(August 9) The construction cost on the Adelanto Detention Center project this week increased for the nineteenth and twentieth times, zooming to $118,310,972.
The construction bill on the project was originally slated at $90,951,937.
Moreover, the total cost of the project, including engineering, architectural, licensing  and inspection costs, has moved beyond  $145 million, $25 million more than the $120 million projected to be the project’s overall cost including a ten percent cost overrun contingency.
The expansion will add 1,392 new beds to the existing 706-inmate capacity of the facility, which was  formerly privately owned and run while known as Maranatha Prison. The owner of that facility, Maranatha Private Corrections, a part of the Moreland Family Trust, in April 2005 sold the prison, located on 9438 Commerce Way in Adelanto,  to the county of San Bernardino for $31.2 million.
This week the board of supervisors approved the ninth change order to its construction contract with Lydig Construction, Inc. in the amount of $326,568, increasing the total contract amount from $117,274,871 to $117,601,439. Immediately thereupon, the board approved the eleventh contract amendment to the contract, increasing the total contract amount from $117,601,439 to $118,310,972.
The change order is intended to compensate Lydig for the labor and materials related to five constructability issues that involve the addition of countertop supports at the center core of the housing units; hard wiring of the dryers in the compressor room; modifications to the detention ceilings and drywall in various areas of the housing units; and revisions to the light fixtures in the dormitory ceilings and the center core of the housing units, along with three items related to the fire alarm system; as well as  three issues pertaining to the exterior of the new facility that include the addition of protection bollards; installation of decomposed granite in specified areas; and the addition of sidewalks and a ramp between the new housing units and the existing buildings.
The contract amendment covers what was characterized as the “unforeseen requirement” for the installation of a third electrical service necessary to increase the available power for the expansion of the facility while providing capacity for future upgrades of the facility; the installation of a fire booster pump to ensure the proper flow and functioning of the fire protection systems; the expedited procurement and delivery of smoke control panels and supervisory panels necessary to achieve the scheduled project completion date; and the relocation of smoke detectors in the dormitory sleeping areas as required by the Board of State and Community Corrections.
There have been multiple overruns on the project, which the county’s architecture and engineering officials claim stem from what they say were unanticipated developments. Those changes, however, now exceed more than 20 percent of the original budget – well beyond the ten percent contingency initially allowed when the project was approved.
Recurrent issues in the construction cost increases have been functionality problems and design changes with the smoke control and fire sprinkler systems and change orders and contract amendments pertaining to a water well on the site which was intended to provide water to the facility that turned out to be contaminated with a high level of fluoride.
Bellevue, Washington-based Lydig Construction, Inc. has been the beneficiary of all of the construction  upgrades to the contract.

(August 9) Congressman Paul Cook (R-Yucca Valley) has called for a federal review of the Cadiz Valley Water Project.
That project, the proponent of which is Los Angeles-based Cadiz, Inc, upon completion will extract an average of 50,000 acre-feet of water from the East Mojave Desert annually and convey it via pipeline to Orange and Los Angeles counties for use there.
The Santa Ana Margarita Water District in Orange County, which lies 217 miles from the  project area and which has contracted with Cadiz, Inc. to purchase one-fifth of the desert water, assumed lead agency status with regard to approval of the project and its environmental certification, including acceptance of the environmental impact report for the undertaking. The county of San Bernardino, which contemplated challenging Santa Ana Margarita’s role overseeing the project, ultimately laid aside its authority as lead agency and last October accepted a water use monitoring plan for the project which gave Cadiz, Inc. procedural clearance to move forward with the project.
The project, however, has provoked eleven separate lawsuits challenging the project.  Those lawsuits allege, variously, that the project will drain the aquifer in both the Cadiz Valley and nearby Fenner Valley, wreaking environmental harm; that the approval process for the project which allowed a water district in Orange County more than 200 miles from the  project area to serve as the lead agency for the project and oversee its environmental certification violated state and federal environmental laws; that the county of San Bernardino failed to abide by its own desert groundwater management plan by acquiescing to the project; that the environmental impact report for the project was inadequate; that approval of the project violated provisions of both the National Historic Preservation Act and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and that the Bureau of Land Management failed to conduct a proper review of the cultural and environmental impacts of the project; that the extraction of the water will interfere with salt mining and other pre-existing industrial operations in the area; and other issues.
