By Mark Gutglueck
In a last-ditch effort, San Bernardino Mayor Helen Tran stemmed yet further erosion in the erosion of the power and prestige she holds as the 34th municipal leader of the county seat.
Tran, the city’s one-time human resources director who left the city when she had a run-in with her predecessor as mayor and then gave up a lucrative career as a municipal administrator to return as a vanquishing heroine and occupy a position that many thought might prove a major step on her way to eventual occupancy of the Governor’s Mansion in Sacramento, has learned just as literally a dozen of what were seemingly upward bound politicians before her came to know: the gavel she wields seems to be cursed.
The power that was once vested in the San Bernardino mayor and what remains of it is of a highly nuanced nature, requiring deliberate, delicate and carefully calibrated maneuvering.
For 111 years, the mayor’s influence was more, or was potentially more, administrative than it was political. Nevertheless, during that era, the post was, if held by a skillful political operator, a powerful political position. Eleven years ago, the mayor’s administrative authority was taken away, necessitating that the mayor’s political instincts and skills needed to be honed to perfection if he or she was to be an effective leader.
The City of San Bernardino came into being, more or less, in 1853 with the Mormon migration to California and the establishment of a settlement – at that time a fort – in San Bernardino. It had two mayors in the early days but when Brigham Young called the Mormon faithful back to Salt Lake City in the winter of 1857/58, civic organization was put on hold until the city officially incorporated in 1869.
San Bernardino had no mayor from 1869 to 1905 because it was incorporated as a town rather than a city during that period, governed by a board of trustees rather than a mayor. The municipality fluctuated between being unincorporated and incorporated as a town or city, formally becoming a city again in 1886 and later, with the adoption of a new charter 1905, returned to a mayoral system. Continue reading →

A controversy has developed over what officials with the Apple Valley Unified School District and the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools’ division of business advisory services has acknowledged was the repeated transfer of substantial amounts of money in what are otherwise the Apple Valley district’s sequestered accounts for funds earmarked for specific purposes.
In a recent opinion piece by a member of the Apple Valley Unified School District’s Board of Trustees, Renee Longshore, published by the Victorville-based Victor Valley Daily Press, note was made that the district in some of its financial documentation provided to her, other members of the board and the public, there was a discrepancy between what shown as deficit spending and decreases in the district’s reserves.
Additionally, in the opinion piece, which appeared in the paper on January 22, Longshore noted that district revenue had grown by 57 percent between fiscal year 2018/19 and 2024/25 but that the district had also seen a 39 percent increase in teacher and pupil support staff salaries and a 45 percent increase in what the district pays for books and supplies. She expressed concern that over the same six year period, the district had sustained a 90 percent increase in the cost of employing supervisors and administrators. Continue reading →

With the February 9 deadline to make a final decision approaching, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for California to use the gerrymandered congressional map Governor Gavin Newsom and his Democrat cohorts were able to get the state’s voters to approve in November which was drafted to result in five of the 12 California Congressional seats now held by Republicans being filled by Democrats following the November 2026 election.
The only change in the state’s electoral map that is likely to impact San Bernardino County consists of the possibility that Republican Congressman Ken Calvert, whose current 41st District in Riverside County was eliminated in a bid by the Democrats to end his political viability entirely, will now challenge 40th District Congresswoman Young Kim, who represents the southwesternmost portion of San Bernardino County.
At present, forty of California’s 52 Congressional seats are held by Democrats. From the outset of the gerrymander effort which began last summer, the Democrats’ intent was to thin the ranks of California’s Republican Congressional delegation even further.
That move required voter approval, which Newsom and the Democratic state legislature obtained by placing an initiative on the ballot in a specially-called election, at a cost of $282.6 million, in November.
A coalition of Republicans challenged the unusual maneuver and the elections outcome, but in a terse, one-sentence order, the justices turned down that request to have the state utilized the electoral map that was drawn in 2021 by a nonpartisan commission using data from the 2020 U.S. Census and which which was used in the last two federal election in California.
