(November 18) RIVERSIDE—U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Meredith Jury, who is overseeing the city of San Bernardino’s Chapter 9 bankruptcy filing, on November 15 rejected a request by the city’s largest creditor to challenge the city’s bankruptcy eligibility at the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
That creditor, the California Public Employees Retirement System, has disputed San Bernardino’s contention that it is in dire fiscal straits since shortly after the municipality’s filing of its August 2, 2012 bankruptcy petition. San Bernardino, which currently has a $25 million annual obligation to the retirement system, withheld more than $14 million  in pension fund payment from July 2012 until July of this year. The city wants to continue to make partial payments until such time as it gets back on its feet financially.
In responses to the city’s filings, the retirement system has said that San Bernardino possesses untapped assets that could be liquidated and is simply skipping out on its financial responsibility. It has said San Bernardino is not eligible for bankruptcy.
Jury has consistently ruled that San Bernardino is as insolvent as it claims. In August, she ruled that the city’s bankruptcy should be granted pursuant to a pendency plan by which the city continues to pay its employees and other expenses critical to its day-to-day operations but services its other debts on the basis of the limited financial means available to it.
In dissenting from Jury’s rulings, the California Public Employees Retirement System, known by its acronym CalPERS, has maintained that it has special status among the city’s creditors and that the city cannot be excused from making good on its obligations to the pension fund. CalPERS maintains that it is a creature of the state government, and as such merits a first place in line among those to whom the city is in arrears. Jury has rejected those arguments. In its dissent CalPERS requested leave to appeal. San Bernardino responded by arguing that remaining in bankruptcy court before Jury is the appropriate venue for coming to terms with all of its creditors, including CalPERs, in accordance with a still confidential and tentative plan for structured repayments which the city council approved in October. The plan is now subject to court-supervised mediation and the city claims a CalPERS’ appeal at this point is counterproductive to the mediation process.
Jury found that bringing the 9th Circuit into the matter would be “duplicative and not an efficient use of judicial resources.”
Unlike San Bernardino, two other large California cities that have filed for bankruptcy protection – Vallejo and Stockton – are continuing to make payments to CalPERS. In San Bernardino, which is now staggering under the end result of extremely generous salary and benefit packages granted to city employees as the result of aggressive public employee union pressuring of the city’s elected leaders, city officials are now exploring whether the city can use bankruptcy to reduce its pension obligations.
CalPERS, which perceives that San Bernardino prevailing in that effort would set a precedent that would be applicable up and down the state and compromise its ability to continue to deliver retirement benefits to all of its members, is digging in for a battle royal.  Consequently, CalPERS did not accept Jury’s ruling as the final say in the matter and has taken its request to a U.S. District Court judge.

(November 18) Four months after it was ordered by the California Public Utilities Commission to do so, Southern California Edison has completed the dismantling of the 197-foot high transmission towers the utility giant had located along a 3.5 mile span of Chino Hills  as part of the so-called Tehachapi Line.
Utilizing two cranes, including one with a lifting capacity of 250 tons, Edison crews cut the tubular poles into sections and then lowered them to the ground. The crews began removing the poles on September 25. The last of the structures yet standing, at the hill near Peyton and Morningfield drives, was removed on November 9.
In 2009, the California Public Utilities Commission, over the city of Chino Hills’ protest, granted Southern California Edison clearance to erect a series of 197-foot high power transmission towers through the heart of 44.7-square mile Chino Hills along a long-existing power corridor easement owned by the utility.
Fearing a host of problems from the imposition of the towers, including significant negative impacts on property values in the city, the Chino Hills City Council authorized the expenditure of over $2.3 million to employ attorneys and make other efforts to contest the Public Utility Commission’s action, including a suit against Southern California Edison alleging the company had “overburdened” the power line easements. That legal effort failed when West Valley Superior Court Judge Keith D. Davis ruled the California Public Utilities Commission has exclusive jurisdiction regarding the route used by Edison.  Davis’s ruling was upheld when Chino Hills appealed it to the 4th District Court of Appeal.
In 2011, Edison erected 18 of the towers within Chino Hills within a portion of its 150-foot wide right-of-way, which runs for 5.8 miles from Tonner Canyon to the Riverside County line, before a city appeal to the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and Public Utilities Commission Chairman Michael Peevey in particular succeeded in a temporary halt to the towers’ construction being granted in November 2011 while a potential undergrounding alternative was explored.
Ultimately, in July, the California Public Utilities Commission board of directors voted 3-2 to reverse its 2009 decision and directed Southern California Edison to underground the lines, which are intended to link what is planned as the world’s largest windfarm consisting of hundreds of electricity-producing windmills in Kern County to the Los Angeles Metropolitan basin.
According to Edison, the dismantling of the towers cost nearly $4 million. Edison is now taking bids on undergrounding the project through a 3.5 mile portion of the city. The anticipated cost for that is $224 million to $300 million. The remaining 1.5 mile stretch of the Tehachapi Line through Chino Hills in the area known as Oak Tree Downs will remain above ground.

