenting the city council with options, Leoni did not dwell upon assertions the city might make in its defense, in particular that one of its members, Eunice Ulloa, has a claim, at least by virtue of marriage, to being Hispanic. She is married to Bob Ulloa, who boasts impeccable credentials as to being a bona fide Latino. Moreover, Chino was the political base of Ruben Samuel Ayala, a Chino school board member, Chino city councilman, and Chino’s first elected mayor, who subsequently was elected to the county board of supervisors. Ayala then represented Chino and the surrounding area in the California Senate for 24 years, the first Mexican-American to serve in the state senate since 1911, when Miguel Estudillo represented Orange and Riverside counties.
Rather, Leoni sternly warned that if Chino did not adopt district representation as part of the city council’s electoral formula by the upcoming November election, Shenkman would almost assuredly sue the city. The council then passed a resolution by a vote of 4-0 invoking by fiat a by-district election system that will be in place by November. That council’s action calls for public hearings/meetings to discuss defining districts, city council discussions of the matter on May 17 and June 7, at the last of which the council will consider the adoption of the ordinance committing the city to the district system. The filing period for city council candidacy begins on July 8.
Rancho Cucamonga was among the several cities that received the December letter from Shenkman & Hughes. By January the city began seeking input from the city’s residents about potential boundaries for contemplated electoral districts. Shenkman did not deem the city to be acting with sufficient alacrity and on March 14 the city was served with a lawsuit claiming the city was in violation of the California Voting Rights Act. The suit sought a court imposed requirement that Rancho Cucamonga have the district system in place by the November election.
Despite widespread resentment that the system is being foisted upon the city by outside interests and the belief that the city, which has voted two Hispanic candidates – Mike Palombo once and Rex Gutierrez four times – into office, the city capitulated, seeking to minimize the payday Shenkman & Hughes are seeking by agreeing to hold an election in November to determine if the voters will support district elections.
So far, nine proposals on how the city should be divided district-wise have been brought forth. Six of those originated with city residents. Three are the brainchild of a consultant hired by the city.
One of those, a proposal by Rancho Cucamonga-based attorney Jim Banks, would have created two districts, one of which would have existed at the southernmost end of the city within the traditional community of Cucamonga, where well over fifty percent of the residents identify as Latino. That district, with a population of 41,317 or thereabouts, would have been represented by a single council member. The other district, which would include the northernmost portion of Cucamonga, as well as all of Alta Loma and all of Etiwanda, would be represented by three candidates elected at large from throughout the district. City officials did not embrace Banks’ proposal. Nor did they look with favor upon another proposal brought up by another resident that would have created not four districts representing somewhere near 41,317 residents each but six districts representing roughly 27,545 residents. City officials looked with disfavor on that proposal because they are committed to keeping the city council a five-member panel, meaning four council members each representing a single district and a mayor elected at large.
At the April 6 city council meeting, city attorney James Markman said that because Rancho Cucamonga is a general law city, it must function with a five member city council. “Since this is not a chartered city, there can only be five councilmen,” he said.
Another proposed district map which followed zip code boundaries was deemed unacceptable because the districts were not equal in population. The council and city staff seemed favorably disposed toward four of the proposals that not only were balanced by population – a constitutional requirement in council districting – but generally kept the area south of Foothill Boulevard – a major portion of historic Cucamonga that features a Latino population – as one district. Three of those drafts were done by the city’s consultant.
On April 6, Mayor Dennis Michael said it is not a foregone conclusion that any of those models for the drawing of the districts will be accepted and automatically approved.
“I want to make sure that everyone’s aware, that as your mayor and city council, we want the Rancho Cucmonga community’s participation and input on this very important issue that’s before this city,” Michael said, “and we want you to be very involved and engaged in this process. This is an issue that we did not bring forward. We have litigation that has occurred against the city, so we are looking for all kinds of public input and we welcome your thoughts and weighing in on this issue”
City manager John Gillison said that prior to the lawsuit the city was at least partially prompted to move forward with the proposal because of the interference of Shenkman. “We received a threat of litigation,” Gilison said.
Nevertheless, the city is not necessarily buying its way out of the lawsuit by giving the voters the option of choosing districts, Markman said. It remains possible Shenkman and his firm will seek legal fees from the city in the aftermath of the vote on districts, whether or not the voters approve them. The lawsuit is yet proceeding and if the voters reject districts, the matter may end up in court. In the event the voters pass the measure calling for district elections, Shenkman & Hughes could very well seek attorneys’ fees, arguing that the suit was a valid one that resulted in the city effectuating the change.
Markman disputed that the city’s action should be interpreted as the city admitting it has had unfair elections in the past.
“Why are we doing this?” Markman asked, and then proceeded to answer. “The Federal Voting Rights Act since 1964 and the California Voting Rights Act now have questioned open elections in areas where you might get polarized voting that precludes any good possibility that a member of a protected class, in the case of Rancho Cucamonga Latinos, could actually be elected because of voter preferences that are related to their race,” Markman said. “That’s all a calculation, a demographic calculation, and there have been a number of lawsuits filed in California. The law’s been around for a long time, but there’s been a wave, an epidemic, of lawsuits that have forced a lot of cities in this position. There was recently a letter put out by a couple of organizations threatening about 199 more lawsuits. So, when we look at all that – in fact before we got this threatening letter, staff was looking at the census data and recognizing the number of Latinos that have been identified in the census and started looking at this even before all this litigation popped up. That’s called polarized voting and we are not, we have not, legally concluded we have polarized voting in California, and depending on how all of this goes and whether there is an election and what the outcome is, we could be litigating that point, so I don’t want anyone to take the fact that we’re doing this process, because it’s the most efficient cost effective way of dealing with this problem, that we’re conceding such a lawsuit should be filed or should be prosecuted or would be successful because we don’t concede any of that.”