The court’s order came two months to the day after the justices, over a dissent by the court’s three Democratic appointees, granted a request from Texas to allow it to use a new map intended to allow Republicans to pick up five additional House seats in that state. Continue reading →

The musicians of the Ontario Chaffey Community Show Band and the Keith Family are proud to present a program entitled “Love Is In The Air” on Monday, February 23, 2026 at 7:30 p.m.
The concert will be held in Gardiner W. Spring Auditorium, located on the campus of Chaffey High School at 1245 N. Euclid Avenue in Ontario.
The Woodwind Celebration Ensemble will present a pre-concert recital in the auditorium lobby at 7:00 p.m. Complimentary coffee and cookies will be served in the lobby prior to the concert. The performance is free to the public.
The February concert will feature many selections related to Valentine’s Day and the spirit of love. The show will be highlighted by special guest artists vocalist Skip Cain and jazz saxophonist and vocalist Jeff Waldon. Show Band soloists will include trumpeters Steve Collins and David Grasmick and a vocal by Show Band Director Pat Arnold.
Skip Cain a becoming a regular with the Chaffey Community Show Band. His vocal repertoire includes songs of joy, romance, and love from yesteryear and today. Skip’s repertoire ranges from Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr., Tom Jones, Lionel Richie, Tony Bennett, James Brown, Wilson Pickett, and Teddy Pendergrass. Skip will perform “I’ve Got You Under My Skin,” “The Way You Look Tonight,” and the Tom Jones megahit “It’s Not Unusual.” Continue reading →

FBN20260000145
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
ARROW DOG AND CAT HOSPITAL [and] ARROW DOG & CAT HOSPITAL [and] ARROW DOG & CAT VETERINARY HOSPITAL [and] GENERAL DOG & CAT HOSPITAL [and] ADVANCED PET CARE OF MONTCLAIR 5405 ARROW HWY SUITE 108 MONTCLAIR, CA 91763: GENERAL DOG & CAT VETERINARY HOSPITAL, INC. 215 CAMPBELL AVE REDLANDS, CA 92373
Business Mailing Address: 5405 ARROW HWY SUITE 108 MONTCLAIR, CA 91763
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION registered with the State of California.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: January 5, 2026.
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ MARIAN M. HABIB, CEO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 01/12/2026
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy F3010
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on January 16, 23 & 30 and February 6, 2026.

FBN20250011678
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
DESTINY RENTAL 15370 CHOLAME RD #3 VICTORVILLE, CA 92391: ROSINA MENDIOLA
Business Mailing Address: 15370 CHOLAME RD #3 VICTORVILLE, CA 92391
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: December 15, 2025.
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ ROSINA MENDIOLA, Owner
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 12/15/2025
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy K1587 Hesperia
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on January 16, 23 & 30 and February 6, 2026.

Continue reading →

In the midst of the confusion over Adelanto Elementary School District Superintendent Terry Walker’s continuing tenure with the district, the matter grew even more turbulent as Walker and her top-ranked assistant precipitously went out on leave last week. They have not returned.
Simultaneously, Walker’s executive secretary had departed the district, leaving the district essentially rudderless, as there was seemingly no one in place in the district’s executive suite over a period during which preparations for this week’s board meeting needed to be tended to, resulting in the meeting being canceled.
While Walker’s executive secretary, Xenia Lovett, has now returned to her post, the district appears to be running on autopilot, as both Walker and the assistant superintendent of academic services Walker hired in September, Saida Valdez, remain absent.
Among Adelanto residents, in particular parents of students in the district, there has been speculation at the reason for the interruption in normal district operations. The most recurrent and obvious theory to emerge from that speculation is the 3-to-2 divide on the school board that has manifested in recent months in which the majority has become disenchanted with Walker’s oversight of district operations created an atmosphere which has made her day-to-day function uncomfortable. Based on Walker’s contract, which was ratified by the school board in November 2024 and which runs through June 2028, she cannot be terminated on anything less than a 4-to-1 vote of the school board.
