Alliance rails against administration, arguing that trial courts should get a say in court policies, spending cuts, media coverage and other issues. Chief justice says the hostile insurrectionists are ‘not giving me a chance.’
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charles E. Horan rejoiced over last month’s state audit that savaged the California court system’s mismanagement of a costly new computer system.
“This is the sort of thing we have been complaining about,” exulted the Pomona judge. “Do you think perhaps now people ought to pay attention to what we’re saying?”
In 2009, Horan helped found a group of judges to challenge the power and authority of the state’s judicial leadership. After two years of being marginalized as a fringe clique of black-robed dissidents, the group of largely anonymous judges is now making friends in Sacramento and gathering strength.
The insurrection has sparked new legislation, generated hostility toward the judicial leadership, inundated judges’ mailboxes with caustic e-mails and threatened to throw the state’s new chief justice off-step just as she assumes the reins of the California judiciary.
The rest of the story can be read here.
_____________________________________________________________________
Don’t back off for even one second. The honeymoon is over. -JCW
_______________________________________________________________
This is the best op-ed I have seen yet-
A judicial hierarchy out of control
// By Charles Horan
Friday, March 4, 2011 at midnight
After an exhaustive investigation, the state auditor delivered her conclusion last month. The Administrative Office of the Courts and the California Judicial Council completely botched the largest information technology project in California history, the California Case Management System. The complete audit report is at bsa.ca.gov.
The word “failed,” as in “failed to disclose accurate cost estimates,” appears 50 times in the audit report. “Risk” and “risky” 81 times, “problems” 60 times, and “lack of oversight,” “lack of planning,” “lack of documentation,” “lack of any documented plan,” “lack of understanding,” “lack of transparency,” and “lack of expertise” 39 times. The word “competent” appears not once.
The newspaper headlines describing the situation were depressingly similar. Words like “mismanaged,” “over budget,” “bungled,” “botched,” and “a mess” were the norm. A common press theme was the obvious lack of oversight of the project by the Judicial Council, and the eightfold underestimation of its cost – the Administrative Office estimated the total project cost to be $250 million, while the auditor pegs the true price at a minimum of $1.9 billion. This, while some courtrooms are closed to the public due to lack of operating funds.
The auditor’s findings were devastating, but the reactions of the Administrative Office and Council were equally disturbing. Confronted with 138 pages documenting years of mismanagement, misrepresentations, scripted responses to criticism and an absence of Judicial Council oversight, the Administrative Office and Judicial Council responded with a scripted video produced by the Administrative Office’s own phony “News Bureau” which reassured us that all was well, and that any problems would somehow be solved simply by its director, William Vickrey, creating a new committee. After roughly 24 hours of repeating this flapdoodle, they proclaimed that they were now “ready to move on.” Indeed.
Enough is enough. The auditor gets it. The press gets it. The public gets it. The Legislature most certainly gets it. We must get it.
The judicial branch must have the trust of the public and of the Legislature in order to function. If we condone conduct of the sort uncovered by the auditor or of the bureaucratic denial we have just seen, we will not have that trust. Nor will we deserve it.
The Alliance of California Judges, now several hundred strong, was formed in late 2009 to address concerns such as these. The computerized system may be but the tip of the iceberg – no one has yet conducted an audit of the Administrative Office’s $1,100 to $1,700 per-square-foot construction projects, as but one example.
We need to face the larger truth: Our judicial governance structure is broken. Some of our leaders appear arrogant, and others too accustomed to power – one has served on the council for 14 years. I experienced this arrogance last year in the Judicial Council chamber as I watched our former chief justice imperiously silence a judge who sought to speak a few sentences about our governance problems. The judge had traveled to San Francisco at his own expense to deliver a pre-submitted and preapproved statement (a requirement of the Judicial Council, lest an upsetting word slip into that rarefied air). Not one council member spoke up to defend this judge’s right to speak. On that day, when not 30 seconds would be given a judge to air concerns shared by hundreds of judges, the Judicial Council did find time to unanimously pass a motion that the Administrative Office of the Courts be given an award for exemplary service to the public.
