Concern regarding rare earth metal mining within the vast reaches of San Bernardino County’s outback is reviving.
That concern is vectored from two perspectives that are nearly at polar opposites of the political spectrum. Some have misgivings that the intensive disturbance of the soil, to include pit mining and hydraulicking involving vast amounts of water in an arid environment will ultimately redound in an ecological disaster. Others find it more disturbing that restrictions growing out of that environmental advocacy which are being imposed by both local and state government at present on what they consider to be an activity that has tremendous strategic importance for the Unitied States both economically and militarily are giving foreigners the upper hand in terms of access to a vital resource.
Rare earth metals, also referred to as lanthanides, are a set of 17 minerals – specifically scandium, yttrium, lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, gadolinium, europium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, lutetium and ytterbium.
Prior to the late 19th Century, rare earth elements did not have a crucial or indispensable role in important applications. Rare earth metals first achieved significant industrial and consumer relevance in the 1890s when chemist Carl Auer von Welsbach utilized cerium and thorium to create the Welsbach gas mantle, which allowed for very bright gas-burning street lights. Welsbach thereafter developed “mischmetal,” an alloy of rare earths, which was widely used as flints in pocket cigarette lighters. The advent of color television in the 1950s and its refinement in the 1960s created unprecedented and enduring demand for europium, which creates a bright red illumination within television screens. Continue reading →

By a bare 4-to-3 margin, The Chino Planning Commission on Wednesday, July 15 shot down AYPA Power’s request to develop a 400-megawatt battery energy storage system facility between Benson Avenue and Oaks Avenue, south of Shaefer Avenue and north of Edison Avenue on industrially-zoned property adjacent to residentially-zoned property.
The decision comes after multiple other cities in California, including ones in San Bernardino County, have struggled with safety issues relating to dense energy storage facility dependent upon lithium batteries, which are vulnerable to “runaway thermal” in circumstances in which the integrity of their containers have been breached.
While the project site technically is within an industrial zone and proximate to the Edison Corridor and its power lines which span a swath running virtually the entire width of the city, it also lies roughly 900 feet from the city’s premier recreation amenity, Ayala Park, and is close to residential neighborhoods.
AYPA Power’s proposal, referred to as the Dirac project, is the logical outgrowth of a surge in the popularity of battery storage facilities in that they provide rapid solutions to unprecedented power demands such as those from artificial intelligence and data centers, prevent rolling blackouts during extreme weather, and store cheap renewable energy for use during expensive peak hours. Continue reading →

In response to a lawsuit that alleged unregistered foreign nationals being detained at the Adelanto Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s processing Center in Adlanto are being subjected widespread abuse and inhumane conditions, Federal Judge Judge Sunshine on Thursday issued an order that federal immigration officials undertake immediate reforms at the facility to safeguard the the health and safety of the inmates there.
Public Counsel, along with the Coalition for Human Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), Immigrant Defenders Law Center, and Willkie Farr & Gallagher, filed a lawsuit in January 2026 against federal authorities and agencies, asserting the operators of the prison, GEO, on behalf of the federal government and the Donald Trump Admionistration were subjecting those incarcerated there to inhumane conditions “a core part of its broader scheme to harass, intimidate, punish, and deport immigrants.”
That mistreatment extended, but was not limited, to providing the inmates with insufficient food, unclean drinking water, moldy towels and inaequate medical care, according to the lawsuit. In encouraging or tolerating the manner in which GEO is operating the Adelanto Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center, Public Counsel, the Coalition for Human Immigrant Rights, Immigrant Defenders Law Center and Willkie Farr & Gallagher maintain the government is denying those incarcerated “basic human needs” such as “food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and reasonable safety.” As such, without having obtained a conviction or any form of adjudicated determination, those inmates are being subjected to punishment that violates their constitutional rights to due process of law. Continue reading →

A dozen years after a Rialto Unified School District accountant was caught embezzling at least $1.8 million in student lunch money from the district’s Nutrition Services Department, the audits and investigations division within the California Department of Education has determined that the district never fully redressed its accounting and internal auditing shortcomings, resulting in it misdirecting to itself over $3 million in state funding for the district’s student meal program.