Though the board majority does not have sufficient votes to force the superintendent’s departure at this time, the two members of the board who are yet standing behind her, La Shawn Love-French and Christina Steward, are due to stand for reelection later this year. With the prospect that Love-French or Steward might opt out of seeking reelection or could be displaced in the voting if they do run, Walker is acutely aware that she may not be able to serve out the entirety of the time specified in her contract, which provides her with $282,782, in salary and another $92,635 in perquisites and benefits for a total annual compensation of $375,417. Accordingly, it appears, at least to some people involved with the district either as parents, employees or officials, that Walker has been engaging in strategizing to either keep her job long-term or maximize the amount of money she can arrange to receive if she comes to some early termination/separation agreement with the district.
In this way, it appears that what occurred last week and what is continuing into this week was an effort to illustrate that Walker, if not absolutely indispensable to the district’s operations, is of substantial value and key to keeping thing running smoothly. That Walker, Valdez and Lovett all went out on leave together and without any forewarning was either an extraordinary coincidence or deliberately calculated, several of those contemplating it have observed.
During the work week of January 19 through 23, Lovett, Valdez and Walker were gone, reportedly having taken simultaneously unspecified leave, unofficially described as sick leave or medical leave. When Board President Miguel Soto Jr. made a routine inquiry early in the week about progress on finalizing the agenda for the regularly scheduled board meeting that was to take place on January 27, he received no response. Through further inquiry, he learned that Walker, Valdez and Lovett were not present at the district headquarters and, further, could not be reached by phone, text or email.
Somewhat inexplicably, armed security guards employed by the Blue-Nite Protection Agency were in place at the district office beginning on January 20 and remained in place until January 23. Blue-Nite Protection Agency, which is owned and operated by Jerry Plascencia, had been previously contracted with by the district to provide security at the district’s board meetings, but was never employed by the district outside that context. There was no explanation given to district staff either by text message, email or verbally as to why they security guards were there or that they were going to be there ahead of time. No one at the district had any information as to who had hired them for the district office security detail. No vote to have them in place was made by the school board. It is not clear on whose authority they were hired. The scope of work specified in the district’s contract with the company extends only to board meetings held twice monthly.
Under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California’s open public meeting law, the items, issues for discussion, actions or votes to take place at a meeting must be given preview in an agenda for the meeting, which must be posted in a place or forum accessible to the public at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Given that the meeting was to commence in the evening of January 27 and the district’s offices close for the weekend, there was a deadline of 5:30 p.m. on Friday January 23 by which the agenda had to be completed and posted.
Under the district’s standard procedure, the agenda is formulated by the superintendent assisted by the superintendent’s executive secretary, incorporating items earmarked for discussion and votes by members of the school board ahead of time as well as routine business items such as payments to material vendors or service providers which are intrinsic to ongoing and continuing district functions. Without Walker available, the board sought to draft an agenda, but upon completing the title, date, time and location for the document, bogged down when seeking to lay out the topics for discussion, as this required the provision of back-up or accompanying materials pertaining to the schedule of actions/votes. Lovett, they learned, was the only district employee who had access to the programs on the district’s computers that would allow for the uploading of the documents that needed to be included with the agenda.
With the January 23 5:30 p.m. deadline approaching and Lovett nowhere to be found and unavailable for contact telephonically or online, a decision was made to cancel the January 27 meeting.
The implication of Walker, Valdez and Lovett checking out with seemingly no warning last week is still being felt. Though Lovett returned on Monday January 26, Walker and Valdez are out of the office, incommunicado with both the public and at least three and quite possibly all five of the board’s members.