(November 21) REDLANDS—For thirteen years, ending a little less than a year ago, Joe Baca was a member of Congress, with stature as one of the senior members of a growing number of Hispanic Democrats in the House of Representatives, exemplifying a key component of the party and its future. This month, in seeming concert, Democratic Party heavyweights, local and national, were endeavoring to disenfranchise him entirely, and neuter him as any sort of political force.
Baca, who since 1999 had represented California in the Washington D.C.’s lower house in the heavily Democratic-leaning  42nd and 43rd Congressional districts with solid Democratic support, in 2012 found himself most logically ushered into the newly drawn 31st Congressional District as a result of the reapportionment following the 2010 Census. The 31st was a Democratic-leaning district as well, but the Democratic-registration advantage there was only seven percent over the Republicans. Incumbent Congressman Gary Miller, whose 42nd district in northeast Orange, southeast Los Angeles and southwest San Bernardino counties had likewise been reapportioned out from underneath him, elected against running against fellow Republican Ed Royce in the newly-draw 39th District and instead declared his intention of wrestling Baca for the voters’ nod in the newly drawn 31st District.
Members of Congress do not need to live within the geographical boundaries of the district they represent, and merely need to live within the state where the district in which they hold office is located.
Baca, perhaps fearing Miller’s prodigious fundraising ability, opted to run in the neighboring 35th Congressional District, which was even more heavily laden with Democrat voters. And, indeed, Baca appeared to be a shoo-in in the 35th, where he cruised to a relatively convincing victory in the June 2012 primary, capturing 12,619 votes or 47.17 percent to 9,078 or 33.93 percent that went to then-state senator Gloria Negrete-McCleod, another Democrat, and  5,058 votes or 18.9 percent, that went to Anthony Vieyra, a Green Party Candidate.
In 2012, California had switched to an open primary system, which ended sequestered party ballots and effectively ended the tradition of guaranteeing that a Democrat would face a Republican in the November general election. Instead, the open primary led to setting up a November race between the two highest vote-getters in June, regardless of party affiliation. Thus, a confident Baca last fall squared off against Negrete-McLeod. On the strength of his primary showing, his incumbency, his perceived fundraising advantage, his superior name recognition, and his unwillingness to engage in a bare-knuckle political slugfest against a woman who was like him Democrat and Hispanic, Baca waged little more than a minimalist campaign, fully anticipating he would easily pick up at least three percent of the vote that had gone to Vieyra in the primary campaign to put him over the top.
In the final weeks before the general election on November 6, however, Negrete-McLeod’s campaign was infused with $3.8 million in donations from a political action committee controlled by Republican New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, which paid for a $2.3 million television advertising blitz during the last week of the campaign. Caught flatfooted and unable to respond in kind to both a bevy of negative hit pieces that attacked him on his record and upbeat mailers that lionized Negrete-McLeod for her service in the California legislature, Baca saw the election slip away, with Negrete-McLeod capturing 61,065 votes or 54.35 percent to his 51,281 votes or 45.65 percent.
Meanwhile, over in the 31st District, which encompasses parts of Upland and Rancho Cucamonga, and stretches eastward across San Bernardino County through a large portion of Fontana, Rialto, Colton, San Bernardino and Redlands, four Democrats – Pete Aguilar, Justin Kim, Rita Ramirez-Dean, and Renea Wickman sought election last year, as did Miller. In addition, another Republican, Bob Dutton, joined the fray in the 2012 primary. Despite the seven percent Democratic voter registration advantage in the 31st, simple mathematics hurt the Democrats as their vote was divided four ways, while the Republican vote was split two ways. Dutton and Miller proved to be the two top vote-getters and under California’s open primary arrangement, the November general election came down to a race between Republicans Miller and Dutton. Miller prevailed in that race.
Now 66, Baca is unwilling to hang up his political spikes and has given every indication he intends to make a comeback by challenging Miller next year. Despite the consideration that he shied away from battling it out with Miller last year, his candidacy has some viability.
In addition to the name recognition Baca brings to the political table, he possesses, as a former member of Congress, indirect and residual political clout, together with an insider’s knowledge of issues and alliances, which he is working assiduously to bring to bear.  In this way, Baca can count on big money backing from national and even international players. An example of this is his recent move to stand up for the Keystone XL Pipeline, which was originally undertaken by one of Baca’s former political supporters, ConocoPhillips, in conjunction with TransCanada. The first two of the four phases of the pipeline system to transport oil sands bitumen from Canada and  Bakken synthetic crude oil and light crude oil produced from the Williston Basin, known as the Bakken region, in Montana and North Dakota  primarily to refineries on the Gulf Coast have been completed. ConocoPhillips at this point has sold its interest in the undertaking to TransCanada, which is now investing heavily in the effort to assure the completion of the last two phases of the project, involving the expansion of refining and processing capability on the Gulf Coast and a controversial pipeline to originate at Hardisty in Alberta, Canada and extend 1,179 miles to Steele City, Nebraska.
Environmentalists are opposed to the project. Baca, however, has given TransCanada his assurance he will support the project on the grounds that it represents an advance toward North American energy independence as well as economic rejuvenation. In this way, he has taken a crucial step toward ensuring that he will receive substantial assistance from TransCanada, its investors, lobbyists and the political action committees TransCanada has endowed.
