Burbank Independent_3/11/2024

MONDAY, MARCH 11- MARCH 17, 2024

George Gascón bound for runoff in reelection bid for LA County DA

District Attorney George Gascón will be heading to a November runoff election in his bid to retain his position, likely squaring off against Nathan Hochman, a former U.S. assistant attorney general who was the Republican candidate for state attorney general in the 2022 general election.

With neither candidate earning more than 50% of the vote from Tuesday’s primary election, the top two vote-getters advance to the November general election.

Gascón topped the field of 11 challengers with 21% as votes were tabulated Wednesday. Hochman was running a close second at 17% and Jonathan Hatami, a child abuse prosecutor in the District Attorney’s Office, in a fading third place with 13%.

Gascón was elected in 2020 over incumbent Jackie Lacey as he promised a wave of progressive changes. But he has been under fire since taking office by issuing a series of directives critics have blasted as being soft on crime. The directives included a rule against seeking the death penalty, a ban on transferring juvenile defendants to adult court and prohibitions on filing sentencing-enhancements

in most cases.

“This campaign is not about me, this is a community movement,” Gascón said last November, when he kicked off his reelection campaign. “This is about looking at the criminal justice system of the 21st Century not with a rear-view mirror but looking forward.”

Also running for his job were three other members of Gascón’s office: John

PG 02 By City News Service

While Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff and Republican former Dodger Steve Garvey prepare for a November runoff election after topping a crowded field of candidates looking to claim the U.S. Senate seat previously held by the late Dianne Feinstein, Katie

By City News Service

McKinney, supervising district attorney; Maria Ramirez, the head deputy D.A.; and Eric Siddall, a violent crimes prosecutor.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judges Debra Archuleta and Craig J. Mitchell were also on the ballot, along with David S. Milton, who retired as a Superior Court judge in 2014.

The other candidates

were Jeff Chemerinsky, an assistant U.S. attorney; criminal defense attorney Dan Kapelovitz, and Lloyd “Bobcat” Masson, a cold case prosecutor in San Bernardino County.

Most of the opponents were challenging a number of Gascón’s policies, with numerous candidates framing a narrative of outof-control crime in Los Angeles, driven by lenient

policies enabling criminals’ release.

Hochman, a former U.S. assistant attorney general, offered voters what he described as a “blueprint for justice.”

“I am shocked and disappointed at how our public safety has seriously worsened over the last three

Porter calls primary election for Senate seat ‘rigged’

Porter is catching flack Thursday for saying the system to select candidates is rigged.

Porter, a member of Congress representing Irvine who finished third in the primary election, posted on social media Wednesday that donors supporting

Schiff used their money to rig the election.

“Thank you to everyone who supported our campaign and voted to shake up the status quo in Washington. Because of you, we had the establishment running scared — withstanding 3 to 1 in TV

spending and an onslaught of billionaires spending millions to rig this election,” Porter said in a post after the race was called.

According to still-unofficial results from Tuesday’s primary election, Schiff, D-Burbank, led the way among the more than two

dozen candidates seeking the seat, earning 33.2% of the vote. Garvey was only about 30,000 votes behind, earning 32.4% of the tally.

Porter, D-Irvine, was a distant third at 13.8%,

years under current D.A. George Gascón,” Hochman stated on his campaign website. “I am prepared to fight to restore it. My Blueprint for Justice outlines the changes I will make as your District Attorney to restore safety and justice to our county.”

Hochman said that under Gascón’s leadership, veteran prosecutors were stripped of their ability to file appropriate charges against violent, repeat offenders.

As for part of his blueprint, Hochman vows to “restore the purpose of the District Attorney’s Office to fairly, effectively, and vigorously prosecute those who break laws in Los Angeles County based on the evidence and the law.”

Hochman said he would also “restore the integrity and independence of the district attorney by not making decisions based on a party affiliation or political ideology but solely on the facts and the law.”

His campaign points out that Hochman is running as an Independent.

“I believe the D.A. needs to be fiercely independent and have encouraged all other candidates to do the

and Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, placed fourth at just 7.4%.

Porter issued a statement Thursday to address criticism for saying the primary election was rigged.

CHLA study: Children with sickle cell anemia lack preventive care

LA city’s ‘Healthy Streets’ initiative on track for passage

Nathan Hochman, left, and George Gascón. | Photos courtesy of Nathan Hochman for L.A. District Attorney; and the LA County District Attorney’s Office

LA city’s ‘Healthy Streets’ initiative on track for passage

By City News Service

Acity ballot initiative that would require the installation of various street modifications aimed at making roadways safer for pedestrians and bicyclists appears Wednesday to be headed for a resounding victory.

The Healthy Streets LA ballot measure, also known as Measure HLA, was pulling “yes” nods from more than 60% of Tuesday’s voters.

The early-voting results comprise of vote-by-mail ballots that arrived before election day, as well as ballots cast at vote centers before Tuesday.

After Tuesday night, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk will release daily updates for the next two weeks. The election results are set to be certified at the end of the month, March 29.

Even after facing a campaign against the measure, launched by firefighter unions, LA voters were supporting the measure that would require the city to follow and implement its Mobility Plan 2035 — a 20-year city planning document for improving LA streets and promoting other modes of transportation such as walking, biking and other transit options.

If the measure is official-

ly approved by the voters, the city would be required to implement modifications described in its Mobility Plan 2035 whenever certain street improvements are made to at least one-eighth of a mile of roadway.

Additionally, it would require the city to create a website so the public can follow the progress of Mobility Plan projects, and give residents.

Backers of the measure call it an attempt to improve street safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. According to city data, traffic violence took the lives of 336 Angelenos in 2023, and over the past five years more than 1,500 residents have been seriously injured annually.

But some previous efforts by the city to implement roadway modifications and make streets safer for nondrivers have come under fire for narrowing roads or even eliminating traffic lanes, leading to extensive motor vehicle congestion.

In 2017, the city eliminated some traffic lanes in the Mar Vista and Playa del Rey areas to improve access for pedestrians and bicyclists. The resulting uproar from motorists over increased congestion and traffic delays prompted the city to remove some of the modifications

Mayor Karen Bass is touting a new partnership between Los Angeles and California that officials say will help keep areas where homeless people live near freeways cleaner and safer, and was awaiting approval from the City Council on the deal Thursday.

Initiated by the Mayor’s Office, the agreement between the Los Angeles Department of Sanitation and the California Department of Transportation will allow city crews to access Caltrans properties to remove trash and debris. Bass’ office called it “an important strategy to help make sure public spaces are clean and safe following successful operations that bring unhoused people inside.”

The state will reimburse Los Angeles for costs associated with the partnership

and restore traffic lanes.

A similar uproar occurred two years later when the city installed a protected bike lane along a mile of Venice Boulevard on the Westside.

City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo recently estimated it would cost $3.1 billion over 10 years for the city to fully implement the measure.

Several LA City Council members questioned that estimate, saying Szabo’s report seemed to conflate costs associated with some of the city’s current obligations to repair sidewalks and ensure compliance with ADA requirements with Measure HLA.

Streets for All, the organization that led the initiative to place HLA on the ballot, also criticized the CAO’s numbers. The group came out with its own estimate that put the price at $286 million over 10 years for street safety measures, such as pedestrian enhanced districts and bike networks.

Measure HLA is backed by environmental and labor groups, as well as some nonprofit organizations, such as the Sierra Club, Unite Here! Local 11, SEIU Local 721, Climate Resolve, Streets for All and Biking While Black.

Opponents of the

measure, such as Keep LA Moving, the National Motorists’ Association and Safer Streets LA, argue the measure is a “one-size-fitsall” mandate that would negatively impact drivers and increase traffic. They also say it will cost the city and taxpayers.

United Firefighters of Los Angeles City, International Association of Fire Fighters, California Professional Firefighters and Keep LA Moving launched their “Don’t Slow Us Down!” campaign against the measure. Firefighters say

Measure HLA would negatively impact emergency services, contending that the Mobility Plan measures could obstruct roads for motor vehicles, making it tougher for emergency vehicles to navigate traffic.

Several LA City Council members have come out in support of Measure HLA, including Nithya Raman, Heather Hutt, Eunisses Hernandez, Katy Yaroslavsky, Imelda Padilla, Marqueece-Harris Dawson and Hugo Soto-Martinez.

The other council

Mayor Bass, Gov. Newsom advance partnership to address freeway encampments

By City News Service

in the Caltrans District 7 Metro Region.

“When we were in Sacramento last week, we raised the need to cut through red tape and come together to help keep public spaces near freeways clean and safe as we continue our work to bring unhoused Angelenos inside,” Bass said in a statement. “Governor Newsom and Secretary Omishakin shared our commitment and just days later, we are moving this agreement forward. That’s why we make these trips.”

For his part, Newsom added: “As we work to get people out of tents and into housing, collaboration is key. This agreement between the city of Los Angeles and the state underscores our shared commitment to addressing encampments and ensuring clean and safe public spaces for all Californians.”

The agreement must still be approved by the Board of Public Works and the Los Angeles City Council. Councilman John Lee, who chairs the council’s Public Works Committee, said the agreement creates an opportunity for the city to work more “efficiently and collaboratively” with the state.

“Addressing matters of public safety should not be limited by jurisdictional boundaries and so this collaboration will crucially help our city’s efforts to keep public spaces clean,” Lee said in a statement.