Efforts by the Sentinel to reach both Walker and Valdez were routed to answering systems, which engendered no response, or to district personnel who had no information as to where either was or when they were to return.
Walker’s tenure as the superintendent grew problematic shortly after she was promoted into the acting/interim superintendents’ post in September 2024, a mere month after having been brought in as the interim assistant superintendent for personnel in August 2024. Walker was moved into the acting superintendent’s role because of the abrupt resignation of John Albert, the district’s one-time assistant superintendent for human resources, who had himself been moved into the interim superintendent’s position following a move by what was then the board majority, consisting of Christine Turner, La Shawn Love-French and Christina Steward, to place then-Superintendent Michael Krause on leave in March 2024. Krause and the district reached a separation agreement in June 2024, whereupon the following month he took out nomination papers to run in the November 2024 election for the Area 1 board position against Turner.
After temporarily promoting Walker to the interim superintendent’s post, the school board the following month voted to hire the executive headhunting firm of Leadership Associates to carry out a nationwide search for a superintendent to occupy the position on a permanent basis.
As the Fall 2024 campaign heated up, Walker acceded to requests by the then-board majority to hire, at the district’s expense, an attorney, Dominic Quiller, to author a letter that was sent to Krause, asserting that his candidacy and campaign for the school board constituted an abrogation of his separation agreement with the district, in particular its non-disparagement clause which required that the district and Krause mutually refrain from making any statements about the other that could be construed as critical. Dominic informed Krause that the district was immediately discontinuing the scheduled monthly payments and accompanying medical coverage he was receiving as in accordance with the six-month severance pay-out contained in the separation agreement and that if he did not immediately withdraw from the board race, the district would sue him.
Krause did not discontinue his candidacy. As a result of the poll voting at the three precincts in the Adelanto School District Area 1 on November 5, 2024 and the mail-in ballots received by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters Office prior to, the day of and after the election, Krause defeated Turner by a margin of more than 5.5 percent, as he claimed 1,720 or 52.78 percent of the total 3,259 votes cast to Turner’s 1,539 votes or 47.22 percent. With the election concluded, Turner’s remaining time on the board was reduced to just over a month, with four-year term to which she had been elected in 2020 due to expire in December 2024.
In that interregnum, one week after the election, on November 12, 2024, Turner, Steward and Love-French voted to dispense with the nationwide search for a superintendent and instead permanentize Walker as superintendent, approving a contract with her that runs until June 30, 2028. The contract was not, as required by law, made public on the November 12, 2024 agenda. The contract conferred upon Walker a compensation package that dwarfed that of any previous superintendent, consisting of a yearly salary of $282,782, perquisites and pay add-ons of $16,747 and benefits of $75,888 for a total annual compensation of $375,417. Moreover, it involved providing Walker with a level of job security never provided to earlier superintendents. Terminating her under the contract, either with cause or without cause, required under the contract’s terms, a supermajority vote of the board, that is, four of five votes.
The vote to hire Walker was made on a 3-to-2 vote of the board on November 12, 2024, with Turner, Steward and Love-French prevailing and board members Miguel Soto Jr. and Stephanie Kyer, who were not provided with a copy of Walker’s proposed contract, in opposition.
After the election results were certified, Krause was sworn in. Over the next several months, a new majority on the board evolved. Soto and Kyer previously had not been aligned with Turner, Love-French and Steward and had not joined in with them in March 2023 in voting to place then-Superintendent Krause on administrative leave. Nor had they supported hiring Quiller to write the letter to Krause in October 2024 in an effort to persuade him to drop out of the race and they were unsupportive of the decision to extend and approve a contract with Walker while the district was yet engaged in a nationwide superintendent recruitment effort. With Krause having joined Soto and Kyer on the board dais and with Turner gone, the 3-to-2 majority of Turner, Love-French and Steward prevailing over Soto and Kyer became a 2-to-3 minority, with Love-French and Steward dissenting to the predominating Soto, Kyer and Krause.
