It’s been about 24 hours since we all were rather shocked by the events that transpired in yesterdays session of the Assembly Judiciary Committee. No doubt there remains some uncertainty and lots of mixed emotions. Mixed emotions because the issues of judicial branch governance have been partially removed from the table and many are assessing to see what remains.
A few of my favorite posters who were invested in this effort have indicated they’ve hung up their hats. We all know that AB1208 did not go far enough in the first place. Getting some protective measures for trial court funds this year as a possible stopgap measure to further legislation next legislative session is always a good start. Our analysts were surprised by the move to put it in accountability and believed it would not survive an up-or-down vote as it stood in either judiciary committee due to the considerable amount of AOC influence built in to the committees.
As we stated before, the devil to the new AB1208 is in the details- the changes to legislation which were not apparent when it was passed out of committee. But it was indeed passed out of the committee so there remains significant opportunity.
Today is a brand new day. A day to relax, to contemplate, to be proud of your considerable accomplishment that something meaningful got out of the judiciary committee. Tomorrow is a brand new day as well and perhaps, just perhaps an opportunity to join others in galvanizing your resolve and getting ‘er done.
A stunning editorial from MetNews Felix Frankfurter, She is Not.
A great article by Courthouse News. California Courts win a round in battle with State Bureaucracy
Judicial Council Watcher 
Judicial Council Watcher
May 4, 2011
Excerpt from the metnews article “Felix Frankfurter, she is not” Be prepared to say ouch.
__________________________________________________________________
“But none of (Arnold Schwartzenegger’s) deeds or misdeeds exceeded the damage he did upon the people of California with his appointment of the new Chief Justice.
Tani Cantil-Sakauye is a pleasant, likeable graduate from the UC Law School at Davis. The only trouble is that a Felix Frankfurter she is not. Arnold Schwarzenneger plucked her out of hundreds to become the next Chief Justice of California.
What is her history? College and law school at UC Davis; four years in the Sacramento District Attorney’s office; eight years in the Superior Court as a trial judge; five years in the Appellate Court. She had also served one year as legal affairs secretary for then Governor Deukmejian. Scholarly writings in books, appellate briefs, law review articles, none. Teaching in law schools, none.
Unless she has completely concealed it from public scrutiny, she has never managed an investment or a business, nor been involved in any personnel administration, public or private. Yet, she has been put in charge of a multi-billion dollar enterprise with real estate holdings in every town so large it would make Donald Trump look like a piper.”
________________________________________________________________________
Whoops, it looks like someone credible exposed yet another facet of “The Big Lie”
“Our Chief Justice is an accomplished administrator”
Of what? Her daughter’s girl scout troop?
wendy darling
May 4, 2011
Hirshberg’s opinion piece is as persuasive, credible, and powerful as the recent article from Judge Kopp, and the recent editorial piece from Judge Horan, and others, if not more so.
Unfortunately, it will fall on deaf ears of the tone-deaf leadership of the the Office of the Chief Justice, the Judicial Council, and the AOC, at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, who will likely respond with another version of “It’s all just so ‘unfair’.”
The AOC line staff, however, all know that Hirshberg speaks the truth, even if they cannot do the same without being mercilessly punished.
Long live the ACJ.
Mrs. Kramer
May 4, 2011
I have no opinion one way or the other on the issue of creating a seventh district court. I don’t know the issue. But I did find this quote before the Ca Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday to be timely,
“Emmerson criticized the judicial council’s position ‘as not terribly honest.”
Sen. Bill Emmerson, R-Hemet, said moving the two counties and Inyo County from the Fourth Appellate District to a new Seventh Appellate District recognizes the huge population growth in the area. …Daniel Pone, of the Judicial Council, the governing body for the court system, said the new district was unnecessary and would increase costs. And Fourth District Administrative Presiding Judge Judith McConnell said other district justices opposed creating a seventh district and that any proposed split needs more study.
http://www.pe.com/politics/miller/stories/PE_News_Local_D_appealdistrict04.2941eac.html
Chuck Horan
May 4, 2011
The Alliance took no formal position on this bill but we let it be known that we favored and fully understood the frustration of those Appellate Justices who took their issue directly to the legislature. As we said to the press last week when asked about the issue: Sometimes the only audience is the legislature. The issue has been around for years and those justices got tired of waiting for an “in branch solution”. Sound familiar?
