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

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

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

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

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

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

(November 16)   For the victors, there was elation after the November 6 election. For the losers, there was abject disappointment. At the polls throughout San Bernardino County there were a few unexpected twists and some perhaps predictable but still noteworthy developments.
The least expected outcome from November 6 was the fall of the Baca Political Dynasty. Incumbent Congressman Joe Baca, Sr. was sent into retirement by state Senator Gloria Negrete-McLeod, who will now represent the voters of California’s newly redrawn 35th Congressional District  in Washington, D.C. Baca’s son, Joe Jr., was likewise turned back in his attempt to return to the state Assembly in his run against Cheryl Brown, the co-publisher of the Black Voice News and a staff member for outgoing Assemblywoman Wilmer “Amina” Carter. Of note, all of those involved in those races, both Bacas, Negrete-McLeod and Brown, are Democrats.
Joe Baca, Sr., a Vietnam Era Army veteran, engaged in epic battles against Jerry Eaves, another Democrat, in races for the Assembly in the 1980s. Baca came up short in each of those engagements but resiliently fought on, finally gaining victory and revenge in 1992 when he defeated Eaves’ protégé, John Longville to go to Sacramento to represent the 62nd Assembly District, newly redrawn after the 1990 Census. In 1998 he stepped up to the California Senate in the 32nd District. In 1999, he was elected to succeed longtime Congressman George Brown following his death in office. At that time, the senior Baca represented California’s 42nd Congressional District. Following redistricting based on the 2000 Census, he successfully ran for reelection as Congressman in California’s 43rd Congressional District.
Baca, Sr. was something of an enigma, a living paradox that seamlessly embodied contradictory elements. In the years he was struggling against Eaves, union backing eluded him, but once in office, he commanded strong union support. He aligned himself with and became a dominant figure within the Hispanic Caucus in Congress but then butted heads with a celebrated Latina lawmaker, Loretta Sanchez, who abruptly resigned from the Latino Caucus because of her differences with Baca.
Joe, Jr,, with the advantage of the name recognition and support provided by his father, successfully ran for the California State Assembly in the 62nd District in 2004. Two years later, he vied for the California Senate in the 32nd District. His opponent in that contest was Negrete-McLeod, who defeated him as she would his father six years later. That same year, Joe, Jr.’s sibling, Jeremy Baca, had sought to succeed him in the 62nd Assembly District, but lost to Carter. In time, Joe, Jr. would land another political gig, as councilman in Rialto.
2012 had held promise for the Baca family. If Joe Sr. and Joe Jr. had won, they would have represented the most powerful familial legislative combination in San Bernardino County, indeed in the state of California.
But McLeod, assisted by $2.7 million provided to her campaign by Republican New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, surged to a come-from-behind victory over Joe, Sr.  Joe, Jr., who had better funding than Brown, was no more successful on November 6 than his father.
On the western side of the county, the long sleeping Latino political giant that has gradually been awakening over the last decade-and-a-half is coming to even fuller consciousness. It was not until 1999 that Ontario elected its first Hispanic councilman, Paul Leon. Leon was  not only the first Hispanic elected, he would be the first one reelected. He then acceded to the mayor’s post in 2006, and in 2010 became the first Latino re-elected mayor.
Pursuant to the polling on November 6, Leon will be joined by a second Latino on the council dais, Paul Vincent Avila. Voters also thought they were electing, or re-electing, a third Hispanic candidate, Debra Dorst-Porada. Four years ago, Dorst-Porada used her full name during her campaign. This year, she shortened her surname to simply Porada. Her yard signs did not even mention her first name. Many have mistakenly assumed that Porada is a Spanish surname, when actually, it is Polish.
While Dorst-Porada was granted another four years on the council, Avila displaced the other incumbent in the race, Sheila Mautz. Mautz went down to defeat despite having the advantage of incumbency and accompanying name recognition, not to mention the largest political war chest of any of the candidates – $80,000. Avila won despite having run virtually no campaign. He spent less than $1,000, ran no ads,  and did not provide a ballot statement.