Bass led a delegation of City Council members to the state capitol last week to lobby for resources that would benefit the city’s efforts on homelessness and housing, public safety, and upcoming world events such as the 2028 Olympics.

Bass was preparing to

members have criticized the measure for its potential price tag. Councilwoman Traci Park has come out against it, backing the firefighter unions opposing the ballot initiative.

Mayor Karen Bass has also not commented on whether she supports or opposes the measure.

LA County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, state Sen. Ben Allen, Assemblyman Isaac Bryan and Assemblywoman Tina McKinnor have endorsed the measure as well.

travel again Wednesday to Paris alongside a delegation of city and Olympic officials to foster business

development and learn from French officials as that city prepares to host the Summer Olympics this

year. Los Angeles will host the 2028 games. Bass and the delegation are set to return Sunday.

| Photo courtesy of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation

LA Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom, seated, along with City Council members Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martinez, announce the agreement between the city and state to clean freeway areas. | Photo courtesy of Mayor Karen Bass/X

HLRMedia coM

Editorial editorial@beaconmedianews.com editor@hlrmedia.com

Graphics/Production production@beaconmedianews.com production@hlrmedia.com

Advertising advertising@beaconmedianews.com advertising@hlrmedia.com

Legal Advertising legals@beaconmedianews.com legals@hlrmedia.com

Business accounting@beaconmedianews.com accounting@hlrmedia.com

BEACON MEDIA ADDRESS:

820 S. Myrtle Ave. Monrovia, CA 91016

PHONE: (626) 301-1010

WEBSITE www.beaconmedianews.com

HLR MEDIA ADDRESS: 820 S. Myrtle Ave. Monrovia, CA 91016 PHONE: (626) 301-1010 www.HLRmedia.com

PRESS RELEASE SUBMISSIONS editor@beaconmedianews.com editor@hlrmedia.com

ANorthridge woman arrested in 2021 attack on US Capitol

Northridge woman is facing federal felony andmisdemeanor charges Thursday related to her alleged conduct during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 and made her first federal court appearance in downtown Los Angeles.

Kayla Reifschneider, 27, is charged in a criminal complaint filed in the District of Columbia with a felony offense of obstruction of an official proceeding and several misdemeanor offenses, including entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, and acts of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Reifschneider made her initial federal court appearance Wednesday in downtown Los Angeles.

According to court documents, Reifschneider — a member of the Telegram online chat group Patriots 45 — traveled from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C., in advance of Jan. 6, 2021. Patriots 45 was organized to support then-President Donald Trump and discuss what its members viewed as fraudulent election results.

In one post to the group, prosecutors allege, Reifschneider shared a screenshot of a Tweet from another individual, which read, “If you’re in D.C. on January 6th, STAY HOME! The domestic terrorists (Boogaloos, Prod Boys, etc.) are planning to break into federal buildings, cause violence against law enforcement, burn down buildings, and even try to shoot up federal employees and lawmakers. STAY

HOME!!!!!!!!”

After sharing the screenshot, Reifschneider apparently wrote, “Lmfaooo. What a l[os]er.” Another user responded, “Real Trump supporters are looking to arrest traitors ... not attack buildings lol,” court papers show.

Reifschneider allegedly replied, “Exactly. We arent antifa and blm. We have an actual mission.” The Justice Department contends she also discussed planning to provide that same individual with weapons — including a stun gun and pepper spray — to transport to Washington in advance of Jan. 6, 2021.

Prosecutors allege that Reifschneider was depicted in open-source video footage from Jan. 6, 2021, on the Upper West Terrace, yelling obscenities at police. She then purportedly left the area and joined a group of rioters on the east side of the Capitol, where members of the media had set up.

The media members were behind bike racks, separating themselves from the crowd. In an open-source video at

Oil sheen spotted in ocean off coast of Huntington Beach

Aroughly 2.5-mile-long oil slick was spotted Friday off the coast of Huntington Beach, but its source remained unclear.

According to the Coast Guard, the slick is about 1.5 miles off the coast.

“Aerial surveys are planned to assess the size and potential impacts,” Coast Guard officials said on social media. Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley wrote earlier on X, formerly Twitter, that crews were responding to the area, saying there were initial reports that oil had spilled from an off-shore platform.

this location, Reifschneider apparently can be seen yelling at members of the media. After other rioters knocked over and removed bike racks, Reifschneider was seen climbing over a small wall that had separated the media from the rioters, according to court documents.

As media members ran away and their equipment was destroyed, Reifschneider cheers and is seen spitting in the direction of the media and yelling expletives, federal prosecutors allege. She allegedly is then seen approaching, lifting and throwing a helmet in the direction of another individual, and moments later approaching a camera on the ground and stepping on it. She then leans down, lifts the camera and throws it back to the ground, according to prosecutors.

In another open-source video, capturing the following moments, Reifschneider celebrates. She allegedly raises a middle finger, shouts an expletive and yells, “It’s been four years I’ve been

wanting to do this!”

On Jan. 6, 2021, Reifschneider is alleged to have texted another person, “Time to show them who they should be afraid of. Curfew at 6. We will not comply.”

That individual wrote back the following morning, “So they beat the crap out of the police?” Reifschneider responded, “I definitely saw one getting help. Limping. We (messed) them up worse than antifa and blm. Lmao,” according to court papers.

Reifschneider’s alleged actions and the actions of others disrupted a joint session of Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes in the 2020 presidential election, according to the Justice Department.

Prosecutors note that in the 38 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 1,358 people have been charged in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the Capitol, including more than 486 defendants charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.

Kayla Reifschneider yells during the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. | Photo courtesy of the FBI

Teamsters, Hollywood union members rally ahead of contract negotiations

Ahead of last week’s meeting with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, the motion picture Teamsters rallied in Woodley Park in Encino with other Hollywood union members.

The union members demanded at the March 3 rally strong contracts ahead of the following day’s negotiations with the AMPTP. Their united message was that “Nothing moves without the crew.”

General President Sean M. O’Brien, General SecretaryTreasurer Fred Zuckerman and International Vice President and Teamsters Motion Picture Division Director Lindsay Dougherty spoke about the need for solidarity while highlighting the Teamsters’ priorities in bargaining.

“We are going to negotiate the strongest contract possible in film and television to protect our jobs, pay our members what they’re due and protect our work from dangerous, irresponsible technology,” O’Brien said.

By City News Service

“There’s too big a disparity between executive pay and the workers who make them a success. We are going to make sure that we close that gap. It’s not about what these studios are going to give us. It’s about what we are going to demand and take for working people,” O’Brien said.

The union leaders emphasized that behind every production is a skilled team of technicians, artisans, creatives, tradespeople and craftspeople who make up the crew that brings production to life.

In this year’s negotiation cycle, the crew unions stressed that they are

committed to addressing the specific priorities of each craft represented in the fight to protect, preserve and improve economic gains, retirement and health benefits and safe working conditions on and off set.

“We are going to remind Hollywood that nothing moves without the crew,” Dougherty said. “We make up many crafts but share the same fight.”

The Teamsters “Black Book” agreement covers nearly 4,000 members across 13 Western states.

The current contract expires July 31.

‘Rust’ armorer convicted of manslaughter for cinematographer’s on-set shooting

By City News Service

The armorer on the New Mexico set of the film “Rust” has been convicted of involuntary manslaughter for the 2021 on-set death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, who was struck by a bullet discharged from a prop gun wielded by actor Alec Baldwin, and was waiting to be sentenced Thursday.

Hannah GutierrezReed, 26, showed little emotion as the New Mexico jury’s verdict was read, convicting her of involuntary manslaughter but acquitting her of evidence tampering. She was taken into custody immediately following the jury’s verdict.

The jury deliberated for less than three hours before reaching its verdict. Gutierrez-Reed faces up to 18 months in prison. A sentencing date was not immediately set.

Baldwin, 65, is scheduled to go on trial in July on the same involuntary manslaughter charge stemming from the Oct. 21, 2021, shooting that occurred inside a church set, where Baldwin was wielding a supposed prop

gun while helping set camera angles for a scene.

The weapon discharged, killing the 42-year-old Hutchins and wounding film director Joel Souza.

Baldwin has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing stemming from the shooting, which reverberated through the film industry and prompted calls for revamped safety standards on sets, particularly involving weapons.

Baldwin has maintained he did not pull the trigger on the gun, and said he had been told it was “cold” — meaning it did not contain live ammunition.

The actor known for films such as “The Hunt for Red October” and TV appearances including “30 Rock” and “Saturday Night Live” was originally charged along with Gutierrez-Reed in January 2023, but prosecutors dropped the charges against him four months later, citing “new facts” that left them unable to proceed with the case.

Baldwin’s attorneys at the time were questioning whether the prop gun

that Baldwin was holding on the movie set during a rehearsal was functioning properly when it fired the live round.

In January of this year, Baldwin was indicted by a New Mexico grand jury, again on a charge of involuntary manslaughter. Baldwin has pleaded not guilty.

“Rust” assistant director David Halls previously pleaded no contest earlier to a charge of negligent use of a deadly weapon in exchange for a suspended sentence and six months’ probation. He testified during GutierrezReed’s trial.

Sheriff’s investigators eventually determined that live ammunition was found on the “Rust” set, mixed with blanks that are traditionally used in film production.

