This weekend the California Judges Association held a meeting in Long Beach. One section of that meeting was moderated by Judge Michael P. Vicencia and was themed “Order in the courts”.
As the Courthouse News article suggests, more than a few judges were hopping mad at an AOC legislative attempt to transform governance to ensure that the AOC was left in charge of the trial courts. Additional issues included the selection of tone-deaf appointees of the Judicial Council who seemingly follow whatever the AOC suggests, endorsing anything that the AOC does regardless of the legal ramifications.
A judge wanted to know about a bill in the Legislature that would have given central bureaucrats the power to appoint the head clerk of every local trial court, a measure that would have taken away much of the authority of local presiding judges to run their courthouses. The questioner asked why the measure was drafted and who was behind the move. From the panel at the front of the room, Appellate Justice Douglas Miller said Supreme Court Justice Marvin Baxter had withdrawn the bill because he had been blindsided by the proposal. “Why was it drafted in the first place?” Judge Lance Ito of Los Angeles shouted out. “Why don’t you have the answer?” shouted Judge Timothy Fall from Yolo County.
Miller ultimately said he did not know why the measure was drafted, but knew the staff member responsible.
Appellate Justice Douglas Miller is now the chair of the Executive & Planning Committee, the single most powerful position behind the chief justice on the Judicial Council. Prior to Mr. Miller, it was Mr. Huffman that chaired this committee when this maneuver was committed. Judges, court employees and the public are upset about primarily two things: Transparency and accountability. If any one person is or was responsible for a legislative effort to profoundly change the laws as well as judicial branch governance as Mr. Miller suggests, both transparency and accountability dictate that this person is identified and publicly reprimanded or fired. The public has a right to know. Judges and Justices have a right to know. Court employees that serve the people of the state of California deserve the right to know and everyone, including our perp deserves to see some accountability happen over the issue as this was not an insignificant matter easily dismissed. People are growing more angry and not less angry as time goes by and more people discover the truth.
With respect to Judge Kevin McCormick’s request for contracting information and the lizard Roberts intent to not disclose any information with respect to contracts issued before October 1, 2011, these too are issues of both transparency and accountability. As the AOC has previously illustrated if you give them a milimeter, they will take a thousand miles. Disclosure of ALL contracts currently in force is what the judges, court workers, the legislature and the public deserve. Mr. Miller can talk about how transparent the Judicial Council has become because they permit public comment now but the rubber meets the road on what you do, not merely what you say. The responsibility and the proper directive to disclose this information was made by the chair Strategic Evaluation Committee. In fact, Justice Scotland and his committee would be derelict in their duties in not considering this exact same information that Judge Kevin McCormick requested of the AOC. By all accounts, both Vickrey and Kann were responsible for coming up with this information and then they retired.
In our minds, the responsibility for coming up with these answers now falls on Tonto’s shoulders. Ron Overholt should produce these answers within a time certain – or face dismissal. It is all about transparency and accountability these days. Transparency and Accountability should also serve to dismiss Mr. Moore for not adhering to a judicial council ordered pause in CCMS development AND continuing to employ a half million dollars per year worth of additional contractors for at least an additional three years. Over the course of five years these same contractors equate to the loan granted San Francisco and there was the last 5 million that was spent before year end on the last 20+ contractors related to CCMS and long term contracts.
Nobody has faith in governance when the governed appear to be ungovernable, when transparency is a big secret and when accountability is non-existent.
Maria Dinzeo’s article goes on to state:
The get-together came at a time freighted with disagreement over how policy is set and money is spent in the courts. State Representative Bonnie Lowenthal, Democrat from Long Beach, was on the panel at Friday’s session. Referring to efforts to fix the problems in the courts with legislation, she said that one thing her experience had taught her is that “You don’t want to have it done to you.” Lowenthal pressed on the difference between internal matters of policy at the courts and the handling of public money, which is disbursed by the Legislature. She said a recent proposal favored by many trial judges and trial courts as a whole, called the trial court bill of rights, involved matters best handled within the judicial branch. “If the Legislature sees mismanagement,” she warned. “that’s another thing.”
