Mountain Views News          Saturday, February 6, 2016

19

LEGAL NOTICES

Mountain Views-News Saturday, February 6, 2016 

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: 
GERALD MEERKREEBS 
CASE NO. BP170171

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

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

THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that MICHAEL MEERKREEBS 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: 02/24/16 at 
8:30AM in Dept. 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

TIMOTHY J. MURPHY - SBN 92862

LAW OFFICE OF TIMOTHY J. MURPHY

33 E HUNTINGTON DR

ARCADIA CA 91006

2/6, 2/13, 2/20/16

CNS-2841289#

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

(Sent to the City Council and Mountain VIews News)

Dear Mayor Capoccia:

 I find it discouraging that our city is divided when we all have 
the same goal in mind: A better or more vibrant Sierra Madre. 
As a result, I have decided to write to you with my thoughts on 
how our city can (i) deal with Arcadia's rejection of its request for 
supplemental police services, (ii) make needed improvements, 
and (iii) meet all funding needs. To that end, I encourage you to 
take the following actions:

 1. Adopt the sheriff's 20/20 proposal and bank the $700k in annual 
savings it will yield. This will for the first time free the city 
from its 47% police services spend. It will also enable the city to 
receive the 24 hour/devoted police service coverage it requires 
without having to engage in the now necessary protracted and 
expensive re-build of the police department.

2. Withdraw the 10% UUT proposal, which is openly being promoted 
as a way to provide still further funding to the police department 
without addressing our disproportionate police spend.

3. Propose and place on the ballot an 8% UUT increase of $500k 
a year which would be applied to civic improvements and infrastructure. 
During year one I would propose that $250k of this be 
devoted to improving our little league facilities, $150k to improving 
our library, and $100k for senior services. It is essential that 
the council promise that all future proceeds of the increase would 
be applied to civic improvements and/or investments in parks 
and infrastructure. 

I am confident the entire city would get behind such a proposal, as 
the cost (loss of a proprietary police department) would be more 
than offset by the benefits (a steady flow of civic improvements). 
Moreover, I am confident the city council would prefer to be involved 
in building and delivering civic improvements rather than 
trying to continually deal with the ever increasing funding demands 
associated with our police department. 

 

Once again, I would like to thank you for your service to our City 
and wish you and the council well in addressing our civic needs, 
Rick De La Mora

Dear Ms. Henderson:

Here are some comments regarding your recent article in the 
Mountain View Publication on January 30, 2016.

We live in a very special area and Sierra Madre is really special. 
It’s a city with many residents on a fixed income with limited disposable 
funds. For these folks every penny counts for expenses of 
food, clothing and housing. The Utility Users Tax affects all of us 
since water, electricity, gas, phone and internet services are taxed.

Sierra Madre needs lots of city maintenance for its crumbling infrastructure 
like water mains in the streets, water pumping stations, 
etc. Curbs and sidewalks are also in dyer need of repairs 
since they are a danger to pedestrians. We are quite sure that you 
know the extent of these expenses.

The city’s resources should be spent in a more judicious way and 
the raising of taxes or higher fees should be the last resort.

An example of high fees are the costs of the size of water meters 
and sewer fees are 2 to 3 times higher than neighboring cities.

The yearly savings of $800,000 by contracting with the Sheriff’s 
Department would be a good start to spend the cities resources in 
a more judicious way. The Sierra Madre’s police officers should 
have the interest of the city in mind instead of their own and 
match the offer of the Sheriff’s Department if they want to keep 
the cities police department.

If half of the police force abruptly quits to put the city in a bind, 
that is not something they can be proud of!

Respectfully,

Joe K., Sierra Madre


Mountain Views News 80 W Sierra Madre Blvd. No. 327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Office: 626.355.2737 Fax: 626.609.3285 Email: editor@mtnviewsnews.com Website: www.mtnviewsnews.com