In addition to Avila, there were three other Hispanic candidates in the race –  Josie Estrada, John Lira and Ruben Valencia. Notably, of the five candidates presumed to be Hispanic, it was the one at the top of the ballot – Avila – and the one at the bottom of the ballot – Porada – who won. Four years ago, when there were likewise two open seats up for election, it was the candidate at the top of the ballot – Mautz – and the candidate at the bottom of the ballot – Dorst-Porada – who prevailed, as well.
In the Ontario-Montclair School District Board race, there was further evidence of Latino political dominance. Sam Crowe, whose presence on the school board has been almost universally recognized as a stabilizing and beneficent factor key to sustaining a district that is under severe challenge because of financial and other factors, failed to achieve reelection. Selected by voters were J. Steve Garcia and Maureen Mendoza. Ironically, Mendoza, who has a Spanish surname, is not a Latina.
In Yucca Valley, the balloting this year proved something of a cliffhanging nail-biter, although it did not turn on personalities. Both of the incumbents in that town of 20,700 up for reelection, George Huntington and Robert Lombardo, faced no opposition. Rather the real horse race involved Measure U, which called for the imposition of a one percent municipal sales tax to provide town officials with funding to pay for a host of improvement projects, foremost of which is a sewer system being mandated on the town by the state of California.
There was something of a spectacle to Yucca Valley’s elected town officials, all of whom are Republicans who normally abide by a strong anti-tax ethos, advocating the passage of a tax measure. Prompting the town to this out-of-character tax gambit is the consideration that the desert town is entirely reliant on septic systems. In 2007, the state agency responsible for protecting water quality, the California Regional  Water Quality Control Board, adopted a resolution identifying the town of Yucca Valley as one of 66 communities throughout the state with groundwater threatened by the continuing overuse of septic systems. As such, the state has imposed septic discharge prohibitions due to be triggered as of May 19, 2016. Under that mandate, phase 1 of a wastewater system must be completed or significantly on its way to completion by that date or the state will initiate enforcement action. The first phase of the project is to cover the downtown area of Yucca Valley, the area most proximate to the heart of the groundwater basin.  Similarly, phase 2 must be completed or nearly completed by May 19, 2019 and phase 3 must be completed by May 19, 2022.
If those systems are not in place by the stipulated dates, further development in Yucca Valley will be prohibited. Moreover, existing property owners will receive cease and desist orders with the potential of daily fines for non-compliance. They will be ordered to discontinue the discharge from their septic systems, seal them off and pump them regularly. If they do not, the fines to be levied against them can reach $5,000 per day.
In the face of those threats, town residents as a whole did not feel compelled to approve Measure U, which went down to defeat, as  3,147 residents of the town, or 47.97 percent voted yes and 3,443, or 52.03 percent voted against the measure.

(November 9)  For the second time in less than four years, San Bernardino County’s incumbent sheriff will make a sudden departure from his post in the midst of his elected term.
Rod Hoops, who was nominated by his predecessor as his successor and then appointed sheriff on the strength of that recommendation when Gary Penrod abruptly resigned as sheriff in January 2009, announced he would abdicate as sheriff on November 7.  He asked that the county board of supervisors select assistant sheriff John McMahon to succeed him.
Hoops said he was induced to leave by the offering of a fellowship with the National Police Foundation in the nation’s capital. His departure came one day after the November election in which one of the candidates for county supervisor, James Ramos, won and another candidate for supervisor he endorsed, sheriff’s captain Rick Roelle, lost.
After his appointment in 2009, Hoops was elected sheriff in the 2010 election in his own right, albeit with the advantage of incumbency. Shortly thereafter the department was hit with a string of scandals that brought the agency and Hoops’ leadership of it into question.