Quite a few legislators have decried mismanagement including Bonnie Lowenthal who asked for Vickrey to be dismissed. Not a whole lot has changed in that respect. Now the AOC is led by another character whose resume includes other information technology application boondoggles, most notably in Alameda County. We’re not sure that Ms. Lowenthal is looking at the same tea leaves we are but what we see is that issues of governance remain entrusted with a very select few loyalists, some of questionable character, all appointed or backed by our chief justice. Given the considerable lobbying power that consumer attorneys and others have over judges in the legislature, we too are willing to bet that the legislative solution would not necessarily be to the judges liking. Short of taking the issues directly to the people via the initiative process or convincing our chief justice to change course or a concerted and considerable lobbying effort being made to every legislator by judges statewide, we’re not sure that things will change because the people are in charge that don’t want change. They sit in the catbirds seat and that is not going to change voluntarily.
Related articles
- 37 Days – AOC Governance issues – Directors vs. Division Managers (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- What became of the emergency funds? (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- 12 Days – The Recorder – Viewpoint: The Judicial Council’s misplaced priorities (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- 31 Days – The Chief Justice & Judicial Council’s crafty, predictable ploy (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- Analyze their own operations? That’s a long term committee thing. (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- 17 Days – When a pause voted on by the JC is marching orders for the AOC (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
Nathaniel Woodhull
September 19, 2011
Interesting to note that the California Judges’ Association Annual Meeting apparently had a record low turn out. Maybe that is because more and more judges are bailing from the do-nothing CJA, (whose Board may or may not be finally coming to the party) and joining the ACJ instead. People have gotten tired of working form within the undemocratic system when the deck is stacked against them.
MrsKramer
September 19, 2011
Amen to that, Judge Woodhull. I am REAL tired of it. I think I have aged 30 years in the past six from having to deal with these dysfuctional people. I cannot even imagine what it must be like to be an honest judge trying to do your job and having to deal with this five days a week. Or a parent losing a child to an abusive spouse while the leadership deals cards from under the table and squanders needed money by chasing their bets. (lingo understandable for CJ TCS).
Maybe we should all chip in and rent a Bill Board close to the State Capitol Building and not take it down til the inept and compromised are removed from the helm of the judicial branch.
Been There
September 19, 2011
“Miller ultimately said he did not know why the measure was drafted, but knew the staff member responsible.”
As a former staff member I can only ask Justice Miller to disclose the name of the AOC Manager who ordered the staffer to draft the measure. Staff does not lead; staff follows orders.
Wendy Darling
September 19, 2011
Published today, Monday, September 19, from Courthouse News Service, by Maria Dinzeo:
Chief Justice Promotes Optimism in Conclave With California Judges
By MARIA DINZEO
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/09/19/39887.htm
Also published today, from The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw, by Cheryl Miller:
State’s Judges of Two Minds on AOC Question
Cheryl Miller
The Recorder
September 19, 2011
LONG BEACH — Lee Smalley Edmon, Los Angeles County Superior Court’s presiding judge, threw out a novel suggestion to her fellow jurists at last weekend’s California Judges Association gathering here.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202514969550&States_Judges_of_Two_Minds_on_AOC_Question&slreturn=1
And from Ron “Little Bill” Overholt, confirming the “interim” appointment of Christine Patton as Deputy Director of the AOC, and announcing some additional new promotions:
_____________________________________________
From: Overholt, Ron
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 3:11 PM
To: AOC Users-All
Subject: Executive Office Administrative Support Changes
Good afternoon,
I want to update you on administrative support changes for the Executive Office.
