Good Morning California,
We’re curious where CCMS is after the so-called pause.
.
.
On 8/26 we heard that with the exception of thirteen level three errors (defined as an error that has a workaround) and one major reporting error that was separated from the project, CCMS is complete as of today.
But it was supposed to be ready on July 1. Before that it was supposed to be ready on April 1st. And before that, November 2010 and before that – July of 2010. Before that, August 2009. And on and on and on. In fact, slipping time lines since 2006 have continued to push back CCMS delivery for over five years.
The AOC has alleged the use of hundreds of trial court testers to verify the completeness of the application. It has stated that all current CCMS courts have participated and confirmed the proper operation of the application. It has further represented that it has stress and load tested the application. Yet an integral component to the CCMS system is a document management system. Without having a document management system (DMS) to interface with CCMS there is no way to manage the documents and load them into or retrieve them from the system. Yet the AOC represents that the whole issue of document management systems remains an outstanding item that the AOC still needs time and money to work on. Regardless of what is finally selected for a DMS, the AOC will also need time to develop an interface to any and all selected document management systems hosted locally or at the CCTC at a substantial extra ongoing development costs. Once such a system is integrated and the whole application is tested in real world conditions of utilizing a document management system, how will it perform?
Loading and retrieving documents into CCMS is one of its core functions. This is where the rubber meets the road as to the overall functionality and usability of the application itself. JCW has had others continuously representing to us that this application is not at all complete, that everything you hear from Bruniers and Moore is not true and that CCMS does not function the way it is supposed to. We have had others continuously represent to us that the application remains user unfriendly and uses a counter intuitive machine user interface.
On CCMS’s alleged date of completion, we want to know what the testers and the trial courts know about V4 because we are getting conflicting information. We can plainly see in reports to the Judicial Council from the AOC that DMS is an integral part of CCMS, yet in the so-called one year pause, no funding is being asked for to solve the DMS problem directly. Because of governance issues in the council where one vote was taken on the special funds report rather than individual votes on AOC recommendations, some funding will be taken out of the deployment costs to fund the DMS issue. The following was taken from the special funds allocations document, page 37, presented to the Judicial Council on July 22, 2011. http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/20110722item3.pdf
We want to emphasize here that no working DMS interfacing with CCMS = No working CCMS.
16. CCMS Document Management System (DMS) Development and Deployment FY 2011–2012 Allocation from special funds—$0
The need for a DMS has been identified by AOC divisions and trial and appellate courts. The former CCMS steering and oversight committees endorsed the need for a DMS to be integrated within CCMS. The Court Technology Advisory Committee recommended that a project to develop a DMS solution be undertaken. The AOC ISD has partnered with the Superior Court of Santa Clara County to initiate a DMS pilot project targeted to provide input for the optimal DMS solution. Under the TCBWG one-year pause recommendation, no costs would be incurred for the development and deployment of DMS.
Under the alternative strategy identified in the CCMS Deployment section, funding in FY 2011–2012 will allow the following planned activities:
• Strategy and plans for a DMS development environment for early adopter courts that do not have a DMS or seek to use a centralized service;
• Negotiation and procurement of DMS software and professional services;
• Establishment of CCTC hosting services;
• Implementation of the DMS development environment; and
• Development of the business case for full deployment
_______________________________________________________
Tell us what you know about CCMS utilizing our private message window.
_______________________________________________________
Here is a CJIS Group update on the DMS RFP and future award. This whole CCMS project is still well in development without having ever left.
DMS Contract Update – Santa Clara County & AOC
.
.
keeping the FAITH
August 31, 2011
Just curious, since CCMess is an epic fail, will the first two branches of our govt say enough already to the AOC and CCMess and cut the head of the snake off. CCMess has taken ten years, and still nothing. Technology has grown and advanced over the past ten years, cell phones, ipads, tablets, hi def tvs, etc. Heck new cell phones become outdated every few months. And the AOC can’t get CCMess deployed after all these years?
Its time for the legislature to end all of this now. End waste of public money. Keep our courts open.
By the way, any news on whether they will do anything before Sept 9th? Hundreds of people are counting on this.
Thank you.