Initially, at least, Soto, Kyer and Krause sought to make the best of things, as the imperative to educate the district’s 7,742 students beckoned constantly, and keeping things moving at the 14 campuses – nine elementary schools, three middle schools, two kindergarten to 8th grade schools – and its three alternative programs took precedence over whatever matters of personality conflicts or differences that cropped up among the board members.
In time, however, particularly during the two-and-a-half month summer break from regular academics, issues developed that created tension between Walker and the board majority.
In the summer of 2025, Julie St. John-Gonzales, the district’s assistant superintendent of business services, precipitously jumped ship, leaving the employ of the Adelanto Elementary School District with no forewarning and little more than a second-hand explanation that she had been offered a higher paying opportunity elsewhere. St. John-Gonzales’s departure caught the board, which had been satisfied with her performance, unawares and sent the Adelanto Elementary School District scrambling to replace her. In fielding a set of potential candidates to replace St. John-Gonzales, Walker offered the board a short list of applicants to interview and choose from. When it emerged that information about the background of at least some of those candidates had been withheld, members of the board majority became concerned about the level of openness and transparency that Walker was maintaining.
Inquiries with regard to some other issues highlighted what members of the board majority characterized as communication problems or the withholding of what some said was crucial information upon which they were basing their decisions. Soto, Kyer and Krause, observing what they interpreted as Walker’s reluctance to provide them with information and documentation they were seeking, grew concerned that there was a hidden agenda they were not privy to that was playing out in the district they were sworn to oversee. This resulted in the board members going to the extraordinary effort of filing requests and California’s Public Records Act for the district records and internal documents, material that under most circumstances is routinely available to board members. In some cases, records and documents were said to be missing or did not exist. The claim that records the district kept as a normal consequence of its operations were nonexistent was perceived as a deliberate effort by Walker to stymie the board’s exercise of oversight. In other cases, the board learned of some expenditures which seemed to have no or questionable value toward the education of the students in the district. While some were relatively minor expenditures, there were several which pertained to the district engaging in outsourcing of services traditionally provided inhouse, such as securing bus service from outside transportation companies when the district has buses and drivers of its own. Another involved the district’s receipt of $150,000 in Expanded Learning Opportunities Program funds from the California Department of Education. Those knowledgeable about how that money was spent described a substantial amount having gone toward purchases they say were unnecessary and in no way represented an effort toward expanded learning opportunities.
Over the course of more than five months, the board majority had compiled 75 pages of documentation obtained through the California Public Records Act request process which indicated district money was being expended on items or services of no or little conceivable application toward educating the district’s students.
For a time, the board majority’s focus, at least partially, turned toward hiring decisions Walker had engaged in. While school boards generally have the ultimate authority with regard to whom they hire as superintendent, beyond that hiring authority for the remainder of the school district’s personnel lies with the superintendent together with the district’s personnel director, commonly referred to in recent years as the human resources manager or director. While the board is empowered to have input with regard to the hiring decisions, it is the superintendent’s judgment in making such decisions that prevails.
Evolving out of the emerging board majority’s dissatisfaction with Walker was concern over the standards being applied in both hiring and the setting of salary levels.
Soto and Kyer began pressing for an audit of the superintendent’s office and a comprehensive fiscal audit of the district.
Reportedly, a topic that emerged in the board’s closed-door executive discussions relating to the superintendent’s performance was what options the district had in finding another superintendent, which would require that Walker be eased out of the post. The termination clause in her contract, however, required that no fewer than four of the board’s members vote to terminate her.
For months, the 3-to-2 board majority has been faced with the reality that despite their dissatisfaction with Walker’s performance, they do not have the political muscle to terminate the superintendent.
As the actuality of the situation has become more and more apparent, there has been a wellspring of support in the community – extending to the political backers of Love-French, Steward and the currently out-of-office Turner – for Walker. Walker’s supporters include parents of some of the district’s children, some teachers and at least a handful of other district employees. The show of support they have put on has been intended to make the board majority think twice about pressing forward with an effort to force her out.