Things must change. Under the mantra of statewide administration, we have allowed an unaccountable bureaucracy to hold sway over our judges. Fourteen years ago, as part of the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act of 1997, the Legislature instructed the Judicial Council to enact a “trial court bill of financial management rights” by Jan. 1, 1998, precisely so this situation would never occur. Thirteen years later, the judges of the state still await Judicial Council action.
The Alliance of California Judges stands firmly behind the Legislature in this regard, and has proposed legislation to bring this long-awaited goal to fruition. Further, we will support efforts to democratize the Judicial Council. For far too long, a small, insular minority of favored judges have allowed the Administrative Office to hide behind our robes. It is time for that to stop, and it will.
Horan is a judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court and a director of the Alliance of California Judges._____________________________________________________________________
Jon Wintermeyer
March 14, 2011
The former AOC and Court staff terminated in 2009 and 2010 also knew it and that is why they were terminated and everything in their offices, all files and computers, etc, were removed never to be seen again, at the directive of their paranoid coverup inner circle supervisors, to protect the guilty and punish the whistleblowers.
Many fellow staff in our offices and Bench Officers in our courts that knew us and worked with us for years, could not understand why this happened to loyal, respected, valued and trustworthy managers. These supervisors did all they could to make us and what we knew disappear and discredit our reputations.
They did so knowing that the AOC management system would cover for them using unlimited taxpayer monies that they do have to account for to fund AOC’s legal council services for them, because they know that the whistleblowers cannot possibly match those funds as terminated staff from their own limited resources.
Thank you JCW for allowing the real story to be told.
antonatrail
March 14, 2011
As Judge Horan so aptly put it, “It is time for that to stop, and it will.”
My thanks also to JCW to enable the truth to get out, which the AOC seems to have successfully prevented in the past.
Michael Paul
March 14, 2011
I still prefer the military term as it says so much about this in just one little word.
“Clusterfuck”
wendy darling
March 14, 2011
Snafu and fubar also spring to mind.
Nathaniel Woodhull
March 15, 2011
In 2004, some of us in earnest tried to work within the “system” to calmly and rationally discuss concerns that were then blatantly evident with the direction that HRH George and Vickery were attempting to take the Judicial Branch. It was made very clear to us that such heresy would not be tolerated and that by even voicing such ridiculous drivel resulted in our being marginalized and kept off any committees of consequence, let alone getting onto the Judicial Council.
Unfortunately, under former Governor Schwarzenegger, HRH George had some mystical control that allowed him to name virtually every appellate justice to the bench. The former Chief did not hold punches in letting people know that dissidents would not be chosen for positions of higher authority.
Tani Cantil-Sakauye “a moderate Republican chosen largely for her diplomatic and administrative skills” was hand-picked by HRH George to succeed him. I defy anyone to show me any real administrative background on the part of the new Chief. Her background is nice and all, but remarkably she isn’t the only one who had to work for a living to get to her current position. Since being installed to the throne we’ve heard more about her background and less about her abilities than just about any of her predecessors. To be sure, HRH George chose wisely. He is now out of Dodge and has nothing to worry about with respect to a successor that will outshine him.
The playbook being used by the new Chief and her minions (Mr. Huffman and Mr. Bruiniers for example) is really out of date. When there were only a few of us their tactics of denigrating and marginalizing seemed to work just fine. The performance of some of these people would be laughable if it weren’t so sad.
The new Chief Justice could go a long way to restore trust and confidence in the administration of the Branch if she would clean house on the Council. Go out there and promote open, honest communication within the Branch. Don’t instill fear in people so that they do not speak up. Stop funding a system (CCMS) that was a pipe dream if and when it was thought up and is now a national disgrace. Stop building edifices at a cost many times higher than is necessary. Focus on trial courts, as we are where the rubber meets the road. Believe it or not, I know of no one way down here that wants to go back to running any type of fiefdom. I just want a steady income stream so that I can provide services to the public. Uniform rules are fine, but the mega one-size fits all mentality that is prevalent on Golden Gate Avenue has never worked, nor will it work in our lifetimes.
Maybe perspectives would change if the AOC was moved to Bakersfield or Lancaster…
wendy darling
March 15, 2011
Long live the ACJ.
wendy darling
March 15, 2011
A song suggestion for the day, with respect and acknowledgement to the original lyrics in Les Miserables, slightly modified as appropriate to the issue at hand:
DO YOU HEAR THE PEOPLE CRY?
