We’re regularly amused when the judicial council trots out a new mouthpiece out to defend the indefensible. They’re usually so transparent that you might actually walk through their glass doors if you’re not careful. The key to maintaining a disinformation facade is to keep on trotting out more sacrificial lambs as mouthpieces just long enough for them to avoid impeachment and pillory. This vast effort is led by the AOC’s Office of Communications under the direct command of the acting executive director Ron Overholt.
For months now, the office of communications has been mostly silent, just sitting back and being their evasive selves while having other judicial branch leadership take to the lectern or to the pen, encouraging others to carry both their torch, their sword and their shield. However this past week, we’ve seen the office of communications come out swinging and we’re amused at their pathetic, feeble attempts to get you to buy their load of crap. If there is one thing a reporter does not like, be they Leanne Kozack or Phillip Carrizosa it is to be the subject of the news, or in this case… a post about their defense this week of the AOC, Ron Overholt and Bill Vickrey.
Two misleading reports aired in San Diego and Sacramento on Thursday, November 17, 2011. 10News—ABC San Diego KGTV accuses former Administrative Director William C. Vickrey and Interim Administrative Director Ronald G. Overholt of misusing taxpayer dollars. And 3KCRA in Sacramento contained inaccuracies about proposed maintenance funding.
.
The KGTV report claims that Mr. Overholt and Mr. Vickrey have been spending tax dollars on “rooms, flights, drinks, and dinners.” No taxpayer dollars were spent on alcohol; all travel was business-related and required for their jobs; and all meal expenses were reimbursed only at the state’s travel and business meal rates. The news station was provided with all the appropriate records. It did not ask for explanations about the specific items showcased in its story. Nor did it post the relevant records that would have explained this information.
.
Here’s an example of some glaring errors. The story claims that Mr. Overholt “spent $720 for two dinners at a French restaurant and took colleagues out for a $1,215 dinner at a steakhouse on San Francisco Bay.”
.
The truth is that the dinner at L’Olivier was for 40 attendees at the state’s travel meal rate of $18 per person. The attendees paid Mr. Overholt who used his personal credit card to pay the bill, then submitted a claim for reimbursement. This fact is clearly reflected in the records provided to 10News in August.
.
Also, the $1,215 meal was for 27 attendees of a Judicial Council dinner. Again, attendees paid Mr. Vickrey who paid the bill with his personal credit card. Mr. Vickrey filed an expense claim for just $486, which was the total cost for 27 attendees at $18 per person. The record was also provided to 10News in August.
.
Mr. Overholt filed an expense claim for a hotel stay in San Francisco. Contrary to the 10News story, Mr. Overholt does not live in San Francisco—he lives more than 30 miles way. His stay at a hotel was related to a three-day Judicial Council meeting, in which meetings were held late and started early. Members of the Judicial Council stayed at the hotel for the state rate. Mr. Overholt is taxed on the amount he is reimbursed for that stay.
.
The trips that Mr. Overholt and Mr. Vickrey took were done on behalf of the public and the courts. One trip to Washington, D.C. was part of an effort to obtain federal stimulus funds. The other trips were to the California Judges Association annual and mid-year meetings, the Conference of Chief Justices and the National Center for State Courts – all parts of their regular duties as heads of the Administrative Office of the Courts.
.
In Sacramento, half the projects mentioned in the KCRA report were proposed for entirely different courthouses in the Sacramento area, and none have been funded. The kitchenette remodel was entered as part of a building-wide assessment, and was for all kitchenettes in the building. The job has not been done, has not been funded, and is considered a low priority. The planning list itself is required by the Judicial Council. The list has been maintained for the past five years as a part of our stewardship of courthouses statewide. After a 40 percent cut in funding, only $30 million is available in the fund this year to maintain more than 500 court facilities. This has resulted in safety and security issues, and many building systems will necessarily “run to fail.” Ongoing cuts to the judicial branch budget threaten everyone’s access to justice. Get the facts here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/14909.htm
We think Mr. Calderon is onto something with his “other agenda” theory as these working judges have little time. If you plow any pile of overpriced projects in front of non-experts and ask them to act they will defer to your guidance because they don’t know any better. They’re overwhelmed by not only high price tags, but the pile of cases sitting on their bench. And this serves as yet another reason to transfer the buildings to DGS.
