June 22, 2012
Dear Members and Others:
Yesterday the Judicial Council met to receive, discuss and take action on the report of the SEC committee. As you know, the committee was selected by the Chief Justice to undertake a top to bottom review of the Administrative Office of the Courts. The committee took its charge seriously, and after 55 weeks of tireless work — which included painstakingly “extracting” (their word) information from the AOC — issued a scathing 300-page report calling for a complete overhaul and drastic downsizing of the organization, a campaign to restore credibility to an organization almost universally distrusted, and an abandonment of the “culture of control” mindset they found permeated the agency.
Many of you were undoubtedly hopeful that yesterday would be a watershed day for the judiciary. In some ways it was. In other ways, it reflected the very worst our dysfunctional leadership has to offer.
The good news is that two speakers nailed it. During the public comment period, Alliance Director Judge Steve White gave an impassioned presentation of our organization’s view of things, urging the Judicial Council to immediately implement the 140 recommendations of the SEC. Judge White’s comments are attached hereto. We are fortunate to have such a compelling speaker with us.
The SEC chair, Judge Charles Wachob, likewise proved himself to be a convincing advocate for the committee’s findings. Wachob, who spoke for nearly an hour, painstakingly and compellingly detailed the committee’s makeup, approach, methodology and findings. We believe that the judiciary owes Judge Wachob and the other members of the committee a tremendous debt of gratitude. So impressive was Judge Wachob’s presentation that we have attached the entire transcript of his remarks. If you haven’t read the SEC report yet, please do so. In the meantime, we strongly urge you to read the 21-page transcript of Judge Wachob’s summary and arguments.
We have included herein a few highlights from his remarks:
“The information that we received was so powerful and so consistent and so voluminous that it could not be ignored… It was not the members of the committee that were speaking, it was the information that was speaking. It was the judicial branch speaking… I can say, too, that the tone of the report could have been much harsher but it wasn’t… The interviews with the division directors and the managers of the AOC, some were very candid, some helpful, some very forthcoming, and some were not, flat out not… My personal belief, I know this is shared with other members of committee, is that no one really knows how many people worked at various points in time and that’s just the way it is in our view… The AOC has grown in its organization like a coral reef without seeming function or shape… the (organizational chart) of the AOC over years never showed the Judicial Council at the top. That says a lot.”
Judge Wachob noted that those who described the SEC report as a mere “snapshot” in time fail to understand that the report covered a ten-year period in the life of the AOC. “If it’s a snapshot”, he quipped, “it’s a panoramic view.” We couldn’t agree more.
Wachob observed that in 2006, another study of the AOC had been commissioned, which has “gathered dust” for 6 years without a single recommendation being implemented. He made it clear that the committee feared a similar fate for the SEC report, noting that “anyone involved in government knows that the best way to kill a project is to assign it to a committee.”
Of course, this is exactly what the Council ended up doing, after an hour of non-substantive discussions and parliamentary maneuvers.
The Executive and Planning Committee has now been given sole authority over the matter and will commence by referring the report out for a “rolling public comment period.” By our count, this will be the fourth public comment period — CJA’s, the Chief’s, and the SEC’s (which involved sending questionnaires to every current and former judge in the state, among others). The Council has without a doubt now put the matter of the implementation of the report’s recommendations on a piecemeal schedule which could literally take years to run its course.
After it was clear that the Council would not implement the report, Judge David Wesley of the Los Angeles Superior Court gamely tried to salvage something from the meeting, moving to have the Council adopt at least recommendation 4.1. Here it is:
Recommendation No. 4-1: The Judicial Council must take an active role in overseeing and monitoring the AOC and demanding transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the AOC’s operations and practices.
His motion caused obvious discomfort among the Council members and led to page after page of discussion about “debatable and non-debatable motions,” the provisions of Roberts Rules of Order vs. Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, the mechanisms for an “indefinite tabling” of motions, what constituted a “friendly amendment” as opposed to a “substitute motion,” and other such useless chatter. The motion garnered but a single vote.
Perhaps the SEC committee members, most of whom had shown up to see their report received by the council, were surprised by today’s outcome. We were not, having witnessed more than our share of these meetings over the past few years.