It is very unfortunate that the bill seems to have died for reasons of partisan politics wholly unrelated to the bill itself. Such is life.
Judicial Council Watcher
May 5, 2011
Congratulations and please enjoy your retirement Judge Horan. We hope that this means we will be seeing more of you here saying it like it is, unrestrained by the office you currently hold. You’ve been a vocal advocate for positive change so please don’t go away.
Mrs. Kramer
May 4, 2011
It would seem logical that when the market comes back and that area of the state continues with its new construction and increase in population that the Riverside/Inyo justices will eventually be able to establish their own district. One that is out from under the direct control of the chairs of the JC Exec Comm and the CJP. And maybe AB1208 will help to give more localized input into the process, too.
JusticeCalifornia
May 4, 2011
Hey JCW
I was there yesterday, and heard, loud and clear, the expectation that the CJ needs a chance to show her stuff and handle problems. Hands off the CJ during her grace period.
As I said, as of yesterday I intend to honor that unless and until she shows herself to be a minimimi.
I am going to withhold any criticism of the CJ until we see if, from yesterday forward, she can play nicely, and ethically, and responsibly, without self-interest.
JCW, I think we need a new ongoing blog thread, called, “what the CJ should know or does know”.
This could include all kinds of things. . . . .
Like what the CJ must be assumed to be on notice of RIGHT NOW — like all that stuff in the Judicial Council binders and from minutes of the Judicial Council meetings she attended from the time she was appointed– that she said ON CAMERA the Judicial Council has read and has thoroughly “vetted” —
and the backgound and history of her “advisors”–
and what has actually been sent to her–
and what has been sent to the AOC and Judicial Council and branch members that she should know about
and newspaper articles/treatises/reports she should know about.
Let’s politely educate the CJ on the FACTS, so she cannot say she didn’t know.
JCW, what is the best mechanism for this? Periodically e-mailing the JCW links to this particular new thread to the CJ and her top information officers (Lynn Holton?) and the AOC director so none of them can say they were not on notice?
What about documents not ready for prime time (the blog) but that should be forwarded?
Yes, I think this is an excellent idea. Knowledge is power. No one can say they didn’t know. Let’s figure it out.
JusticeCalifornia
May 4, 2011
Let’s make sure there is no room for argument about what our CJ knows or should have known.
I found this which was funny– let’s see if it posts.
Judicial Council Watcher
May 5, 2011
How much more of a grace period does she need?
SF Whistle
May 5, 2011
I agree with JCW’s question here…..just how long should this “grace period” be?
I also question what possible glimmer of hope the CJ has provided that might justify or support the “grace period”….?
Can anyone provide information on one thing that the CJ has done that causes you to believe she wants, or welcomes the “education” that JC writes of?—–I for one, do not believe that the CJ believes she has anything to learn other than how to most effectively wield the power that RG centralized for “his branch”….I think the only education she is intent upon gaining, or interested in is how to continue what she believes to be the good work of RG….
JC—I respectfully submit that one does not learn a damn thing unless they are open to this education….Can anyone report any action taken by cj that would lead one to believe she is listening?
Unfortunately—I believe that there are noteworthy examples found in the conduct of the cj, such as disgusting appointments such as Verna Adams and Kim Turner that would instead support the belief that the CJ intends to give you an education on how she intends to take her corrupt branch to a new level….
The CJ has announced in appointing persons known to be disgusting loyalists (again, such as Adams) that she does not give a damn whether there is a shread of credibility to her SEC….
Her recent comments about the “house that George built” leads me to believe that if she was to issue herself a report card she would give herself high marks—-WHAT EDUCATION is necessary when she believes herself to be the top of the class?
Mrs. Kramer
May 5, 2011
The message I got from reading all the posts and news articles is that the new CJ will have greater ability to steward wise allocation of taxpayer funds by safeguards established through legislation and new government code.