Just off the bat, quickly, the Washington D.C. trip didn’t bring any stimulus funds for ccms because the timid bureaucrats didn’t relish Federal oversight. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
Regarding the KCRA report, “the job has not been done, has not been funded” is a feeble (love your word JCW) excuse after having proposed obscene amounts for the job the mafia would die for.
News flash: Stuffing fat cheeks (both pairs) with steak and lobster and swilling it down with Grey Goose vodka paid for with public funds is not mandatory, Big and Little Bill, for your pompous and absolutely unnecessary meetings. I know this thought comes with brain pain for you, but do try to grasp the idea.
More hubris. If we actually obeyed the law and used real money instead of fiat currency these types of corrupt activities would be impossible. Why don’t I ever hear of law enforcement or attornies seeking justice for State ‘officials’ utilizing unlawful tender??? Thats because all you bureaucrats are corrupt. You will not enforce US Constitution Article 1 Section 10 limits on States to use Gold or Silver Coin ONLY!! You are breaking the law no matter how you try to justify it.
The Law is clear and the result of forcing the use of unlawful Federal Reserve Debt based notes is not only against the law but the fact that debt based fractional reserve currency is mathematically guaranteed to fail AND is mathematically guaranteed to transfer ALL natural wealth to those who own the Federal Reserve means that forcing this unlawful tender upon the people is financial warfare against the people. In the end there is so much increasing devalued currency constantly flooding the system that the small souled men and women participate in the hubris of their afflictions of financial warfare against the people.
How can any of you who are supposedly trying to do the right thing be viewed as anything other than waring factions of the same criminal gang when you will not enforce the law??? Especially a law as important as lawful tender. You are all criminals and we will all lose to your barbarism simply because you will not enforce the tender laws. It all starts there and that is the qualifier between those who are corrupt and those who are truly law abiding servents to the people. Voltaire already settled the argument over the value fiat currency many centuries ago:
“Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value — zero.” Voltaire 1729.
Enforce Article 1 Section 10 or you are obvious criminals!
Check back late tonight/early tomorrow and I will have an depth response of exactly how I am leading by example and exactly why this strategy is the only strategy that has any chance of being successful against what we are actually facing. I will also demonstrate how this applies to JCW efforts. One interesting coincidence is to note the date of your reply, the anniversary of the murder of JFK. He was murdered because he tried to do exactly what I am saying about returning to lawful tender with his executive order 11110 and the bankers via the CIA/Skull and Bones killed him for trying to return to lawful money. You first need to know who the enemy is before you can solve the problems they create. More to come.
What is most striking about the Office of Communications claim of erroneous news releases with me is this sentence:
“After a 40 percent cut in funding, only $30 million is available in the fund this year to maintain more than 500 court facilities. This has resulted in safety and security issues, and many building systems will necessarily “run to fail.” ”
A couple of years ago I wrote AOC management about this very scenario. I described how buildings will “run to fail” due to a tremendously poor lack of planning. Add to that, they were steering overpriced projects to the unqualified contractors doing the maintenance work.
After all of these years, after the tremendous waste of taxpayer funds in good times and an undercurrent in government funding that unofficially states that you must spend the money or lose it, I’m beginning to believe that “run to fail” for the purposes of securing more revenue is part of the model that the AOC is relying upon.
Maintenance is not solely funded from this 30 million dollars in appropriations. Part of the maintenance costs are buried in facilities modifications such as the 700 million dollar OCCM wishlist. This is how the AOC maintains buildings. They pay more than twice as much per square foot than the department of general services does and they re-allocate facilities mods and other project monies away from the projects to do it. While it’s quite complicated, it is revealed in the accounting codes that activities are billed to which are sometimes unrelated to the project that obtained the funding.
These consist of records that I have previously requested of the AOC that they don’t wish to reveal to anyone, which would serve to reveal their knowledge that unlicensed contractors were hiring other unlicensed contractors to perform this overpriced work.
Unionman (who posts he doesn’t like the union when they are backing the policy change that is needed)
I use my real name when I post comments. What’s yours? .