In Upland, the city council could have used its authority, as did the Chino City Council, to create the district system by drawing up four population-balanced wards. Instead, the council chose to send the matter to a vote of the residents. After receiving Shenkman’s letter, the city attorney’s office negotiated with Shenkman’s firm, agreeing to pay Shenkman $45,000 and to draw up the plans for a ward system that the voters could consider. In return, Shenkman offered to hold off on filing the suit, at least until the vote on the district election forming measure is voted upon. If Upland’s voters embrace the district elections and a primarily Latino district is incorporated into that system, Shenkman will very likely leave the city alone. But if the voters do not approve the district plan, Shenkman has reserved the right to file suit against the city.
Some Upland residents called this blatantly racist, unconstitutional, a violation of the 14th Amendment and tantamount to blackmail.
This week, the Upland City Council considered and ultimately approved a plan which Upland Assistant City Manager Jeannette Vagnozzi and a city consultant, David Ely of Compass Demographics, said would involve input being taken from what they called “stakeholders,” including city residents, with regard to a districting map, so that the plan for a ward system could be ready, in Vagnozzi’s words, “no later than August 1.” In this way, a ballot measure to approve or reject the ward system in Upland could be placed on the November ballot.
To facilitate public input with regard to the process, Ely is to establish an office at City Hall, where he will be available during some of the city’s business hours so he can hear from residents with regard to their suggestions as to the formation of the districts to be considered.
Upland City Attorney Richard Adams offered a similar rationale for complying with Shenkman’s demands as had Leoni in Chino and Markman in Rancho Cucamonga. In doing so, Adams went further than either of the other two lawyers in conceding their might be grounds for Shenkman to proceed legally against the city he represents. This upset some of the city’s residents, who do not believe the city should give up any ground to Shenkman.
“The city received correspondence in December indicating that they [Shenkman & Hughes] believe the city was in violation of the California Voting Rights Act because of the demographics in our city and the fact that a particular ethnic group in the city had never had a person on the council,” Adams said. “Their claim was evaluated and basically if they can show that particularly in the city of Upland – there’s 38 percent of the population is I guess what one would indicate quote unquote Latino and there hasn’t been a Latino representative on the council – they have a lot of the evidence they would need to indicate there is polarized voting. The solution the California Voting Rights Act would allow, one of the solutions, the main one that’s being used is to go from at-large elections to district elections because with the smaller districts it’s easier for people to run for office. It’s less expensive because it’s a smaller area to go on. And it’s felt that would be a type of way to handle what is perceived to be a polarized voting situation in our city. I’m not saying there is one, however, there is some evidence toward that. There have been a number of cities that have had situations, in fact some of your neighbor cities have the same kinds of claims made, and any of the cities that have defended these cases have ended up spending in some cases millions of dollars. We haven’t found that any of them have been really successful. They ended up with the courts ordering the district-type elections. This way, the route the council chose, entering into the settlement puts the community in charge of the creation of the districts to be in compliance with the California Voting Rights Act.”
One Upland resident, Todd Mills, said that Adams’ summary of the legal issues pertaining to the matter “was pathetic.” He said that the U.S. Voting Rights Act was framed in the context of wholesale violations of voting rights of African Americans as occurred in the South decades ago and was not applicable to the situation in Upland. He said the California Voting Rights Act institutionalized violations of the principal of fairness and equal protection under the law for all by giving privileged status to one group over others. “There is no application of [the California Voters Rights Act] that is not unadulterated racism,” Mills said.
Mills questioned the process by which the city proposed to draw up the districts, saying private sessions in which Ely would be lobbied by one person or group was unacceptable. “I am going to suggest strongly that they be public meetings… recorded on video and audio, not secret meetings with key stakeholders,” Mills said. “That is simply inappropriate. The residents need to be in charge of this. By saying there is a key stakeholder, that means there is a stakeholder above the other stakeholders. You have listed the group that has blackmailed the city [as a key stakeholder]. They need to be banned from every single part of this process. The main criteria points [for drawing up the districts] are all designed to divide and conquer the residents. It is not appropriate to get into groups and discuss how we are dissimilar. We’re going to sit down and discuss what is different about everybody? Really? That’s outrageous. It pits the residents against one another. We were [threatened with being] sued on false claims of racism and in response to that we have to have a district for one particular race. Your agreement says we have to have a district for one particular skin color.”
This, Mills said, is a violation of the 14th Amendment.
The council, Adams and Ely sought to defuse the charges that the city was engaging in doublespeak by saying, with regard to the “general districting considerations” that the formation of the districts would pay attention to “demographic characterizations, population ethnicity, population by ethnic identification and socioeconomic characteristics,” while saying that legally “race must not predominate” in forming the districts.
Mayor Ray Musser took a shot at resolving that paradox.
“We were chosen [to receive the letter from Shenkman & Hughes] because we have 38 percent in this city who are Hispanic,” Muser said. “It’s hard to explain. It’s not driven by racism but it is. We’re not hiding anything. Let’s say the lower part of the city will be the Hispanic district. We all agree there.”
Musser noted that historically voter turnout below Foothill Boulevard, the southern end of the city, is “about half of what it is around 18th or 19th Street [further north in Upland]. We need to go through this process. Yes, one of the four [districts] will be carefully carved out. Let’s face it. That’s as honest as I can get. We don’t like it but that’s where we are.”
Adams acknowledged the goal is to create a district in which Hispanics will make up the dominant numbers. “The settlement agreement requires that at least one district have a majority of Latino or Hispanic voters, 51 percent or whatever is a majority,” Adams said. He added that people might perceive a “paradox” creating a district that is intended to favor one ethnic group and the law that prohibits a district from being formed so that one race predominates, but that the paradox was one of perception rather than reality. “I don’t see that they are conflicting but I can see that people see they are,” Adams said.