Nathaniel Woodhull
August 31, 2011
Dear JCW,
I don’t understand what all the commotion is about. CCMS is in fully deployed and fully functioning. Why it’s so good, CCMS can even be used to pay users personal bills, schedule their cars for servicings and make dinner reservations. V4 is so good, it even has applications for World peace and ending famine. Why I understand that the big fella upstairs is so impressed, he is thinking of replacing St. Peter with CCMS, if he can only work out the licensing details…
Wendy Darling
August 31, 2011
Dear General Woodhull,
Welcome to Never Never Land. Watch out for the one-armed pirates and the crocodiles.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
August 31, 2011
If this is true, Tani Cantil Sakauye has hit rock bottom. ZERO credibility. Less than zero.
She and her personal bootlicker Grim Churner (I mean Kim Turner) are knowingly funding CCMS on the backs of parents and children. I’m sure they are crying a river about SF losing some of its very best Family Court Services mediators.
Tani and Grim can complete this ugly picture by sending out a new statewide memo to all remaining Family Court Services mediators telling them to a) spend a maximum of 30 minutes on each child custody case, and b) shred their own records the end of each day to get rid of the evidence of neglect, abuse, addiction, or whatever other problems may have surfaced, which the mediators have no time to ask about, let alone follow up on.
Absolutely disgusting.
Hey Senator Noreen Evans, and all the rest that are facilitating this boondoggle, congratulations on participating in this CCMS travesty at the expense of the most vulnerable members of the California population. This song is dedicated to all of you. . . .
Wendy Darling
August 31, 2011
The State Legislature should add the AOC to this legislation:
From the on-line publication of The Sacramento Bee, by Torey Van Oot.
August 31, 2011
Senate Approves Bill To Create Watchdog for National Guard
The Senate today approved legislation to give the governor the power to appoint an independent inspector general to oversee the California Military Department.
Senate Bill 921, by Democratic Sens. Ted Lieu and Lou Correa, comes in the wake of an ongoing Sacramento Bee investigation that has uncovered examples of fraud and mismanagement within the California National Guard.
In addition to replacing the department’s internal inspector general with an independent watchdog, SB 921 would provide protections for whistle blowers, mandate a toll-free number for reporting alleged abuses and require that the independent inspector general continues to investigate allegations of misconduct.
“The National Guard has had systemic breakdowns in different parts of its organization. One of the reasons for this is guard members who are scared or unwilling to come forward when they see the illegal, inappropriate behavior. A more independent inspector general plus additional whistle blower protections would mitigate that problem,” Lieu, of Torrance told Capitol Alert.
Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/#navlink=navdrop#ixzz1Wehh9stx
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
August 31, 2011
Published late today, Wednesday, August 31, from Courthouse News Service, by Maria Dinzeo:
SF Courts Strike Deal to Spare 100 Jobs
By MARIA DINZEO
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/08/31/39443.htm
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
August 31, 2011
Also published late today, Wednesday, August 31, from The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw, by Cheryl Miller:
S.F. and AOC Reach Deal on Court Funding
Cheryl Miller
http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202513069818&SF_and_AOC_Reach_Deal_on_Court_Funding
Long live the ACJ.
Delilah
August 31, 2011
Notice, though, the games the AOC plays with the grant money, and the fact that PJ Feinstein “would not be commenting further on the agreement.” My admittedly jaded assumption is that, in return for this agreement, the AOC imposed a gag-order on her from further publicly speaking out about AOC bloat and mismanagement of funds. She came at them with both barrels and had the guts to play the game of brinksmanship, so now that they’ve coughed up the money they always had available, in return, she must agree to STFU.
keeping the FAITH
August 31, 2011
If that’s the case every single PJ needs to come out with both barrels. Do what they gotta do to get the funding they need.
Hats off to the PJ of SF for standing up to the AOC.
JusticeCalifornia
August 31, 2011
“In an announcement late Wednesday, Feinstein said the court will receive $2.5 million in emergency funding, after agreeing to accept $650,000 in grant money to partially fund two complex litigation departments.”
Query: does this include Judge Harold Kahn’s “special” complex litigation department?
“The Administrative Office of the Courts has been criticized for using the award of funds to push pet projects and favor loyalists.”