Whereas the thefts Rialto Unified School District Accounting Manager Judith Oakes was proven to have perpetuated between 2005 and 2013 were crudely but effective carried out and entailed physically removing cash and coins, the activity that took place during the 2020-to-2022 COVID crisis that involved Nutrition Services Director Fausat Rahman-Davies, Assistant Nutrition Services Department Director Maria Rangel and Nutrition Services Program Innovator Kristina Kraushaar was more sophisticated, involving electronic entries across two data entry systems and the conveyance of some of the food purchased for the district by the state being handed off to charities or others connected to Rahman-Davies.
Similarly, the perpetrators of the 2005-to-2013 and 2020-to-2022 diversions were able to keep a lid on them through the compromising of those at a higher administrative or political level within the district. Oakes succeeded in keeping the thefts from coming to light, at least during the end stage of that chapter, by entering into a sexual relationship with Harold Cebrun, who was then Rialto Unified’s superintendent. Rahman-Davies] insulated herself and the misuse of the state funding by arranging for the district to hire the mother of one of the school district’s board members as a nutrition services division employee. Continue reading →

In what has virtually grown into an annual event, Silverwood Lake was the site on an algae bloom.
In response, the California Department of Water Resources instituted temporary restrictions at the popular recreational venue, including banning the use of boats, watercraft and fishing. On Tuesday, July 14, the lake was close to allow for the infusion of copper sulfate into the water to manage the algal bloom.
The California Department of Water Resources’ action was taken to head off what would otherwise have become a severe “danger” level at the lake in the San Bernardino Mountains, south of Hesperia. Continue reading →

FBN20260005872
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
BLUEFIN 15229 HALLMARK LN VICTORVILLE, CA 92394: MARLON R SOLARES
Business Mailing Address: 15229 HALLMARK LN VICTORVILLE, CA 92394
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or name listed above on: N/A
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 17913). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ MARLON R SOLARES, Owner
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 06/24/2026
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy J9535
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on June 26 and July 3, 10 & 17, 2026

FBN20260005091
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
SCIENCE EDVENTURES 18217 BETONY PLACE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407: JOANN C PERSAUD
Business Mailing Address: 18217 BETONY PLACE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or name listed above on: April 19, 2026
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 17913). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ JOANN C PERSAUD, MRS
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 06/01/2026
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy K3379
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on June 26 and July 3, 10 & 17, 2026

FBN20260005255
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
RC PIANO LESSONS 8006 HENBANE STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739: LINO LEVERAGE GROUP INC. 8006 HENBANE STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739
Business Mailing Address: 8006 HENBANE STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION registered with the State of California.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or name listed above on: June 1, 2026
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 17913). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ KIMBERLY LINO, Secretary
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 06/04/2026
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy J9676
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on June 26 and July 3, 10 & 17, 2026

Continue reading →

A two-year-old child yesterday killed himself with a gun he came across in the Highland apartment he lived in with his mother and her boyfriend.
According to authorities, the gun was hidden between the seat cushions of a couch in the small apartment at 6920 Victoria Avenue, near the corner of Pacific Street and Victoria Avenue.
According to San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department spokeswoman Gloria Orejel, “Through investigation it was determined that the child found a loaded firearm inside the house, in between some cushions on the couch. He grabbed the gun and accidentally shot himself.”
According to a statement put out by the sheriff’s department, “On Thursday, July 16, 2026, at about 5:27 p.m., deputies in Highland were dispatched to a residence on Victoria Street for a two-year-old child who had been shot. Deputies arrived at the location and began cardiopulmonary resuscitation on the child. Emergency medical personnel responded and transported the child to the hospital where he died shortly after. The child’s mother, Jamaria Cobb, and her boyfriend, Armand Bright, were inside the residence when the shooting occurred.”
