Over the weekend, COMET’s counsel received written notification from the Supreme Court that its decision on COMET’s petition to the Court, to order the Fourth District Appellate Court to decide COMET’s writ petition to it on its merits rather than the summary (Ed’s note: without giving any reasons) denial, would be extended to June 4, or perhaps earlier. The writ petition concerns damages suffered by Mentone as a result of Redlands’ demanded annexations.
Due to the Coronavirus pandemic, the County courthouse has been closed to all but emergency situations since mid-March and is scheduled to reopen May 28, unless it is extended again (it was to have reopened on May 1). The Appellate Court is likewise operating through its clerks working at home.
FIRE TAX NEWS: GET OUT AND VOTE IT DOWN!
From Tom Murphy at Red Brennan Group:
“All,
As many of you know, the San Bernardino County Supervisors voted April 7th to place FP5 repeal on the November 2020 ballot. This is a win! We will keep you updated as we continue with this effort.
However, the Red Brennan Group is contemplating further legal action against the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District in the matter of FP5 expansion and the protest process. We are considering a lawsuit in Federal court based on equal representation and due process claims.
Our organization is in the process of identifying plaintiffs.
If you, or someone you know, was unable to respond to the Protest Process in September 2018 for any, or all, of the following reasons:
Never received notification letter
Unable to obtain a protest form
No internet access
No access to hardware or software required to locate or print a form
And they fit into one of the following profiles:
Profile One – District Resident/Property Owner
Resident of San Bernardino County
Registered to vote in San Bernardino County
Property owner with property located in the San Bernardino County Fire
Protection District
Profile Two – California Resident/Property Owner
Resident of California
Not a resident of San Bernardino County
Property Owner with property located in the San Bernardino County Fire
Protection District
Profile Three – Non-resident/Property Owner
United States Citizen
Not a resident of San Bernardino
Not a resident of California
Property owner with property located in the San Bernardino County Fire
Protection District
The Red Brennan Group would be interested in direct contact via a follow-up interview.
If you are interested please send an email to tmurphy@redbrennan.org or contact Tom Murphy at (760) 810-5830. Please DO NOT REPLY ALL to this email!! However, feel free to forward this email to people you believe may fit into one of the three profiles.
Tom Murphy”
The Red Brennan Group
ANOTHER PIECE OF MENTONE GOES AWAY!
On May 12, the Planning Commission will consider the following proposal and its agenda items reads as follows:
“PUBLIC HEARING to consider the following applications for a 0.71-acre site located at 1248 North Wabash Avenue (APNs: 0298-042-17-0000 and 0298-042-18-0000) in the Highway Commercial (C-4) District:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 1139 – A request to construct a new Jack in the Box restaurant with approximately 3,000 square-feet in floor area and one drive-through lane, as well as associated new parking lot with 30 spaces, on-site landscaping and lighting, and related site improvements including perimeter walls, driveways, and utility connections. The proposed project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (New Construction of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
“2. Commission Sign Review No. 462 – A request to construct a pedestal sign up to 12 feet high, and a total area of approximately 24 square-feet per sign face.
“3. Lot Line Adjustment No. 648 – A request to merge two lots into a single 0.71-acre parcel for development. The proposal is exempt from environmental review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). It encompasses the former party store/strip mall and the vacant land across Naples from the RV storage facility. If readers object, following are the instructions how to do so, from the Commission’s e-mail: “ll votes during the teleconferencing meeting will be conducted by roll call. The meeting can be observed online via the City’s website and on Redlands TV Channel 3 (Spectrum) and Channel 35 (Frontier).
“HOW TO SUBMIT COMMENTS: Following public health recommendations to limit public gatherings during the COVID-19 pandemic, City Manager Charles M. Duggan Jr., acting as the City of Redlands Emergency Services Director has directed that Planning Commission meetings be closed to the public until further notice or until the current local State of Emergency has been lifted. The Council Chamber will not be open to the public during the Planning Commission meetings.
“In order to have your public comment read into the public record at the meeting, members of the public are asked to submit comments prior to 3:00 p.m. the day of the Planning Commission meeting by email at PlanningCommission@ cityofredlands.org or through the public comment form on the City’s website at www.cityofredlands.org/webform/planning-commission-comments-form. You can also submit a comment by voice mail by calling (909) 307-7333 prior to 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.
“In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance with public comment, please contact staff at the Development Services Department, (909) 798-7555 ext. 2, at least two hours prior to the meeting to make alternate arrangements (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
“If you challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised prior to the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission prior to this public hearing.
” ‘NOTE: Any writings or document distributed to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding an open session agenda item less than 72 hours before this meeting are available for public inspection at the Planning Commission’s website (https://www.cityofredlands.org/planning-commission).’ “
Senior Affairs Commission: Skin Cancer
Below is a leaflet from the Senior Affairs Commission showing information on skin cancer. For more resources and additional information, please click here.