Indeed.
” ‘I compromised on this temporary approach because there is momentum building among attorneys and lawmakers to achieve a long-term solution to inadequate trial court funding,’ Feinstein said in a prepared statement.”
Query: do attorneys have more power with lawmakers than judges? And aren’t attorneys the ones pushing CCMS for Tani and Grim? The answer is yes, I watched them tell the JC and members of the legislature how important CCMS was. What gives?
And BTW, are the SF family court mediators still getting laid off ?
Inquiring minds want to know.
keeping the FAITH
August 31, 2011
While it is great news that additional funding has been made available for SF to save more jobs, the fight must continue to ensure that all trial courts receive proper funding. Let’s not forget courts such as LA and San Joaquin, just to name a few. They are still in need of funding. Also, there are still 75 people in SF who face losing their jobs.
The legislature needs to move forward with plans to allocate money for trial court funding. Cut the AOC to the bare bones. Plain and simple. It makes no sense for courts to have to beg for funding to operate. Folks, its been a long time coming, but a change is going to come. Believe that.
Thank you. Keeping the FAITH!!!!!!!
PS: did the AOC announce to the media, courts, ect that CCMess was launched/deployed today????? If anyone has heard anything please post.
L. A. Observer
August 31, 2011
The Recorder article indicates that Overholt is recommending a $2 million bailout for San Joaquin as well.
keeping the FAITH
August 31, 2011
Great news!
Everyone needs to remember that these are temporary fixes. The fight to change how funds are allocated to the courts must continue. The courts must not be satisfied with the bones the AOC are throwing their way. Take the whole dang steak. I for one will not be happy until all courts are back to funding pre-AOC.
Again, hats off to the PJ of SF.
tony maino
August 31, 2011
There are about 75 people who work in the San Francisco Superior Court who will probably lose their jobs. At the same time there are 100 people in the education division of the AOC who are not going to lose their jobs.
Before the AOC got involved in education most of judicial education was taken care of by the CJA at no cost to the taxpayer.
The solution to the budget crisis is to give the AOC a haircut. Then the judicial branch must regain the confidence of the Legislature and the Governor. This confidence will not be established by sending a bunch of retreads up to Sacramento to lecture the legislators and the Governor. I believe that the Governor will not agree to legislation increasing judicial branch funding so long as AOC executives are paid more than what he is paid.
Unprotected in Sac
August 31, 2011
So, SF screams and cries and gets money. In Sacramento, we get told we’re short $18.5 million and now the judges are out to get rid of all the unrepresented staff, which won’t even come close to that number. The judges aren’t screaming for more money, instead they’re going after the unprotected, non-union staff. Instead, they want to spend money on new computers for CCMS, the system they hate. Maybe its time we organize and get ourselves represented so that we get treated fairly, like getting raises (like the unions did this year and next) and having our benefits and jobs protected.
It won’t get better with AB1208 because now we’ll have to compete with LA for money in the legislature…and we know how many votes they can line up…
keeping the FAITH
September 1, 2011
If judges in Sacramento are and have spoken out against CCMess then why are they spending money on computers for it as you have stated? The system does not work. Never will work. After all the money wasted legislative termination as Mr.Paul has stated seems to be the smart thing to do.
Commercial IT
September 1, 2011
Unprotected, can you please provide more details? What new computers? What type? Costing how much? To do what?
Nathaniel Woodhull
September 1, 2011
Please do not think that true judges of this State are not painfully aware of the pain, suffering, and sacrifice of our courtroom staff and those working throughout our courthouses are going through.
HRH George decided to close all of our courthouses on Wednesdays during the last round of budget cuts and asked the judges to voluntarily relinquish their salary by 4.9%. Some of us saw that jive for what it was. Those judges who opted for the Chief’s plan signed away their salaries which went right back to 455 Golden Gate Avenue, further filling their coffers. (This was done under threat that those who didn’t follow the Chief’s mandate would have their names published by the press.) Meanwhile, some of us decided not to channel our salaries to the Crystal Palace, rather voluntarily pay that 4.95% to our staff during this mandated “furlough.” The cash went directly to them and they were most appreciative. None of us asked for, nor did we want any recognition for our actions.