Ely said, “Race can be used to benefit people or to hurt people. Federal law says that you got (sic) to make sure it is not being used to hurt people. You got (sic) to make sure that the districts are fair, so you consider race when you are doing it. The expectation that’s embodied in the settlement agreement is that if you draw districts that fairly represent the communities the way they exist in the city, one of them will have at least a fifty percent Latino voting age population. Given the context of the California voting rights act and some of the federal requirements to avoid minority vote dilution, in looking at voter participation we use surname matching methodology to get an estimate of registered voters who fall into different ethnic groups.”

The acute understaffing of San Bernardino County’s judicial bench might be partially cured by transferring judges here from other areas in the state where there are currently plenitudes of judicial officials.
According to the Commission on the Future of California’s Court System,   in some of California’s 58 counties, such as San Bernardino and Riverside, there are too few judges. In some others, according to the commission, there are more judges than are needed. The commission’s conclusion was compended in a report that was relayed to Governor Jerry Brown on Tuesday by California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye,
Before adding large numbers of judges to the state’s payroll, the game plan in Sacramento appears to be to take the most underworked jurists in the state and move them into more demanding assignments elsewhere.
Last year, Governor Jerry Brown sounded an alarm with the regard to overburdened judges in certain judicial districts in California and the need to more evenly distribute the workload among existing jurists before making new judicial appointments or filling chronically vacant slots.
On Tuesday, Cantil-Sakauye delivered to Brown the Commission on the Future of California’s Court System’s report in which that panel called for expeditiously making the transfers of a few judges out of the districts that have unclogged court calendars to ones that have a backlog of cases. Once those changes have been made, the next move would be to assess what continuing shortages within the state’s various courthouses exist, and apportion the appropriate number of judges to them.
Far-flung San Bernardino County, the largest such political subdivision in the Lower 48 States at 20,105 square miles, has been particularly hard hit by cutbacks in the state court system that accompanied the downturn in the national, state and local economy that began in 2007 and persisted until 2014. During that period, the county sustained the closures of the Chino courthouse on its southwest extreme, the closure of the Needles courthouse on its northeast end and the Twin Peaks and Big Bear courthouses in its central mountain communities. In addition, operations at the Barstow courthouse were scaled back to a single courtroom that is open three days a week. There have been consequent case delays and crowded calendars and courtrooms at all the county’s other courthouses.
With its population having now eclipsed 2.1 million, San Bernardino County is the second-most judicially understaffed of California’s 58 counties.
An uptick in the number of judges would offset some of that problem. The California Judicial Council has approved the eventual addition of seven more judges in San Bernardino County beyond the 86 Superior Court judges and commissioners now in place. The funding for those seven judges has not yet been forthcoming. Yet even if those judges are appointed and take positions on the bench, law professionals and associations consider 93 judges to be well short of the number, pegged at 156, deemed appropriate for a jurisdiction of San Bernardino County’s size and population.
A Judicial Needs Assessment Report, issued in 2014, estimated that more than 260 new judges are needed statewide, with roughly 85 of those earmarked for San Bernardino and Riverside counties. The courts in Riverside and San Bernardino counties have just 60 percent of the judges they need, a report put out by the Commission on the Future of California’s Court System maintains. Meanwhile, courts elsewhere have more judges than necessary to handle their needs. Alameda County has three vacant judgeships and Santa Clara County has two, the report notes. The commission has recommended that when a judgeship goes vacant in a county where the number of judges exceed that county’s needs, the position should be shifted to a county with too few judges.
The Commission on the Future of California’s Court System’s recommendation is to be evaluated by the Judicial Council, which is primary advising body to the governor and state legislature on court policy. One of those recommendations calls for legislation redistributing vacant judgeships to the courthouses where they are most in need and giving the chief justice of the California Supreme Court the ability to make decisions on judicial assignments.

by Ruth Musser-Lopez
NEEDLES—Over the objections of a number of residents, the Needles City Council on Tuesday April 12 voted 4-2 to raise water and water treatment rates in this city of 4,884 at San Bernardino’s extreme east end on the west bank of the Colorado River.
In the weeks prior to the vote, local opposition against the rate increase had mounted, with activists encouraging rate payers they spoke with to hand deliver written opposition to City Hall, particularly with regard to the planned sewer rate increases. Nevertheless, only two of the council’s members, Louise Evans and Shawn Gudmundson, dissented in the vote at the public hearing calling for an increase in water and wastewater service rates.
The new water calculation will include a basic fixed charge of $38.49 for a 3/4” size water meter, which is in the “lower half of water rates in San Bernardino County,” according to Needles City Manager Rick Daniels. The current method of calculating the rate provides for the first 1,000 cubic feet as part of the fixed basic service charge of $38.91, but the new rate structure does not include a given amount of water as part of the new basic service charge. It is thus unclear whether the city is making a straight across comparison in its countywide rate ranking.
Ratepayers will now pay the base rate and for all water that they use on top of that. Further, the amount they pay for those precious drops will increase 20% from $1.54 to $1.85 imposed on every 100 cubic feet of water. Thus, the old basic supply of 1,000 cubic feet will cost $18.50 and every 1,000 cubic feet after that will be increased from $15.40 to $18.50, a net increase of $3.10 or a 20% increase. Daniels stated the volumetric rate is in addition to the 42 cent reduced base charge “in order to allow folks to control their bills by regulating their use to achieve conservation requirements of the state.”
The city estimates that the average charge will be $65.00 per month for water and Daniels asserts that the typical residence will see an overall decrease of $.44 in their monthly bill. Gudmundsen objected strongly to the basis of this “overall” calculation, saying it was misleading since the Prop 218 adjustments lowering electricity rates were figured in and should have nothing to do with how the water rate restructuring is presented to the public.