Jamaria Heaven Ana Cobb, 20, and Armand Shay Bright, 52, both of Highland, were arrested. The firearm was legally registered to Bright, who is not the victim’s biological father, according to Orejel.
San Bernardino County Child and Family Services took a second child, the victim’s one-year-old sibling, who was also residing inside the home, into protective custody. by, Orejel said. Continue reading →

Less than a month after the Barstow City Council cited overriding considerations in disregarding ecological concerns to give approval to what was touted as being the world’s largest rail freight handling and truck transfer complex at a site on the city’s west side, a coalition of conservation and environmental groups and local residents has filed a lawsuit that seeks to block the $4 billion project.
In concert, Earth Justice, the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice assert in a lawsuit filed in San Bernardino County Superior Court that the seven-square-mile project will weak havoc on the wildlife in the area of the Mojave Desert where it is to be established, exacerbate already dangerously intense air pollution and impose upon those living nearby serious health and safety hazards.
The Barstow International Gateway project is a 4,500-acre project that is to create an integrated rail facility, consisting of a new and separate rail yard than the one that already exists in the city, what is to entail an intermodal installation and warehouses for transloading freight from international ship containers to vessels suitable for domestic train or truck transport.
The facility will allow the direct transfer of containers from ships at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to trains for transport through the Alameda Corridor onto the Burlington Northern Santa Fe mainline up to Barstow. Once the containers reach the Barstow International Gateway, they will be processed at the facility using cargo-handling equipment powered by clean energy, and then staged and built into trains moving east via Burlington Northern Santa Fe’s network across the nation.
Touted as having a $1.5 billion baseline cost when the project was first unveiled in 2022, the evolving scope of Burlington Northern Santa Fe’s plans have pushed the total estimated price of the undertaking to $4 billion. Whereas the proposal’s primary focus four years ago was on the core rail yard, transload warehouses, and the intermodal facility required to shift freight from international containers to domestic ones, the revised project reflects broader and more comprehensive goals that include extensive supplementary infrastructure. The higher price tag accounts for zero-emission cargo-handling equipment, channel upgrades to reduce regional flooding, roadway circulation enhancements, and the replacement of the Hinkley Road Bridge over the Mojave River.
The initial $1.5 billion estimate contained in the preliminary 2022 projection underwent a 266 percent increase by the time the comprehensive total investment package by Burlington Northern Santa Fe of $4 billion was given approval by the city on June 2, 2026.
A coalition of conservation and environmental justice groups within a month moved to file a lawsuit against the city of Barstow over its approval of the  BNSF’s Barstow International Gateway project, naming Burlington Northern Santa Fe as a real party in interest.
The groups claim the nearly 5,000-acre project, which will become the largest rail facility in the U.S., will devastate the Mojave Desert ecosystem, worsen air pollution, and pose serious health and environmental risks to nearby communities.
BNSF spokeswoman Lena Kent said the legal opposition flies in the face of the overwhelming support of the project expressed by state, county and local officials.
The Barstow International Gateway project is the first project certified by Governor Gavin Newsom under Senate Bill 149, which was intended to facilitate red-tape reduction within the administrative and judicial processes relating to transportation-related infrastructure improvements.
A noteworthy element of the Barstow International Gateway project is that from an overarching perspective, it will streamline the transportation of freight and reduce pollution, in particular diesel exhaust, nitrogen oxide emissions, carbon monoxide emissions, greenhouse gasses, particulate matter, ozone precursors, low-lying ozone and smog in general, in that it is part of Burlington Northern Santa Fe’s more comprehensive goal of eliminating the need for containers on ships arriving at ports in Los Angeles County and Long Beach to be placed on trucks, which then separately remove the goods to hundreds of thousands of warehouses and factories where differing arrangements for their delivery elsewhere are effectuated. In this way, the Barstow International Gateway and its proposed function is linked to the San Pedro Bay Port Complex, which consists of the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach. Those ports are the two largest seaports in the United States and together handle approximately 40 percent of the nation’s waterborne cargo. Cargo arriving at the ports is presently transported throughout the region by rail and truck through an interconnected goods movement network.