While the three apparent votes against Walker are not at this time sufficient to hand her a pink slip, there is a possibility that by the end of 2026, a fourth vote to remove her as superintendent will materialize. Both Love-French and Steward must stand for reelection this year and succeed to remain in office. Love-French, whose children are no longer students in the district, has made public statement indicating she might not run for re-election. Reportedly, the union representing teachers in the Adelanto Elementary School District, the Adelanto District Teachers Association, which is affiliated with the California Teachers Association and the National Education Association, will oppose both Steward and Love-French if they run.
It is in this atmosphere that Walker has been contemplating her future. While she would prefer to remain in place as the Adelanto Elementary School District’s superintendent until the end of her contract in June 2028 or even beyond that, it may behoove her to cut herself an exit early, foreclosing the possibility that a newly-composed board at the end of this year or early next year forces her hand by terminating her with or without cause.
There were reports two weeks ago that Walker was engaged in some confidential discussions to see what arrangements could be made for her to step down prior to her contract running its course. Speculation went all over the place. One unconfirmed report was that Walker wanted, and the district was contemplating providing, a guarantee of her contract through to June 2027, a year before her contract is set to expire. In return, she would engage in a wholehearted recruitment drive to find her replacement, essentially reinitiating the search that Leadership Associated was engaged in when the troika of Turner, Love-French and Steward rendered that effort moot by hiring her as the full-fledged superintendent a week after Turner had been voted out of office.
It seems, based on Walker’s action in going out on leave with her second-in-command Valdez and her executive secretary Lovett, that the above-referenced speculation was not quite accurate. Her action has confounded her supporters and those who are in favor of her leaving alike. While the paralysis that gripped the district during the period Walker, Valdez and Lovett were gone did prevent the agenda for the January 27 meeting from being completed and posted, resulting in the cancellation/postponement of the meeting, that was, at best, a temporary interruption. It may have demonstrated the degree to which the district has become dependent on Walker and her team, but such dependence is not absolute. It further alerted the board majority that in the future it will need to have an alternate administration core in place if there is a repetition of what went on from January 19 to January 23.
Moreover, Walker’s lasting absence and that of Valdez has resulted in the loss of what was formerly imputed to her as her morale authority. Many of her supporters had lionized her as someone who put the interest of students first and who was standing up not for herself but for the principle of furthering educational opportunity. Leaving the district and its students in the lurch as she and Vldez have is undercutting her stature in the community.
Walker’s move is inexplicable because of the position it is putting her two crucial supporters on the board – Love-French and Steward – in. Both, for as long as they remain in office, formerly came across as ready to stand unquestionably by Walker. While Love-French remains inextricably tied to Walker, Steward bond to the superintendent is not unbreakable. Indications are that Steward is intent on seeking reelection in November. In the run-up to that contest, she may find it difficult to explain to the voters of Trustee Area 4 why she remains committed to continuing to employ a superintendent who without explanation headed out on an extended leave, departing in such a way that no arrangement for substitute management/administration/leadership put in place first and put the district’s academic mission at risk.
Not just those supporting Walker but others in favor of her departure as well as district observers who have no feelings one way or the other about her continuation as superintendent are baffled by her absence.
Equally mysterious was why Valdez, whose employment with the district began under Walker but whose continuing tenure with the district is by no means necessarily tied to that of the superintendent, seemingly acted in concert with her. The district’s academic services division is arguably that part of its operations most important to the core mission, and there appears to be no one fulfilling Valdez’s function. The district employees the Sentinel spoke with this week seemed genuinely unexpecting of what was ongoing, with one, who spoke guardedly, acknowledging that something was indeed going on, but that only those at the top of the district knew what that was. For the record, none of the board members are making any statements as to Walker’s status.