Filming on “Rust” — for which Baldwin is a producer — was suspended after the shooting, but has since resumed, with Hutchins’ husband serving as a producer under the terms of a lawsuit settlement.

| Photo by alexstand/Envato Elements

| Photo courtesy of Canva

California voters split on $6.4B mental health measure

By Joe Taglieri joet@beaconmedianews.com

Avoter initiative on Tuesday’s primary election ballot that calls for a revamp of the California mental health care system was still too close to call Friday amid ongoing vote-tallying.

Proposition 1 is a twopronged measure that has the support of Gov. Gavin Newsom and a number of Southern California officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and LA County Supervisors Hilda Solis and Janice Hahn. Proponents of the proposition claim it will drastically increase treatment beds and supportive housing, but opponents say it will lead to funding cuts for existing programs that have proven to be successful.

Friday morning’s vote tally signaled a nearly even split. Yes votes for Proposition 1 totaled 2,182,664, or 50.4%, compared with 49.6%, or 2,152,019 no votes, according to the California secretary of state.

If a majority of California voters approve the proposition, it would create 11,150 behavioral health treatment beds across the state, along with housing and 26,700 outpatient treatment slots, according to the governor’s office. About $1 billion of

the bond measure would go specifically to services for veterans.

The proposed law funds the delivery of those services by issuing $6.38 billion in bonds, and also through a reallocating funds provided by the 2004 voter-enacted Mental Health Services Act, which levied a 1% income tax on people earning more than $1 million per year. Funds from that measure mainly go to counties to finance mental health programs, but Proposition 1 aims to cede control over a lot of that funding to the state.

Newsom framed Proposition 1 as a step toward the fulfillment of 50-year-old calls for a statewide mental health care system that never materialized.

“We can make history,” Newsom said earlier this year during a Los Angeles event to begin the campaign in support of the ballot measure. “We can’t make up the last 50-60 years, but we can finally fulfill that vision that was set forth a halfcentury ago. This initiative, Proposition 1, promotes a number of things. It does not, however, promote the following — and that’s the status quo. If you’re for the status quo, vote no on

Proposition 1.”

Bass contended that in addition to righting years of governmental failure to address the state’s mental health crisis, Proposition 1 would also help alleviate rampant statewide problems surrounding the homelessness crisis.

“Think of how much money would be saved when Proposition 1 is passed and there’s actually facilities for folks, we get people off the streets,” Bass said. “We know that addiction and mental illness is a contributing factor to homelessness.”

The mayor added that homelessness and mental health issues are undeniably connected, and therefore the two social issues are inseparable.

“It is not enough to get a bed for a person,” Bass said. “We can get people off the street, we have demonstrated that people are willing to come off the street. But you have to address why they were unhoused to begin with. And you have to have a comprehensive approach, and Proposition 1 is a step forward in that direction.”

The group Californians Against Proposition 1 attacked the measure for being “huge, expensive and

destructive.” Opponents claimed it would result in more than a $9 billion expense born taxpayers over the life of the bonds, while ordering officials to redirect $30 billion in existing mental health services funds during the law’s first decade after enactment.

The result of that would be “cutting existing mental health services that are working,” according to opponents.

“Prop. 1 breaks promises made by the voters when

they first passed the Mental Health Services Act,” according to the opposition group. “The idea then was to create permanent, dedicated funding for long-neglected mental health services, including prevention, early intervention, programs for youth, programs for struggling and under-served populations, including racially and ethnically diverse groups and LGBTQ people. The MHSA is a proven model, offering ‘anything it takes’

The role of dashcams in vehicle accidents and their effect on your car insurance

By John Davey, Stacker

Car accidents are unforeseen events that can bring about numerous challenges, from property damage to potential injury claims. As technology advances, one device has gained popularity for its ability to provide invaluable evidence in accident situations — the dashcam.

In this article, Cheap Insurance will explore the value of dashcams in vehicle accidents and how they can play a role in both safeguarding your car insurance and finding the cheapest car insurance rates.

Dashcams act as impartial eyewitnesses, capturing real-time footage of the

road ahead and the events leading up to an accident. This video evidence can be invaluable in determining fault in an accident and preventing fraudulent claims. Insurance companies can use dashcam footage to assess the situation accurately, leading to fair claim settlements. As

a result, the claims process becomes smoother, and you are less likely to encounter disputes over liability.

When filing a car insurance claim, having dashcam footage can make all the difference. Instead of relying solely on verbal accounts or sketchy details, insurance adjusters can use the

dashcam video to recreate the accident scene accurately. This evidence not only expedites the claims process but also increases the likelihood of receiving a fair settlement.

Understanding insur-

See Dashcams Page 07

to help individuals who need a range of services.”

Propopsition 1 would significantly reduce MHSA funding “and take a hatchet to dozens of programs across the state that cannot survive without MHSA funding,” opponents claimed. “It orders counties to do more with less.”

The secretary of state’s office has until April 12 to complete vote counting and certify election results.

City News Service contributed to this report.

ance companies’ perspective on vehicle dashcams: Advantages and considerations

As dashcams become more prevalent in vehicles, insurance companies have taken notice of their

The Exodus Eastside Urgent Care Center offers mental health services. | Photo courtesy of Los Angeles County

The presidential candidate raising the most from individual donations in each state

By Elena Cox, Stacker

The 2024 primary elections are underway, and residents in some states have already chosen who they want to see on the ballot in November. But before heading to the polls, Americans showed support for their preferred candidate in 2023 by giving them their hard-earned cash.

Presidential hopefuls raised more than $119 million from individual donors last year, according to the latest data from the Federal Election Commission. Individuals can donate up to $3,300 to a primary campaign and another $3,300 for the general election but can spread that over multiple payments.

Republicans fared particularly well — receiving 75% of the total haul — but the once-crowded field has thinned out in recent months. The top fundraiser, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, ended his campaign in January. Coming in second was former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who raked in $22.5 million, followed by independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Democratic President Joe Biden.

One candidate noticeably absent from the top 10 fundraisers was former President Donald Trump, who received $145,000 from individual donors in 2023, FEC data shows. Prior to the 2016 general election, his presidential campaign received more than $75 million in donations from individual contributors.

The total amount a candidate raises is just one way to look at voter sentiment. A New York Times analysis of the same data shows Trump had more individual small donors in 2023 compared to Biden.

The former president is currently in the lead for his party’s nomination, winning 63 delegates so far, but recent polling shows the appetite for a Trump-Biden rematch may be waning among some voters.

Stacker analyzed campaign finance data compiled by the FEC to see which presidential candidates Americans gave the most money to in 2023. Candidates are ranked on the total dollar amount they received from individual campaign donors in each state.

Alabama — 1. Ron DeSantis, $182,309 in total donations; 2. Nikki Haley, $110,424 in total donations; 3. Tim Scott, $73,519 in total donations

Alaska — 1. Nikki Haley $29,453; 2. Ron DeSantis $28,945; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $27,457

Arizona — 1. Nikki Haley $548,629; 2. Ron DeSantis $484,841; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $416,910

Arkansas — 1. Asa Hutchinson $537,175; 2. Nikki Haley $184,141; 3. Joe Biden $38,759

California — 1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $3,825,496; 2. Ron DeSantis $3,453,531; 3. Joe Biden $2,412,342

Colorado — 1. Nikki Haley $466,920; 2. Ron DeSantis $419,404 in total donations; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $415,841

Connecticut — 1. Nikki Haley $374,874; 2. Ron DeSantis $309,780; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $241,656

Delaware — 1. Joe Biden $110,567; 2. Nikki Haley $43,845; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $38,359

Florida — 1. Ron DeSantis $11,859,915 in total donations; 2. Nikki Haley $2,144,580; 3. Jim Alexander Norris $1,430,000

Georgia — 1. Nikki Haley $763,466; 2. Ron DeSantis $457,259; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $330,055

Hawaii — 1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $126,453; 2. Joe Biden $90,834; 3. Nikki Haley $36,294

Idaho — 1. Nikki Haley $92,106; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $69,808; 3. Ron DeSantis $55,815

Illinois — 1. Nikki Haley $585,809; 2. Ron DeSantis $581,221; 3. Joe Biden $426,124

Indiana — 1. Mike Pence $920,190; 2. Ron DeSantis $333,802; 3. Nikki Haley $189,135

Iowa — 1. Nikki Haley $191,293; 2. Ron DeSantis $77,561; 3. Joe Biden $64,550

Kansas — 1. Ron DeSantis $236,468 in total donations; 2. Nikki Haley $109,454; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $63,816

Kentucky — 1. Ron DeSantis $114,723; 2. Nikki Haley $113,399; 3. Robert F.