In October, Laura Rigdon will be transferring to the Court Programs and Services Division to work on the Judicial Council’s strategic and operational plans and related issues. For the next couple of weeks, she will be assisting Bill in winding up activities. Laura has been a very valuable support to Bill and many of us throughout the agency in her role with the Executive Office. Her institutional knowledge of the judicial branch, the council, and justice system partners will continue to be a great asset to the AOC and to the council in its planning efforts.
Sara Hurd will continue to support me. On Monday, Lusia Siaki, who has provided excellent intermittent support to the Executive Office on a regular basis, will join us as executive secretary to Chris Patton for the duration of Chris’s appointment. As you work with Sara and Lusia on requests and scheduling for Chris and me, please also ensure that all requests and materials for the Chief Justice are routed through the Executive Office. This ensures streamlined communication and coordinated services for the Chief and her chamber’s staff.
Thank you.
Ron
Ronald G. Overholt
Interim Administrative Director of the Courts
Judicial Council of California – Administrative Office of the Courts
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
415-865-4235, FAX 415-865-4244, ron.overholt@jud.ca.gov
http://www.courts.ca.gov
“AOC: 50 years of service to the courts and the people of California, 1961–2011”
Long live the ACJ.
antonatrail
September 19, 2011
I see the pointy-headed bean-counters are still fiddling while Rome burns. They’re so insulated, they’re not aware of the forest fires burning down California. So collegial too! First names referred to on an inter-office memo to all AOC users. All this joviality and optimism could gag a maggot.
Hoping AB12008 passes.
Citizen Ant
courtflea
September 19, 2011
Good info Wendy. I am guessing that Chris Patton’s appointment is to have a salary to pad her retirement? As I have said before, I just don’t see this as a long term thing. Chris is at a prime age to retire and I know she has roots in Santa Cruz where she worked for years.
Some folks don’t realize that you can use 1 year of salary to increase your retirement. A lot of public agencies require an average of 3 years to calculate your retirement. with the recruitment out for a new director, my guess and many others here is that Ron O will retire and then the new guy (Roddy) will be appointed and after Roddy comes on board , Chris will retire as well. A clean sweep of Dirketors except Ms. Patel. Humm, after Roddy’s history with her, I would not be suprised if she is the new Assistant Dirketor after Chris retires. Just speculation.
But I must say and pardon for my language, who gives a crap about who is supporting Ron O the clown in the executive office???? Seriously, even interally at the AOC.
anna
September 20, 2011
There’s more! HRH-2 is now begging the State Bar to work on behalf of the AOC and JC to get more from the Legislature see California Chief Justice Asks for State Bar Support to Address Budget Crisis sent out for release by the AOC.
If anyone here thinks appointing Angela Davis is going to bring a fresh perspective, your nuts. She covered up re:Richard FIne, and was on the committee to violate the State Bar Act by adopting rules that the Legislature expressly prohibited the Board of Gov. from doing in persecuting lawyers. See B&P Code 6001.
The idiots at the State Bar see Article in the Recorder,http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202514490735&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=The%20Recorder&pt=The%20Recorder%20News%20Alert&cn=California%20News%20Alert
%2C%20September%2019%2C%202011&kw=Viewpoint%3A%20Bar%20Discipline%20System%20in%20Bad%20Shape
don’t even know how to get evidence in a court trial, [easy as pie] yet these are the people who are going after brilliant trial lawyers, who stand up for plaintiffs against the corporate interests and the political donors of George and co., when they win on behalf of the “average worker”.
Now the AOC and JC will have more committees to have exparte communications to persecute lawyers, and some of you wonder why no one will represent Michael Paul.
These people aren’t even subtle about it. They keep great tabs on the lawyers who contribute to the State Bar Foundation, and who doesn’t. Don’t kid yourself, They only go after those who do not give to the State Bar.
When you have someone like Zitrin complaining that the State Bar OCTC doesn’t even know the most basic rules of evidence, and that they target lawyers in area 4] and 5] of his article for political reasons, instead of going after lawyers who steal from their clients something is very,very wrong.