The county has spent $1.5 million so far on outside legal counsel in defending itself against those lawsuits. As part of the county’s acceptance of the groundwater management plan for the project, Cadiz, Inc. is required to reimburse the county for any legal costs it experiences as a consequence of the project.
In a letter dated June 12 to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, Cook stated, “I am writing to request a reevaluation of the impact the Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project will have on my constituents in the 8th District of California. The Cadiz Project, as it currently stands, is likely to impact San Bernardino County’s water resources, harming ranchers, rural communities, East Mojave landowners, and the National Chloride Company of America’s brine mining operation on Bristol Dry Lake. Moreover, the aggressive project pumping could harm the springs of the Mojave National Preserve and regional air quality, while exporting precious water resources out of San Bernardino County to ratepayers in Los Angeles and Orange counties.”
Cook’s letter continues, “In order to ensure this project won’t adversely affect my district, I respectfully request the Cadiz Project be subject to a National Environmental Policy Act review. This may be achieved by the Department of the Interior requiring the project to obtain permission to use a railroad right-of-way contingent on federal analysis of its impact to adjacent public lands. Additionally, I request that the United States Geologic Survey conduct an updated analysis of the hydrologic features of the project area and that any new or revised Cadiz Project proposals adhere to the principle of sustainable yield, meaning no more water would be pumped out of the aquifer than would be replaced through natural recharge as determined by the United States Geologic Survey. This is intended to protect sustainable water supplies for East Mojave communities and businesses.
“Currently, no federal environmental reviews or approvals have been conducted, despite numerous requests from the Bureau of Land Management that Cadiz Inc. supply them with specific project information relating to the construction of a 43-mile water conveyance pipeline along the Arizona and California Railroad right-of-way,” Cook further wrote. “While Cadiz Inc. claims it is furthering a railroad purpose by installing fire hydrants and building redundant emergency access roads along he rail line, railroad experts have reported that these actions are not industry standard.“
Noting, “Professional independent reviews have called into question the 32,500 acre-feet per year recharge rate Cadiz Inc. claims will naturally occur,” Cook went on to state, “These independent scientists concluded that the actual recharge rate is between 2,000 and 10,000 acre feet per year. There are serious doubts about the validity of the previous environmental studies, specifically the draft environmental impact statement” for the project. Cook concluded, “This project must be examined thoroughly before it moves forward.”
Floyd Wicks, a water resources engineer who is a consultant to Cadiz Inc. on the project, said, “A new federal review would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. Doing so disrespects our state’s environmental process, discounts the voices of supportive stakeholders and impedes needed water supplies and jobs for thousands. Numerous government agencies, independent groups, scientists and hundreds of individuals reviewed and commented on the project proposal.”
Wick’s insisted that building the pipeline that will be used to convey the water to Orange County “serves the public’s clear interest in constructing infrastructure projects where they do the least environmental harm. Cadiz specifically chose an active railroad route to avoid untouched desert lands.”

The county has purchased for the sheriff’s department a refurbished armored BearCat vehicle for use by its specialized enforcement division/SWAT team.
The board of supervisors this week authorized the expenditure of $140,494 obtained through a special revenue fund drawn from money passed through to the county by the Department of Justice as part of its Federal Seized Assets program.
The BearCat is to be purchased from LENCO Armored Vehicles.
According to sheriff’s captain Steve Higgins, “The acquisition of a refurbished vehicle will generate approximately $75,000 in savings compared to the cost buying a new one.”