If you have some free time, we urge you to read the transcript of the last 20 minutes of yesterday’s meeting. It is the best argument we can think of for democratizing the Council and enacting AB 1208. The Council’s nearly unanimous refusal toimmediately accept the responsibility for overseeing the AOC is a new low in judicial governance. No committee report or extended comment period is needed for us to draw that conclusion.
Included are two articles dealing with the meeting, one by Cheryl Miller of The Recorder, and the other by Maria Dinzeo of the Courthouse News.
Again, we urge you to read the comments of Judge Wachob in their entirety. His committee labored for over a year to bring you the truth. Please look at what he had to say yesterday.
Directors, Alliance of California Judges
__________________________________
Council Sets Up Committee to Study Report Critical of AOC
Courthouse News Service
California Judicial Council Inching Toward Court Bureaucracy Reform
While the report has been praised by many trial judges for recommending sweeping change to what it characterized as a “top-heavy” Administrative Office of the Courts, it has also drawn some criticism over its crisp wording and incisive tone, as it blasted the AOC for mismanagement, fiscal waste, hiring too many employees and hiding its budget process. The report recommended that the AOC downsize its workforce, eliminate unnecessary divisions and focus on serving the state’s 58 trial courts rather than influencing judiciary policy for its own purposes.
“Our report – its tone, its objectivity – it was not meant to be a feel-good report,” said Presiding Judge Brian McCabe of Merced County, one of the report’s authors.
At Thursday’s Judicial Council meeting, McCabe and Judge Charles Wachob of Placer County presented the findings of the Strategic Evaluation Committee (SEC), the 11-member group tasked with doing a top to bottom review of the AOC by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye.
“Some people have asked about the way in which the SEC came about with its recommendations and findings. How did you get a room of a dozen or so judges to reach a decision on anything? It’s a fair question,” Wachob said. “And I just have to say, it was incredibly simple. The information that we received was so powerful and so consistent and so voluminous that it could not be ignored.”
He added, “I believe based on the information that we have that the tone was completely appropriate. When you are looking at problems, when you are looking at personnel rules that are ignored, and various problems that we saw, they had to be discussed. Sometimes there’s just not a really pleasant, nice way to talk about those. I can say, too, that the tone of the report could have been much harsher but it wasn’t.”
The committee recommended that the council exercise greater control over the bureaucracy, ensure that the AOC understands its role as a service provider to the courts, demand that the agency provide the council with a business analysis for each of its projects and conduct periodic reviews of its administrative director. The council decided to table discussion on those recommendations until August.
Wachob said the SEC found it interesting that organizational charts on the structure of the AOC did not place the council at the top, even though the council is the head of the judiciary and the AOC is meant to be its staff agency. “It says a lot about Judicial Council oversight but it also talks and speaks about the perspective or a viewpoint of the organization itself- that it’s an organization unto itself. And that has to change,” he said.
Wachob said much of the committee’s information came from interviews with judges and trial court officials and described the conversations as confessional. “They were incredibly candid. Many people expressed that they had been wanting someone to tell their concerns to for a long time, in a safe way where there would be no possibility of any retribution or financial consequences to their courts whatever. It was almost like a confessional at some point,” he said.
To put together the voluminous report, the committee often had to dig for information. In his presentation, Wachob noted that the number of AOC employees was particularly hard to pin down. While the committee found the bureaucracy employed 1,008 people, by May 2012 the number had dropped to 883.
“That’s not much of a drop from the 1008 that existed at the end of the year. My personal belief, and I know this is shared with other members of committee is that no one really knows how many people worked at the AOC at various points in time and that’s just the way it is. That should change,” he said.
He added that even a simple question to the AOC often turned into a frustrating misadventure. “A question, for example, about whether or not a division used a cost-benefit analysis in trying to decide which programs to offer seems like a fairly straightforward question, but it often diverged into multiple e-mails, requests for clarification, letters, correspondence, and at the end of the day, the answer was no,” Wachob said. “Some of the answers, some of the responses that we received from AOC staff in response to our questions for information, were simply non-responsive. People on the committee would joke sometimes that if we were in court and heard that answer and someone objected that the answer was non-responsive, all 12 of us would have sustained the objection.”