TransCanada is just one of the big name, big money players Baca is counting on to boost his electoral effort.
Whatever his overall chances, the heart of the Democratic Party is not behind Baca. Rather, it has locked onto Aguilar, the current mayor in the city of Redlands, as its best hope to reclaim primacy in the 31st Congressional District.
With no little justification, the Democrats consider the 31st District to be one that should naturally fall to them. Of the district’s registered voters, 127,690 or 41 percent, are affiliated with the Democratic Party.  Registered Republicans in the district number 104,938, or 33.7 percent. Independent political appraisers see the 31st as a Democratic asset as well.
Even before Miller outpolled Dutton in November 2012, Democratic strategists were conferring about what steps could be taken to ensure that Democratic disarray in 2014 does not perpetuate Miller’s incumbency beyond the current Congress. In short order, a game plan was hatched by which Aguilar, who had polled the most votes among the four Democrats in the 2012 primary, was chosen as the logical party standard bearer. By promoting Aguilar early, engaging in brisk fundraising on his behalf and warding off any other Democrats so a concentrated party electoral effort to advance Aguilar can be mounted, they believe Aguilar can beat Miller in a toe-to-toe slugfest a year from now, despite Miller’s incumbency and formidable fundraising capability.
Relatively early on, well-connected Democratic-functionaries acted to boost Aguilar.  In May, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee selected Aguilar as one of five candidates nationwide to be included in its Jumpstart Program, which is intended to assist early-emerging Democrats seeking to unseat incumbent Republicans deemed to be vulnerable.
Party leaders convinced California’s two senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, to endorse Aguilar. Party donors, inside and outside California, were encouraged to provide him with campaign cash, and money started pouring into Aguilar’s political war chest. More attention was drawn to him, ensuring even more contributions, when the Washington-based news organization, Politico, in July named Aguilar one of “50 Politicos to watch in 2013.”
Despite all that, Baca remains in place as a candidate. Not only that, two other Democrats have declared their candidacies in the 31st next year and they are further compromising any chance for party unison heading into the June primary. Eloise Gomez Reyes, an attorney and longtime Democratic activist, and Danny Tillman, a school board member from San Bernardino and a one-time close associate of former California Assemblyman Jerry Eaves, don’t appear to be responding to their party’s signals to get out of the race. While neither can boast anything approaching the funding at the beck of Miller, Aguilar or Baca, both seem to genuinely believe they have sufficient charisma, existing support, and name recognition to get one of the two top spots in the primary and then follow-up to prevail in November 2014.
This leaves Aguilar with a double-dilemma: to ensure at least a second-place showing in June, he will need to go on the attack against one or all of his Democratic rivals, a move he would rather not make. Moreover, to engage in such attacks, he will need to squander money he would rather retain for the big fight against Miller in the general election.
Clearly, Aguilar, who has already made a good impression on high ranking members of his party, needs to do something to distinguish himself from the pack of Democratic candidates in the minds of those whose decision will ultimately count next year, i.e., the voters in the 31st District. Despite the money he is raising and despite the endorsements he is accruing, two recent polls show that among the 31st District voters, Miller and Baca have the most name recognition, the highest positive name identification totals and that Miller and Baca are ahead of the other three candidates in the race.
Aguilar has yet to undertake a campaign against Baca in earnest, though such an effort will be very likely if the status quo continues, involving, perhaps, unprecedented early mailers and advertising to get the Aguilar campaign off the dime and into gear. At present, a fierce behind-the-scenes battle to cut Baca off at the pass is being waged.  One sign of how cutthroat the completion between Aguilar and Baca is finds demonstration in how local Democratic clubs have been pressured by party higher-ups to suspend party and club rules to make early endorsements of Aguilar.
In September, in a rare if not unprecedented move, the Redlands Area Democratic Club endorsed Aguilar. Normally, party clubs hold off on making endorsements until after, in some cases  well after, the filing deadline for a particular office is closed, giving all potential candidates an opportunity to make the case for their candidacy. The Redlands Area Democratic Club’s action defied that tradition. In reaction, the Democratic Central Committee adopted new rules and bylaws that called for Democratic clubs holding off until after the final filing date for office to ensure that no candidates are left out of the endorsement evaluation process.
Yet so intense is the pressure to promote Aguilar and thereby foreclose Baca’s candidacy, four more Democratic clubs – the West End Democratic Club, the East Valley Democratic Club, the Helen L. Doherty Democratic Club, the Stonewall Democratic Club – have announced their support for Aguilar, in defiance of the new rule.
“Our members voted unanimously to endorse Pete Aguilar for Congress because of his proven record of delivering results for the citizens of Redlands and his strong commitment to improving the lives of hard-working families throughout San Bernardino County. Pete’s just the leader we need to make sure that Congress is working for us,” the clubs’ leadership announced in a joint communiqué.
Baca said he was disappointed the four clubs’ leadership and members had broken a party charter rule, but that he was confident that among the district’s Democratic voters at large, he retained a commanding lead over Aguilar.
Steve Chapman, the president of the Redlands Area Democratic Club, said Aguilar’s support by a key constituency within the Democratic Party – public employees – distinguished him from the other candidates in the race. “Aguilar’s leadership through difficult financial times and fair treatment of municipal employees has been very impressive,” Chapman said.