SAC-HAC-Did-You-Know-Skin-CancerBeware of Scams and Frauds amid COVID-19 Pandemic
SMP-CoronaVirus-Fraud-Alert
For additional information on healthcare and fraud, please call 855-613-7080 or visit their website at cahealthadvocates.org
Happening in Mentone This Week
Revelation_of_Peace_FLYER
Revelation of Peace online live streaming with Jeffrey Harper on Friday, April 10, 2020 at 7:00pm. Online Live-stream link, Pre-Registration, + More, Visit:
RevelationofPeace.live
STILL WAITING. . .
C.O.M.E.T.’S counsel hasn’t yet received any notification from the California Supreme Court whether it will order the [subordinate] Fourth District Court of Appeals to consider C.O.M.E.T.’s Petition for Writ of Mandate to the San Bernardino Superior Court to reconsider or reverse its denial of C.O.M.E.T.’s request for damages in its lawsuit against the City of Redlands and San Bernardino County LAFCO (“Local Area Formation COmission,” which oversees annexations).Â
In the meantime, everything else sits: the San Bernardino Superior Court closed March 17 for all but emergency matters, like restraining orders, until April 30, although courthouses apparently are still open in the high desert. All other matters and deadlines are extended by 30 days. The Fourth District Court is open on shortened hours but the Supreme Court is apparently completely open, hearing arguments by teleconferencing. MM will keep you posted on the progress of the lawsuit. MM
COURT OF APPEAL DENIES WRIT PETITION; PETITION FOR REVIEW FILED
On February 26 the court denied COMET’s Petition for Writ of Mandate, which sought an Order to the Superior Court to reverse its denial of COMET’s request for leave from filing a late claim for damages. The Appellate Court did not specify its reasons for denying the Writ Petition (Ed.,’s note: that process is called a “summary denial”). According to lawyers’ blogs online, the court summarily denies most writ petitions.
COMET’s Writ Petition was based on the grounds that Mentonites did not know of Redlands’ annexations of their territory until long after they were concluded and therefore Mentonites could not have filed their protests or claims for damages within the 60-day time limitation; that when they learned of the completed annexations they did not know what to do about them except protest, which did not stop the annexations, until advised to file suit; and then could not find an attorney to take the case for what they could afford, until late 2018. The lawsuit was filed in Spring 2019.
On March 6 COMET’s pro bono (Ed.’s note: donating their professional time) counsel filed COMET’s Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court, requesting that the high court order the Fourth District Court of Appeals to consider the Writ Petition on its merits or on the grounds stated in it. One ground in the Petition for Review is that the 1997 Measure U, which Redlands utilizes to demand annexation in exchange for water and sewer service (where available) – after decades of allowing hookups for just a minimal cost for connection – was unauthorized by existing state Supreme Court law at the time: in 1915 and again in 1986, the high court held that a city purchasing a private water company was required to continue providing water to the customers, including any new customers who moved into the area. The Supreme Court cases were mentioned in a case decision supplied by Redlands’ and LAFCO’s counsel. A San Bernardino-based case also prohibited discrimination in the provision of water.
Another ground in the Petition for Review quoted a 1982 case which held that rules for LAFCO (Ed.’s note: Local Area Formation COmmission, which the Legislature set up to exist in every California county) did not allow a receiving city to vote on annexation, that the voting right belongs solely to the territory being annexed. The Petition for Review also raised constitutional issues with Measure U and reiterated its position that Measure U is extortionate (Ed.’s note: in other words, demanding something that it is not entitled to have).
The high court can either:Â grant the Petition and review the case itself; grant review and order the Appellate Court to reconsider its denial; or deny the Petition for Review, with or without comment. There is no time limit to do so.
The Superior Court also denied COMET’s earlier Motion for an Injunction against Redlands’ enforcement of Measure U; however, that Motion did not contain the law given in the Petition for Review, which was recently discovered by COMET’s counsel.
COMET stands for Community of Mentone Empowered Together and represents all Mentone residents and landowners who wish to be involved : of the respondents to a recent poll conducted by MM, almost all were against annexation. MM will report on developments as early as possible after they occur.
MM
Upcoming Events from Yucaipa
Upcoming-events-III
Upcoming-event-IV
Upcoming-events-II
Yucaipa Road Race: Friday, April 24th
Upcoming-events-1-rotated-1Yucaipa Regional Park, off Oak Glen Road
- 9:00 am:  Stage 2 – PossAbilities Para-cycle Circuit Road Race  (25 laps, 32.5 miles)
Start at Sunnyside Drive north of Oak Glen Road, Finish at Oak Glen Village
- 10:00 am: Stage 3 – City of Yucaipa Road Race for Men  (6 laps, 90.0 miles)
- 11:10 am:  Stage 3 – City of Yucaipa Road Race for Women  (4 laps, 61.8 miles)
Mentone Beach Moose Lodge: Upcoming Events
[fb_plugin page href=”https://www.facebook.com/mentonemoose.lodge.7″ tabs=”events”]