Those of us who have been around since before State Trial Court Funding and the resultant shift to a mega-bureaucracy were focused on trying to do right by our employees and provide a high quality of service to the public. These efforts were translated by HRH George and his successor, Tiny-Whiny, as local courts interested only in trying to maintain their local fiefdoms. I can assure you I was never part of a fiefdom, but I was part of a community that cared about each other (employees and judges) and we were all concerned about trying to provide the highest possible service to the public. Under the current oppressive regime, I see people who have worked well together for 25 years or more growing suspicious of the motives and actions of all those around them. Many have left service and many of us are contemplating that same move.
courtflea
August 31, 2011
That emergency funding comes with a lot of strings. Those courts will lose control of their budgets and their courts. Every expenditure and operational move will be questioned, approved or denied by the AOC. these courts are doing what they have to do but it is tantamount to selling their collective souls and now will be forced to be AOC bootlickers. I feel so bad for them. This is how the AOC silences dissenters and does it quite well. I wish these courts luck. General Zod is in charge now. I bet Ron O is giggling ala Anderson Cooper right now.
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
Courtflea, I believe you are right.
If the courts are about to go belly up (with a push or two or three from the AOC), the AOC can dole out a couple of million dollars that should have gone to the trial courts in the first place, and effectively shut that court up, and gain some control of the court. $2.5 mil to buy Judge Feinstein’s silence was a deal.
Ron George and Bill Vickrey have been empire building for two decades. They both were in place in the early 90’s. Many of the key players in power right now were right there with Ron and Bill in the 90’s, and helped Ron and Bill get the CJ/JC/AOC right where they are– in control, without any oversight at all. At this point, it appears to be no secret at all that the CJ/JC/AOC want their regional offices to effectively take over the operation of the 58 trial courts.
This has been a long time coming. Loyalists have been carefully groomed. How? Well, for over a decade I have watched top leadership “save” severely compromised Marin bench officers/members, and help excuse their clear conflicts of interest, self-dealing, and gross misdeeds. That is how and why I began watching top leadership. By saving unethical members of the branch, and then grooming them to serve top leadership‘s purposes, top leadership has created a perfect army of beholden mercenaries willing to cleanse files, hammer critics, and do whatever else is necessary, however ugly and illegal that might be. Marin’s Judge Lynn Duryee — a master at empire building and lining her own pockets with the help of her husband’s law firm, was placed by Ron George and Ming Chin on the Commission on Impartial Courts, to teach the branch how to use bar members for branch purposes! Marin’s CEO Kim Turner– well, we all know about her. She facilitated and covered for her former boss’s improper/illegal expenditures, and then took his place. She has spent $2-2.5 million a year on a stupid, aged, court computer system in Marin (how is that possible???). Ron George put her on the Judicial Council in June 2009, and 3 months later she engaged in the mass destruction of child custody evidence in the middle of a state audit with the help of the AOC and Marin’s troubled Judge Verna Adams. Now Kim is the new CJ’s right hand woman and chief bootlicker, advising the Judicial Council on CCMS (what a funny joke) and good old problematic Verna (whose sorry ass has been saved many, many times by top leadership) has been hand-picked by the CJ to serve on the “Strategic Evaluation Committee” to “investigate” the AOC. That’s just Marin’s story!
So here we are. The CJ/JC/AOC have absolute control courtesy of the current governance structure; an army of well-paid down and dirty loyalists in place throughout the court system; and a nice pot of discretionary money to play with courtesy of CCMS and trial court construction/maintenance funds. What better way to effect a takeover than to exploit budget problems and facilitate a financial meltdown at the trial court level? In one fell swoop, top leadership and its loyalists can get the judges on their knees begging for money; install/use people like Kim Turner statewide to gather intel and “clean up” nasty messes reflected in the court records; get rid of court reporters, longtime clerks and other court personnel who know too much; create a whole new army of mercenaries by recruiting bar members to do top leadership’s bidding and then rewarding them; and lobby for legislation that will further financially devastate the public (pile on those fines and fees!), while limiting the public’s access to justice (open courthouses, impartial judges, competent court clerks and good court reporters, trials by a jury of their peers, etc.) Sorry to sound jaded, but I have been watching this go down for over 12 years, and have been memorializing it for almost as long.