Zitrin is no zealot for ‘”rights of the accused” in the State Bar, Something has to stink to high heaven, or other lawyers are now worried what happened to Phil Kay is going to happen to them.
These people are criminals. They will stop at nothing, as long they can cover up for their past misdeeds.
George and company did not set this system up a decade ago, so they could be prosecuted now. Follow the money
anna
September 20, 2011
The committee members on the State Bar and AOC and JC reads like a book of losing counsel [big defense firms] to Phil Kay. Some of these firms took a beating in the press.
George and co, have choked on the verdicts they had to uphold when it came to the cases of punitive damages that Kay won on behalf of his clients.
The fact that the CJ is talking to the State Bar, is problably an ethical violation. See 170.9. That means that the lawyers who give to the state Bar, or lobby on behalf of the AOC or JC could or will get beneficial treatment. There is a reason the Cal Cont. set the state bar up as a public corporation, and is not allowed to have judges as members. The State Bar appears before the Supreme Court, as a litigant.
These people don’t even care anymore about appearing neutral.
The rules that the BOG of the State Bar set into place, against the State Bar Act is, now the State Bar “court” can consider hearsay, which it was prohibited from before. The rules of evidence was too “hard” for the “judges” of the State Bar court too understand. And the “prosecutors” had “too hard” a time understanding how to put in evidence. These are all lawyers, who are suppose to be “pure as the driven snow”, yet, are as stupid as can be. When you have an ex- prosecutor of the STATE Bar stating that its prosecutors have now taken the position that they can lie in order to disbar lawyers they don’t like we are in trouble
SEE the Blogsite of David Cameron Carr – kafkaesq it’s next to one of his last entries [ I don’t’ know the link]
One of the rules of professional conduct is not to be incompetent, yet these are the people the STate Bar has put to be in charge of persecuting lawyers. And yes, I do mean persecute. All they care about is currying favor with political interests. That does not include 1]trial courts for individuals, only their big corporate interests, and 2] protecting the public when it comes to “civil rights” and important civil rights verdicts in favor of employees.
anna
September 20, 2011
P.S. The rules of evidence are not that hard. Every good trial lawyer could recite them in their sleep. The fact that the people who were “appointed” to be judges in the State Bar don’t know them, speaks for itself, the fact that they don’t even need evidence, to yank the license of the lawyer you hire, means that you have more rights than your lawyer. So, why should any lawyer represent someone as Michael Paul, who takes on political corruption?
While there are some posts that have complained about this blog site being too critical of the judiciary, the schemes set up by George and co, by expanding and creating all these BS committees which shadow what the legislators do, and creating all these CRC”s and the redundent CACI v. BAJI was to “keep tabs on litigation” and someone to keep them informed. [CCMS] Does anyone really think the public wants to know what lawsuit is filed and in which county? No, only the little minions that are in the AOC and report to Beth Jay, to tell the CJ and those interested what’s coming down the pipeline, was behind this.
Those of you who know, Case law is decided by what cases[lawsuits] are won or lost, and the subsequent opinions the Courts write. No case, no opinion. The judicial branch only gets to exercise it’s power through case law. They don’t write laws. That is what the legislature does. George and CO wanted more control of everything. Too call it the Reign of HRH George is, and was, an understatement.
anna
September 20, 2011
CCMS, first it was wanted by the public, then it was to help the judges in the trial courts, now it’s wanted by “private attorneys”?????? See
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/09/19/39887.htm
WTF???
So, now the law firms who contribute to this [big defense firm] will get their wishes?????
What the next trial balloon they will float to pay and cover-up for this debacle?
Conclave??? Is she the pope?
anna
September 20, 2011
Considering, that many legislators are some very successful ex-trial lawyers, HRH-2 is full of crap. They know all too well of what, or not, the judiciary does What there appalled about is the expansion of the AOC and JC, and the power-grab George has foisted on this state.
anna
September 20, 2011
i apologize for all the grammatical errors i have indulged in. They’re v. there etc. Most of you know exactly what I’m talking about. Some of you are banking on the ignorance of lay people, because, now that you know, you have the responsibility of reporting these “criminals” to the CJP. Under the cannon of judicial ethics. So, so much for ignorant lay people,
We are in a sorry state.