DeSantis $126,031

Montana — 1. Nikki Haley $75,489; 2. Ron DeSantis $64,339; 3. Joe Biden $50,562

Nebraska — 1. Nikki Haley $92,480 in total donations; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $50,350; 3. Ron DeSantis $45,308

Nevada — 1. Nikki Haley $263,840; 2. Ron DeSantis $243,371; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $185,146 in total donations

New Hampshire — 1. Nikki Haley $204,972; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $120,320; 3. Joe Biden $102,727

New Jersey — 1. Chris

Christie $1,894,617; 2. Ron DeSantis $833,667; 3. Nikki Haley $608,684

New Mexico — 1. Joe

Kennedy Jr. $87,392

Louisiana — 1. Ron DeSantis $121,558; 2. Nikki Haley $116,172; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $73,704

Maine — 1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $152,806; 2. Joe Biden $82,446; 3. Nikki Haley $64,266

Maryland — 1. Nikki Haley $472,630; 2. Joe Biden $404,965; 3. Ron DeSantis $233,909

Massachusetts — 1. Nikki Haley $679,319; 2. Joe Biden $650,970; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $396,216

Michigan — 1. Perry Johnson; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $359,471; 3. Ron DeSantis $301,306

Minnesota — 1. Nikki Haley $358,165; 2. Doug Burgum $200,388; 3. Joe Biden $188,845

Mississippi — 1. Ron DeSantis $132,799; 2. Nikki Haley $43,995; 3. Tim Scott $23,183

Missouri — 1. Nikki Haley $409,769; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $137,492; 3. Ron

Biden $103,192; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $86,634; 3. Nikki Haley $85,160

New York — 1. Ron

DeSantis $2,144,556; 2. Nikki Haley; $1,322,654; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $1,251,864

North Carolina — 1. Nikki Haley $871,336; 2. Ron DeSantis $333,811; 3. Joe Biden $262,223

North Dakota — 1. Doug

Burgum $892,785; 2. Nikki

Haley $28,418; 3. Joe Biden $7,409

Ohio — 1. Vivek Ramaswamy $2,435,490; 2. Nikki Haley $679,125; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $327,664

Oklahoma — 1. Ron

DeSantis $204,374; 2. Nikki Haley $153,928; 3. Vivek Ramaswamy $62,618

Oregon — 1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $285,087; 2. Joe Biden $217,583; 3. Nikki Haley $183,041

Pennsylvania — 1. Ron DeSantis $809,469; 2. Nikki Haley $468,801; 3. Joe Biden $370,042

Rhode Island — 1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $59,826; 2.

Joe Biden $36,750; 3. Nikki Haley $30,153

South Carolina — 1. Nikki Haley $2,164,207; 2. Tim Scott $2,040,117; 3. Ron DeSantis $267,582

South Dakota — 1. Nikki Haley $58,011; 2. Ron DeSantis $49,372; 3. Doug Burgum $25,281

Tennessee — 1. Ron DeSantis $749,943; 2. Tim Scott $459,192; 3. Nikki Haley $382,911

Texas — 1. Ron DeSantis $3,020,079; 2. Nikki Haley $2,529,801; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $1,132,264

Utah — 1. Ron DeSantis $324,857; 2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $260,115; 3. Nikki Haley $159,867

Vermont — 1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $72,932; 2. Joe Biden $48,314; 3. Nikki Haley $23,044

Virginia — 1. Nikki Haley $698,141; 2. Ron DeSantis $634,529; 3. Joe Biden $411,793

Washington — 1. Joe Biden $628,604; 2. Nikki Haley $493,168; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $431,449

Washington, D.C. — 1. Joe Biden $299,618; 2. Nikki Haley $203,348; 3. Ron DeSantis $178,571

West Virginia — 1. Nikki Haley $28,296; 2. Ron DeSantis $22,487; 3. Joe Biden $19,740

Wisconsin — 1. Nikki Haley $334,010; 2. Ron DeSantis $287,044; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $123,357

Wyoming — 1. Ron

DeSantis $99,647; 2. Nikki Haley $59,666; 3. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $39,384

Story editing by Ashleigh Graf. Copy editing by Tim Bruns. Photo selection by Clarese Moller.

Republished pursuant to a CC BY-NC 4.0 license. This article was copy edited from its original version.

| Image courtesy of Stacker

potential impact on the insurance industry. Here’s an overview of what insurance companies think about vehicle dashcams and how these devices are influencing insurance practices.

Enhanced claims process

Insurance companies recognize that dashcams can significantly improve the claims process. The availability of video evidence from dashcams provides insurers with a clear and objective view of what transpired during an accident. This helps expedite claim investigations, leading to quicker claims settlements and reduced administrative overhead.

Improved claims accuracy

Dashcams contribute to increased claims accuracy by providing a more comprehensive view of an accident. This minimizes the possibility of fraudulent or exaggerated claims, as insurers can cross-reference the incident details with the dashcam footage to verify the accuracy of the claim.

Better determination of fault

In accidents where liability is disputed, dashcam footage acts as an unbiased witness, helping insurance companies determine fault more accurately. This objective evidence assists insurers in making fair and equitable claim decisions, reducing disputes between involved parties.

Promoting safer driving habits

Insurance companies also recognize the potential of dashcams to promote safer driving behaviors. Knowing that their actions are being recorded, drivers may become more cautious, leading to a reduction in risky driving behaviors such as speeding, abrupt lane changes, and running red lights. As a result, insurance companies may observe fewer accidents and claims, potentially leading to reduced insurance premiums for policyholders with dashcams.

Incentives for dashcam use

Some insurance companies have started offering incentives to policyholders who install dashcams in their vehicles. These incentives can include discounts on insurance premiums or special benefits that encourage policyholders to embrace this technology. By rewarding dashcam use, insurance companies hope to create a safer driving environment and mitigate risk.

Addressing privacy concerns

While recognizing

the benefits of dashcams, insurance companies are mindful of potential privacy concerns. They emphasize that the primary purpose of dashcams should be to record road incidents and support accident claims. Insurers also ensure that the use of dashcam footage adheres to data protection regulations and respects the privacy of individuals captured in the recordings.

Encouraging responsible usage

Insurance companies encourage responsible dashcam usage among their policyholders. This includes complying with local laws and regulations regarding dashcams, as well as using the footage solely for its intended purpose — documenting road incidents and supporting insurance claims.

Embracing technological advancements

As technology continues to evolve, insurance companies remain open to embracing new advancements in dashcam technology. They recognize the potential of innovative features, such as real-time streaming or AI-assisted accident detection, in further improving the claims process and enhancing customer experience.

Insurance companies view vehicle dashcams as a positive addition to the insurance landscape. These devices have the potential to streamline the claims process, enhance claims accuracy, and promote safer driving habits. While addressing privacy concerns and encouraging responsible usage, insurance companies embrace dashcams as a tool that benefits both insurers and policyholders. As dashcam technology continues to evolve, insurance companies will likely continue to explore and leverage its full potential to improve their services and foster a safer driving environment.

Navigating the privacy concerns of dashcams in vehicles

While dashcams offer undeniable benefits in terms of road safety, accident evidence, and potential insurance discounts, they also raise important privacy considerations. Personal privacy groups are at the forefront of scrutinizing the implications of widespread dashcam use. Let’s delve into some of the common concerns these groups raise regarding the deployment of dashcams in vehicles:

Invasion of privacy

One of the primary concerns that personal privacy groups voice is the potential invasion of privacy

Dashcams

caused by dashcams. These devices continuously record the surrounding environment, capturing not only road incidents but also the activities and conversations of passengers and pedestrians. There are apprehensions that this constant recording might encroach upon the privacy of individuals who may not be aware that they are being filmed.

Data storage and access

The storage of sensitive data is another issue that worries privacy advocates. Dash cams capture and store video footage, often including the vehicle’s location and surrounding details. Questions arise about who has access to this data, how long it is retained, and how securely it is stored. There are concerns that unauthorized access to this data or its misuse might compromise individuals’ privacy and security.

Potential misuse of footage

Privacy groups are wary of the potential misuse of dashcam footage. While the primary purpose of dashcams is to document accidents and ensure driver accountability, there is a possibility that the recorded footage could be exploited for other purposes. Whether it is for voyeurism, surveillance, or sharing online without consent, privacy advocates caution against the unintended consequences of unrestricted access to dashcam recordings.

Dual-edged sword of surveillance

While dashcams can help prevent insurance fraud and assist in resolving accident disputes, they also introduce a level of constant surveillance on public roads. Personal privacy groups argue that this raises questions about the balance between safety and individual freedom. Striking the right balance to ensure safety while preserving personal privacy is a delicate challenge that needs careful consideration.

Addressing privacy safeguards

To address these privacy

explore what law enforcement thinks about vehicle dashcams and how these devices are influencing their practices:

Supporting objective accident investigations

concerns, personal privacy groups advocate for clear guidelines and regulations governing the use of dashcams. They stress the importance of informed consent, ensuring that all passengers are aware of the presence of a dash cam and its recording capabilities. Additionally, they call for data protection measures, limiting access to recordings to authorized parties and establishing protocols for secure data storage and retention.

Encouraging responsible usage Privacy groups also emphasize the need for responsible usage of dashcams. This includes promoting ethical behavior among dashcam owners, respecting the privacy of others, and using the footage only for its intended purpose — recording road incidents

While personal privacy groups acknowledge the potential benefits of dashcams in enhancing road safety and supporting insurance claims, they remain vigilant about the possible privacy implications. Striking a balance between safety and privacy is crucial as we navigate the growing popularity of dashcams in vehicles. By promoting informed consent, data protection, and responsible usage, we can ensure that dashcams serve their intended purpose while respecting the privacy rights of individuals on the road. Collaboration between stakeholders, including personal privacy groups, vehicle manufacturers, and regulatory authorities, is essential to address these concerns effectively and responsibly integrate dashcams into our driving culture.

Insights from law enforcement: Evaluating the impact of vehicle dashcams

As dashcams become increasingly prevalent in vehicles, law enforcement agencies have been closely observing their impact on road safety, accident investigations, and law enforcement procedures. Let’s

Law enforcement officers appreciate the valuable role dashcams play in providing objective and unbiased evidence during accident investigations. The recorded footage helps reconstruct the sequence of events leading up to a collision, allowing officers to determine fault accurately. This streamlines the investigation process and ensures that justice is served based on concrete evidence.