(November 18)  Newly installed San Bernardino City Attorney Gary Saenz quickly moved to terminate all nine of his office’s investigators as the first significant act of his term in office.
Saenz was elevated to the city attorney’s post as a consequence of the successful recall effort against his predecessor, Jim Penman, who had served as elected city attorney for nearly 26 years.
Penman was targeted for recall in April by San Bernardino Residents For Responsible Government, a group that sought to remove the mayor, all seven city council members and the city attorney in the wake of the city’s 2012 bankruptcy filing.
Ultimately, the group failed to qualify recall questions against council members Rikke Van Johnson, Fred Shorett, Virginia Marquez, Chas Kelley, Robert Jenkins and it dropped the recall attempt against mayor Patrick Morris after Morris opted not to run for reelection in November. But the group did qualify recall votes against Penman, councilwoman Wendy McCammack and councilman John Valdivia. Valdivia survived the vote but McCammack and Penman did not.
Saenz, who competed as an alternative city attorney candidate against Tim Prince during the November 5 balloting, prevailed in that contest. On November 13, he was sworn into office. The next day, he cashiered all nine of the investigators working for him.
Under Penman, who was first elected in 1987, the investigative arm of his office was expanded dramatically.  Penman maintained that a substantial investigative staff had not been his idea but rather one that was suggested by former city manager Fred Wilson as a way of lessening the burden on police department investigators who were being detailed to look into civil issues and thus were diverted from their province of criminal probes. Whether or not the idea originated with Penman, the city attorney took advantage of the opportunity to draw to himself more power through the acquisition of resources of potential political and authoritative application.
He had recruited investigators almost exclusively from the ranks of retired law enforcement, individuals over the age of 50 who were drawing substantial pensions. To ensure that they did not lose those pensions, they were hired on a part time basis, being paid $32 per hour and working no more than 960 hours per year.
Some of the investigators’ function was legitimate and related to civil issues as well as the city’s  earnest effort to expand the city’s code and civil enforcement processes. Nevertheless, there were accusations that the detectives were also being marshaled as a political hit squad, moving into provinces well beyond their charter, digging up derogatory information pertaining to Penman’s political adversaries and generally abusing their authorty. Indisputably, the investigators’ first loyalties were to their boss and his agenda, professional, political, personal or otherwise.
In time, Penman would acquire a reputation of acting in manner that went beyond his elected authority of city attorney. Instead of merely acting as an advisor on legal matters, he became actively involved in influencing policy decisions or seeking to do so. At city council meetings, he routinely went to the public speaker’s podium to weigh in on matters before the council.
Occasionally, charges that Penman was misusing the investigative staff as well as seeking to expand the city attorney’s authority beyond that conferred upon him by the city charter was made. He was called upon to curtail his office’s investigative activities and reduce the size of his detective unit. He defied those requests, expanding the number of positions over the years, installing retired undersheriff Bob Peppler as the unit supervisor, who until last week oversaw eight investigators. After the economic downturn and dwindling revenues pinched all of the city’s departments and it was suggested that his investigative staff should be subject to the same economies as were imposed elsewhere at City Hall, Penman stubbornly refused to downsize his investigative staff, going so far as saying he would simply balance his budget by decreasing the number of outside lawyers he was using to augment his in-house stable of attorneys to keep his investigative reach intact.
Beneath the surface was tension between the city attorney’s office and the police chief and the upper echelon of the police department over the investigators, borne of the impression that Penman was treading on the turf of the department, although no public airing of the dispute was made.
The perception that Penman was utilizing those investigators as a secret police force and political enforcement squad contributed toward the atmosphere that led to the recall effort against him.
In the run up to the recall vote, Saenz questioned the need for the city attorney’s office to employ investigators at all. He was sworn in as city attorney on November 13. Less than 24 hours later, he terminated Peppler and his eight underlings. Saenz then issued a statement that he considered the unit duplicative and that it interfered, overlapped and was not coordinated with the function of other city departments. He said the city would reap an immediate $250,000 to $300,000 savings as a result of transferring the unit’s activities to the police department, city clerk’s office and code enforcement division.
Despite Saenz’s clear indication during the recall election campaign that he intended to do away with the unit if Penman was recalled and he was selected to succeed him, the investigators talked of being blindsided and caught totally unaware when Saenz acted.
They said that the move was pennywise but pound foolish, given that the code enforcement activity they engaged in and the fine revenue they generated far outran the cost of maintaining the unit.

(November 21)  U.S. District Judge John  Kronstadt on November 14 denied defense motions to dismiss the Securities and Exchange Commission’s charges that the city of Victorville, its airport authority and assistant city manager Keith Metzler defrauded investors with a 2008 municipal bond offering.
On April 29 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a suit against Victorville, the Southern California Logistics Airport Authority  and Metzler, who in addition to his role as assistant city manager is also the executive director of the airport authority. In its complaint, the SEC alleges those entities made misrepresentations to the purchasers of bonds, the proceeds from which were intended to assist in the development of Southern California Logistics Airport.