Controversy also centered around the need for the rate increase—how the increase can be justified —and how the rates are calculated. Three concerns expressed by the public pertained to 1) cutting losses — considerable concern has been expressed in recent weeks that the increased rates were based upon artificially low historic utility income due to the fact that the city failed to collect payment for services from a privileged class; 2) controlling costs — concern was expressed that the city included in its calculations the cost of improvements that under the requirements of Proposition 218 would have required a vote of affected residents to approve a neighborhood specific property assessment instead of a rate increase on the entire community; and 3) the city is using what some residents maintain is an unfair standard, known as an equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) system, to calculate the sewerage rate increases. Proposition 218 allows city officials to minimize the requirement that those subjected to tax or rate increases by a governmental entity approve them first by allowing cities to call for a show of opposition to the rate or tax increases through letters of protest. Thus, if a majority of residents do not send in such letters of protest, the rate or tax increase stands. Virtually never do such letter of protest efforts reach the crucial majority threshold.
City officials sought to put the best face on the increases. Prior to the water rate increase vote, utility board member Steve Moffitt stated that “It’s real simple and fair…you use more, you pay more.” City manager Rick Daniels asserted that the city’s collections policy had been revised and now would be fairly applied and enforced with cutoff being thirty days after non-payment. As far as funding repairs and improvements, Daniels said that the city’s operations will comply with state regulations as far as what can be funded and what can’t. Public sentiment was expressed however that the city was not doing enough to cut costs. Some charged that the city manager glossed over the fact that of the $290,000 figure paid to a contracted firm to run the sewer plant, much of that cost would not be necessary if the city had its own certified Class IV plant operator/manager.
The new flat rate of $1.85 per 100 cubic feet is estimated by the city to be the cost of service or the cost of delivering water. But some rate payers expressed concern that the rate increases reflect a cost greater than the actual cost to the city in delivering the service and that the ratepayers are thus defraying the increases in pay and benefits to the management echelon at Needles City Hall and within the city’s utility division.
Resident activists characterized those pay increases as “extravagant,” given Needles standing as San Bernardino County’s least populous city and one which ranks at the bottom of the county’s 24 cities in terms of household income and tax revenue into municipal coffers per capita. Needles’ low income ranking is on the order of the cities of San Bernardino, which declared bankruptcy in 2012, and Adelanto, which declared a fiscal emergency in 2013. The same critics of municipal operations also cited the city’s failed collections program in the very recent past.
Needles’ city attorney, John Pinkney, reported that his firm had prepared or reviewed the Prop 218 notifications, related resolutions and the method in which the protests would be validated and interpreted as to whether a majority existed in the count. He clarified that the Prop 218 allows the council to take action, or not, at their discretion. The city clerk, Dale Jones, announced that 75 protests had been received against the waste water rate restructure plan and that 26 protests had been received against the water rate restructuring plan.
Opponents allege that the low number of written objections is due to lack of voter education and the fact that in the local media, the opportunity to object was couched in long articles predicated by the oratory on city officials’ assertions that more funds were necessary to provide the services. Opponents have further asserted that the only notification that rate payers received regarding the need to put their objection in writing was surreptitiously printed in small print on a confusing brochure available at the public presentations that were made by the city manager.
Public comment was received from Debra Downey, who said that she had been appointed by a larger circle of citizens to ask why the city had waited so long to comply with Prop 218, citing the city’s assertion that the law went into effect in 2010. Prop 218 was actually passed in 1996 according to the Public Policy Institute of California. Pinkney claimed that he began working on the changes soon after he was appointed city attorney. Needles Utility Board members Steve Moffitt and Terry Campbell testified and indicated that compliance efforts began around 2010.
The controversial brochure, opponents say, obfuscated the manner in which the sewer rate increase was calculated. Needles Utility Board Member Terry Campbell, a former councilman who was ousted in 2014, asserts that the new rate structure is fair because it is based upon an Equivalent Dwelling Unit system. When concerned citizens learned that the “engineer” who designed the system had “retired” and could not be contacted to corroborate some publicly contested calculations, many lost confidence in Mr. Campbell’s plan.
The brochure asserted that the EDU is generally calculated as the cost of providing service to a typical single family residence (one unit). The EDU is established at $41.54 per month. The monthly service charge up until this week was $39.67 for a single family residence. Thus, the basic increase is calculated at 4.7% more than what was being charged up until this point. Further, the city plans to authorize annual inflationary adjustments or cost of living adjustments (COLA) which will be added to all rates on October 1st of each year beginning in 2017 subject to the proration of the initial COLA.
Under the rates approved this week, the Needles Unified District’s sewer bill will increase 300% to $8,000 per month, a price that members of the Needles Unified School District Board objected to. School board president Shane Breaux expressed to the utility board in March that the school district wanted to pay its fair share and do its part to enhance the community, but district officials did not believe the formula to be fair. Further, Breaux emphasized that the district had not budgeted for the kind of rate shock the city was suddenly imposing on the district. Breaux was deeply concerned that it would be the school children who suffer from the rate increase because the district would most likely need to cut back on staff and student’s educational programs.
The largest user of water and water treatment services in Needles is the school district. Prior to the council’s action this week, the school board had earlier met with city manager Rick Daniels, who relayed to the utility board the concerns the school district was having with the calculation. Daniels informed the utility board that the EDU for the school was calculated using a formula based on total enrolled students (1005) rather than average daily attendance (795). He explained that the higher figure had been provided to the engineer doing the calculation but that the city staff could have used the average daily attendance figure instead. Daniels provided very articulate advice to the utility board and informed them that “Schultz” the “engineer” who calculated the amounts, had retired and could not be contacted. Daniels asserted that had the engineer been at the meeting he could have substantiated that the average daily attendance figures would more accurately reflect a proportional fair charge. The utility board seemed to dismiss Daniels’ advice and moved forward to approve the rate restructuring.