But oppression will not be tolerated here. If a revolution is necessary to effect court reform, I have no doubt that there will be a full-fledged revolution. If our not-too-bright gambling barmaid, and her new BFF Turner, truly think they can crack the whip and have 1600 trial court judges on their knees kissing their boots and marching in lockstep; and slap the legislature around and get them marching in lockstep; and continue to abuse and exploit the public; I do believe they are “riding for a fall” (as my dad used to say). It’s only a matter of time.
The last time I looked, this was the United States of America, not Nazi Germany.
MrsKramer
September 1, 2011
JC, approaching the elephant from a different side but still seeing the same elephant; I would have to agree with your harsh analogy that this situation is similar to how Nazi Germany came to be. What they doing is diabolical. And its very concerning that they continue to get away with their misdeeds, intimidating tactics and power plays.
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
Intimidating is not the word.
Shocking. Unimaginable. Incomprehensible. Intolerable.
Any entity with $4 billion, absolute control of governance, a cloak of secrecy, self-made exemptions from the law, the right to investigate and report on itself, the ability to cloak its loyalists with absolute immunity, and a COMPLETE lack of oversight and accountability by or to anyone is going to a) be riddled through and through with corruption, and b) have no incentive to negotiate with anyone trying to change the status quo.
Top leadership of the largest judiciary in the Western World has a better gig than any other criminal organization of which I am aware.
Delilah
September 1, 2011
Oh, Bravo! JC! Brilliant analysis and synopsis of exactly how the AOC works and what a monster it has become: A corrupter of everything it touches. I think a revolution will be necessary.
Mirko Vojnovic
October 21, 2011
Where can I officially verify that justice Ming Chin placed Lynn Duryee on the Commission on Impartial Courts. I would appreciate quick answer because that can prove conflict of interest in my case. Thanks!
JusticeCalifornia
October 22, 2011
Mirko Vojnovic
October 25, 2011
Thanks JusticeCalifornia!
It looks like in my case Ming Chin had his fingers in appointing Lynn Duryee to hear disqualification of judge Neal Cabrinha. Chin and Cabrinha are old USF buddies from student days. All three of them are smiling together in this picture: http://usf.usfca.edu/law/news/stories/blakeay.html
JusticeCalifornia
October 27, 2011
Same as it ever was.
A few years ago an SF judge sitting with Lynn Duryee on the editorial board of the California Courts magazine was assigned to determine a 170.1 challenge of Duryee. There were serious procedural irregularities surrounding that challenge as well. Check out the tiny handful of judges that are on the editorial board.
Mirko Vojnovic
October 27, 2011
Did anybody challenge that appointment and what was the result?
I challenged Duryee’s (still in process), for not following proper CCP 170.3 procedure. I also pointed out personal relationships of the participants. We’ll see what transpires…
lando
September 1, 2011
General Woodhull you are brilliant. Your post says it all. For 2 billion dollars CCMS should do all that and more. But wait . Despite J Bruiners claiming that CCMS would be fully deployed today I see no evidence that such is the case. It reminds me of the You Tube video of a JC meeting about 2 years ago when all JC members and AOC staff assembled were promised that we were at the “tipping point” to deploying CCMS. Does everyone see a pattern here? It is time to hold the JC and AOC responsible for overseeing this disaster. The legislature needs to step in to audit all of the AOC’s remaining operations and demand an accounting line by line of their spending including on CCMS.
MrsKramer
September 1, 2011
There is definately a pattern here. Found this old news release while searching for a mailing address:
Michael Paul
September 1, 2011
It seems they took the original CCMS and broke it up into a California case management application, plus a host of undeveloped external deliverables that actually make it a case management system. When a major error is declared in the reporting, they just remove the major error from the project and call it complete.
This program is at risk for legislative termination and has been for over a year. Painting the program in the best possible light by breaking up all of the underlying dependencies while declaring the core code complete is really all they can do to try and save the program.