Higgins told the board of supervisors before that panel approved the purchase that “Approval of this item will authorize a non-competitive purchase order with LENCO Armored Vehicles for one refurbished armored BearCat vehicle. County Policy No. 11-04 requires county departments to seek board approval for any non-competitive procurement of goods or equipment in excess of $100,000. The sheriff department is requesting a non-competitive procurement of a efurbished, 2002 model, BearCat armored vehicle from LENCO Armored Vehicles to be used by its specialized enforcement division/SWAT team to be stationed in the High Desert area of the county. The department already has one 2006 model LENCO BearCat that is stored in the San Bernardino area and deployed to emergency situations county-wide. The additional armored vehicle will be stored in the High Desert to improve the department’s response times to critical incidents requiring the presence of such specialized tactical equipment in the High Desert area and beyond, while maintaining the safety of its personnel. LENCO is the manufacturer of the BearCat and is able to refurbish these vehicles when they are no longer needed by the military and convert them for non-military use. The department is requesting a non-competitive procurement with LENCO in order to maintain standardization with its existing equipment to facilitate SWAT training.”

(August 9) There are indications that Chad Mayes, the chief of staff for San Bernardino County Supervisor Janice Rutherford, may not remain in his current position, even if Rutherford seeks and successfully obtains reelection next year.
Mayes is himself a declared candidate for the state Assembly in 2014. Along with two others, Mayes is vying to replace Brian Nestande, who must leave office as the 42nd District Assemblyman after his current term because of California’s term limitations on state office holders.
Mayes, a former mayor in Yucca Valley, resigned that post to become Rutherford’s chief of staff two years ago. Despite an eighty-mile commute to work in Rancho Cucamonga and a sixty-mile commute to work in San Bernardino, Mayes remains a resident of Yucca Valley as well as the 42nd Assembly District, which covers much of the desert areas of adjoining eastern San Bernardino and eastern Riverside counties.
The pace of fundraising activity for the upcoming race in the 42nd is accelerated this year because of Nestande’s pending departure. In the sweepstakes for money to be used in next year’s electioneering, Mayes so far is leading the pack.
Between January 1 and June 30 of this year, Mayes banked $95,652, more than double of his nearest competitor, former Palm Springs police chief Gary Jeandron and roughly eight times what Banning businessman Chris Mann collected. Jeandron brought in $45,179. Mann stacked up $12,084.
Mayes, Jeandron and Mann are all Republicans. The 42nd leans strongly in favor of the GOP.
Touting himself as a conservative Republican, Mayes previously based his political campaigns on right-wing values, including appeals to religious principals and causes, among them a stance against abortion. He is a member of Grace Community Church, where his father, Roger, is the pastor, and his mother, Ruth, is the principal of the affiliated Christian school. Chad Mayes was educated at Jerry Falwell’s fundamentalist Liberty University.
While on the city council, he championed several “limited government” laissez faire economic and government policies.  He was the co-founder of  the Morongo Basin Lincoln Club.
Mayes’ political ambition, in particular in an Assembly District significantly removed from the San Bernardino County Second Supervisorial District in which he is employed, is seen as a signal that Rutherford, who must herself stand for reelection in 2014, will be seeking a new chief of staff as the primary election in June 2014 approaches. While there is no legal requirement that Mayes resign or take a leave of absence from Rutherford’s staff while he campaigns for state office in the 42nd District, having a chief of staff who is focused on political issues far removed from the Second District could prove disadvantageous to Rutherford in her reelection effort.

(August 9) The county has extended by two years the time a meat packing plant will be permitted to maintain its ongoing operations on county owned property in the former Chino Agricultural Preserve.
This week, the board of supervisors approved an amendment to its lease agreement with American Beef Packers, Inc. to extend the term from October 15, 2013 through October 14, 2015 for 34.77 acres of county-owned dairy land and improvements in Ontario for total revenue in the amount of $102,000.
According to David H. Slaughter, the director of the San Bernardino County Real Estate Services Department, “On May 18, 1993, utilizing funds made available to the county under the provisions of Proposition 70, the county purchased a 34.77 acre dairy, located at 7777 Schaefer Avenue in Ontario for $2,200,000. Following acquisition, this dairy was leased to the seller until December 2008. Because of unfavorable economic conditions in the dairy industry at the time, the county was unable to attract a new operator to the site and the property remained vacant until 2010.