But he also noted that other staffers were more helpful. “Some were very candid, some helpful, some very forthcoming. Some were just flat out not.”
The intention of the SEC’s report, McCabe and Wachob noted, was to provide an outline for restructuring the AOC and rebuilding its credibility. Over the past decade, the agency has so grown in size and scope that some courts have come to resent the bureaucracy for exercising what the SEC termed “a culture of control” over the courts it is meant to serve.
While the AOC has seen some changes in the past year, with budget cuts forcing layoffs and the retirement of its former director, deputy director and various other highly compensated AOC executives, Wachob said the changes have been incremental, and mostly circumstantial. “We characterized the AOC’s change in the last year as inching towards consolidation and functions and not necessarily as one that came through a predetermined game plan. The organizational consolidations that occurred in the last year we felt resulted from extraneous events, retirement, attrition, that type of thing. I think the AOC is moving towards the predetermined game plan and structural reorganization but I don’t think that that has occurred yet,” he said.
The council received dozens of pages of comments from judges and attorneys, either urging immediate action to accept the report’s recommendations or decrying the report as unfair to the hardworking staff at the AOC. “If the problem is not addressed, the AOC and the Judicial Council simply will not be able to lead our court system,” wrote Presiding Judge Lee Edmon of Los Angeles. “The best and most immediately effective way to address the lack of trust and confidence of the judiciary in the AOC is to endorse the SEC report and to ensure judges that concrete steps will be taken to implement the SEC recommendations.”
“The report has very little focus on the significant and positive efforts of the AOC to carry out this council’s policy in terms of ensuring access to justice in our courts,” said Appellate Justice Laurie Zelon during the council’s public comment period.
Speaking on behalf of the judicial reform group the Alliance of California Judges, Judge Steve White of Sacramento also urged the council to act quickly to implement the committee’s proposed reforms. “For too many years, the AOC has actively and aggressively usurped the power of the courts and has been found to be dishonest with budgeting, staff levels, pretend hiring freezes, major projects reflecting AOC priorities and the list goes on. This happened because the Judicial Council let it happen. The docility and compliance of previous councils aggrandize the powers of the AOC and the Chief Justice alike. Change must come,” he said.
Judge James Herman of Santa Barbara urged the council to move past the tone of the report and “evaluate substance.”
“You know, I am very concerned for the AOC employees, because I think I’ve shared the experience that many have expressed here. The experiences I have [had] have been by and large extremely positive. The other side of the coin, though, is the report is here. And as judicial officers by and large, by training we look past tone. And I think we got to get past the tone issue, look at and evaluate substance on a go-forward basis,” he said.
In answer to critics on the tone of the report, McCabe said the committee struggled for months on its perspective. “We sat around the table, bickering and arguing with each other and it was kind of a family atmosphere. We’ve had some drag-out arguments, but at the end of the day, not personal and we kept it in perspective. So it took us a long time, trained professionals, to remove that influence, every one of us. And there’s a knee jerk reaction. I’ve sat here and I hope I’m not disrespectful to anybody if I’m grinning, because I’m hearing what we’ve all already lived through and we’ve already struggled with.”
Council member Judge David Wesley moved to accept and endorse the report before sending it out for further public comment, but the word “endorse” did not sit well with fellow council members. “It doesn’t mean you endorse every single one of the recommendations, but endorse the report received from this committee as a — as a significant, important report for this council,” he said.
Instead, the council decided to get further comment on the report, then send it to the council’s Executive and Planning Committee to review the report’s over 100 recommendations. Wesley’s was the only dissenting vote.
McCabe and Wachob were appointed to the council by Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye earlier this month, and will assist the council’s executive and planning group with its review. Wachob said he agreed with the move to refer the report to that group, but was concerned that the council was getting too fixated on the process, rather than the report’s recommendations.