The airport authority was formed by the city of Victorville to facilitate the conversion of the former George Air Force Base, which was shuttered by the Department of Defense in 1992, into a civilian airport. The Southern California Logistics Airport Authority, which has as its board of directors all five members of the Victorville City Council, issued bonds which were sold to investors to generate revenue to be used in making the base’s civilian use conversion.
Fundamental to the SEC complaint is the allegation that the defendants made misrepresentations with regard to the value of four airport hangars that Victorville referenced in its official statement for an April 2008 bond offering. The value of all four hangars was listed at $65 million. The county assessor later valued the hangars at $27.7 million. The SEC alleges that the authority used the inflated estimated values to mislead bond investors.
Two separate responses to the SEC complaint  were filed on August 30, one from attorneys with the law firm of Arent Fox, which represents Victorville and the airport authority and another from the law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, representing Metzler. Those responses augmented a joint motion filed by Arent Fox and Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe June 12 to dismiss the claims against their defendants.
Also charged in the SEC’s April complaint were  Kinsell, Newcomb & DeDios Inc., the underwriter for the bond offerings, that company’s owner, Jeffrey Kinsell, and Kinsell, Newcomb and DeDios investment banker Janees Williams.
The SEC complaint consists of nine claims for relief and one prayer for disgorgement. The authority is named in the first two claims for relief. Kinsell, Newcomb and DeDios [KND] is named in the third, fourth and eighth claims for relief. KND and Jeffrey Kinsell are named in the fifth and sixth claims for relief. Victorville, Jeffrey Kinsell, Williams and Metzler are named in the seventh claim for relief.  Jeffrey Kinsell and Williams are named in the ninth claim for relief.
In the prayer for disgorgement, which is a request for restitution of ill-gotten profits from security law violators, all the parties are named.
The responses filed August 30 pertain only to the city, the airport authority and Metzler. Lawyers for those defendants and the SEC presented verbal arguments to Kronstadt at a hearing October 28.
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe maintain Metzler should not have been included in the case in that he twice provided correct information to KND prior to the bond sale about the true value of the hangars and that responsibility for any misrepresentations with regard to the value of the assets securing the bonds fell to the bond underwriters.
Arent Fox maintains that even if the hangar valuations were overstated, they were not material misrepresentations by which the financing of the bonds in terms of the city’s and airport authority’s ability to continue to make payments to the bondholders was threatened. At no time did the actual debt service ratio between the bonds and the assets securing them fall below the SEC’s own standard of 1.25, Arent Fox maintains, exonerating the city and the airport authority.
Kronstadt on November 14 ruled that the combined defenses’ overall rationale for dismissing the case against the three defendants was “unpersuasive,” and that the bulk of the matter should go forward. The judge did, however, make a determination that the SEC has not yet presented any convincing evidence to show the defendants improperly gained from their alleged misconduct, which is the basis of the SEC’s request for disgorgement. “Given that the SEC has engaged in a three year investigation into this matter, its decision to present no allegations support[ing] of the request for disgorgement is significant and telling,” Kronstadt found in dismissing that portion of the case against Victorville, the authority and Metzler.
Trial on the case will not begin until late 2014 or late winter 2015.

(November 21)  APPLE VALLEY—The Apple Valley Town Council on November 12 awarded a construction contract on the Yucca Loma Bridge project, providing local residents and those traversing the area with another means of crossing the Mojave River, providing a new route from Apple Valley to Spring Valley Lake and Victorville.
Based upon town staff’s recommendation, the council accepted a bid of $37,265,833.50 from  Security Paving Company, Inc.
In April of 2012, the Town of Apple Valley entered into a construction funding
agreement with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, by which the authority agreed to be responsible for 45% of the costs for constructing the Yucca Loma Bridge over the Mojave River. The town agreed to be responsible for the remaining 55% of the construction costs.
In May of 2013, the Town of Apple Valley entered into an agreement with the San
Bernardino County Transportation Authority and the county of San Bernardino, by which the authority agreed to be responsible for 82.2% of the Yates Road improvements construction costs and the county agreed to be responsible for the remaining 17.8% of the construction costs. The town agreed to serve as the lead agency in the construction of the project, in conjunction with the Yucca Loma Bridge construction, and to be responsible for 0% of the construction costs. As lead agency, the town agreed to advertise, award, administer and initially fund the construction activities.
Plans and specifications for the Yucca Loma Bridge over the Mojave River and the Yates Road improvements project were finalized on August 13, 2013.
On August 22, 2013, the town’s engineering department issued a notice inviting sealed bids. The town clerk’s office received 10 sealed bids in response to the notice. The project’s bid opening was held on October 10, 2013, at the town council chambers. Security Paving Company’s bid of $37,265,833.50 was followed by M.C.M. Construction, Inc.’s bid of  $37,777,777. Skanska USA bid $38,437,405.00. Riverside Construction Company offered to do the job for $38.712,915. OHL USA, Inc. bid $39,141,674, followed by Sundt’s bid of $39,150,219, and then one by Steve P. Rados, Inc. for $40,323,792.50. Sema Construction bid $41,197,275.30. C.C.Meyrs, Inc. bid $42,500,000. Golden State Bridge, Inc. was the high bidder at $43,156,473.27
Each of the opened bids was later reviewed and analyzed by the engineering department for compliance with the requirements outlined in the notice. The engineering department staff concluded that all 10 submitted bids were complete and that Security Paving Company, Inc., is, in fact, the lowest responsible and responsive bidder.