As posted by Justice California, I think it would be a good idea to recap all the areas that have been adversely impacted under the current situation of no safeguards and put the concerns in writing to the new CJ. That way she would be able to address each area of concern, point by point. All would know that their concerns are clearly and concisely documented as being delivered to the CJ. All would know that they helped her to not miss a needed opportunity to bring change.
It seems like this could aid in determining what AB1208 will look like in its final form when it becomes law. This could aid the new CJ to assure she is crossing her t’s and dotting her i’s when it comes to using tax dollars wisely for functionality of the courts for the good of the people.
Maybe something to the format of:
Here is the problem
This is what allowed it to happen
Suggestion of how to safeguard against it in the future.
Our courts are broken. They need to be fixed. The new CJ is key to fixing them. Could be wrong, but I think there could be many interested in an endeavor to aid the new CJ, by spelling out all the problem areas. An overview of the concerns noted in the state audit of JC/AOC would be a good starting point.
Judicial Council Watcher
May 5, 2011
There is a reluctance to acknowledge the problems and that is where all of the other issues start. Neither the Accountability or SEC committees are charged with looking at anything meaningful and all I hear from JC/AOC is a recommendation that the ACJ join committees. While we’re ameniable to the concept of building lists, we’ve already built two lists – one being the build-a-grievance list and the other being the big lie list. Together they represent a punch list of sorts.
Members of the Judicial Council and senior AOC management read this site daily. If they had any intention of looking at any of this it would have already been underway and these various committees would be recommissioned to look at the issues.
Mrs. Kramer
May 5, 2011
Yes. Lack of transparency and lack of response to concerns raised would seem to be the primary, underlying problems. It seems to me that one has to deliver a formal letter that lists problem areas, overview of what is causing the problems and suggestions of how to rectify.
Don’t forget that from the efforts of ACJ, there is now a bill moving throught the legislature to establish new government code that has yet to be crafted in its final form.
Whether or not some of the problems should or could be addressed through new government code; being able to demonstrate that the new CJ and AOC/JC have been informed in writing where problems stem could go a long way towards promoting transparency, responsiveness and open government within the judicial branch for the good of the people.
As an example, here is one to the EPA that caused the directive of a Federal GAO audit to be adhered to. (boring if you don’t know the issue. just look at pages 8-10, Action Item requests):
Click to access ACHEMMIC_February_2010_Letter_to_EPA_CIAQ2.pdf
JusticeCalifornia
May 5, 2011
Yes, JCW, we have all been run around in circles trying to report waste, mismanagement, embezzlement, etc. Michael Paul’s employment termination for telling the wrong person in the wrong way about what really amounts to highway robbery of public funds, reminds me of this:
But we are being told to “give the little lady a chance” to address the issues and problems people are raising. If there is a “what the CJ should know” thread, those of us who are interested can restate the issues (or raise new issues) in one central location.
I will volunteer to forward the link via e-mail each week to the CJ’s people, print out the e-mail, and copy JCW.
Just a thought.
SF Whistle
May 5, 2011
Forgive me if this sounds too cynical—-but does anyone think for even a minute that the CJ does not know—as example—that Verna Adams being a part of her SEC strips it of any hope of credibility?
Does anyone believe that the CJ does not wish to stand by her remarks about “the house that George built’?—-
“The little lady” is not interested in an education—-she wants more time for all the same reasons that “justice delayed is justice denied”….the longer she occupies the office and is able to thwart challenges the more formidable she becomes…
Each day that passes allows her to raise her skill level in proper use and operation of the network of lackies and loyalists that RG assembled. The JC is a body where loyalty is demanded, expected…Do not expect her to conduct any house purge and surround herself with persons and staff that question actions and have any desire to undertake required reform and change….it aint happening—
Mini-cj is NOT giving up any aspect of the network of sycophants put together by RG—she just needs time to learn how to properly operate the machine….It would be daunting to anyone to find yourself surrounded by suck-ups that would never dream of questioning anything you did…
So—sure—give her more time—send her a weekly letter—she’ll likely get a real chuckle each week.
Delilah
May 5, 2011
IMO you are not too cynical, SF Whistle. More like Spot-On and can we get an Amen!