The reports both from Sacramento & Los Angeles sing the same tune. We urge other courts to release their findings directly to the media so that your comments are not buried and forgotten. Both the Sacramento & Los Angeles surveys can be found at the bottom of the linked post.
A committee of Los Angeles Superior Court judges disseminated among their colleagues on Friday a report drafted purportedly at the request of Chief Justice Tani-Cantil Sakauye that called on branch leaders to decentralize court governance and increase oversight of the Administrative Office of the Courts through the appointment of a bench officer as CEO.
Boy does that take the wind out of the sails of the E&P and AOC’s grand plan of stacking the deck against judges with AOC picked/endorsed CEO’s.
It goes on to state “many judges currently have a negative perception of the Judicial Council’s and the AOC’s performance,” which was attributable to “the overwhelming sense” that branch leadership “has felt that it could do whatever was required to reach a certain presupposed result, regardless of the means employed to reach those ends.”
(and the music just gets louder…..)
The authors cautioned that “until court governance and administration act in accordance with principles that judges accept—adherence to law, opportunity to be heard, candor, collegiality, transparent, accountability and respect for the judicial office—there will be widespread judicial dissatisfaction with Branch governance.”
(It’s the primary reason Judicial Council Watcher exists. Give us these things in a meaningful form DEMONSTRATE YOU MEAN IT and we will shut down this site….)
The council frequently delegates issues of great importance to the Executive and Planning Committee, which limits the ability of members to participate in decision making, to which we would add that the council foolishly delegates issues of great importance to the AOC as well, which gives members no chance to participate in decision making.
The report is purported to state that “judicial input is often minimized or disregarded in entirely, and that the agency exerts control over the selection of persons for committees that are supposed to have oversight of AOC actions.”
(We’re playing this music from Oakland, California and our people in Beverly Hills can hear the music all the way down there…..)
“The council should also have its own staff, separate of the AOC, to assist it in its responsibilities and oversight of its administrative arm, the report said.”
We could NOT agree more.
________________________________________________________________
We again call upon the Chief Justice to release to the public and to the media ALL SUCH REPORTS from every county that submitted them in response to the three questions.
________________________________________________________________
More from MetNews
Wendy Darling
June 27, 2011
You know, you really have to wonder how many times, and from how many different sources, and in how many ways, that the Chief Justice has to hear that there is an absence of transparency, accountability, democratic practice, or willingness to even listen to other points of view without punishing those that speak out about the serious problems infecting the California judical branch, the Judicial Council, and the AOC, before the Chief Justice gets the message, or even if she ever will.
Enough with the surveys, the committees, the committees to oversee other committees, the “misleading” the State Legislature, the whining, and the endless stalling for more time. All the evidence and information is right there, in black and white, many times over. Either exercise some leadership to clean up the branch, or resign the office.
Long live the ACJ.
courtflea
June 27, 2011
Well if this “report” goes the way of all others of this genre commissioned by the AOC it will never see the light of day (i.e. no change will come because of it).
Wendy Darling
June 27, 2011
And why would anyone have any reason to think or believe anything else at this point?
Long live the ACJ.
Michael Paul
June 27, 2011
That’s a good question! Why would anyone have any reason to think or believe that justice Huffman, as the chair of the new accountability committee would ever let any of this see the light of day?
This shell game just moved him from a position of godlike authority to godlike authority over any reforms, transparency or accountability. There is no doubt in my mind that this gentleman either knows where all of the bodies are buried and is playing everyone like marionettes or he is the ringleader to a racketeering influenced corrupt organization, take your pick.
Wendy Darling
June 27, 2011
Published late this afternoon, from Courthouse News Service by Maria Dinzeo:
Brown Announces Budget With ‘Triggers’
By MARIA DINZEO
“That budget included a $150 million reduction to the judicial branch’s budget, on top of earlier cuts, bringing the total amount in cuts for the 2011-12 judicial budget to a total of $350 million. Those cuts are considered unlikely to change.”
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/06/27/37724.htm
Long live the ACJ.
Judicial Council Watcher
June 27, 2011
Obviously, Tani continues to knock on the wrong *$@king door.
JusticeCalifornia
June 27, 2011
Yeah, and surrounding herself with the wrong $*%@king advisors.
Kim Turner is one of Tani’s top CEO/ CCMS advisors right now. Turner has a documented horrific (borderline-if-not-officially-criminal-YET?) record as CEO and assistant CEO, and Turner is spending $2-$2.5 million PER YEAR on Marin’s sad computer system, supposedly while she and Marin are eagerly awaiting CCMS. Now we see a nice new off-the-shelf system could be had in Marin for a third of what Turner spends each year, and maintained for what, under $100K a year?
Way to go, Tani and Kim. uhhhh, that’s just one county. (Hey Kimmie, where did that $2.5 million per year go?)
This garbage is costing the entire branch, and the taxpayers that support it, a whole lotta money, and all of the branch’s credibility.
I hate to say it but I will. I told you so. Bad apples are spoiling it for the entire branch. And top leadership is top heavy with historically bad apples. The first and most obvious step to mending the branch and making way for healthy new growth is to CLEAN HOUSE. Do it, Tani, or continue to let the whole branch suffer because you are obviously incapable of doing it, and therefore you have no respect or crediblity.
sharonkramer
June 27, 2011
Great to bitch, complain and expose. But that does not get the deal done. Here’s the way it works: If you want to sue the state of California, i.e. the judicial branch, and /or the “independant state agency”, CJP, in federal court, you must first file a complant with the Bureau of State auditors for Deliberate Indifference.
Kevin Grimm
June 27, 2011
Hire more staff to the Judicial Council so that they can … wait for it … provide oversight of AOC staff. And just who are AOC staff? Why, they’re staff to the Judicial Council.
JC staff to oversee JC staff. Brilliant.
Judicial Council Watcher
June 27, 2011
The reforms proposed if taken as a whole include losing the tarnished goods sycophants being rotated around for judicial branch leadership positions for real judicial branch leaders. First you have to have some integrity in the JC itself. That’s sorely lacking. Then from there you can have oversight happen. As long as you have a bunch of tarnished goods sycophants leading the branch, there will be no oversight.
courtflea
June 28, 2011
Wendy, the tone of the post sounded optimistic to me………..
Wendy Darling
June 29, 2011
I wouldn’t call it “optimistic” now . .
Long live the ACJ.