Circulating even during Hoops’ campaign for election were reports that a number of his deputies and higher ranking officers had fraudulently claimed to have completed in-service classes and seminars in conjunction with the state of California’s Police Officers Standards and Training protocols that are required for police officers to maintain their certification and allow them to qualify for higher rates of grade and pay. After months of swirling rumors, in March 2011, seven officers and department employees, including a former assistant sheriff, a captain and two lieutenants, were indicted for having falsely claimed to have completed Police Officers Standards and Training coursework or aiding and abetting others in the falsifications.
The following month, a deputy, Nathan Gastineau, was arrested and charged with having sex with a 16-year-old police explorer scout he was mentoring. And a month later, a second deputy, Anthony Benjamin, was arrested and charged with having sex with another explorer scout he was mentoring.
This year, two other deputies were charged with beating a suspect and then falsifying their identities by identifying themselves to the beaten suspect as two other deputies.
In announcing his retirement, Hoops made no mention of those difficulties, instead insisting “I have witnessed the department grow into one of the finest and most respected law enforcement agencies in the country.”
In his announcement, Hoops said, “I have dedicated the last 34 years of my professional life to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department. When I began my career as a 21-year old deputy sheriff in 1978, I had no idea as to what kind of adventure I was in for. I have lived my dream and have made many friends along the way. As your sheriff, I have never allowed myself to become more important than the office into which I was sworn to uphold.”
Hoops spelled out accomplishments he felt he has achieved in the last three-plus years.
“I am very proud of the changes made to the department during my four years as sheriff,” he said. “An emphasis has been placed on a better educated and more diverse workforce. A workforce that will serve our constituents well for many years to come. We are an organization that is made up of exceptionally talented and dedicated individuals that are prepared and ready to lead the department into the future.
“This has not been an easy decision for me, but the time is right for me to begin the next chapter of my life,” Hoops continued. “I have accepted a position as an executive fellow with the Police Foundation in Washington, D.C., the country’s oldest non-partisan policing research organization. It is an exciting opportunity that will allow me to remain involved with the law enforcement profession on a national and international level.
“December 2012 will be my last month of service as sheriff-coroner-public administrator of San Bernardino County,” he said. “I am leaving on my own terms, with peace of mind, in good health and with no regrets. My remaining time in office will be dedicated to insuring (sic) a smooth transition for the next sheriff. I look forward to working with our board of supervisors and our CEO to assist with the selection process.”
The abruptness of Hoops’ departure summoned recollections of Penrod’s sudden exodus. Penrod tendered his resignation in January 2009, less than a month after he was called as a witness to testify in the criminal trial of former Orange County sheriff Mike Carona, who had been charged by federal prosecutors with  accepting illegal campaign contributions, as well as bribes, in exchange for public and private favors. Carona would eventually be acquitted of those charges but was convicted of witness tampering. A nexus was drawn between Penrod and Carona because both had utilized Donald Haidl, a major campaign donor to both, to head their respective reserve deputy divisions. Haidl had profited financially from his relationship to  law enforcement agencies in that he owned a vehicle auctioning business that sold cars recovered or confiscated by those agencies.
When Penrod was called as a defense witness in the Carona trial, he testified he was never overly concerned with fund raising but acknowledged that in San Bernardino County those given honorary deputy or reserve deputy sheriff status were oftentimes his campaign contributors. Penrod said he perceived no problems in such arrangements.
Penrod’s testimony on behalf of Carona in which he maintained that providing special deputy status to those willing to bankroll his political campaigns was an acceptable way of running a law enforcement agency antagonized federal prosecutors. It was widely perceived that the U.S. Attorney’s antipathy toward him led to Penrod’s resignation as sheriff the following month.
Despite the consideration that he had acceded to the position of sheriff primarily because of Penrod’s recommendation of him to the board of supervisors, Hoops nine months later took action to curtail the quid pro quo arrangements between campaign donors and the department.