California Proposition 70, or the Wildlife, Coastal, and Park Land Conservation Act of 1988, was approved by voters on June 7, 1988 and authorized a $776 million general obligation bond to provide funds for the “acquisition, development, rehabilitation, protection, or restoration of park, wildlife, coastal, and natural lands in California including lands supporting unique or endangered plants or animals.”
According to Slaughter, “On November 16, 2010, the board of supervisors approved a three-year lease with one two-year option to extend with American Beef Packers, Inc. for the dairy property at 7777 Schafer Avenue in Ontario for use in their beef cattle production operations. Loss of equipment through theft and vandalism that occurred during the time while the property was vacant precludes the use of the property as a dairy. American Beef Packer’s operation on the property includes the use of the corrals, but not the dairy barn and milking equipment.”
Slaughter said the amendment passed by the board this week “extends the term from October 15, 2013 through October 14, 2015 at a monthly rent of $4,250 which is consistent with rental rates for comparable dairy properties in the Ontario and Chino areas.”
Under the lease, maintenance on the property is to be provided by the tenant except for the residential septic system, roof, heating and air conditioning system, and all major subsurface infrastructure systems including water wells, well casing, septic systems and utility piping located on the dairy, unless the cause of such failure is due to negligence of the tenant.

(August 9) The county has hired Dr. Brian Hutch to serve as one of its forensic pathologists in the coroner’s department.
The coroner’s office, which since 2004 has been a division of the sheriff’s department, investigates deaths within the county to determine the manner and means of death. In certain instances, forensic pathologists conduct autopsies to provide expert diagnosis as to the cause of death. Historically the department has had four full-time and two part-time employment contracts for forensic pathologists. In recent months, the department  had one full-time forensic pathologist vacancy.
The department requested the board of supervisors approve an employment contract with Dr. Hutchins to fill its vacancy. The contract approved provides compensation at a rate of $72.12 per hour with subsequent 2.5% step advancements up to a maximum hourly rate of $101.90 per hour. The
benefits are consistent with those provided to the department’s existing full-time contract forensic pathologists, which have recently been updated to ensure consistency across all county departments.
Provisions include the contractor paying a portion of retirement benefits and receiving the non-pensionable medical plan subsidy benefit. The contract is for a period of one year at a total cost of
$193,700, which includes a salary of $150,010 and benefits of $43,690. The contract automatically renews for successive one-year periods, but may be terminated by either party upon 14 days advance written notice.

LAKE ARROWHEAD–Jerimiah MacKay, who was gunned down by renegade former LAPD officer Christopher Dormer during his February rampage, has been honored, along with his late grandmother, by the dedication of a park in the San Bernardino Mountains bearing the family name.
MacKay Park is the first park to be dedicated in the Lake Arrowhead community. It is located above Papoose Lake off Highway 173.
On July 13, dignitaries representing the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, the California Highway Patrol, Cal Fire, the county Fire Department, the U.S. Forestry Service, the Lake Arrowhead Dam Commission and the Arrowhead Lake Association, dedicated the park in the memory of Audrey MacKay and Jeremiah MacKay with scores of community members in attendance.
Jerimiah MacKay was raised in the San Bernardino Mountains, having spent his childhood in Lake Arrowhead. He had achieved the rank of detective when he and another sheriff’s deputy, Alex Collins, encountered Dorner near Barton Flats on February ??. Both were shot multiple times by Dorner. Collins survived.
Jerimiah MacKay’s grandmother, Audrey, was a leading member of the Lake Arrowhead community and was a founding member and the first chairperson of the Lake Arrowhead Dam Commission, which was started following the Sylmar earthquake of 1971. The commission’s charter was to monitor and maintain the integrity of the dam. Technical evaluation of the dam determined that the original dam, now a section of Highway 173, was seismically unsound. The dam commission, led by Audrey MacKay, undertook to build a second dam, creating Papoose Lake in so doing. .