Do you hear the people cry?
It is the cry of angry men.
It is the voice of a people who will not be fooled again.
When the beating of your heart echoes the beating of the drums
There is change about to start when tomorrow comes.
Will you join in the crusade?
Will you be strong and stand with us?
Beyond the lies and injustice
Is there a world you long to see?
Then join in the fight that will give the truth the right to be free.
Will you give all you can give, so that the banner may advance?
Some will fall and some will live,
Will you stand up and take your chance?
So that the guilty will be held to account for the blood they have spilled at last?
Do you hear the people cry?
It is the cry of angry men.
It is the voice of a people who will not be fooled again
When the beating of your heart, echoes the beating of the drums
There is change about to start when tomorrow comes.
wendy darling
March 16, 2011
There is an article published today titled “Voters OK With Cuts to Courts” from Cheryl Miller on Legal Pad, the on-line publication of CalLaw and The Recorder. The article references a press release from the Alliance of California Judges, which stated: “Coming on the heels of the scathing Bureau of State Audits report detailing mismanagement and an abysmal record of failure, this is yet another wake up call we must take seriously,” the group wrote in a press release. “Our judicial leaders must take appropriate action now to restore the confidence of the public in our branch of government”.
JusticeCalifornia
March 16, 2011
Thank you Wendy. Your watchdog posts are so important.
I do believe the handwriting is on the wall. And has been on the wall for awhile. (Yes, turned-tail-and-ran-where-is-he-now RG got out while the getting was good.)
http://legalpad.typepad.com/my_weblog/2011/03/voters-ok-with-cuts-to-courts.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+legalpad_feed+%28Legal+Pad%29
“California voters say the judiciary is No. 1. But that’s not a good thing.
Asked where state leaders should cut funding to help reduce the $25 billion budget deficit, 59 percent of registered voters told the Field Poll “the courts and state judiciary,” according to a survey released today.
Courts tied with prisons as the most popular budget targets among poll respondents. They were the only two program areas among 14 where a majority of voters supported cuts. By comparison, large majorities want schools and police shielded from cuts, according to the survey.”
Woo-hoo. The CA judiciary is tied with prisons among poll respondents. Does that send a message to anybody?
(Hint: Top court leadership+cronyism+taxpayer waste+crimes against the public interest+ whistleblower retaliation+ judicial branch crimes/horrific retaliation against whistleblowers/complaining litigants/court critics=prison? Or at least retribution?)
wendy darling
March 16, 2011
The article that was published yesterday in The Los Angeles Times by Maura Dolan was picked up by The San Francisco Chronicle and published in today’s print edition; it is also published on the SF Chronicle’s on-line publication, SF Gate (Dissident State Judges Challenge Chief Justice).
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
March 16, 2011
Until I read the “new, improved” info on the “new, improved” CA courts website, I had no knowledge of this:
“A review of the roster of the AB 233 Working Group is a trip down memory lane, as most members have since retired from the bench, including me: Judges Victor Chavez and Ray Hart of Los Angeles, Dennis Cole of San Bernardino, Sandra Faithfull of Santa Clara, William Howatt of San Diego, Dwayne Keyes of Fresno, Arthur Wallace of Kern, and Edward Webster of Riverside. And two working group members—Judges Kathleen O’Leary of Orange and Patricia Sepulveda of Contra Costa—have long since moved to higher office. Court executives were also on the working group and several are still in service to the branch, although in different positions: Alan Carlson (San Francisco), Sheila Gonzalez (now Calabro) (Ventura), Ron Overholt (Alameda), Chris Patton (Santa Cruz), and Mike Roddy (Sacramento). Fritz Ohlrich, now Clerk of the Supreme Court, was Court Administrator of the Los Angeles Municipal Court when he served on the working group.”
Reading this was most enlightening. I had no idea that Patricia Sepulveda, (IMHO) appellate court reacharound-mistress extraordinaire, was from Contra Costa and was so involved with so many corrupt powers that be. I now fully understand her assigned function, and her resulting (heretofore inexplicable) horrendous written opinions.
JusticeCalifornia
March 16, 2011
I am so inspired that I may, time permitting, post excerpts of some of Patricia Sepulveda’s interesting and egregious bull$$$$, court-wh$$$ reacharound opinions.