In October 2009, Hoops without fanfare withdrew from circulation the hundreds of honorary sheriff’s badges Penrod issued to his friends, associates and campaign supporters.  Hoops issued a directive to his deputies instructing them that if during routine operations such as incident investigations or traffic stops they encountered anyone brandishing a special deputy or posse badge issued by Penrod, those badges were to be immediately confiscated.
With that directive, Hoops effectively diffused charges by any would-be electoral opponent or the U.S. Attorney’s office that he was condoning Penrod’s practice of conferring special or honorary deputy status on the politically well connected.
Other than the adverse publicity the department had suffered as a consequence of the criminal cases filed against 11 of its employees over the last 20 months, there was no indication that problems similar to the one dogging Penrod was bedeviling Hoops and had prompted his resignation.
Nevertheless, like Penrod before him, Hoops seemed intent on handpicking his replacement with a department loyalist.
McMahon, 48, grew up in the High Desert and graduated from Apple Valley High School in 1982. He began his law enforcement career with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department in 1985, working patrol out of the Needles station.
McMahon obtained an associate’s degree in police science from Victor Valley College and a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice management from Union University. He eventually returned to his hometown after he attained the rank of captain, serving as the station commander of the sheriff’s operation in Apple Valley from 2003 to 2007. He subsequently was a deputy chief with the department, overseeing desert patrol and the detentions and corrections bureau. He promoted to assistant sheriff two years ago.
With the choice of  McMahon, to oversee the department’s 3,700 personnel and $440 million budget, it appears that undersheriff Robert Fonzi may have been stepped over.
Paul Schrader, who ran against Hoops in 2010 and has announced he will again run for sheriff in 2014, said he hopes Hoops will rethink the wisdom of appointing a replacement from within the department and that the board of supervisors this time will not blindly comply with the departing sheriff’s wishes.
“I hope that he will abandon his request to appoint an incumbent to his office, which has been a very bad past practice,” Schrader said.

(November 9)    In what came across as an aggravated insult, Los Angeles International Airport officials on November 5 signaled further disregard of the diminishing passenger traffic at Ontario Airport, with one major carrier advertising direct flights out of Los Angeles International to the popular winter vacation destination of Aspen in Ontario’s hometown newspaper.
On the same day that American Airlines and American Eagle began running the ad on the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin’s website along with a link that allowed Daily Bulletin readers to click and book reservations, the newspaper ran an article headlined in its on-line version, “Ontario airport passenger traffic to continue downward.”
The article, authored by Daily Bulletin staff writer Liset Marquez, reported that Robert Hazel of Oliver Wyman,  a global management consulting firm, had projected that Ontario International Airport flight schedules through April indicate the airport will have 6 percent fewer seats available and that passenger traffic in all of 2012 is anticipated to decline 5.5 percent from last year.
Passenger traffic at Ontario International Airport has been in severe decline since 2007, when the number of those flying into and out of the airport reached an all-time high of 7.2 million. But with the downscaling of the economy and other factors, passenger traffic has lapsed to 4.6 million per year.
In the meantime, Ontario officials have blamed the entity that runs Ontario Airport, Los Angeles World Airports, for deliberately mismanaging the facility as part of a ploy to increase use at Los Angeles International Airport, which is also run by Los Angeles World Airports. Ontario officials maintain that the decline in passenger traffic at Ontario International has damaged the local economy. They are pushing to have the city of Los Angeles deed Ontario Airport back to the city of Ontario.
In 1967, the city of Ontario entered into a joint powers authority arrangement with the city of Los Angeles to allow the larger city to operate Ontario Airport, which at that time boasted fewer than 200,000 passengers per year. Los Angeles was able to use the leverage it possessed to control gate positions at Los Angeles International Airport to induce airlines to increase the number of flights into and out of Ontario. Simultaneously, Los Angeles and its department of airports, which today functions in conjunction with the Los Angeles World Airports non-profit corporation to operate the four airports Los Angeles owns, embarked on a series of improvements to Ontario International Airport, which to date represent an undertaking costing in excess of $550 million.