Had the utility board, made the correction in accordance with its legal authority, the school’s charges would have been lowered to $7,000/month a savings of $12,000 year. The utility board refused to make that downward adjustment, saying the revenue stream from the school district was needed to balance the utility division’s budget. One board member suggested that the consequences would be even higher rates in the future if the current rate increase is not effectuated. Daniels told the utility board the city would need to go through the Proposition 218 protest process again.
Bruce Pocock, chairman the utility board was concerned that if the board changed the calculation for one party prepared by the engineer based upon an empirical rate study, then there would be others who would want changes.
Robert Benoit, the head of the city’s waste water division, attempted to add support to the argument that the school rate should be higher since potency of the waste is an issue. He claimed that homes have showers that dilute the waste but said nothing about the fact that the schools also have showers. Absent the engineer who did the calculations, questions could not be answered as to the intensity or dilution of the schools effluent or whether the schools being closed on weekends, holidays and during the summer was taken into consideration.
Other utility board members echoed the sentiments of Pocock and Benoit, expressing their view that the utility division must concern itself with the fiscal integrity of the utility division and could not make special allowances for the school district. They said the city would have the option of adjusting the rates downward without having to use the Proposition 218 process if the utilities department’s financial problems were straightened out.
The Utility Board’s meeting was held on March 15. On April 8, four days prior to the council meeting, Daniels responded to questions from the Sentinel saying that an adjustment had since been made to the school district’s EDU calculation to use as its basis the average daily attendance figure rather than the 1005 enrolled students figure. Needles Unified School District superintendent, Dr. Mary McNeil appeared before the council to thank them for working with the district on this matter.
Since February, about 85 people in total showed up at the eight community meetings and workshops that Rick Daniels held to discuss the rate increases.

The list of candidates vying in the various local, state and federal political races scheduled for the June Primary Election has been set.
In the contest for 1st District San Bernardino County Supervisor, incumbent Robert Lovingood is up against challengers Rick Roelle, Angela Valles, Bill Holland and Paul Russ. Lovingood is seeking reelection this year after being elected in 2012, when he and Roelle proved the highest vote-getters in the primary election before tilting against one another head-to head in the November election. Lovingood edged Roelle in the run-off, 38,640 votes or 51.22 percent to 36,798 votes or 48.78 percent. Roelle is a former Apple Valley councilman and mayor; Valles, Roelle’s wife, is a former Victorville councilwoman. Holland is currently the mayor in Hesperia. Russ is a councilman in Hesperia.
In the county’s 3rd District, incumbent supervisor James Ramos is seeking reelection. His lone challenger is Donna Munoz, who formerly worked as one of his field representatives and is currently the general manager of the Morongo Valley Community Services District & Fire Department.
Incumbent Fifth District Supervisor Josie Gonzales will face no opposition.
Incumbent 8th Congressional District Representative Paul Cook, a Republican, is being challenged former Assemblyman and fellow Republican Tim Donnelly and three Democrats — former Copper Mountain College board member Dr. Rita Ramirez, Victor Valley Community College Board President John Pinkerton and U.S. Army combat veteran Roger La Plante.
Pete Aguilar, the former Redlands mayor who was elected to Congress in the 31st Congressional District in 2014 will need to face down fellow Democrat Kaisar Ahmed, former Democrat-but-now-Republican Joe Baca, Republican Paul Chabot and Republican Sean Flynn. Baca was a member of Congress for 13 years before he was turned out of office in 2012 by another Democrat, Gloria Negrete-Mcleod. Aguilar beat Chabot in the 2014 election.
Former Pomona Mayor and incumbent 35th District Congresswoman Norma Torres, a Democrat, will vie against Tyler Fiscella, a Republican.
In the 25th Congressional District, Ryan Caforio, a Democrat and Lou Vice, a Democrat and Jeffrey Moffatt, a Republican, are seeking to unseat incumbent Steve Knight, a Republican.
Incumbent 40th District Republican Assemblyman Marc Steinorth must fend off Abigail Medina, a Democrat.
In Assembly District 41, Chris Holden, the Democrat incumbent, will run against three hopefuls, Republicans Y C. Higgins and Dan M. Taylor and Alan S. Reynolds, who has no party affiliation.
Incumbent 42nd District Assemblyman Chad Mayes, who was formerly the mayor of Yucca Valley, must hurdle over Democrat Greg Rodriguez and Libertarian Jeff Hewitt.
Cheryl R. Brown, the incumbent Democrat in the 47th Assembly District is being assailed by another Democrat, Eloise Reyes and A Chanel Sanchez, a Republican.
In Assembly District 55, Gregg D. Fritchle, a Democrat and Republicans Phillip Chen, Ray Marquez, Mike Spence and Steven M. Tye are running to replace Ling Ling Chang, who is seeking election to the State Senate in the 29th Senate District.
In the 21st state Senate District seat being vacated by Republican state senator Sharon Runner, assemblyman Scott Wilk, R-Santa Clarita, and Republican law firm co-owner Star Moffatt are vying for the office along with Democrats Johnathon Ervin, an aerospace engineer, and Steve Hill, an appraiser and businessman.
Incumbent state senator Mike Morrell, R-Rancho Cucamonga, plans to fend off challenges from educator Ronald J. O’Donnell and small businessman Mark Westwood, both Democrats, in the state 23rd Senate District.
Incumbent 33rd District Assemblyman Jay Obernolte, R-Hesperia, is facing a challenge from building contractor Scott Markovich, a Democrat who ran for the seat as a Republican in 2014.