Improving officer accountability

Dashcams not only hold civilians accountable for their actions on the road but also promote accountability within law enforcement itself. The presence of dashcams in police vehicles fosters transparency and helps maintain public trust in law enforcement. Officers know that their actions are under scrutiny, which can encourage them to act professionally and responsibly during interactions with the public.

Enhancing officer training and evaluation

Dashcam footage serves as a valuable training tool for law enforcement agencies. It allows supervisors to review officers’ responses to different scenarios, identify areas for improvement, and provide targeted training. Additionally, dashcams help in evaluating the appropriateness of an officer’s actions during critical incidents, ensuring that their conduct aligns with departmental policies and standards.

Resolving disputes and false allegations

Dashcams have become indispensable in resolving disputes between law enforcement and the public. In encounters where conflicting accounts arise, video evidence can clarify the situation and validate an officer’s actions. Moreover, dashcams help refute false allegations made against officers, preventing baseless complaints from tarnishing an officer’s reputation.

Upholding traffic law enforcement

Law enforcement officers acknowledge the positive impact of dashcams in promoting adherence to traffic laws. Knowing that their actions are being recorded, drivers tend to be more cautious and are less likely to engage in reckless driving behaviors. This contributes to overall road safety and reduces the

number of traffic violations.

Managing privacy concerns

While recognizing the advantages of dashcams, law enforcement agencies are also attentive to privacy concerns. They are committed to using dashcams responsibly and respecting the privacy rights of individuals when handling recorded footage. Striking a balance between accountability and privacy remains a priority for law enforcement agencies.

Embracing advancements in technology

As technology continues to evolve, law enforcement agencies are open to embracing advancements that can enhance their operations. Dashcams with additional features, such as live streaming capabilities and built-in GPS, are being explored for their potential to further improve officer safety and efficiency in emergency situations.

Overall, law enforcement views vehicle dashcams as valuable tools that contribute to safer roads, objective accident investigations, and enhanced officer accountability. While acknowledging their positive impact, law enforcement remains mindful of privacy concerns and strives to use dashcams responsibly. As dashcam technology continues to evolve, it is expected that law enforcement will continue to adapt and harness the full potential of these devices in their commitment to serving and protecting the community.

Final thoughts

Dashcams can be valuable tools in safeguarding your car insurance claims and enhancing road safety. The unbiased evidence they provide can expedite the claims process and protect against fraudulent activities. Moreover, with safer driving habits, you may even find opportunities for cheap insurance rates from insurers offering discounts for dashcam-equipped vehicles.

Before installing a dashcam, it’s essential to research local laws and choose a model that addresses privacy concerns appropriately. With the right dashcam, you’ll have an extra layer of protection on the road and the potential for a more favorable car insurance experience.

This story was produced by Cheapinsurance.com and reviewed and distributed by Stacker Media.

Republished pursuant to a CC BY-NC 4.0 license. This article was retitled and copy edited from its original version.

A dashboard camera. | Photo courtesy of Shomrey1/Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Probate Notices

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:

NICHOLAS E. TOMCHUK

CASE NO. 23STPB13717

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of NICHOLAS E. TOMCHUK.

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by LISA KIM in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that LISA KIM be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 03/28/24 at 8:30AM in Dept. 99 located at 111 N. HILL ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner

RICARDO GOMEZ - SBN 276552

LAW OFFICE OF RICARDO GOMEZ

15924 HALLIBURTON ROAD

HACIENDA HEIGHTS CA 91745

Telephone (626) 723-4187

3/4, 3/7, 3/11/24 CNS-3788595#

ARCADIA WEEKLY

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF RALPH RICHARD LOPEZ

Case No. 24STPB00448

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both, of RALPH RICHARD LOPEZ A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by Richard Lopez in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that Lisa Marie Valenzuela be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an in-

terested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held on May 6, 2024 at 8:30 AM in Dept. No. 67 located at 111 N. Hill St., Los Angeles, CA 90012.

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk. Attorney for petitioner:

MARIO D VEGA ESQ SBN 197659

GIOVANNI H FALCON ESQ SBN 340480

VISTAS LAW GROUP LLP 1150 S OLIVE ST STE 600

LOS ANGELES CA 90015

CN104881 LOPEZ Mar 4,7,11, 2024

ROSEMEAD READER

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:

ARMANDO L. NAJERA

CASE NO. 24STPB02371

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of AR-

MANDO L. NAJERA.

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by VICTORIA NAJERA in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that VICTORIA NAJERA be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 04/02/24 at 8:30AM in Dept. 44 located at 111 N. HILL ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person in-

terested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner

BRADLEY R. KLEIHEGE - SBN 323025

LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL K.

LANNING, APLC

11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD., STE. 750 LOS ANGELES CA 90049

Telephone (310) 820-1600 BSC 224785 3/7, 3/11, 3/14/24

CNS-3790333#

ROSEMEAD READER

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: JACK LEE JACKSON

CASE NO. 24STPB02351

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of JACK

LEE JACKSON. A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by REBECCA GOMEZ in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that REBECCA GOMEZ be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests the decedent’s WILL and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The WILL and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 04/02/24 at 8:30AM in Dept. 29 located at 111 N. HILL ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner

ANNA VALIENTE GOMEZ - SBN 246661 2146 BONITA AVENUE LA VERNE CA 91750

Telephone (909) 593-1388 BSC 224803 3/11, 3/14, 3/18/24

CNS-3790906# ROSEMEAD READER

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF JOAN E. McFADDEN aka JOAN ELAINE McFADDEN

aka JOAN McFADDEN

Case No. 24STPB02439

To all heirs, beneficiaries, cred-itors, contingent creditors, and

persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both, of JOAN E. McFADDEN aka JOAN ELAINE McFADDEN aka JOAN McFADDEN

A PETITION FOR PROBATE

has been filed by Ellen Lozar in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that Ellen Lozar be ap-pointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the dece-dent.

THE PETITION requests the decedent’s will and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administra-tion authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objec-tion to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held on April 11, 2024 at 8:30 AM in Dept. No. 62 located at 111 N. Hill St., Los Angeles, CA 90012.

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your ap-pearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowl-edgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk. Attorney for petitioner: PATRICK L BARNES ESQ SBN 39511 PATRICK L BARNES A LAW CORPORATION PO BOX 660267 ARCADIA CA 91066 CN104922 MCFADDEN Mar 11,14,18, 2024 SAN GABRIEL SUN

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF CYNTHIA D. THOMPSON

Case No. 24STPB02375

To all heirs, beneficiaries, cred-itors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both, of CYNTHIA D. THOMPSON

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by Andrea S. Moss in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES. THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that Andrea S. Moss be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administra-tion authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objec-tion to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will

be held on April 2, 2024 at 8:30 AM

in Dept. No. 44 located at 111 N. Hill St., Los Angeles, CA 90012.

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your ap-pearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code.

Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowl-edgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk. Attorney for petitioner: NEAL B JANNOL ESQ SBN 180713

LAW OFFICES OF NEAL B JANNOL 10850 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 825 LOS ANGELES CA 90024

CN104924 THOMPSON Mar 11,14,18, 2024

SAN GABRIEL SUN

Public Notices

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME PETITION OF Yao, Kuan Ling FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER: 24PSCP00048 Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles 400 Civic Center Plaza, Pomona, Ca 91766, East Judicial District TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner Yao, Kuan Ling filed a petition with this court for a decree changing names as follows: Present name a. OF Yao, Kuan Ling to Proposed name Lin, Kuanlin 2. THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter shall appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reason for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing NOTICE OF HEARING

a. Date: 04/12/2024 Time: 9:00AM Dept: L. Room: 302 The address of the court is same as noted above. 3. a. A copy of this Order to Show Cause shall be published at least once each week for four successive weeks prior to the day set for hearing on the petition in the following newspaper of general circulation, printed in this county: Azusa Beacon DATED: January 31, 2024 Bryant Y. Yang JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT Pub. February 19, 26, March 4, 11, 2024 AZUSA BEACON

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME PETITION OF Daniel Jianhong Yao FOR CHANGE OF NAME

CASE NUMBER: 24PSCP00047 Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles 400 Civic Center Plaza, Pomona, Ca 91766, East Judicial District TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner Daniel Jianhong Yao

CASE NUMBER:

les 150 West Commonwealth Avenue, Alhambra, Ca 91801-3787, Northeast Judicial District TO ALL INTERESTED

PERSONS: 1. Petitioner OF Qiang Zhu and Yi Shi filed a petition with this court for a decree changing names as follows: Present name a. OF Shirou Zhu to Proposed name Alice Zhu 2. THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter shall appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reason for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing NOTICE OF HEARING

a. Date: 05/10/2024

Time: 8:30AM Dept:

X. The address of the court is same as noted above. 3. a. A copy of this Order to Show Cause shall be published at least once each week for four successive weeks prior to the day set for hearing on the petition in the following newspaper of general circulation, printed in this county: Arcadia

Weekly DATED: February 22, 2024 Robin Miller Sloan JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT Pub. February 26, March 4, 11, 18, 2024 ARCADIA WEEKLY

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME PETITION OF Gisselle Leon FOR CHANGE OF NAME

CASE NUMBER:24AHCP00053 Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles 150 W. Commonwealth Ave, Alhambra, Ca 91801, Northeast Judicial District TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner Gisselle Leon filed a petition with this court for a decree changing names as follows: Present name a. OF Gisselle Leon to Proposed name Gisselle Madrigal de Leon 2. THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter shall appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reason for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing NOTICE OF HEARING a.