MacKay Park, which was fashioned out of a piece of ground formerly known as “the flats,” entails a toddlers’ playground, a picnic area, walking paths and a viewing deck offering views of both Papoose Lake and the Lake Arrowhead marina.

(August 9) The county this week approved a one-year retroactive extension on the time the developer of a long-delayed 2,000-lot subdivision in Lytle Creek has to complete a levee and other drainage improvements for the project.
The county is requiring Corona-based Lennar to construct the Lytle Creek Levee Improvement and Sycamore Creek Drive road and drainage improvement projects for Tract 18402, which is a partial re-subdivision of Tract No. 15900.
County policy for improvement security and bonding on the subdivision, approved on September 16, 1985 and then later amended on June 3, 1991, allows for extensions of time where there are extenuating circumstances. Lennar has requested several extensions of time to complete the required levee improvement and road and drainage improvements, most recently on May 29, 2013. “This extension of
time is retroactive due to delays in receiving approval documents from other agencies,” said Tom Hudson, the director of the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department.
On May 19, 2009, the county board of supervisors partially reduced the initial road and drainage performance securities for the Lytle Creek Levee Improvement from $10,449,000 to $2,099,800.  On June 15, 2010, the board reduced the performance securities for the Sycamore Creek Drive road and drainage improvements from $7,506,000 to $1,501,200.
As part of the original Tract 15900 sureties, Lennar agreed to complete the required Lytle Creek Levee Improvement and Sycamore Creek Drive road and drainage improvements by July 13, 2012. The board granted an extension of time on September 11, 2012, which moved the completion time from July 13, 2012 to July 13, 2013 after Lennar cited the downturn in the housing market as the reason for the delay.
Economic difficulties have caused delays in the completion of the improvements and Lennar has requested a time  extension to complete the levee and drainage improvements once more.
According to Hudson, “This extension of time will allow Lennar until July 13, 2014 to complete the required improvements. Lennar has paid the required deposit for the extension of time. The department is satisfied that the secured amounts are sufficient to complete the construction of the required Lytle Creek Levee Improvement and Sycamore Creek Drive road and drainage improvements and therefore recommends approval of this extension of time. The flood control district’s operations division is satisfied that the Lytle Creek Levee Improvement is currently in good standing and therefore recommends approval of this extension of time.
The performance securities will be held until Lennar completes construction of the required improvements and the board accepts the construction. The labor and materials securities will be held until six months after the board accepts construction of the improvements and the department verifies that no liens have been filed with the clerk of the board.”

(August 2) There are indications that in 2014, at least two of San Bernardino County’s leading politicians will need to withstand serious political challenges to remain in office.
In the case of Fourth District County Supervisor Gary Ovitt a persistent rumor is that Assemblyman Curt Hagman will vie for the supervisor’s post representing Chino Hills, Chino, Montclair, Ontario and southern Upland. Hagman’s intention next year has not been clarified, however, and his candidacy for supervisor has not been confirmed.
More certain is that Redlands Mayor Pete Aguilar will challenge 31st District Congressman Gary Miller next year. Miller, who formerly represented the 42nd District, which covered the heavily Republican tri-county area of northeastern Orange County, southeastern Los Angeles County and southwestern San Bernardino County, after the redistricting following the 2010 Census opted not to fight it out with fellow Republican Ed Royce to remain in Congress representing Orange County and instead run in the 31st District, which spans across San Bernardino County from Rancho Cucamonga to Redlands.
In running in the 31st. the Republican Miller took a risk in that Democrats held a slight voter registration advantage over the GOP in the district. Miller, as an incumbent Congressman, however, had a huge fundraising advantage and he was further aided by California’s adoption in 2012 of open primaries, in which the top two-vote getters in the June election, regardless of party affiliation, qualified for the November run-off. Aguilar sought election, but was hampered by a large Democratic field, which included Justin Kim, Rita Ramirez-Dean, and Renea Wickman. In addition to Miller, the Republicans fielded Bob Dutton, who at that time was a member of the California State Senate. With the Democrat vote splitting four ways in the primary and the Republican vote splitting two ways, Miller and Dutton qualified for the November race, which Miller won.