SAN BERNARDINO—Taking its first tentative steps toward a semblance of normalcy upon its recently formulated exit from bankruptcy, the City of San Bernardino has lined up an experienced public agency financial issues professional to fill the role of finance director 13 months after the last person to hold that title was given an unceremonious boot out the door.
On Monday, the city council will vote to confirm city manager Mark Scott’s selection of Brent Mason, who has been the finance director in Riverside since 2010. The council’s okay is considered a foregone formality and the day after that vote, Mason is scheduled to go to work.
There are likely several factors in why the finance director’s slot with the county seat has been vacant for over a year and that Scott, who has been in place for just two months, waited until now to fill the position.
Long before Scott arrived on the scene, after years of dwindling revenues, expenditures drastically exceeding income, and deteriorating financial numbers that resulted in $80 million in unfunded liabilities and a $49 million annual operating deficit, San Bernardino in August 2012 filed for Chapter Nine bankruptcy protection.
Just prior to that filing, San Bernardino’s city manager, Charles McNeeley had bailed on the city. Andrea Travis-Miller, stepped in as McNeeley’s interim replacement. There ensued a sincere but prolonged and seemingly ineffectual effort to assess and define the depth and extent of the city’s financial implosion. But efforts by one municipal official after another to put their arms around the problem were met with frustration and failure. One issue was the completion of the city’s 2011-12 audit, followed up by 2012-13 audit. The city’s relationship with its auditing firm – Rogers, Anderson, Malody and Scott, which the city had long employed – deteriorated as Rogers, Anderson, Malody and Scott failed to deliver the audit. David Cain was brought in to serve as finance director in March 2013. He and Travis-Miller did all they could to extricate the audit from Rogers, Anderson, Malody and Scott but were unable to do so. It was not until June 2014 – three years late – that Rogers, Anderson, Malody and Scott at last delivered the 2011-12 audit. At that point the city ended its relationship with Rogers, Anderson, Malody and Scott, bringing in the auditing firm of Macias, Gini & O’Connell to complete the ongoing 2012-13 and 2013-14 audits.
Buckling under the strain municipal officials faced in attempting to right the city’s listing financial ship, Travis-Miller departed to become the executive director of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, a regional joint powers planning agency in Los Angeles County, and Cain exited in September 2014, after 18 months in place.
The city hired Allen Parker, a journeyman city administrator with experience in and outside of California to take the helm as city manager. He brought in two deputy city managers, Bill Manis and Nita McKay, who were hired within weeks of one another in 2014. Manis was detailed to development issues and McKay to financial ones.
Despite the city’s transition to Macias, Gini & O’Connell, the 2012-13, the 2013-14 and the then the 2014-15 audits languished undone.
In December 2014, the city brought in Scott Williams, who had been the lead financial adviser for the Regional Governmental Services Authority in Napa and the finance director in Sonoma. Straightaway, Williams set to work on a financial discipline plan he calculated would tighten the city’s belt, reduce operating costs and create a modest savings in municipal budgetary operations so that a modicum of revenue could be diverted to making at least token payments to the city’s creditors who had been stiffed for so long. It was also expected that Williams would usher the auditing firm of Macias, Gini & O’Connell toward completing the several ongoing and overdue audits from previous years, as the data in those audits was a necessary component of the city’s bankruptcy exit strategy.
In March 2015 it was reported that the production of the audits was severely behind schedule. In a rather feeble stab at creating accountability over the unfolding debacle, the city fired Williams, who had been in place for just three months.
McKay blamed – some said scapegoated – Williams for the delay in the delivery of the audits. McKay indicated that Williams had somehow obstructed the delivery of the information the auditing firm needed to go over to make its report.
But Williams’ departure did nothing to ameliorate Macias, Gini & O’Connell’s failure to perform. Indeed, when the city submitted its tentative draft of its bankruptcy exit game plan – also known as a “plan of adjustment – to Federal Bankruptcy Judge Meredith Jury on May 30, 2015, those audits were not among the back-up material provided. Earlier this year, the city entered into its third arrangement within three years with a third auditing firm, the Pun Group, LLP, to complete that auditing work. It all came together last month, and city officials then collated everything and delivered – just two hours before the March 30 midnight deadline Judge Jury had imposed on the city March 30 – the ultimate plan of adjustment and attendant disclosure and noticing statements intended as the blueprint for the city’s alleviation of a major portion of its debt and other ongoing financial obligations. The plan of adjustment is intended to achieve a rough equivalency between the city’s income and expenditures so that it can make its exodus from bankruptcy.
McKay then abruptly announced her departure on March 31, leaving the same day.
Mason’s arrival comes just as San Bernardino is turning the page on Chapter 9, leaving him untainted by circumstances that undid a host of previous management and finance officials.
Mason, 50, is not a stranger to financial challenges in a municipal setting. He arrived in Riverside as a fresh-faced 29-year-old in 1994, and took on the assignment of city controller. Over the next sixteen years, he was buffeted by his share of exacting circumstances, which were topped with the sharp economic downturn that hit the nation, state and region in 2007 and persisted for five years, resulting in dwindling revenue to all governmental entities. In 2010, he stepped up to become finance director. Riverside, like San Bernardino is faced with a financial deficit, though not to the extent San Bernardino suffered prior to its Chapter 9 filing. For the fiscal year to end on June 30, Riverside is wrestling with an approximate $8 million gap between money coming in and expenditures.

The U.S. Department of the Interior has given go-ahead to the Soda Mountain Solar Project some six miles southwest of Baker, with Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management Janice Schneider signing a record of decision with regard to the project on March 28.
The 287 megawatt facility is to be constructed on 1,767 acres of public land, which is 790 acres fewer than the 2,557-acre footprint originally proposed.