Work will consist of construction of the new Yucca Loma Bridge over the Mojave River, oadway and drainage improvements on Yucca Loma Road near Kasanka Trail,
grading, approach roadway and roadway widening to the west at Yates Road from the western approach to the Mojave Narrows Regional Park entrance, new sound walls along Yates Road, a new project restoration area on the north side of Yates Road, and a new outfall and interim regional drainage facility from Yucca Loma Road at Kasanka
Trail to the Mojave River, as indicated on the plans and specifications in city documents. The project will require minor traffic control for equipment access and construction of the project by the contractor and subcontractors as shown within the contract documents.
Coordination and compliance is also required by the contractor with the various regulatory agencies including, but not limited to, Army Corps of Engineers, Lahotan
Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Fish and Wildlife and San Bernardino County Flood Control District.
Widening and utility improvements on Yates Road are also included in the project.

This Thanksgiving, the San Bernardino Corps of the Salvation Army will once again provide Thanksgiving dinner to help needy families of the Inland Valley.
The San Bernardino Corps will serve dinner from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Thanksgiving Day, Thursday, Nov. 28 at its Corps headquarters building on 746 West Fifth St.
“Times are really tough for everyone, especially at this time of year when people really need an extra hand to get them through the holiday season,” said Major Daniel Henderson, San Bernardino Corps officer. “We have a wonderful Thanksgiving dinner planned, complete with turkey, potatoes, gravy, stuffing, vegetables and pie, and all are welcome to join us.”
The annual Thanksgiving meal brings in hundreds of families, single mothers with children and individuals who do not have the means to provide themselves a Thanksgiving dinner. People come from throughout the Inland Valley for this Thanksgiving dinner, which often serves close to 300 people each year.
The hungry families are joined by hundreds of volunteers who help prepare the food and serve meals to the families. Along with asking volunteers to help serve food, the Salvation Army is encouraging people to donate turkeys or hams, side dishes and other food by calling (909) 888-1336.
“An effort of this size is not a one person show,” said Major Henderson. “Volunteers are needed to help prepare and serve the food along with decorating the facility. It truly is a community effort in making this event a success. Thanksgiving should be a special day for everyone, not just for those who can afford it.”
For more information about this Thanksgiving dinner, donations or volunteering for The Salvation Army San Bernardino Corps, call (909) 888-1336.
Other Salvation Army Corps in the Inland Valley are also planning Thanksgiving dinners. Dates, times and locations are as follows:
Salvation Army Riverside 3695 1st St., Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 784-4490    Nov. 27    11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Salvation Army Redlands 838 Alta St., Redlands, CA 92374 (909) 792-6868    Nov. 28    1:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Salvation Army Moreno Valley
14075 Frederick St.,
Moreno Valley, CA 92553    (951) 653-9131
Nov. 28 11:00 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Salvation Army Ontario  1412 South Euclid Ave., Ontario, CA 91762    (909) 986-6748    Nov. 28 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Salvation Army Victor Valley 14585 La Paz Drive, Victorville, CA 92395    (760) 245-2545    Nov. 28    11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Salvation Army Victor Valley/James A. Woody Community Center 13467 Navajo Road, Apple Valley, CA 92308    (760) 240-7880 Nov. 28    11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Salvation Army Corps Hemet/Valle Vista Assembly of God 45252 E. Florida Ave., Hemet, CA 92544    (951) 791-9495    Nov. 28    11:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m.
The Salvation Army San Bernardino Corps  may be able to provide emergency services including food; lodging for homeless or displaced families; clothing and furniture; assistance with rent or mortgage and transportation when funds are available. The Salvation Army Team Emergency Radio Network (SATERN) assists rescue workers and evacuees in such disasters as fires.
The Salvation Army is an evangelical part of the Universal Christian Church, and also offers evangelical programs for boys, girls and adults. One of the largest charitable and international service organizations in the world, The Salvation Army has been in existence since 1865 and in San Bernardino since 1887, supporting those in need without discrimination.
The San Bernardino Corps of The Salvation Army serves Bloomington, Colton, Grand Terrace, Highland, Rialto, and San Bernardino. Donations may always be made online at www.salvationarmyusa.org or by calling 1-(800)-SAL-ARMY.  The local number is (909) 888-1336.

By clicking on the following portal, you can access and download a copy of the November 15 Sentinel

Sentinel 11-15-13

(November 15)  Acquanetta Warren this week found herself immersed in another conflict-of-interest controversy rising out of her dual roles as an elected municipal official and status as a municipal employee.
Previously the conflict questions that beset Warren pertained to her role as assistant public works director with the city of Upland brought on by her receipt of money as a political candidate based in Fontana. In the most recent case, the conflict impinges upon her role as Fontana mayor, which is complicated by her status as a member of a public employee union, an entity that has been and continues to be impacted by her votes on the city council, including ones that have been secretly cast in closed-door meetings beyond the scrutiny of the public.