Date: 04/05/2024 Time: 8:30AM Dept: V. The address of the court is same as noted above. 3. a. A copy of this Order to Show Cause shall be published at least once each week for four successive weeks prior to the day set for hearing on the petition in the following newspaper of general circulation, printed in this county: Rosemead Reader DATED: February 22, 2024 Robin Miller Sloan JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR

COURT Pub. March 4, 11, 18, 25, 2024

ROSEMEAD READER

NOTICE OF LIEN SALE

NOTICE IS HEREBY given San Dimas Lock-Up Self Storage in City of San Dimas intends to sell Personal Property described below to enforce a lien imposed on said property pursuant to Sections 2170021716 of the Business & Professions Code, Section 2328 of the UCC, Section 535 of the Penal Code and provisions of Civil Code.

San

Glendale City Notices

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE

On February 6, 2024, the Council of the City of Glendale adopted Ordinance No. 6021

entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA AMENDING COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE FEE RESOLUTION REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION FINE AMOUNTS TO ADD VIOLATIONS SUBJECT TO FINES AND PROCESSING FEES RELATED TO THE RENTAL RIGHTS PROGRAM VIOLATIONS

A copy of said Ordinance will be on file and available for public inspection in the office of the City Clerk.

In substance, said Ordinance establishes fine amounts to be assessed by means of an administrative citation for violations of Chapter 9.30 of the Glendale Municipal Code in the amount of $400 for the first violation, $1,000 for the second violation, and $2,000 for the third violation, as well as late fees and processing fees.

Suzie Abajian PhD City Clerk

Publish March 11, 2024

GLENDALE INDEPENDENT

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE

On March 28, 2023, the Council of the City of Glendale, California adopted Ordinance No. 6004, entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND BABAK B. GOLBAHAR FOR THE VERDUGO JOBS CENTER (VJC) FACILITY

LOCATED AT 1255 SOUTH CENTRAL AVENUE, GLENDALE, CA 91204 FOR A 3-YEAR

PERIOD FROM APRIL 1, 2023 TO MARCH 31, 2026.”. A copy of said Ordinance is on file and available for public inspection in the office of the City Clerk.

In substance, this Ordinance approved a lease agreement between the City as Tenant and Babak B. Golbahar as Landlord, authorizing the City to lease the property at 1255 South Glendale Avenue for use as the Verdugo Jobs Center for a three-year term from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2026.

Suzie Abajian, Ph.D. City Clerk of the City of Glendale

Publish March 11, 2024

GLENDALE INDEPENDENT

Probate

Notices form is available from the court clerk.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:

HALINA BOZENNA PLACHCINSKA

CASE NO. 24STPB02230

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of HALINA BOZENNA PLACHCINSKA.

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by JOHN DEPIAZZA in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that JOHN DEPIAZZA be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 03/28/24 at 8:30AM in Dept. 99 located at 111 N. HILL ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice

with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner: Edmond E. Salem, Esq. SBN. 228274

The Salem Law Firm, PC 11620 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 715 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (310) 828-7882 3/7, 3/11, 3/14/24 CNS-3789896#

BURBANK INDEPENDENT

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:

DEBORAH LYNN BOUDREAU AKA DEBORAH LYNN JACKSON

CASE NO. PROVA2400179

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of DEBORAH LYNN BOUDREAU AKA DEBORAH LYNN JACKSON.

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by BRENT ERNEST JACKSON, JR. AND PATRICK RAY JACKSON in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.

Attorney for Petitioner TRACY M. POTTS - SBN 148808, EMANUEL AVILA MARTIN - SBN 323852, LEGACY LAW GROUP 180 PROMENADE CIRCLE, SUITE 120 SACRAMENTO CA 95834

Telephone (916) 643-2000 3/4, 3/7, 3/11/24 CNS-3788868#

GLENDALE INDEPENDENT

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF Talin Zohrabian, Decedent CASE NO. 24STPB02210

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both, of: Talin Zohrabian, Decedent

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by Lilia Ohanians in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that Lilia Ohanians be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act with full authority . (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held on 03/28/2024 at 8:30 am in Dept. 11 located at 111 N. HILL ST. LOS ANGELES CA 90012 STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE,STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE.

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:

LYNNE MARIE MASON AKA

LYNNE M. MASON CASE NO.

30-2024-01382818-PR-LACMC

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of LYNNE MARIE MASON AKA

LYNNE M. MASON.

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by JOEL JAY MASON in the Superior Court of California, County of ORANGE.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that JOEL JAY MASON be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that BRENT ERNEST JACKSON, JR. AND PATRICK RAY JACKSON be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests the decedent’s WILL and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The WILL and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows:

04/11/24 at 9:00AM in Dept. F1 located at 17780 ARROW BLVD, FONTANA, CA 92335

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code.

Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner

SUE C. SWISHER - SBN 243310

LAW OFFICE OF SUE C. SWISHER

20955 PATHFINDER RD., STE 100 DIAMOND BAR CA 91765

Telephone (909) 843-6490 3/11, 3/14, 3/18/24

CNS-3790901#

been filed by HUNG ANH TRUONG in the Superior Court of California, County of ORANGE. THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that HUNG ANH TRUONG be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows:

05/08/24 at 1:30PM in Dept. CM05 located at 3390 HARBOR BLVD., COSTA MESA, CA 92626

NOTICE IN PROBATE CASES

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 04/04/24 at 8:30AM in Dept. 5 located at 111 N. HILL ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 05/09/24 at 1:30PM in Dept. CM06 located at 3390 HARBOR BLVD., COSTA MESA, CA 92626

NOTICE IN PROBATE CASES

The court is providing the convenience to appear for hearing by video using the court’s designated video platform. This is a no cost service to the public. Go to the Court’s website at The Superior Court of California - County of Orange (occourts.org) to appear remotely for Probate hearings and for remote hearing instructions. If you have difficulty connecting or are unable to connect to your remote hearing, call 657-622-8278 for assistance. If you prefer to appear in-person, you can appear in the department on the day/time set for your hearing.

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk. Attorney for Petitioner ROBERT L. COHEN, ESQ. - SBN 150913, LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT L. COHEN, INC. 8081 ORANGETHORPE AVE. BUENA PARK CA 90621 Telephone (714) 522-8880 3/11, 3/14, 3/18/24 CNS-3790963# ANAHEIM PRESS

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: LOI VAN NGUYEN AKA TRAM TU THIENG CASE NO. 30-2024-01382137-PR-LACMC

To all heirs, beneficiaries,

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has

The court is providing the convenience to appear for hearing by video using the court’s designated video platform. This is a no cost service to the public. Go to the Court’s website at The Superior Court of California - County of Orange (occourts.org) to appear remotely for Probate hearings and for remote hearing instructions. If you have difficulty connecting or are unable to connect to your remote hearing, call 657-622-8278 for assistance. If you prefer to appear in-person, you can appear in the department on the day/time set for your hearing.

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code.

Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept

by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner

ANH VIET PHAM - SBN 189030

LAW OFFICE OF ANH VIET PHAM 14602 SHEFFIELD ST. WESTMINSTER CA 92683

Telephone (714) 713-5953

3/11, 3/14, 3/18/24

CNS-3791274#

ANAHEIM PRESS

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: DOMINADOR BALLESTEROS

CASE NO. 23STPB10832

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of DOMINADOR BALLESTEROS.

A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by PERPETUA BALLESTROS PRESTO in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that PERPETUA BALLESTROS PRESTO be appointed as Special Administrator to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.

YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.

Attorney for Petitioner

DEBBY S. DOITCH, ESQ. - SBN 266731, ANDREW D. NUTBROWN, ESQ. - SBN 343702, KJMLAW Partners, PLC

301 EAST COLORADO BLVD., SUITE 600 PASADENA CA 91101

Telephone (626) 568-9300

3/11, 3/14, 3/18/24

CNS-3791571#

BURBANK INDEPENDENT

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: DAVID E. STECYK

CASE NO. 24STPB02577

To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the WILL or estate, or both of DAVID E. STECYK. A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by ROSINA D. STECYK in the Superior Court of California, County of LOS ANGELES.

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that ROSINA D. STECYK be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.

THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.)

The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.

A HEARING on the petition will be held in this court as follows: 04/05/24 at 8:30AM in Dept. 9 located at 111 N. HILL ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.

IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under section 9052 of the California Probate Code. Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult

The following person(s) is (are) doing business as Van Zaig Gallery 1 rancho Clancy Rancho Mirage, CA 92270

County SVZGALLERY LLC (CA, 1 Rancho Clancy, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 Riverside County

This business is conducted by: a limited liability company (llc). Registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or

listed herein on December 1, 2023. I declare that all the information in this statement is true and correct. (A registrant who declares as true any material matter pursuant to Section 17913 of the Business and Professions Code, that the registrant knows to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousands dollars ($1000).)

s. Susan Tucker, Managing Member Statement filed with the County of Riverside on February 8, 2024

NOTICE: In accordance with subdivision (a) of section 17920, a fictitious name statement generally expires at the end of the five years from the date on which it was filed in the office of the county clerk, except, as provided in subdivision (b) of section 17920, where it expires 40 days after any changes in the facts set forth in the statement pursuant to section 17913 other than a change in the residence address of a registered owner. A new Fictitious Business Name Statement must be filed before the expiration. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14411 Et Seq., business and professions code). I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.