The project applicant is an entity known as Soda Mountain Solar LLC, a corporate affiliate of the Bechtel Corporation, which two generations ago was headed by former Atomic Energy Commission Chairman and former CIA Director John McCone. Under the National Environmental Protection Act, the company sought a right-of-way grant from the Bureau of Land Management for approximately 4,179 acres. Within those 4,179 acres, according to the application, construction and operation would have covered approximately 2,557 acres.
Following final engineering and micro-siting of the project, a project evaluation determined that there would be areas within the originally proposed project footprint that would remain undisturbed and not within fenced areas to be included in the right-of-way grant. In addition to the right-of-way grant, a land use plan amendment was also required to identify the site in the California Desert Conservation Area Plan of 1980. Under the dual restrictions outlined in the California Desert Conservation Area Plan and the National Environmental Protection Act, further reductions in the scope of the project were made.
These changes resulted in the 358-megawatt output originally envisaged in the project being downscaled to 287 megawatts and the project size be lessened to 1,767 acres.
The applicant proposed to construct and operate several groundwater wells and submitted a well construction permit application to the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Division.
The application and approval process has proceeded for two years, as the application with the Department of the Interior triggered objections from a multitude of parties, including some environmentalists, desert recreation and off-road enthusiasts, national park users, scientists, former Interior Department employees and local land and business owners. In addition, the National Park Service urged denial of the project. Collectively, they petitioned the Interior Department a year ago to designate the Soda Mountains an area of critical environmental concern, a categorization that would have prevented the project from proceeding.
Soda Mountain Solar is widely regarded as the most controversial renewable energy proposal in the region. Opponents say it will industrialize important habitat for bighorn sheep and other wildlife, less than half a mile from the Mojave National Preserve.
Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of National Parks Conservation Association, summarized the opponents’ objections. Pierno called the approval “an incredibly disappointing move.” She characterized the Soda Mountain Solar facility as a “harmful renewable energy project that is devoid of public support” which upon completion will inhibit national park wildlife from migrating and adapting to a changing climate. The approval of Soda Mountain Solar is a stark contradiction by the Obama Administration,” she said, which runs counter to an earlier Obama Administration move that “designated national monuments in the California desert to protect and connect important landscapes.” The project’s approval, she said, fails to abide by the Interior Department’s pledge to balance energy development with the protection of special places. We will continue to fight this decision and work to protect this pristine, beautiful, wildlife-rich landscape.”
A Bureau of Land Management document, however, propounded that the project fulfilled ecological goals.
“The Bureau of Land Management’s purpose and need for the project is to respond to the applicant’s application under
Title V of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act for a right-of-way grant to construct, operate, maintain, and commission a solar photovoltaic facility on public lands in compliance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act Bureau of Land Management regulations, and other applicable federal laws. In accordance with Section 103(c) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 USC §1702(a)), public lands are to be managed for multiple uses that take into account the long-term needs of future generations for renewable and non-renewable resources. The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to grant rights-of-way on public lands for systems of generation, transmission, and distribution of electric energy (43 USC §1761(a)(4)).”
Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management Janice Schneider emphasized that the project will go a good distance toward meeting President Obama’s Climate Action Plan goal of 20,000 megawatts (MW) of power derived from renewable energy projects on public lands by 2020, while avoiding destruction of hitherto undisturbed land. The Soda Mountain Solar Project is to be located in an area of disturbed lands that include Interstate 15 and an active utility corridor for oil and gas pipelines, electricity transmission and communication lines and facilities. Adjacent to the site is the corridor for the approved and yet to be constructed high speed rail route between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. The facility is also proximate to the Rasor Off Highway Vehicle Area.
“Today’s approval is the result of a comprehensive, multi-year environmental review and extensive consultation process, including scientific analysis and meaningful mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to resources,” said Schneider. “The rigorous standards of outreach, analysis and mitigation for the project reflect this administration’s commitment to facilitate responsible clean energy development in the right places and in the right ways.”
Since 2009, the Department of the Interior has permitted 58 utility-scale renewable energy projects on the nation’s public lands, including 35 solar, 11 wind and 12 geothermal utility-scale renewable energy projects and associated transmission infrastructure. Together, these 58 projects could support nearly 15,500 MWs of renewable energy capacity, enough to power about five million homes and representing $40 billion in potential private capital investments.
“Soda Mountain is another step forward toward diversifying our nation’s energy portfolio and meeting the State of California’s growing demand for renewable energy,” said Bureau of Land Management Director Neil Kornze. “The project is consistent with the BLM’s landscape approach for the California desert, which supports careful development of renewable energy where it makes sense while protecting the resources and places that make the desert special.”

Albert Glenn Kendall was born on April 2, 1849 in Janesville, Rock County Wisconsin, the son of William Kendall, who was born in 1811, and Matilda Bickford Kendall, born in 1818, both of whom were natives of Newfane, Windham County, Vermont. William Kendall moved to Wisconsin and was a farmer.
William Kendall died in 1853, leaving Albert Glenn fatherless at the age of four. His mother was not able to handle all eight of their children alone and so they were sent to live in the care of friends and relatives on the East Coast. When Albert was fourteen, he ran away from his foster home.
Life was very difficult for Albert without relatives or friends to aid him. He worked on farms during the spring and summer and attended school in the winter. At age 14 he left Vermont, promising his future wife, Frances “Fannie” Rosina Morse, that he would come back and marry her, which he did, fourteen years later.
Kendall moved to Omaha, Nebraska when he was 18 and worked in a dry goods store. The owner sold out his entire stock in the store, trading it for cattle which he put on the range. Kendall joined the owner in cattle ranching, herding cattle and assisting in the butchering of the animals. Kendall then went to work as a train boy on the railroad. In 1871, he went with his brother to the Loup River, where he homesteaded 1,000 acres.
In 1873, he was elected county clerk of Howard County, holding that office until 1880. In 1875 he was voted a member to the state’s constitutional convention, representing both Howard and Merrick counties.