Warren found herself in the eye of a political storm as a result of her recommendation, provided at the September 30 meeting of the Upland  Finance and Economic Development Committee, that the city council approve a franchise contract extension for Burrtec Waste Industries, Upland’s trash hauler since 2000. That extension would have provided for Burrtec remaining as the city’s refuse handler at least until 2028, an arrangement that would have precluded an open bid competition for the franchise for 28 years, while involving a contract with a total value exceeding $150 million. Over the last decade, as a successful candidate for the Fontana City Council and Fontana mayor as well as in an unsuccessful run for the State Assembly, Warren received $11,578 from Burrtec.
Questions arose as to whether her receiving that money from Burrtec and then advocating on behalf of the company as a hired/appointed official in Upland entailed a violation of three sections of the California Government Code that are outgrowths of the Political Reform Act of 1974, sections 87100, 87103 and 84308, all of which pertain to conflicts of interest, as well as Government Code Section 1090, which prohibits a public official from having a personal financial interest in any matter he or she acts upon as a public official.
At the September 30 committee meeting, Warren participated in her capacity as assistant public works director. Her comments lauding Burrtec’s performance under the current contract augmented recommendations by Upland Public Works Director Rosemary Horning and Upland City Manager Stephen Dunn, as well as by an outside firm, R3 Consultants, that the city extend the franchise contract.
Government Code Section 1090 states, “Members of the Legislature, state, county, district, judicial district, and city officers or employees shall not be financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members. Nor shall state, county, district, judicial district, and city officers or employees be purchasers at any sale or vendors at any purchase made by them in their official capacity.”
According to California Government Code Section 87100, “No public official at any level of state or local government shall make, participate in making or in any way attempt to use his/her official position to influence a governmental decision in which (s)he knows or has reason to know (s)he has a financial interest.”
Gov. Code Section  87103 (e) states “A public official has a financial interest in a decision within the meaning of Section 87100 if it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will have a material financial effect, distinguishable from its effect on the public generally, on the official, a member of his or her immediate family, or… any donor of, or any intermediary or agent for a donor of, a gift or gifts aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by, or promised to the public official within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is made.”
California Government Code Section 84308 pertains to limitations on an official’s ability to advocate or vote on issues impacting on a political donor as well as the need for a public official to disclose donations he or she has received from entities with dealings before the public agency  that official is acting on behalf of. According to the Fair Political Practices Commission’s web site, “Section 84308 prohibits solicitation or receipt of campaign contributions from parties, participants, or their agents, in proceedings involving licenses, permits, or other entitlements for use. The law also requires an official’s disqualification in those proceedings if the official has received campaign contributions of more than $250 from a party or participant within the 12 months preceding the decision. Finally, Section 84308 requires disclosure of such campaign contributions.”
According to Upland City Clerk Stephanie Mendenhall, Warren’s current statement of economic interests, known as a California Form 700, which she filed with Mendenhall’s office earlier this year and certified as being true under penalty of perjury, states she has “no reportable interests.”
As the Upland City Council’s October 28 vote on the Burrtec contract extension approached, the controversy with regard to Warren’s conflict in Upland hit a crescendo. Prior to the vote, city attorney Kimberly Hall Barlow offered an interpretation of Government Code sections 1090, 87100, 87103 (e) and 84308 that a legal conflict did not apply to Warren’s circumstance vis-à-vis Burrtec since in Upland she was acting as a “hired” official rather than an “appointed” one.
Nevertheless, the contretemps took its toll. On October 28, Mayor Ray Musser, speaking from the council dais in his remarks before the council voted, responded to Barlow’s pronouncement that no “legal” conflict existed with regard to Warren’s participation in the decision-making process, stating that “You can say it’s legally okay, but it is not okay ethically.” He voted against the contract extension, which failed on the resultant 2-2 vote.
This week, at the November 11 council meeting, Deidre Rodriguez, the interim general manager of the San Bernardino Public Employees Association, which represents 15,000 county and municipal workers in San Bernardino County, including those in Upland and Fontana, spoke to the council during the public comment portion of the meeting, addressing Musser in particular in an effort to defend Warren.
She lambasted Musser for his having suggested Warren had any sort of conflict and tore into the mayor for having questioned the ethics of Warren’s participation in the Burrtec discussions, suggesting that   Musser’s raising of the questions relating to Warren’s assumptive conflict during the discussion of the Burrtec contract constituted a violation of the Brown Act, California’s open meeting law.  She said Musser was “not speaking to an item on the agenda” when he called Warren’s conduct into question.
Rodriguez insisted the assistant public works director “was not involved in contract negotiations” with regard to Burrtec’s franchise or its extension.
“It is not against the law to serve the community as an employee and as a public official,” Rodriguez said. Warren, she said, “is stepping up and serving her community and her city. She is well respected. Like most of midmanagers, she is doing two to three jobs. Is this the treatment she deserves? The San Bernardino Public Employees Association stands behind Ms. Warren.”
Ironically, Rodriquez’s show of support for Warren in the relatively limited venue of Upland immediately resonated well beyond the Upland City Council’s meeting chambers. Rodriquez’s remarks, which like the rest of the meeting were broadcast on the local public access television station, vectored attention to the consideration that Warren’s status as a public employee in Upland represented by the San Bernardino Public Employees Association, previously put her into and continues to put her into a conflict when she served as a Fontana council member and is serving as Fontana mayor and voting with regard to that city’s municipal employee contracts.