Upon the completion of the Barstow International Gateway and the initiation of operations there, far fewer diesel-powered trucks will operate out of San Pedro and Long Beach, such that the vast majority of containers arriving by ship will be moved onto rail cars which are to convey them via the currently-underused Alameda Corridor to Burlington Northern Santa Fe’s proposed Barstow facility, which is to entail a 140-acre solar farm, multiple rooftop solar warehouses, solar rail yard canopies and other related infrastructure, powering non-polluting electric powered means of conveying the freight from the rail cars to trucks at that point. This will, according to Burlington Northern Santa Fe, result in 800,000 fewer diesel-powered truck trips between Long Beach/San Pedro and Barstow per year, reducing both freeway congestion and air pollution along that route.
Of note, nonetheless, is that despite the lessening of emissions into the air along the approximately 137 mile route between the Pacific Ocean and the Mojave Desert rail yard, there will be an immense concentration of trains and trucks at the Barstow International Gateway and a resulting increase of emissions at the project site, located generally north of Main Street, between Hinkley and Lenwood roads.
In California, development projects are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, which calls for some order of an evaluation of the environmental impacts of any development to be carried out, which is supposed to outline what specific mitigation or mitigations of those impacts are going to be undertaken or, if the impacts cannot be offset or remedied, an acknowledgment that the impacts are unmitigable. The governing body with land use authority over the land where a project is to take place has the option, if it so chooses, to recognize that a project, despite involving environmental impacts and hazards which will go unredressed, nevertheless entails redeeming qualities and attributes which merit it being allowed to proceed. In the case of the Barstow International Gateway, the Barstow City Council, in deference to the pollution reduction elements of the plan to substantially reduce truck traffic and freeway congestion between the southwesternmost tip of Los Angeles County’s land mass and the High Desert, create substantial solutions to logistics and supply chain problems and serve to create approximately 20,000 new jobs in Barstow over the next ten to 20 years, made a declaration of overriding considerations relating to the environmental issues the project would entail and gave approval to the undertaking.
According to Earth Justice, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club, the East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice and the Natural Resources Defense Council, the statement of overriding considerations and approval of the project are not only on a trajectory to do irreparable harm to individuals who live in proximity to the project and a multitude of species in the area but the evaluation of the hazards was incomplete, such that report upon which the council’s action was taken did not accurately assess the level of damage the project represents.
Yasmine Agelidis, representing Earthjustice; Tyler Szeto and Colleen Fitzgerrell, representing the Sierra Club, East YardCommunities for Environmental Justice and the Natural Resources Defense Council; Alison Hahm, representing the Natural Resources Defense Council; and Peter Broderick and Seth Alston, representing the Center for Biological Diversity, in the lawsuit assert “The freight and logistics industry is one of the biggest polluters in Southern California. The goods movement industry contributes a significant amount of emissions near portside communities, Inland Empire residents, and individuals across the region. While the city and Burlington Northern Santa Fe tout this Project as a greenhouse gas-reducer because it will move goods by train rather than by truck, this oversimplifies and masks the project’s significant contributions to local and regional environmental pollution. The City of Barstow’s environmental impact report for the project concludes that at the height of operations, the Barstow International Gateway will emit over 550 tons of health-harming nitrogen oxide per year and burn approximately 18 million gallons of diesel per year. These figures are jarring, but they severely underestimate the project’s environmental impacts on Barstow and the surrounding Southern California community. Instead of performing an honest assessment of the project’s impacts, the environmental impact report relies on faulty assumptions and makes promises outside of Burlington Northern Santa Fe’s control to claim the Barstow International Gateway will reduce tens of millions of gallons of diesel fuel consumption per year. The city’s environmental impact report analysis lacks substantial evidence and must be corrected. To make matters worse, the final environmental impact report alters some of the draft environmental impact report’s most critical conclusions without explanation, and without recirculating the document for full public review and comment.”
