17 Days – When a pause voted on by the JC is marching orders for the AOC

Posted on August 30, 2011

7


On July 22nd, we all heard that the Judicial Council voted and passed a one year pause to CCMS. What people probably did not notice is that the AOC, via the trial court budget working group, submitted multiple line-items of CCMS related funding that was all recommended and passed, continuously funding CCMS activity at about 652K  per week. In that same recommendation, the AOC sought and was granted the ability of moving the funding around and re-appropriate funding granted as the AOC felt necessary.

Yes, it is time to bring back Johnny Lang to describe what’s really going on.
.
.

.
.
By submitting multiple requests for different aspects of CCMS funding and justifying these multiple requests separately,(see this link- special funds allocations for fiscal year 2011-2012) the AOC managed to convince the trial court budget working group (TCBWG) and the judicial council to fully fund AOC’s CCMS objectives. Describing the whole matter as a “pause” assured that no legislative action would be pushed forth to kill the program because by the time people figured out there wasn’t any pause, there would be days left on this years’ legislative schedule in which to act.

All the pause did was tie the legislatures hands and silence some – but not most – critics. After all, it appeared by any normally accepted definition of a pause that it was a pause. Had all of the individual budget allocations of special funds not been made (totaling some 34 million dollars – continuously funding the CCMS program at a rate of 652K per week…) then there might have been a pause. However, by fully funding every line item recommendation, the JC fully funded the program until FY 2012-2013 with the intent on asking the legislature for 74.5 million next year.

Quote from Mark Moore in the last Judicial Council meeting:

  “It was originally referred to as the one-year pause – we’re now relabeling it. It’s not necessarily a one-year pause,”

That makes sense give that the TCBWG and the JC fully funded the program.

Why pause if the JC fully funded the program?

____________________________________________________________________

In other news, Judge Katherine Feinstein describes the AOC’s funding proposal as “ineffective posturing” that won’t stop any layoffs.

____________________________________________________________________

More from Maria Dizneo of Courthouse News – SF Superior Rejects Bailout Offer, IT Project Continues in Full Swing