In 1877 he returned briefly to Vermont to marry Frances R. Morse, the daughter of Samuel Morse of South Nefane, Vermont. They had three daughters: Beulah, who became the wife of S. G. Reed of Nehalem Oregon; Marian E., later the wife of George D. Brackett, of Marysville in Northern California; and Georgiana V., the wife of Clinton E. Miller of Los Angeles.
In 1880, he was elected the commissioner of public lands and buildings for the state of Nebraska, a position he left in 1885 to become the cashier of the St. Paul National Bank. In the fall of 1887 he resigned that position and went to California, locating in Ontario.
Kendall’s achievements in Nebraska were followed by greater ones in California.
In Ontario, he purchased a ten-acre orange grove and, according to accounts, enjoyed life. In 1891, he was elected tax collector of the county, then reelected and was afterward county assessor for eight years.
Kendall helped organize the San Bernardino County Savings Bank in 1903 and was the cashier and active manager for several years.
While serving as county assessor, Kendall had relocated to the city of San Bernardino. As a city resident, he was not only a member of the board but president of the so-called “fifteen freeholders of the City of San Bernardino” elected at a special election held in San Bernardino on July 30, 1904, to prepare and propose a charter for the city, which had previously incorporated in 1869. Kendall was thus a primary framer of the system of governance in use in San Bernardino today.
Around the same time he was active in the writing of the San Bernardino municipal charter, what is referred to as the Great Tariff Fight began in Congress, and the newly formed California Citrus Protective League was formed to protect the interests of California growers. Kendall was elected as secretary/manager of the California Citrus Protective League and traveled to Washington D.C. to lobby for the tariff. Of his exceptional gifts and his work in the capacity of representing the citrus interests much was said and much was printed, all of a most commendatory and appreciative strain. His efforts served to benefit the California citrus industry for decades.
Kendall was subsequently elected president of the Farmer’s Exchange Bank and of the Savings Bank of San Bernardino and occupied these positions for eight years, at which point he resigned to become the chairman of the board of directors of the Farmers Exchange National Bank.
In 1918, Mark B. Shaw resigned less than halfway into his term as Fifth District Supervisor and Kendall was appointed to fill out the remainder of that unexpired term. Kendall was elected, without opposition, in the fall of 1920, and succeeded J.B. Glover as chairman of the board.
As chairman of the board of supervisors, Kendall used his business training to take on the responsibility of directing the operation of the country’s largest county. It is said that his “knowledge of the functions of all of the county’s departments amazed his associates” and “It would be difficult to name a more popular and prominent man in the county than Albert Glenn Kendall in all circles – official, political, professional, fraternal or social.”
The book “San Bernardino County Supervisors 1855-2006” says of Kendall “He was a real Californian, loving his city, county and state with quiet devotion but never overlooking an opportunity to further the interests of one and all.”
In 1919 Kendall built a quaint cabin in Fawnskin at 1161 Brookside Lane in the San Bernardino Mountains. He sought to promote the new town of Fawnskin even though he did not have much leisure time.
Kendall was a member of San Bernardino Lodge No. 248 A.F and A.M.; of Keystone Chapter No. 56, R.A.M.; of St. Bernard Commandery No. 23, of which he was eminent commander for two terms; and a member of Al Malaikah Temple, A.A.O.N.M.S. His other fraternal affiliation was as a member San Bernardino Lodge No. 836, B.P.O.E. He was a Republican. During World War I, which was referred to as the Great War at the time, he was very active, working unceasingly as chairman of the Liberty Loan Committee, which accomplished much during the war. He was a president of the National Orange Show.
In May 1926 he took ill. He died at the Loma Linda Hospital on June 1, 1926.

Justicia californica is a species of flowering shrub native to the deserts of southern California, Arizona, and northern Mexico. Its common names include chuparosa (or chiparosa, both colloquial Spanish terms for “hummingbird”), hummingbird bush, and beloperone.
It is one of the northernmost distributed species of the mostly tropical genus Justicia.This plant has over 400 cousins that are brightly blooming shrubs occurring in the tropics and subtropics, but the Justicia californica desert scrub in the only one growing wild in the temperate United States.
The Chuparosa is a low bush which grows in dry, hot regions in the sand or rocky terrain of the desert floor. For a short time it bears succulent leaves. It loses its leaves and then produces plentiful tubular flowers, usually in shades of bright to deep red, or sometimes yellow. Each long flower has a wide lower lip that falls open to reveal the inside of the blossom. Hummingbirds visit the bush to feed on the nectar. Other birds eat the sugar-rich flower centers. This plant is sometimes cultivated as a landscape ornamental in desert regions for its bright flowers and to attract birds.
Frost-sensitive, these plants grow in sandy desert washes and on rocky slopes.
These plants bloom in the early spring through early summer.
Characterized as a downy shrub that will reach a height of between two to four feet and a width of four feet, it bears arching flower pendants to 3 or 4 inches long.

By Grace Bernal

Opening Day at Dodger Stadium happened this April 12^th, and everyone swarmed into Los Angeles to catch a glimpse of the game in action.  Fashion however, is exhilarating to watch because the new generation is always surprising the streets as they take on new looks. Guys are expressing themselves wearing trousers and sneakers. Spring fashion is taking  a new twist. Women are exploring with classic black and white pieces and this brings fashion to a  great balance. The trousers are looking black on one leg, and white on the other, and women aren’t afraid to wear them to the office either. The appearance of silver is looking sparkly, too.  Spring in the  21sat century has a lot to offer. Everything happening in fashion with all the  young people who have the courage to experiment with their ideas of creative dressing. Have fun exploring the different looks of spring and enjoy the ball game if you’re into that!

“Style is an expression of individualism mixed with charisma. Fashion is something that comes after style.” -John Fairchild