Peter Aldana, County, Clerk File# R-202401750 Pub. 02/19/2024, 02/26/2024, 03/04/2024, 03/11/2024 Riverside Independent

The

92553

The

s. Die astou Sarre Statement filed with the County of Riverside on January 31, 2024

NOTICE: In accordance with subdivision (a) of section 17920, a fictitious name statement generally expires at the end of the five years from the date on which it was filed in the office of the county clerk, except, as provided in subdivision (b) of section 17920, where it expires 40 days after any changes in the facts set forth in the statement pursuant to section 17913 other than a change in the residence address of a registered owner. A new

Fictitious Business Name Statement must be filed before the expiration. The filing of this statement does not of

authorize the use this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14411 Et Seq., business and professions code). I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.

Peter Aldana, County, Clerk File# R-202401387

Pub. 02/19/2024, 02/26/2024, 03/04/2024, 03/11/2024 Riverside Independent

The following person(s) is (are) doing business as

Peter Aldana, County, Clerk File# R-202400450

Pub. 02/19/2024, 02/26/2024, 03/04/2024, 03/11/2024 Riverside Independent

The following person(s) is (are) doing business as FARMACIA RIVERSIDE 1778 Columbia Ave Suite C Riverside, CA 92507

Riverside County FARMACIA RIVERISDE LLC (CA, 13168 Stanton Dr, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739

Riverside County

This business is conducted by: a limited liability company (llc). Registrant has not yet begun to transact business under the fictitious business name or

Ridge Dr Corona, CA 92882

Riverside County

KP & Son’s Foods Inc. (CA, 3698747

625 Sky Ridge Dr, Corona, CA 92882

Riverside County

This business is conducted by: a corporation. Registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed herein on January 1, 2020. I declare that all the information in this statement is true and correct. (A registrant who declares as true any material matter pursuant to Section 17913 of the Business and Professions Code, that the registrant knows to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousands dollars ($1000).)

s. Mohammed Peerbhoy, CEO Statement filed with the County of Riverside on February 22, 2024

NOTICE: In accordance with subdivision (a) of section 17920, a fictitious name statement generally expires at the end of the five years from the date on which it was filed in the office of the county clerk, except, as provided in subdivision (b) of section 17920, where it expires 40 days after any changes in the facts set forth in the statement pursuant to section 17913 other than a change in the residence address of a registered owner. A new Fictitious Business Name Statement must be filed before the expiration. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14411 Et Seq., business and professions code). I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.

Peter Aldana, County, Clerk

File# R-202402263 Pub. 02/26/2024, 03/04/2024,

s. Mohannad Rashid, CEO Statement filed with the County of Riverside on February 21, 2024

NOTICE: In accordance with subdivision (a) of section 17920, a fictitious name statement generally expires at the

years

A

the date

(a)

State-

-

at the end of

which it

of the County

as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 17920, where it expires 40 days after any change in the facts set forth in the statement pursuant to Section 17913 other than a change in the residence address of a registered owner. A new Fictitious Business Name Statement must be filed before the expiration. 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 14411 et seq., Business and Professions Code) File#: FBN20240001864 Pub: 03/04/2024, 03/11/2024, 03/18/2024, 03/25/2024 San Bernardino Press

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT File No. FBN20240002093 The following persons are doing business as: (1). MINI LASHES (2). MINI LASH , 312 N Mountain Ave, Upland, CA 91786. Mailing Address, 312 N Mountain Ave, Upland, CA 91786. MINI LASHES INC (CA, 5467 Moreno St UNIT C, Montclair, CA 91763; QIANLEI

HUA, PRESIDENT. County of Principal Place of Business: San Bernardino This business is conducted by: a corporation. Registrant has not yet begun to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed herein. By signing below, I declare that I have read and understand the reverse side of this form and that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true any material matter pursuant to Section 17913 of the Business and Professions Code that the registrant knows to be false is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code Sections 6250- 6277). /s/ QIANLEI HUA, PRESIDENT. This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on March 1, 2024 NoticeIn accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 17920. A Fictitious Name Statement generally expires at the end of five years from the date on which it was filed in the office of the County Clerk, except, as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 17920, where it expires 40 days after any change in

16852 Katie Dr, Riverside, CA 92504

Riverside County

This business is conducted by: a corporation. Registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed herein on October 1, 2023. I declare that all the information in this statement is true and correct. (A registrant who declares as true any material matter pursuant to Section 17913 of the Business and Professions Code, that the registrant knows to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousands dollars ($1000).)

s. David R Alvarez, Vice President Statement filed with the County of Riverside on March 6, 2024

NOTICE: In accordance with subdivision (a) of section 17920, a fictitious name statement generally expires at the end of the five years from the date on which it was filed in the office of the county clerk, except, as provided in subdivision (b) of section 17920, where it expires 40 days after any changes in the facts set forth in the statement pursuant to section 17913 other than a change in the residence address of a registered owner. A new Fictitious Business Name Statement must be filed before the expiration. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14411 Et Seq., business and professions code). I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.

Peter Aldana, County, Clerk File# R-202402968

Pub. 03/11/2024, 03/18/2024, 03/25/2024, 04/01/2024 Riverside Independent

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS

CHLA study: Children with sickle cell anemia lack preventive care

By City News Service

Children with sickle cell anemia are vulnerable to serious infections and stroke, but many do not receive the preventive care that could help them stay healthier longer, according to a new Children’s Hospital Los Angeles study.

To assess the quality of preventive care received by children with sickle cell anemia, a team of investigators led by CHLA researchers examined how many children met two nationally endorsed quality standards. The researchers measured how many young children with sickle cell anemia received adequate preventive antibiotics to prevent infection and if children and adolescents with sickle cell anemia received annual brain ultrasounds to assess their stroke risk.

“What we found, unfor-

tunately, was not what we’d hoped for,” said Dr. Ashaunta Anderson, a CHLA pediatrician who led the study.

When CHLA researchers and their collaborators compared Medicaid claims data from California and Georgia from 2010 to 2019, they found that only about 20% of children from three months to five years old with sickle cell anemia received preventive antibiotics in a given year, while about half of children and adolescents between the ages of two to 15 received an annual transcranial Doppler ultrasound, the study found.

Twice-daily doses of antibiotics, given consistently, can protect young children with sickle cell anemia from developing serious infections, researchers said. Children

and adolescents with abnormal ultrasounds have a higher-than-normal risk of stroke, but once identified, their risk can be significantly reduced by receiving regular blood transfusions.

The research was published in the journal Pediatrics.

About 100,000 people in the United States have sickle cell anemia, including roughly one out of every 400 Black people and about one in 19,000 Latinos. The chronic, genetic disease distorts the doughnutshaped red blood cells that carry oxygen in blood into sickle shapes, leading them to clump in vessels and block blood flow to organs. These acutely painful episodes in children can lead to complications, including joint pain, infections, organ damage and

stroke.

“We have a long history of treating patients in our Sickle Cell Disease Program at CHLA,” said Dr. Thomas Coates, CHLA section head, hematology, and the study’s co-author. “We provide specialist care and access to clinical trials. We focus on developing innovations in safer care, such as stroke prevention. We also provide practical support for patients’ families, such as help with transportation to appointments to make it easier for them to get their children consistent care.”

CHLA found that children with private insurance generally meet the standards for preventive care, but because of health care disparities, the quality of care received by children from low-income families insured by Medicaid varies

Senate seat

“’Rigged’ means manipulated by dishonest means,” Porter said in a statement.

“That is dishonest means to manipulate the outcome. I said ‘rigged by billionaires’ and our politics are — in fact — manipulated by big dark money. Defending democracy means calling that out,” Porter said.

She made it clear she did not claim the vote count or the election process was rigged. Rather the donors funding candidates are using their money in inappropriate ways. She said the state election process is “beyond reproach.”

Many pundits were anticipating a Schiff-Garvey runoff, with most believing it could result in an easy Schiff victory in heavily Democratic California as they fight for a full six-year term in the Senate.

Schiff and Garvey will actually appear twice on the November ballot, with both also seeking to fill out the remainder of Feinstein’s term, which ends in January.

Schiff claimed victory at a Hollywood rally Tuesday night, but his speech was interrupted by protesters who loudly chanted “Cease fire now” and “Free Palestine.” While security officials dragged some protesters out of the room, seemingly dozens of others remained, persistently chanting and forcing Schiff to try to speak over the din.

He appeared to eventu-

ally cut his remarks short due to the disruption, but he was able to thank supporters and his family.

“It looks like we’re going to the general, ladies and gentlemen,” Schiff said. “So a little over a year ago we kicked off this campaign and I won’t say it wasn’t without its bumps along the way. I seem to recall, although it’s a little hazy, within hours of our announcement a certain Kevin McCarthy kicked me off the Intelligence Committee. ... And then at the urging and badgering of Donald Trump, the Republicans censured me for holding him accountable. ... And then Trump would attack me after rally after rally. ...

“But you had my back every step of the way, every step of the way. You helped us build the biggest grassroots campaign for Senate in California history and I cannot thank you enough.”

Things were notably

calmer in Palm Desert, where Garvey hailed his advance to the November runoff. He compared the election results to “what it’s like to hit a walk-off home run.”