In 1985, after Los Angeles had met all of the requirements spelled out in the original 1967 joint powers agreement, the city of Ontario in accordance with that agreement deeded Ontario Airport to the city of Los Angeles for no consideration.
Ontario officials have pushed forward with their contention that the city of Los Angeles is exploiting its ownership of Ontario Airport to the benefit of Los Angeles International Airport, which has undergone extensive renovations and improvements in recent years. Los Angeles’s action, according to Ontario officials, has redounded to the detriment of Ontario International Airport, Ontario and the Inland Empire. Ontario’s leadership has publicly suggested that Los Angeles should simply redeed the airport back to Ontario. That suggestion was accompanied by statements to the effect that the airport, as a public benefit property, has no value as real estate. Privately, however, Ontario officials made a confidential offer to purchase the airport for $50 million and an assumption of $71 million in bond debt related to financing for improvements that had been made to the airport and another $125 million to repay Los Angeles for passenger facilities charges collected at Los Angeles International Airport that were used to make improvements at Ontario Airport.  The existence of that offer became public, however, damaging the credibility of Ontario officials and their earlier insistence that the airport has no value in terms of a sale.
Unfazed by that blow to their prestige, Ontario city officials formed with the county of San Bernardino another joint powers agency, the Ontario International Airport Authority, intended to serve as the entity that will manage the aerodrome once it is wrested away from Los Angeles.
Los Angeles officials, meanwhile, have been offended by Ontario’s aggressive efforts and what Los Angeles World Airport officials maintain are misrepresentations about how the airport is being operated. Los Angeles officials reject Ontario officials’ contentions that factors exclusively under Los Angeles World Airports’ control, including higher per enplaned passenger fees charged by Los Angeles World Airports at Ontario than at other airports, are solely responsible for the passenger reductions in Ontario. They point out that they offered to allow Ontario to undertake the marketing of Ontario International Airport after Ontario officials asserted Los Angeles was neglecting the airport in this regard. Los Angeles maintains that the long-sputtering economy accounts for the diminution of ridership out of and into Ontario. They have expressed doubt that Ontario has the means, skill, expertise or the staffing to actually manage an airport, let alone bring it back to profitability. They maintain the airport will recover when the economy does.
Los Angeles officials have scoffed at Ontario’s $246 million offer for the airport, maintaining publicly that they are not prepared to accept anything less than the $550 million expended to put in improvements at the airport since 1967, although there are contradictory indications Los Angeles will accept $450 million for the airport.
This week the on-line advertisement that ran on the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin’s website was widely seen as Los Angeles thumbing its nose at Ontario officials. Ontario does not offer similar frequent nonstop flights to Colorado at the height of the winter skiing season. The presence of the ad in the Daily Bulletin was particularly galling, since the Daily Bulletin has been highly supportive of Ontario’s efforts to win the airport back, providing plenty of coverage of Ontario officials’ assertions of the mismanagement of Ontario Airport at the hands of what Ontario’s politicians have characterized as greedy, duplicitous and Chauvinistic Los Angeles officials.

(November 9)  James Ramos made history this week, becoming the first Native American in San Bernardino County history to accede to the position of county supervisor. Ramos took a commanding lead early, capturing 58 percent of the absentee ballot votes tallied before balloting from the precincts recorded on election day were received. As the precinct results were counted later in the evening of November 6 and into the morning of November 7, Ramos widened that lead, ending with 59.09 percent of the vote.
Derry, a Republican who defeated Dennis Hansberger, also a Republican, in 2008, succeeded in holding onto the Third District supervisor’s post for only one term. Derry’s victory in 2008 came when Hansberger, who had served five four-year terms as supervisor over a span of 36 years, underestimated Derry, a former Marine who had worked as a representative for former state assemblyman Fred Aguiar before successfully running for a position on the San Bernardino City Council.