Before you bash me and SEIU, you might want to look at what they do to help shape policies for union men and you might want to try to understand what I do to help shape polices for union men. My litigation is not about a divorce. It’s about policy and the courts.
This really is not the place for this. It’s one thing to make biting personal comments in the heat of a debate over a serious issue. It happens sometimes. But it is quite another to wish someone you don’t even know physicial harm while hiding behind a pseudonym.
I have no idea who you are or what drives you, which is a little unsettleing when you are wishing me harm. Enough, okay? .
Miss me? LOL at the inevitable — the crazy, disparate, Mos Eisley cantina-like constituents that make up JCW turning on each other.
Go ahead, JCW, ban me. You’ve demonstrated that one viewpoint, and one only, is what is welcome here. You’ve become the FoxNews of judicial branch “reporting” (along with your captive news arm, CNU) — congrats! I won’t be hurt or offended when you cut me off, thereby proving that you’re no better than the Judicial Council that you’re so fond of criticizing.
From one whose issue is closely related but tangental, you are sooooooo wrong! Judicial Council Watcher is doing a great job of managing to keep the eye on the prize in a very complex and multifacited issue – one where cronyism in the judicial branch is causing serious problems in many areas. .
Unionman, I bear no ill will for you and I hope you feel the same. Contention happens when people are trying to take down a corrupt elephant and are attacking it from different sides.
Merry Christmas everyone, including you, Judge Dredd.
[…] Not too far back we covered a series of stories produced by 10 News San Diego and KCRA in a piece labeled “AOC’s pravda feebly attempts to regroup” . […]
antonatrail
November 19, 2011
Just off the bat, quickly, the Washington D.C. trip didn’t bring any stimulus funds for ccms because the timid bureaucrats didn’t relish Federal oversight. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
Regarding the KCRA report, “the job has not been done, has not been funded” is a feeble (love your word JCW) excuse after having proposed obscene amounts for the job the mafia would die for.
News flash: Stuffing fat cheeks (both pairs) with steak and lobster and swilling it down with Grey Goose vodka paid for with public funds is not mandatory, Big and Little Bill, for your pompous and absolutely unnecessary meetings. I know this thought comes with brain pain for you, but do try to grasp the idea.
MrsKramer
November 19, 2011
Who paid for that $250 bar bill in DC, including the two $47 glasses of Clos Du Val Chardonnay?
Pdf Page 6: http://10newsblogs.com/pdf/travel_expenses_111711_revised.pdf
FREEDOM
November 21, 2011
More hubris. If we actually obeyed the law and used real money instead of fiat currency these types of corrupt activities would be impossible. Why don’t I ever hear of law enforcement or attornies seeking justice for State ‘officials’ utilizing unlawful tender??? Thats because all you bureaucrats are corrupt. You will not enforce US Constitution Article 1 Section 10 limits on States to use Gold or Silver Coin ONLY!! You are breaking the law no matter how you try to justify it.
The Law is clear and the result of forcing the use of unlawful Federal Reserve Debt based notes is not only against the law but the fact that debt based fractional reserve currency is mathematically guaranteed to fail AND is mathematically guaranteed to transfer ALL natural wealth to those who own the Federal Reserve means that forcing this unlawful tender upon the people is financial warfare against the people. In the end there is so much increasing devalued currency constantly flooding the system that the small souled men and women participate in the hubris of their afflictions of financial warfare against the people.
How can any of you who are supposedly trying to do the right thing be viewed as anything other than waring factions of the same criminal gang when you will not enforce the law??? Especially a law as important as lawful tender. You are all criminals and we will all lose to your barbarism simply because you will not enforce the tender laws. It all starts there and that is the qualifier between those who are corrupt and those who are truly law abiding servents to the people. Voltaire already settled the argument over the value fiat currency many centuries ago:
“Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value — zero.” Voltaire 1729.
Enforce Article 1 Section 10 or you are obvious criminals!
Michael Paul
November 22, 2011
If you have any thoughts about leading by example and giving up that paper money…feel free to contact me. How is this post germane to anything on JCW?