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
It’s so comforting to know that Judicial council member Judge Erica Yew (appointed by George in 2009 concurrently with Kim Turner and Michael Roddy) can work closely with the CJ/JC/AOC on the CCMS “DMS project”.
In 2010 Yew was appointed by the CA Supreme Court to serve on the Commission on Judicial Performance. Wow! The JC and the CJP at the same time!
Yew’s Santa Clara County Court is in line to get a wonderful new $242 million courthouse. http://www.courts.ca.gov/facilities-santaclara.htm
Woo hoo. That makes the new Morgan Hill Santa Clara courthouse opened in 2009 through the County look like small potatoes: http://www.dta.com/_dta_work/justice.html.
Yew came up the ranks through the state bar, and went on the Santa Clara Bench in 2001. She was around for Kiri Torre’s Santa Clara file decimation /manipulation hijinks and is oh so aware of the years of conflicts of interest on the Santa Clara Bench. (As one example do Vanessa Zecher and her family ties– parents and husbands –ring a bell? It rivals Marin’s Duryee/Wood/Dufficy/Sutro/Adams/Freitas McCarthy bedmates.) In fact, while Kiri Torre was in Santa Clara, files in controversial cases Yew was involved in reportedly went missing.
Like Tani, Yew has boasted about her domestic violence experience; like Tani, she voted along with the rest of the Judicial Council to excuse Marin County’s demolition of child custody evidence (which included evidence of abuse) in the middle of state audit and ongoing child custody cases.
I’m sure the Santa Clara county court will be as transparent, impartial and honest about DMS and CCMS as it has been about everything else over the years. . . .
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
Hey Erica
You are on the CJP. When judges at any level (including but not limited to your CJ, your Judicial Council mates, your Santa Clara benchmates) say or allow others in the branch to say things that they know are not true, or do or allow others in the branch to do things that are unethical/illegal, or take actions or urge others to take actions they know obstruct justice or obfuscate the issues or give one side an unfair advantage, what has the CJP in general, based on its graphic, detailed knowledge, and what have you specifically, based on what you know or should have known, done about it?
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
I (and so very many others) could ask the same or similar questions of ever so many other conflicted top leadership and current and former CJP members. . .
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
I mean really, Erica, what do you ( in your multiple roles) do with judges who have been and are knowingly making and soliciting misrepresentations to the public and the branch and the legislature about a failed multibillion dollar IT project, and other important issues?
Sorry to linger on this subject but it is just so interesting. When top leadership of the largest judiciary in the Western World goes so very south, what is the branch –and what are the other two branches–to do?
Wendy Darling
September 1, 2011
Yet another reminder of what the California Judicial Branch once was – a branch based on integrity and dedication to the highest quality of public service in the adminstration of justice – and what it might be yet again.
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
September 1, 2011
The above post was intended as a reply to General Woodhull’s reply post to Unprotected.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
September 1, 2011
Thank goodness, Wendy, I thought your post was a tribute to super ultra conflicted Erica Yew. 🙂
Just kidding. I really didn’t think that. I knew you meant N.W.’s wonderful post.
keeping the FAITH
September 1, 2011
One must assume that since it was not posted here as a news item, that CCMess wasn’t deployed as ‘promised’ by the folks @ the AOC?
So, does this now mean that the executive and legislative branches are finally going to put an end to it once and for all? They must now see that CCMess is an epic fail and must now stop the waste of money that could be used to keep our courts open. To allow excuse after excuse and ten plus years of waste to continue is crazy. One can only hope that the fight continues to ensure that this long running wrong is corrected.
Thank you.
lando
September 1, 2011
Thanks General for those comments. I also remember a time when the court system was closer to the people they served. Positive relationships were built on a decentralized local level and the courts operated at a high level of competence and dedication to public service. Given that, we never experienced any financial difficulty as we worked within our means. We also had the freedom to innovate and develop creative solutions to issues that confronted us without interference from the JC or AOC. All that changed when CJ George and J Huffman used the 1998 Trial Court funding act to set up a centralized bureaucracy under their control to attempt to run an entire branch of government. The result is bloat, mismanagement, incredible waste of taxpayer money , a 2 billion dollar computer system that is no where near deployment, closing of courts, furloughs, layoffs and reduced service to the public we serve. While it is almost time to get off the stage , I want to try and do what I can to protect our court employees from economic ruin, insure that our court can serve our community and through constitutional or legislative change end the antidemocratic and insular tyranny that runs out of 455 Golden Gate .