Where are you, Gen. Woodhall, C. Horan, Judge Lampe?????????
Silent as crickets.
I don’t expect you to answer, at your own peril. However, one would expect that somewhere, someone, would sound the call.
Our forefathers did.
Are we no less then them????
MrsKramer
September 21, 2011
Anna has a point. I, too, don’t understand the silence from those who post on this board that are judges. You all do so much to work to cut off the head of snake, as JCW says. But you have it in your power under Canons of Judicial Ethics to stop them cold by addressing it from what they are doing from the bench. There is a Canon that says if you know a judge is doing wrong, you are suppose to report them to the CJP.
Huffman in the Phillip Kay matter, removed Judge (whatever his name is) from the case. But he ignored the evidence that Kay had provided that the judge committed perjury when filing a complaint agaisnt Kay with the State Bar. The Bar went after Kay based on the judges perjury. Kay can also show a clerk entry that is incorrect and not a ruling made by the judge.
My case. What Huffman, McConnell, Benke, Kelly, et. al., have done that are criminal actions of rewarding perjury over a matter of public health, formatting the CCMS and Remittitur to cover the judges aiding with a malicious litigation carried out by criminal means – and then issuing a nonsense gag order for a sentence not even in my purportedly libelous writing.
Salcido can evidence Huffman denying a writ – involving his son and the SD DA’s office having undue influence in Family Court.
DA Dumanis has boycotted judges – and now has a $20M lawsuit against her for framing a military wife for murder. Where were the local judicial leaders to stop this? (the adage “thick as thieves” goes here)
That is just some what I know of. I bet there is MUCH more out there. The CJP is an independent state agency that is suppose to watchdog this kind of stuff in the judicial branch. It is subject to audit by the BSA.
You can cut off the head of the snake from the body – or you can cut off the body of the snake from the head. But either way, the snake dies.
I don’t mean this to sound accusatory. I am just wondering why you don’t use that means available to you to stop the corruption. Why don’t you all call them on the carpet for what they are doing from the bench and as clerks? Didn’t you all take an oath and have a legal and ethical obligation to do so?
Sal
Alan Ernesto Phillips
September 21, 2011
In our isolated and insulated Shasta county we still have an 18-YEAR retired, “Assigned Judge” who has been milking for 18-YEARS!, what could in theory be an okay 30 to 60 DAY program. He keeps getting his ticket punched for that entire time while families like mine pay deeply for the enabled (I would characterize sociopathic) non-child focused decisions, or lack of them. He handles the cases in Department 12 that have primarily people (like me) who are in poverty and pro per. Slam dunk – next – chick-ching!!
That “judge” is beyond reproach and accountability under the assigned judges program, the AOC, His JC-fellows and the Chief’s rubber-stamped endorsements. The entire mediation services under that ‘judge” and their “pro-resources” seem all in lock-step with all the above. In the meantime, while everyone is being so urbane, intellectual and collegially polite, my children are in misery. Multiply little-lay-old-me by thousands… and you get why the Vatican was so protective of their own pedophile-priests…
In apology to the GOOD readers & participants on this thread for my partially personal outburst… Hopefully, more whistle-blowers will come out. Sadly, it seems too late for my children now to be protected by the very system sworn and highly paid to do so. But if SOME of you come forward and do the right and brave thing… maybe… just maybe… after my kids are At-Risk youth, have dysfunctional relationships and have gone through the Family Law meat-grinder (as it is), maybe… reform would have happened to the degree that the true, implied intent of the Elkins model and hopeful-sounding sentiment therein will be more than just an experiment in institutionalized laziness and Judicial self-protection. Maybe, might not be the word for consideration. Rather, it should “Unless…” (see, “The Lorax,” Suess)