As 2014 approaches, the Democrats appear to have learned from what occurred last year and are determined to not be outmaneuvered again. In this way, the party is coalescing behind Aguilar, who outpolled all of the other Democrats vying in the 31st in 2012.
In May, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has 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. In California, Aguilar has pulled in the endorsements of Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.
Money is pouring into Aguilar’s political war chest. More attention was drawn to him, ensuring even more contributions, when the Washington-based news organization, Politico last month named Aguilar one of “50 Politicos to watch 2013.”
Simultaneously, Democratic Party officials are seeking to encourage both Joe Baca, a Democrat who was a member of Congress from 1999 until he was ousted by another Democrat, Gloria Negrete-McLeod, last year, and Eloise Gomez Reyes, a longtime Democratic activist, to steer clear of an electoral effort in the 31st next year. By presenting a united front that is undiluted by competing Democratic candidates, Democratic strategists believe Aguilar can beat Miller in a toe-to-toe slugfest, despite Miller’s incumbency and formidable fundraising capability.
There are signs that Miller recognizes difficulty may lay ahead for him and there has been talk of his abandoning the 31st District in 2014 to run in the 45th Congressional District, where Republican Representative John Campbell has announced he will retire from Congress following the current term. Miller, however, has said he is committed to remaining put in the 31st District..
At the county seat in San Bernardino, where Gary Ovitt has been serving as the Fourth District Supervisor since a special election was held in 2004, reports are circulating that Curt Hagman, a former Chino Hills mayor and a member of the California Assembly since 2008, covets Ovitt’s position. In 2014, Hagman will be prohibited by California’s term limit restrictions from running for the Assembly again. Under the county’s term limit regulations, Ovitt will be eligible to run for one last term on the board of supervisors next year.
Both Hagman and Ovitt are Republicans and at least until lately, political allies. They endorsed each other in their last election efforts. Hagman is currently the chairman of the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee, i.e., the GOP’s county political apparatus, giving him considerable control over the party’s fundraising processes, including the ability to endow independent expenditure committees. This could leave Ovitt, a former Ontario mayor, at a disadvantage since the county has instituted campaign finance limits which have curtailed the ability of supervisorial candidates to draw money from individual donors with the exception of independent expenditure committees.
Reportedly, efforts are under way to persuade Ovitt to “voluntarily” choose not to seek reelection next year, a course of action that will be made easier given his pension as a retired teacher and the pension he can draw as a former supervisor. Neither Hagman nor Ovitt have at this point officially announced their respective 2014 intentions.

(August 2) SAN BERNARDINO – Claiming that San Bernardino city officials delayed their responses and improperly confiscated recall petitions, the group sponsoring the effort to remove most of the city’s politicians from office filed a writ of mandate with the San Bernardino Superior Court on July 29 seeking to compel City Clerk Gigi Hanna to count signatures endorsing the recall against city attorney James Penman that Hanna has rejected as improperly collected.
Michael L. Allan, the attorney representing San Bernardino Residents For Responsible Government, stated in the writ that Hanna had used a “false pretext” to derail the recall effort.“Hanna’s actions do not comport with the clear language of the [city] charter, nor are they based upon the documents filed pursuant to the recall nor the timing thereof,” according to Allan.
San Bernardino Residents For Responsible Government, headed by Scott Beard, formed in April and has undertaken to recall Mayor Patrick Morris, all seven members of the city council and city attorney James Penman.
According to Allan, the group adhered to the recall process specified in state law and in the city of San Bernardino’s charter, including proper handling of the petitions, their circulation and giving the recall targets the opportunity to provide a response that would be circulated with the petitions when signatures were gathered by the proponents. Allan claims, however, that city officials, including Penman and city manager Allen Parker, used their positions and authority to intimidate Hanna, illegally take custody of the petitions and through an overbearing assertion of non-existent protocol induce her to reject the petitions pertaining to Penman that have so far been filed.