In illustration, Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston state that “Whereas the draft environmental impact report concluded the project will decrease fuel consumption by 5 million gallons of diesel per year compared to existing conditions, the final environmental impact report newly determined without justification that the project will increase diesel fuel usage by over 3 million gallons per year compared to existing conditions. This 8-million-gallon difference in annual diesel fuel consumption certainly amounts to significant new information that required environmental impact report recirculation.”
According to Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston, the project’s untoward effects are not confined to the people living in Barstow but extend to flora and fauna in the environs of Barstow.
“In addition to the region-wide and global harms posed by the project’s air pollution greenhouse gas impacts, the construction and operation of these facilities will transform the local landscape of Barstow and the Mojave Desert,” the lawsuit states. “The project will destroy or degrade thousands of acres of habitat relied upon by numerous special-status wildlife species and native plants, and will imperil the adjacent Mojave River, a critical water source for both people and wildlife in the arid region. The environmental impact report fails to adequately address or reduce these harms.”
Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston hold that the project will severely impact the quality of life of those living in proximity to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railyard facility that is to be created.
Further, beginning during construction and continuing throughout operations, railyard and warehouse facilities will impose huge burdens on nearby communities “due to constant light, noise, dust, and traffic; all of which are impacts the city refused to mitigate through feasible measures or alternative designs,” the lawsuit states. “On June 2, 2026, the city council approved the Barstow general plan update, which takes actions to accommodate the Barstow International Gateway Project and forecasts Barstow’s significant development over the next 25 years. The massive BIG [Barstow International Gateway] project will move shipping containers from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach 130 miles to the High Desert town of Barstow, where goods will be repackaged before they are shipped nationwide. Likewise, goods will travel from the rest of the nation to Barstow and then onwards to the Ports. The Barstow International Gateway will operate 24 hours a day, 365 days per year. BIG will use diesel locomotives, diesel trucks, and diesel railyard equipment, all of which contribute significant amounts of pollution to a region already plagued by the nation’s worst air quality. Specifically, the project proponent, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, intends to operate diesel switcher locomotives, which are locomotives that move trains within the railyard itself; a ‘captive fleet’ of diesel line-haul locomotives to travel back and forth from the ports to Barstow on a closed loop; diesel line-haul locomotives to travel to and from the project from the east; and diesel railyard equipment, such as rubber-tired gantry cranes and transport refrigeration units to manage goods at the project site. The Barstow International Gateway will also receive hundreds of trucks per day, all of which are expected to be fueled by diesel. The city, as the lead agency for the Project, must prepare a California Environmental Quality Act environmental review disclosing the project’s environmental impacts for public review and comment, and must adopt all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project’s significant environmental impacts to the extent feasible.”
Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston said the city could and should have required, in giving go-ahead to the project, that Burlington Northern Santa Fe dispense with diesel-powered train engines in favor of ones running on electricity.
They maintain that “the project is ideally suited to operate entirely—or at least partially—with non polluting equipment, including switcher locomotives, ‘captive fleet’ locomotives, railyard equipment, and trucks. In fact, on June 5, 2026, the South Coast Air Quality Management District awarded $190 million for 31 battery-electric switcher locomotives and supporting charging infrastructure, the largest award of its kind. Electric freight locomotives are also widely used around the world, and there are more than 2,500 non-polluting heavy-duty trucks operating across the country today. The Barstow International Gateway project was proposed and paid for by Burlington Northern Santa Fe, one of the largest Class I railroads in the United States, which enjoyed net profits exceeding $5.475 billion last year. Despite repeated attempts for years by members of the public and the Sierra Club, the East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Center for Biological Diversity, collectively the ‘petitioners,’ requesting the city address the deficiencies in its California Environmental Quality Act environmental review for the project, the city failed to, among other issues, adequately disclose, analyze, and mitigate environmental impacts before approving the project. The city’s findings and statement of overriding considerations, adopted in connection with the project, are also invalid both because they unlawfully purport to override impacts that can and should have been analyzed and mitigated more fully and because they are not based on substantial evidence supporting either the purported benefits of the project or the environmental effects being outweighed, including the adverse economic consequences of such effects. For all these reasons, we ask this court to issue a writ of mandate directing the city to vacate and set aside its approval of the project, certification of the environmental impact report, adoption of related findings, statement of overriding considerations, and mitigation monitoring and reporting program.”
