SACRAMENTO (CN) – An overwhelming majority of California legislators voted Thursday to pass a trailer bill that would hold judicial branch bureaucrats accountable for their spending on a $1.9 billion IT project. If an independent audit finds the project is beyond saving, a Republican legislator asked, will her colleagues have the nerve to “shut it down.”
With a vote of 68 to 8, the state Assembly passed the bill requiring California’s judicial administration to retain an independent consultant who would review the project annually and report back to the legislature with its findings. The reports are required to point out deficiencies in the project and make recommendations on how to address them.
The bill specifies that the computer system is not to be installed in any of the state’s 58 trial courts until the review is complete, though the Administrative Office of the Courts hopes to begin installing it as early as this summer. The balance of the article can be read here.
Here is a fitting tribute to CCMS
Added: Who were those voting against an independent evaluation?
Tim Donnelly, Rep, 59th Bakersfield
Linda Halderman, Rep, 29th, Fresno
Brian Jones, Rep, 77th, Santee
Steve Knight, Rep, 36th, Palmdale
Allan Mansoor, Rep, 68th, Costa Mesa
Jeff Miller, Rep, 71st, Mission Viejo (Orange county and Riverside)
Mike Morrell, Rep, 63rd, Rancho Cucamonga
David Valadao, Rep, 30th, Hanford <<<— The ONLY rep whose courthouse obtained federal stimulus funds because they went around the AOC to do it.
Michael Paul
March 18, 2011
I don’t think I need the AOC’s underlying data anymore as even the legislature is crying foul. A real independent analysis should reveal what the whole program will cost, not just the software development. It wouldn’t be this way if I didn’t have so much time on my hands . As it is we’ve just gotten warmed up. To cite JusticeCalifornia, the AOC has underestimated both the capabilities and resolve of the opposition. We’re not dumb enough to underestimate the AOC. It’s nice to no longer get e-mail from the AOC complaining about my participation in the political process and ordering me to stop.
Michael Paul
March 19, 2011
Life’s been good to me so far…..
JusticeCalifornia
March 19, 2011
Props to our legislature for stepping up and stepping in–
Saturday requiems for CCMS follies: I am going to try to post another great song– if it doesn’t work, google “the party’s over” by Doris Day on youtube. Great rendition of that classic song. . .
judicialcouncilwatcher
March 20, 2011
JCW appreciates the research of AntOnATrail for identifying the eight perps voting against common sense.
versal-versal
March 21, 2011
Let us all remember that CCMS is just a symptom of what is wrong with the centralized control of the California Judicial branch. Please don’t buy into this whole trumped up idea that with a new CJ things will certainly get better soon. This new CJ has not changed anything. She instead has embraced CCMS, appointed J.Bruiniers to oversee CCMS despite the fact he actively lobbied against a fair state audit of the failed project and now apparently has allowed a former Judge , Terry Friedman to actively lobby the states trial
court Judges to oppose the trial court bill of rights. This is the same former Judge Friedman that allowed the AOC and its representatives to sit through every CJA Board meeting. We need meaningful change.Everyone who reads this blog please contact your local legislator and urge the passage of the trail court bill of rights. Thanks.
Michael Paul
March 21, 2011
Let me illustrate how important this is. I wrote the then-head of the accountability committee and chief justice designate about my concerns regarding this whole mess directly. The reply I got back was that this was being referred to the AOC’s office of general counsel “because they know more about this matter”. William Kasley writes back and indicates that the only person I should be communicating with regarding my concerns is John Judnick.
As I have said before, read them here friend.
Nathaniel Woodhull
March 21, 2011
Versal makes an excellent point. CCMS has been an excellent and identifiable object that can be used to expose the greater disease permeating the judicial branch.
Under the leadership of HRH George and Vickery, the AOC embarked on an unbridled path of Stalin-esque management. Any semblance of democracy within the branch was quickly eroded upon HRH George’s coronation in 1996. Placing Mr. Huffman and Mr. Bruiniers and others with similar closed-minded philosophies to key positions within the branch spelled its downfall. When two-way communication was ended, it was only logical that at some point in time major errors would occur and there were no checks and balances in place to allow them to be resolved form within.
I laugh at those who say we need to give the new CJ a chance and we should work within the system to change things. What do you think many of us have been doing for the past decade. You can only be called shrill and uninformed or be referred to as ants along the path for so long.
The only way that the Chief Justice (Sakauye) will convince me that she is serious about meaningful reforms within the administration of the branch will be when she cleans house on the Judicial Council, gets rid of Vickery and his minions, and starts a process toward transparency and meaningful dialogue within the branch. Until that occurs, it is no wonder that the Legislature wants to stick their nose into our business and as a taxpayer, I can’t blame them!
lando
March 21, 2011
Thanks Woodhull. Its time to clean house indeed. The new Chief should: 1. Suspend all CCMS funding. 2. Appoint an outside software expert to review CCMS.3. Ask for the resignations of Vickery and all his managers. 4. Remove J.Huffman and J Bruiners from all JC management and policy making decisions. 5. Move to democratize the JC by allowing 50% of its members to be elected. Thats meaningful change.
judicialcouncilwatcher
March 21, 2011
Courthouse news accuses the AOC finance department of funny math and inept budgeting.
Tell us something we don’t know. Nonetheless, it is nice to have a CPA confirm it.
antonatrail
March 21, 2011
I would respectfully nominate Karen Covel, CPA, for the JCW Hall of Fame. On another note regarding just one of Covel’s interesting and cogent points, what would be the reason for the AOC reporting two different sets of numbers for fixed costs from the past? I’d love to hear the explanation.
judicialcouncilwatcher
March 21, 2011
:::ponders previous meaningful contributions to the discussion:::
Agreed.
wendy darling
March 21, 2011
As I read Bill Girdner’s story, and Karen Covel’s analysis, on the AOC’s funny math, it all sounded strangely familiar. And then I remembered reading similar stories a few years back about the accounting firm Arthur Andersen and a little company some of you many have heard of. It was called Enron.
Michael Paul
March 21, 2011
That AMAZING similarity was covered here just two days after christmas last year. I guess JCW is just ahead of their time.
https://judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/the-aoc-enron-and-stanley-milgram/
regina phelangee
March 22, 2011
You don’t really think anyone at the aoc has actually stopped deployment, do you? All systems are GO for deployment.
Michael Paul
March 22, 2011
I would expect Mark Moore to be looking for the afterburners, finding his core developers in that clusterfuck of a mess of consultants, setting aside everyone else and getting this program right and getting this program delivered.
He has but one tiny little problem. He must defy the laws of physics to deliver the goods.
Tom Fjord
March 22, 2011
Mark Moore is the director of SRO ccms staff. He has no authority over the SF managers, regardless of program. SF still operates wholly under Mark Dusman.
judicialcouncilwatcher
March 22, 2011
JusticeCalifornia
March 22, 2011
Well, Regina, that would be a big mistake on the CJ’s part. Very, very big. Amazingly big.
On February 25, 2011, at the Judicial Council meeting, she assured the Council there would be no deployment, pending the further independent audit.
And by the way, I repeat my prior query, what was the 2011 CCMS deployment budget, that was NOT disclosed to the Judicial Council at that meeting? And what has been spent to date?
And what about that legislative mandate?
If the CJ and her minions are participating in deceiving the taxpaying public, and the Judicial Council, and the legislature, this is very serious, indeed.