Typically, municipal employee contract negotiations involve surveys of the salaries and benefits provided to employees with surrounding cities. In this way, Warren’s salary in Upland could have an impact on the salaries paid to comparable employees in Fontana.
Available Fontana City Council meeting minutes show that the council, including Warren, made a practice of meeting in closed session to conduct labor negotiations with representatives of the San Bernardino Public Employees Association and ratified the city’s final agreements with the association on the city’s labor contracts, known as memorandums of understanding, outside the scrutiny of the public. Fontana City Attorney Jeff Ballinger cited Government Code Section 54957.6 in justifying holding those negotiations in secret.
Warren’s participation in past employee contract votes leaves them subject to legal challenge.
The city administration in Fontana deferredto Ballinger  questions with regard to Warren’s circumstance and whether she will be precluded from participating in future votes pertaining to San Bernardino Public Employee Association-negotiated contracts. Ballinger is with the law firm Best, Best & Krieger, which serves Fontana under contract.. Repeated phone calls to the Best, Best & Krieger office in Ontario did not elicit responses from Ballinger or his firm colleague, Clark Alsop, who was previously city attorney in Fontana during much of Warren’s tenure there as a city councilwoman.

(November 14) Biologists surveying the Mojave Desert’s mountains for the National Park Service and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife have noted a significant decline in the bighorn sheep population in a substantial portion of the region.
Scouts for Fish and Wildlife, utilizing helicopters, since late October visually scoured over 75,000 acres on and around Old Dad Mountain, the Marble Mountains, and the Kelso, Bristol, Clipper, Soda, Providence, Granite, Hackberry and Woods ranges in a concentrated effort to spot bighorn, which have been decimated by pneumonia since earlier this year.
Scouts were able to spot fewer than half the number of bighorn than they typically see during similar flyovers.
Wildlife officials are concerned that the pneumonia outbreak among what was considered one of the hardiest of the state’s herds, which killed as many as 45 bighorn sheep in the Mojave Desert between May and August, is persisting and could result in a catastrophic die-off.
Pneumonia is a pernicious condition with respect to bighorn. It can incubate in the animals for months with little or no outward indication for weeks and then strike the animals dead in a short time after it manifests. Sick animals are highly contagious and the disease can spread quickly to other members of the heard.
The disease has infested an unknown number of a herd of more than 300 of the sheep near Old Dad Mountain after first showing up in some of the desert ruminants around nearby Kelso Peak.
Wildlife officials were initially put on alert that there was a pneumonia outbreak among the bighorn in May, when three dead rams turned up at guzzlers – man-made watering founts – near Old Dad Mountain. Tests performed on the dead animals by UC Davis’s extension Animal Health Laboratory in San Bernardino confirmed they had succumbed to pneumonia. Biologists have speculated that pneumonia was introduced into the herd when a hunting guide felled a feral angora goat near Marl Springs, a dozen miles east of Old Dad Mountain.
Bighorn are particularly vulnerable to pneumonia and can contract it from domestic goats and sheep or cattle, which have a greater resistance to the disease. Once hit with a full blown case, the sheep become extremely lethargic and their air passageways coated with mucous, making respiration difficult. Upwards of 80 percent of an infected herd can die as a result of the contagion.
In August, wildlife officials were contemplating wholesale killing and removal of animals confirmed to be infected as a means of bettering the odds of survival for those yet uninfected. At least ten suspected bighorn sheep were shot. All but one was indeed infected.
The helicopter survey was augmented with efforts to fit a large number of the bighorn with radio beacon collars so their movements can be closely monitored. More than 70 such beacons were successfully affixed to the sheep. The upshot of the helicopter survey and the direct contact with the sheep, which in several instances included taking blood samples and nasal swabs, was the observation that the pneumonia outbreak is most serious in the environs of Old Dad Mountain.
Bighorn sheep can be inoculated against pneumonia but the resulting immunity lasts only about four weeks.
Herds of bighorn sheep south of San Bernardino County in Riverside, Imperial and San Diego counties were significantly depleted from a pneumonia outbreak that ranged all the way down to the Mexican border in the 1980s. A strategy that was somewhat successful in that episode consisted of isolating the healthy sheep and removing feral animals, including cattle, from the area in which they roamed.
The situation in the Mojave Desert comes less than two years after biologists had reported an uptick in the number of bighorn in San Bernardino County. According to the Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep, surveys that group had completed in recent years in conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Game and the Forest Service showed steady increases in the bighorn sheep population locally. Those entities, which have conducted surveys for bighorn sheep in the San Gabriel range annually since 1979, said the San Gabriel Mountains, which lie south of the westernmost portion of the Mojave Desert, once held an estimated 740 sheep, making the San Gabriel population the largest population of desert bighorn sheep in California.  The bighorn population declined over 80 percent through the 1980s but appeared in 2011 to be on the increase. Estimates at that time postulated approximately 400 animals.
There is no indication that the pneumonia outbreak has extended into the mountain population of bighorn at this time.