According to Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston, both Barstow officials and Burlington Northern Santa Fe took advantage of those who are to be most directly impacted by the project because those being hurt most are too impoverished and unsophisticated to fight back and are in large numbers what are defined as “protected racial and ethnic minorities.”
“Approximately 25,415 people reside in Barstow, including over 40 percent Hispanic or Latino residents and over 19 percent Black or African American residents,” according to the lawsuit. “Only 13.2 percent of Barstow residents hold a bachelor’s degree or higher coupled with a median household income of $53,380 compared to the $100,149 median household income in California. An estimated 23.1 percent of the population earn income below the federal poverty level. CalEnviroScreen, the California Environmental Protection Agency’s health screening tool, identifies census tracts in Barstow as having an overall pollution burden as high as in the 86th percentile, meaning these census tracts experience more pollution than 86 percent of all census tracts in the state. The area also has census tracts that are in the 99.9th percentile for asthma and cardiovascular disease. Residents in and near the project area are exposed to more diesel particulate matter than 97.8 percent of census tracts, more ozone than 87.8 percent of census tracts, and more traffic impacts than 73.5 percent of census tracts. The Mojave Desert exceeds federal public health standards for ozone and particulate matter.”
Barstow municipal officials shortchanged the community by failing to carry out an adequate assessment of the environmental impacts of the project, Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston maintain.
“On or about February 15, 2024, the city issued a notice of preparation of a draft environmental impact report and notice of public scoping meeting for the project,” the lawsuit states. “On or about March 13, 2024, the city held a public scoping meeting for the project. On or about November 9, 2025, the city issued a notice of availability of the draft environmental impact report. On or about November 10, 2025, the city released the draft environmental impact report and circulated the document for a 56-day public comment period for the project. On or about November 13, 2025, the city issued a notice of completion of the draft environmental impact report. On or about November 21, 2025, petitioners submitted a written request that the city extend the comment period by an additional 45 days to allow for adequate evaluation of the lengthy, complex, and highly technical draft environmental impact report, particularly in light of the federal government shutdown, attacks by the federal government on communities impacted by the project, the lack of Spanish translation of the draft environmental impact report, and the comment period falling largely over the holiday season. On or about December 30, 2025, 6 days before the original deadline and 39 days after petitioners submitted their request for an extension, the city extended the public comment period for the draft environmental impact report from January 5, 2026, to January 12, 2026. Numerous organizations, individuals, and agencies, including CARB [the California Air Resources Board] and and SCAQMD [the South Coast Air Quality Management District], submitted comments highlighting flaws in the draft environmental impact report.”