“Your vote was your shared belief with me that California is no longer the heartbeat of America — but now just a murmur,” Garvey said. “That we have challenges to face up to — like closing the border. And responsibilities to live up to — like helping the homeless off the streets with a pathway back to their dignity. And that if we do those things and more — that our best days will be ahead of us. With California once again being the heartbeat of America. As we celebrate tonight — I want you to know that we haven’t come this far, to only go this far.

“When I stepped on the field for the Dodgers and Padres, I didn’t play for Democrats, Republicans or Independents — I played

by state and can depend on whether the child’s family lives in an urban or a rural area.

As patients got older, they were less likely to receive their annual scan for stroke risk. However,

the percentage of children getting scanned for stroke overall increased during the years of the study, which CHLA experts credit to growing data collection efforts by states — leading to more awareness.

for all the fans. And now I’m running for all of the people.”

Porter conceded defeat during a gathering with supporters in Long Beach, saying she remains convinced that voters want to see change in Washington.

“You want leaders who demand better from both parties, leaders who want progress not partisanship, officials whose bottom line is people, not profits,” she said. “That is why we were able to turn heads in this campaign and make the people in power listen and run scared. Let’s be honest, I think all of us can agree that our government isn’t working well for us, for families, for Californians, for workers, for consumers. So many of those in power are too interested in helping other powerful people instead of paying attention to the needs of

everyday people. Too many are more interested in being an elected official than in actually doing anything to fix the problems that everyday people face.”

Lee issued a statement early Tuesday night thanking her campaign supporters and stressing the issues she was fighting for in the campaign.

“Universal healthcare, climate justice, economic equity, reproductive freedom, peace and security around the world — these are only ideas if we don’t fight for them,” Lee said. “They’re fights I’ve dedicated my life to.

“And seeing the passion and enthusiasm on the ground, willing to do the work and come out and join this fight — I couldn’t be prouder to know that progress is happening here in California.”

Schiff raised eyebrows

during the campaign by running ads that framed the race as a contest between his Democratic credentials and Garvey’s record. Those ads helped boost Garvey in the polls. Political analysts said Schiff was intentionally raising Garvey up so can fend off the Democratic candidates and dispatch Garvey in the November election.

“It’s pretty clear Schiff is trying to bolster Garvey’s credibility as his opponent in the runoff and then Schiff can take the rest of the summer off,” Democratic political consultant Garry South told the Los Angeles Times.

Because of Democrats’ overwhelming voter registration edge in the state and California’s open primary system, analysts have opined that the race for the Senate will effectively be over if Schiff faces Garvey.

| Image courtesy of the National Institutes of Health/Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Katie Porter. | Photo courtesy of Katie Porter for Senate

Adam Schiff, left, and Steve Garvey. | Photos courtesy of Adam Schiff for Senate; Steve Garvey for US Senate

Hahn outpaces Villanueva, RPV mayor in supervisorial reelection bid

By City News Service

LosAngelesCounty Supervisor Janice Hahn appeared to be heading for a third and final term Wednesday, narrowly maintaining enough of a margin to avoid a November runoff with former Sheriff Alex Villanueva.

Updated results from Tuesday’s election showed Hahn with 55.6% of the vote, just over the 50% she needs to avoid the runoff. Villanueva was a distant second with 29.9%, followed by Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor John Cruikshank, who had 14.6%.

It was unclear how many ballots from District 4 still need to be tallied.

The District 4 seat represents more than 50 communities, including Artesia, Long Beach, Pico Rivera, Torrance, Whittier, along with the unincorporated areas of East La Mirada, Santa Catalina Island, Westfield and the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Harbor City, San Pedro and Wilm-

ington. Hahn was elected in 2016 and reelected to another term in 2020. Previously, she served three terms on the Los Angeles City Council representing the 15th District before being elected to Congress in California’s 36th, and later, 44th districts.

Hahn, 71, said her top priority is confronting the homelessness crisis. According to her campaign’s website, “Hahn is leading the implementation of California’s new Care Court in LA County, which is helping get unhoused people with severe mental health issues off our streets and into supervised care facilities to receive the treatment they need.”

As a supervisor, Hahn has “created housing solutions across her district quickly and affordably using former motels and vacant government property,” her campaign website states.

The campaign also

touts her efforts to improve public safety and emergency response.

“She has invested in local police, firefighters and paramedics to reduce emergency response times and is working to increase the number of Metro police in stations and on trains to make LA Metro safer,” Hahn’s campaign said.

Hahn is also fighting to

“reduce gun violence and keep guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals, including those accused of domestic violence.”

During his term as sheriff, Villanueva often clashed with the Board of Supervisors. He was also accused of mishandling certain issues within his department, including the investigations into deputy

DA race

same,” Hochman said.

Hatami, who was hired as a deputy D.A. in 2006, said he wants to restore public safety and make meaningful reforms in the office.

“As your district attorney, I will prioritize public safety by implementing comprehensive strategies to protect all of our

Asheriff’s department team that connects homeless people with housing and support services recently worked throughout Rancho Cucamonga and surrounding areas of San Bernardino County.

On from 6 a.m. to 4 p.m. the Community Service & Reentry Division, Homeless Outreach Proactive Enforcement, or HOPE, team conducted Operation Shelter Me in Rancho Cucamonga and surrounding unincorporated areas of the county.

The outreach effort aimed to connect county staff members with unhoused residents, according to a county statement. The four-man

communities from danger, prevent crime, maintain peace, hold violent offenders accountable and establish a path to success for low-level offenders,” Hatami said on his campaign’s website.

Hatami also served in the nation’s first Complex Child Abuse unit at the Hall

of Justice in downtown Los Angeles, according to his campaign.

“I believe in reforms, rehabilitation and second chances,” Hatami said. “However, we must first and always follow the law. We must balance reforms with public safety and protecting

our most vulnerable.”

Hatami vows to “bring transparency back to the people’s office, hold wrongdoers accountable, and make real, meaningful reforms.”

Most of the challengers in the race said they planned to reverse the sweeping policy changes Gascón enacted on

gangs and refusing to enforce COVID 19 vaccine mandates — criticisms he vocally rebuffed.

Villanueva, 61, served as sheriff from 2018 to 2022, when voters gave the job to former Long Beach Sheriff Robert Luna. Before being elected sheriff, Villanueva was a deputy sheriff for more than 30 years. He ran on a platform of restoring safety and security, and reducing the impact of homelessness on families and businesses.

“The Board of Supervisors has a responsibility to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the county,” Villanueva said in September, when he announced his candidacy. “In that regard, they have failed absolutely miserably.”

He also said he wanted to rebuild the sheriff’s department “after it was gutted by the defunding movement.” He also advocated repeal of Prop 47, which voters passed in November 2014. It classi-

fied retail theft under $950 as a misdemeanor, not a felony.

Cruikshank, 57, said he wanted to tackle what he called the core four issues: public safety, infrastructure, homelessness and economic empowerment.

“We need to reopen our jails and start putting the bad guys back in them,” Cruikshank said. He added that if the county DA is “soft on crime,” then it is the “law-abiding citizens who suffer the consequences.”

The supervisorial seats are nonpartisan. It’s been 44 years since an incumbent county supervisor has lost a reelection bid.

The LA County supervisors rank among the most influential local government officials nationwide. The five board members govern a county with approximately 10 million residents. Supervisors are elected to serve four-year terms and can remain in office for up to 12 consecutive years.

his first day in office. Gascón, despite all the criticism, was able to fend off two recall attempts. During a debate with nine of the 11 challengers, Gascón defended his directives.

“We have seen crime coming down not only in our community, but we’re seeing

Homelessness outreach team conducts Operation Shelter Me in Rancho Cucamonga, nearby areas

By Staff

sheriff’s outreach team offered housing, medical and mental health treatment services.

“The team provided 21 individuals with referrals to programs for assistance,” according to the county’s statement. “Four individuals were linked with follow-up professional services and one veteran experiencing homelessness was provided emergency housing while awaiting services from local veteran service providers. While service capacity is limited, the teams will continue to work with this population to get them into services as they become available.”

The HOPE team focused on locating homeless individuals suffering from the most significant forms of

mental illness in order to get them “linked to restorative mental health pathways,” officials said.

One individual the team encountered possibly qualifies for a state program for unhoused people “with histories of hospitalization or incarceration, and histories of violence to themselves or others,” officials said.

“Staff will coordinate with the Department of Behavioral Health for further services for this individual,” officials said.

In June 2023, San Bernardino County opted into Laura’s Law — state legislation also referred to as Assisted Outpatient Treatment that “provides opportunities for courtordered community treat-

crime going down nationwide, at the same time that we have continued with the reform efforts,” Gascón said. “We’re showing that not only we cannot go back to the way that we did business, but actually the fact is our reforms are good for public safety.”

ment pathways,” according to the county.

The sheriff’s HOPE team was able to conduct this homelessness outreach operation with funding from Senate Bill 170, officials said.

“The H.O.P.E. team and other aligned resources will continue operations of this type throughout the county over the next several years,” officials said.

Authorities asked the public to contact the HOPE team at 909-387-0623 or email hope@sbcsd.org if they know anyone experiencing homelessness or in need of services.

The HOPE team speaks with an individual experiencing homelessness. | Photo courtesy of San Bernardino County

Janice Hahn. | Photo courtesy of Justin Rudd/Facebook