The Third District is home to more than  183,000 registered voters who live in Grand Terrace and Loma Linda,  Barstow,  Highland, Redlands, Mentone, Yucaipa, Big  Bear City, Yucca Valley, Joshua Tree, Twentynine Palms, Johnson Valley, Lucerne Valley, Landers  and the eastern portion of the city of San Bernardino.
In 2008, Derry was able to fund his supervisorial run with more than $50,000 provided to his campaign war chest by the county’s sheriff’s deputies’ union. Derry’s displacement of Hansberger created a division within the county’s Republican Party and earned the enmity of Hansberger, who was a prominent member of that portion of the Republican political machine based in Redlands. Hansberger, along with other members of the Redlands Republican wing, which includes district attorney Mike Ramos and Congressman Jerry Lewis, broke party ranks to endorse James Ramos, a Democrat.
James Ramos is also the former chairman of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, a tribe of 167 members who own the San Manuel Casino near Highland. That casino generates a significant amount of money for the tribe, estimated at $400 million per year. James Ramos and the tribe have used that money to powerful effect, making political contributions and endowing charities to create a political machine of their own, which has now reached fruition with the election of Ramos to Third District county supervisor. The financial advantage enjoyed by James Ramos proved a political juggernaut, as donors who had lined up behind Derry four years ago began to rethink the wisdom of continuing to support him in the face of Ramos’s overwhelming funding advantage. A key defection crippling Derry this year was the decision of the deputies’ union to withdraw its support of him in favor of Ramos. The San Manuel Tribe, while it was chaired by Ramos, had made hefty political donations to the deputies’ union, totaling $300,000 since 2005.
Another problem besetting Derry’s reelection effort was the filing of criminal charges against him last year by the state attorney general’s office relating to what was alleged to be Derry’s attempt to launder a $5,000 donation to his electioneering fund from Highland developer Arnold Stubblefield in 2007. Those charges were based upon information gathered by investigators for the San Bernardino County district attorney’s office and included one felony count of fund laundering, one felony count of perjury and a misdemeanor count of campaign fund misreporting. The two felony counts were dismissed upon Derry’s agreement not to contest the misdemeanor charge. Though Derry would assert that the matter had been overcharged by prosecutors who were linked to district attorney Mike Ramos, a member of the Redlands political machine he had upset with his successful challenge of Hansberger in 2008, he was not able to overcome the negative publicity that attended the matter. James Ramos used Derry’s no contest plea to the campaign fund misreporting misdemeanor in his campaign, characterizing his opponent as a criminal.
While in county office Derry sponsored, supported or had a hand in three ethics reform measures that have been enacted. One of those was a county “Sunshine Ordinance,” which makes meeting records more readily accessible to the public. Another was the establishing of campaign contribution limits for county-level elected officials. The third provided for reductions in lavish benefits afforded to various elected and appointed officials.
The campaign contribution limit measure caps campaign contributions at $3,900 per election cycle effective January 1, 2013. Currently there is no limit. The State Fair Political Practices Commission is designated to investigate and enforce the new rules. The benefit reduction measure affected reductions in various retirement contributions and capped the amount of leave time that may be cashed out by affected employees.
Two days after the election, Derry told the Sentinel he was at peace with the outcome of the race. “That’s life,” he said. “We have elections for reasons. I wish James the best. I hope he does the best for our constituents, since I am one. I ran a campaign without a lot of resources and we tried to be competitive. We did everything we could and the voters made a decision.”
Alluding to the disappearance of many Third District-related documents from the office he came into in December 2008 after the departure of Hansberger, Derry said he was seeking to make a smooth transition between his administration and that of Ramos. “There won’t be file shredder’s running amok on the Fifth Floor [of the county administration building, where the supervisors’ officers are located]. I hope James will bring a lot of the projects we started to fruition.”
Ramos said that his priorities in office will be to “bring jobs to our area and grow economic opportunities, keep schools and neighborhoods safe, protect taxpayers through sound fiscal management, improve education and youth programs, and oppose the illegal fire service tax being imposed by the state in our unincorporated areas.”