According to Agelidis, Szeto, Fitzgerrell, Hahm, Broderick and Alston, “The draft environmental impact report is internally inconsistent regarding the project’s truck trips. The draft environmental impact report estimated the Barstow International Gateway would process 108,405 trucks per year in 2028, 137,605 in 2033, and 169,725 in 2048, but also stated the project will move significantly higher numbers of containers by trucks—128,000 in 2028, 160,000 in 2033, and 200,000 in 2048. Reasonably assuming one container per truck, these figures cannot be reconciled, and the draft environmental impact report offers no explanation for this disparity. By presenting contradictory, unexplained, and misleading information regarding the number of the project’s train trips, the draft environmental impact report fails to provide an accurate, stable, and finite project description. For example, the draft environmental impact report is internally inconsistent, without explanation, regarding the number of trains that will pass through the Barstow International Gateway over the course of the project’s lifespan. At one point, the draft environmental impact report anticipated 24 daily freight train pass-bys in 2028 and 35 in 2048. At another point, the draft environmental impact report assumed 32 trains per day as a present-day baseline and anticipated 37 trains per day in 2028, amounting to a 5-train per day increase. At yet another point, the draft environmental impact report assumed the existing trains per day total 45.3, and that this will increase with the Barstow International Gateway to 134.9 trains per day in 2048, amounting to nearly 90 additional trains per day. The draft environmental impact report’s project description for the Barstow International Gateway is inaccurate and severely underestimates the project’s impacts by relying on faulty and inaccurate assumptions in the trucks analysis, which underpins the project’s entire environmental impact analysis. For example, the trucks analysis relied on nationwide ‘reduced on-road truck trips’ and ‘reduced diesel fuel usage’ figures without adequate justification, and this conceals the true, localized impacts on Barstow and the surrounding region. The trucks analysis also rests on unenforceable assumptions that Burlington Northern Santa Fe will not replace supposed truck trip reductions by increasing cargo volumes at Burlington Northern Santa Fe railyards in the region. Moreover, because the trucks analysis failed to disclose critical information, including where the project will generate additional truck trips, omitted sources, underlying data, and assumptions, and presented an incoherent, scattered document that is not accessible to the public, the draft environmental impact report’s project description is inaccurate, inconsistent, and unstable.”
Those seeking to prevent the project from proceeding are the ones shortchanging the Barstow community, Southern California and the entire nation, according to Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad spokeswoman Lena Kent. The $4 billion investment into the facility in Barstow will be a boon to the local economy, bringing in much-needed employment to the area, she insisted. Furthermore, Kent said, “The Barstow International Gateway will allow for fast, efficient and cost competitive rail service, moving goods on trains directly from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach through the underutilized Alameda Corridor to Barstow.”
Kent emphasized that what Burlington Northern Santa Fe is offering to Barstow and the Mojave Desert is “a state of the art master planned intermodal facility, with fully integrated rail and transload capability for a streamlined supply chain. This will include on-site warehouse development, access to the fastest intermodal route and the world’s largest hub network and a more sustainable supply chain solution.”

“It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.” – Yogi Berra

In what is for San Bernardino County a rare effort, one that is considered by the community’s social and political establishment hopelessly quixotic, the incumbent county treasurer/auditor is contesting the outcome of last month’s primary election in which he was defeated.
At issue in the challenge is not the accuracy of the tally of votes received by Rancho Cucamonga Councilman Ryan Hutchison or current San Bernardino County Treasurer-Tax Collector/Auditor-Controller Ensen Mason in the balloting that corresponded to and concluded with the June 2, 2026 California Primary Election. Rather, Mason is seeking exacting scrutiny of Hutchison’s qualifications and bona fides as a financial professional whose skill in number crunching and money management would ensure that he can carry out the heavy load of assignments demanded by the four separate assignments with which the voters entrusted him over the upcoming four years from January 2027 until January 2031.
Mason has brought the matter foursquare into public consciousness through a lawsuit, the second one he has filed relating to Hutchison’s ability to perform in the capacities he is now otherwise due to take on as of January 2, 2027. In the previous proceeding, Mason raised the same issues at play in the current legal battle, which provoked arguments that sufficed in convincing Superior Court Judge Stephanie Tañada, who heard the case in April, to leave Hutchison’s name on the ballot and to allow the voters to make the decision as to who will oversee disbursements from and through the county’s annual $10.9 billion budget and the management of its $15 billion investment pool. Judge Tañada’s decision more than three months ago, however, was made during a time-compressed window in which the court was seeking to meet a pressing deadline imposed by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters Office so it could meet its target date by which it was to finalize the form of the ballots that had to be printed for the June 2 election. Continue reading →