L. A. Observer
September 2, 2011
Lando and Woodhull,
All you say is so very true. One of the greatest problems we all face is the judges who entered office over the last decade have no knowledge of most of this and are only now beginning to understand what has happened. It is an uphill battle educating these “in the trench” judicial officers, made more difficult with the control of statewide education by the AOC and the failure of CJA in its educational presentations to question this new history.
The indoctrination of “there was no true judicial branch until CJ George and BV arrived” is fed to all new judges almost from the get-go. They need to be reminded that for the first 150 years the trial courts did very well on their own. They were not “fiefdoms” but were well run courts and administered justice to the public in a fair, efficient and impartial manner, working well with their county partners. They prospered and grew. Sure they had problems and funding issues, but they were able to meet with those who controlled the purse strings one on one. More importantly, they and the County Supervisors shared the same constituency, the citizens of the county.
They were in touch with the citizens and the needs of litigants and fashioned justice delivery systems tailored to their own unique counties. It was only after the takeover by George and Vickrey that for the first time ever courts needed to close courtrooms, lay off personnel and lose efficiency and deny access. We are losing the judges with institutional memory so the education of the new judges about what happened must continue.
What was lost was individuality, subjugated to one-size-fits-all mandates. They lost direct input into the funding decisions and they gained a new bureaucracy with a voracious appetite for special projects and growth which is choking the trial courts. They can right this by demanding democracy on the Judicial Council and amendments to trial court funding to give the trial courts authority over most of the funding distribution decisions. The education will continue. It took a decade to ruin the trial courts, it will take a bit of time to correct this wrong. But it will happen.
Oliver T.
September 2, 2011
Well said, Lando. The spectacle of courts lining up with their gruel cups outstretched to the AOC is appalling. What an image–begging THEIR STAFF for assistance.
BTW, did it strike anyone else as puzzling that the AOC was making offers to SF even BEFORE the council meeting? The question again arises: Who is running the ship? Did the Chief authorize this on her own? Did E and P? Did anyone? Obviously, the Chief was aware of the situation–she mentioned it before the council meeting started last Friday, when she or someone else inadvertently keyed her microphone, as correctly pointed out by JCW. She asked “Is Dolan here–does he know about the offer to San Francisco?” Interestingly, she apparently felt it important that plaintiff’s attorney Christopher Dolan, who of late has been carrying the AOC message for them, knew what was going on before he delivered his statement to the council. Very interesting alliance she has formed, when she should be making alliance with her own judges. Hundreds of them have waited in vain for any sign that she values their opinions. Those who were willing to “give her a chance” are writing her off, in droves. They realize that she never had any intention whatsoever to reach out to critics. It was simply not true, and she proves it every day.
antonatrail
September 2, 2011
She did reach out to her critics. Rather quickly too. Her little claw stretched out as she asked the ACJ for their roster. (Bbwwhhaaaaahhh!) Yeah, right. Get the names, then clean house with the sycophants enforcers. Frightening, really. This situation with the third branch has got to be the strangest thing in a century. James Ellroy ought to write a few books …
MrsKramer
September 1, 2011
CPJ = Corrupt Judiciary Protector
MrsKramer
September 2, 2011
I ralely nede ot laern ot tpye. CJP = Corrupt Judiciary Protector
Nathaniel Woodhull
September 2, 2011
Lando,
Well said!
anna
September 2, 2011
Lando, you haven’t gone far enough with your analysis, they just didn’t want to control the daily procedures, they wanted to control the outcome of trials, and verdicts that happen all over the state. One controls that by controlling the “pleadings” or moving papers one can file, and then appeal. They want to create a false “wavier” on the part of parties, and lack of documentation of issues for the courts to decide. It’s evil. The lack of jurisdiction for their actions is being swept under the rug. That is why they need additional legislation to protect them, and immunity. The immunity they claim is not existent when it comes to the acts they do in an “administrative capacity” . That is why they need this new bill.