According to Allan, “On May 21, 2013, the city manager, Allen Parker, descended upon Hanna’s office and confiscated the recall election files, taking the documents to his office. Reputedly, Hanna did not resist the confiscation of the recall election files. It was not until, approximately June 5, 2013 at 4:25 PM that Hanna took possession again of the recall files.”
The writ continues, “On July 12, 2013, petitions requesting the recall of city attorney James F. Penman, bearing almost 19,000 signatures of the voters of the city of San Bernardino, along with a filing cover letter and a certificate of acknowledgment, were submitted for filing to Hanna, in her official capacity as the city clerk of San Bernardino and its elections officer. Hanna stated that she as invalidating the petitions, returned them to Beard, and declined to sign the certificate of acknowledgment. She then handed an already prepared letter to Scott B. Beard, proponent and responsible officer for San Bernardino Residents For Responsible Government, attempting to justify her rejection of the petitions. Hanna’s letter asserted a failure to jointly publish the notice of intent to circulate a recall petition and [the] answer of Penman as the justification for her action. Hanna did not provide a certificate of sufficiency or insufficiency regarding the petitions or the reason for their alleged deficiency.”
According to Allan, the recall effort’s campaign manager, Michael McKinney, had earlier sought to comply with the requirement that the recall targets be allowed to propound their response to the recall group’s stated grounds for the recall.
“On May 9, 2013, on behalf of the proponents and the proponents committee, McKinney began requesting information regarding the filing of answers by the officers, and copies of answers filed and statements regarding publication,” the writ states. “Further requests for the answers, and copies of any other documents filed, if any, including the officers’ declarations of intent to publish, were made on May 13, 14, 16, 20, and 24, 2013, requesting from Hanna copies of all documents filed by the officers in response to the notices of intent to circulate recall petitions. No purported declarations of intent to publish were sent by Hanna or her office, nor acknowledged. Indeed, on May 14, 2013 at 8:48 AM, [and] at approximately 1:30 PM, McKinney telephoned Hanna and spoke with her directly and asked her for copies of the declarations of intent to publish by the officers, if any had been filed. Hanna responded that there were none.”
The writ continues, “On May 24, 2013, McKinney at 10:03 AM, emailed a letter to Hanna, inter alia, acknowledging that the city manager had removed the recall documents and files from her office, and reminding her that no declarations of an intent to publish, which had been repeatedly requested by the San Bernardino Residents For Responsible Government, had been provided by her office or by the city manager during his interregnum.”
According to Allan, on May 29, Parker wrote the recall group, asserting that all of the recall proponents had filed answers they wanted published with the recall notices and that the recall proponents were required to publish those answers.
When Hanna rejected the petitions to recall Penman, she cited the section of the city charter which provides for the circulation of petitions only after the simultaneous publication of a notice of intention to circulate a petition together with the reasons for the petition and any response the targeted official provides. According to the city, Penman has a copy of his request with a time stamp indicating the request was made by the deadline and at the same minute that he submitted his response.
Allan maintains Penman’s response was forwarded to the recall proponents too late to be included in the published notice of the recall but that it was included on the petition for recall, which afforded those who signed the petition the opportunity to read his answer before they endorsed the petition.
The writ calls upon the court to “issue an order declaring that a) plaintiffs/petitioners complied with the requirements of Charter Section 122 as regards the service, filing, publishing, circulation for signatures, and submission for filing of the recall petition concerning Penman, b) that the officers, and each of them, failed to comply with the strictures of Charter Section 122 regarding any purported request for joint publication of the notices of intent to circulate a recall petition and their respective answer [and] c) that no duty to jointly publish the notices and answers of the officers, or any of them, is now or was during the period from the filing of the notices against the officers to the present time, incumbent upon the petitioners.”
Neither Hanna nor Parker had filed a response to the writ by press time.