FREEDOM
November 23, 2011
Check back late tonight/early tomorrow and I will have an depth response of exactly how I am leading by example and exactly why this strategy is the only strategy that has any chance of being successful against what we are actually facing. I will also demonstrate how this applies to JCW efforts. One interesting coincidence is to note the date of your reply, the anniversary of the murder of JFK. He was murdered because he tried to do exactly what I am saying about returning to lawful tender with his executive order 11110 and the bankers via the CIA/Skull and Bones killed him for trying to return to lawful money. You first need to know who the enemy is before you can solve the problems they create. More to come.
Michael Paul
November 24, 2011
What is most striking about the Office of Communications claim of erroneous news releases with me is this sentence:
“After a 40 percent cut in funding, only $30 million is available in the fund this year to maintain more than 500 court facilities. This has resulted in safety and security issues, and many building systems will necessarily “run to fail.” ”
A couple of years ago I wrote AOC management about this very scenario. I described how buildings will “run to fail” due to a tremendously poor lack of planning. Add to that, they were steering overpriced projects to the unqualified contractors doing the maintenance work.
After all of these years, after the tremendous waste of taxpayer funds in good times and an undercurrent in government funding that unofficially states that you must spend the money or lose it, I’m beginning to believe that “run to fail” for the purposes of securing more revenue is part of the model that the AOC is relying upon.
Maintenance is not solely funded from this 30 million dollars in appropriations. Part of the maintenance costs are buried in facilities modifications such as the 700 million dollar OCCM wishlist. This is how the AOC maintains buildings. They pay more than twice as much per square foot than the department of general services does and they re-allocate facilities mods and other project monies away from the projects to do it. While it’s quite complicated, it is revealed in the accounting codes that activities are billed to which are sometimes unrelated to the project that obtained the funding.
These consist of records that I have previously requested of the AOC that they don’t wish to reveal to anyone, which would serve to reveal their knowledge that unlicensed contractors were hiring other unlicensed contractors to perform this overpriced work.
unionman575
November 24, 2011
It’s all part of the accouting shuffle the AOC does year after year and it’s all wrong. Where the hell is the Legislature when we need them?
Future Political Prisoner Of CA Courts
November 29, 2011
unionman575
December 23, 2011
Kramer has a new name. Oh my God knock it off Kramer. You are out of your mind posting that video clip. Just stop.
sharonkramer
December 23, 2011
Unionman (who posts he doesn’t like the union when they are backing the policy change that is needed)
I use my real name when I post comments. What’s yours? .
Before you bash me and SEIU, you might want to look at what they do to help shape policies for union men and you might want to try to understand what I do to help shape polices for union men. My litigation is not about a divorce. It’s about policy and the courts.
Enough already
unionman575
December 23, 2011
AFSCME here.
Not SEIU.
I disagree with SEIU policy positions.
Off to jail you go next month and deservedly so.
sharonkramer
December 23, 2011
Unionman,
This really is not the place for this. It’s one thing to make biting personal comments in the heat of a debate over a serious issue. It happens sometimes. But it is quite another to wish someone you don’t even know physicial harm while hiding behind a pseudonym.
I have no idea who you are or what drives you, which is a little unsettleing when you are wishing me harm. Enough, okay? .
Judge Dredd
December 23, 2011
Miss me? LOL at the inevitable — the crazy, disparate, Mos Eisley cantina-like constituents that make up JCW turning on each other.
Go ahead, JCW, ban me. You’ve demonstrated that one viewpoint, and one only, is what is welcome here. You’ve become the FoxNews of judicial branch “reporting” (along with your captive news arm, CNU) — congrats! I won’t be hurt or offended when you cut me off, thereby proving that you’re no better than the Judicial Council that you’re so fond of criticizing.
Hey, Happy Holidays, everyone!
sharonkramer
December 24, 2011
Judge Dredd,
From one whose issue is closely related but tangental, you are sooooooo wrong! Judicial Council Watcher is doing a great job of managing to keep the eye on the prize in a very complex and multifacited issue – one where cronyism in the judicial branch is causing serious problems in many areas. .
Unionman, I bear no ill will for you and I hope you feel the same. Contention happens when people are trying to take down a corrupt elephant and are attacking it from different sides.
Merry Christmas everyone, including you, Judge Dredd.
unionman575
December 28, 2011
Agreed.