“What concerns me is the focus seems to be on methodology, what type of committee do we want to have, what kind of process do we want to have. And it seems to me is that the first thing that has to happen is there has to be a commitment,” he said. “You know, here we are at this historic one moment in time for this judicial branch to get things right and to get things moving. And there has to be some kind of a commitment. And once you have that commitment, then there’s probably a number of ways, a number of ways to implement that will.”
Wendy Darling
June 22, 2012
As usual, the ACJ nails it.
Recall the Chief Justice.
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
June 22, 2012
“I am not a crook.” — Richard Nixon
“I am not the father of that child.” — John Edwards
“CCMS is finished and it works,” — Justice Bruniers
Feel free to add your own.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
June 22, 2012
“We have learned our lesson and turned over a new leaf” — Team George
ok, so I used a little poetic license but you get my drift. . . .
Love that last comment, Wendy.
wearyant
June 22, 2012
“It depends what your definition of ‘sex’ is” – Bill Clinton
The JC/AOC/CJ claim to be wordsmiths.
I hope that the JC/AOC/CJ will not be allowed to round-file the excellent and fair SEC report. Hon. Wachob said it could have been harsher. I wish it had been. Bless the Hon. Wesley for continuing in his efforts to implement the needed changes to the AOC called for in that report.
One of the elderly statesmen said he left the meeting with a good feeling about what was accomplished. I had another feeling — of horror and nausea. I guess we live in different places and views; one, an ivory tower; the other, on the plains with the unwashed masses.
Recall Tani!
It’s now necessary to pass and implement AB 1208!
Long live the ACJ!
anna
June 23, 2012
Somewhere I read that George studied international govt. and that included the Byzantine Empire. I’ll give the assho*e credit. He created a byzantine mess that we won’t be able to extricate ourselves out of. That was his entire goal. He just never thought a little thing like the internet would be created. Too Bad. He belongs in jail.
wearyant
June 23, 2012
Thank you, Hon. Wesley, for continuing on with your attempts to get the SEC endorsed and implemented. It was prime time for that as many recognized. Hon. Wesley also must have known the fate of this excellent and exhaustive SEC report as he continued on in the face of resistance with preventing the report from being killed a slow death (remember Darrell Steinberg and AB 1208 in the Senate?). Head unbowed, even though he be a unwanted, unwashed stepchild, Wesley persisted in getting a motion to endorse and implement (my words) the SEC report … and we all know the rest. The rest of the council went home feeling warm and fuzzy in their hearts with their accomplishments.
We’ve got to stop this gang, folks!
Recall Tani!
Pass and implement AB 1208!
Long live the ACJ!
Curious
June 23, 2012
I note that CJA, the older, bigger judges organization, is bleeding members and money. They just announced to all of their members that they are giving up their San Fran digs and moving to Sac. Also having to lay off all but one (!) employee and moving from managing their own shop to having their lobbyist do it. This proves one thing: In the long run, cozying up to the Chief and the AOC will tear the heart out of any organization. They have unfortunately brought this on themselves. Years ago, they sold their soul by having presidents l(you all know who they are, right?) would do everything, including the limbo, for the AOC. They had Bill Vickrey write their agendas, and let him sit in on their board meetings–not a joke, this is true. “What ye sow….”
Nathaniel Woodhull
June 23, 2012
I wish I was omniscience, but I’m not. Reality, being what it is, I can simply connect the dots having been a trained observer.
The SEC report is dead. Tani & Company, actually lead by Beth Jay, are in continuous denial, simply to maintain the legacy of HRH-1 (Ronald George) but Tani can’t even figure that out…
According to all the information on the California economy, including the information from UCLA, the current “recession” will be in effect through at least 2018. The budget cuts will continue and the Judiciary is going to pay the price for its own arrogance, or should I say the arrogance within 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
Something that I proposed 3+ years ago as a joke may now be a necessity. Let’s have each session of court sponsored by some business within the private sector. Remember Arthur Godfrey? Okay, I may be old, but not that old. Godfrey (before he went a little crazy) was the consummate hustler. He could sell anything. We should follow his lead. I can see it now… coming back from a recess during a three-week long trial about nothing, I could explain to the jury that I can understand just how they feel. Then I could point out that they must be terribly uncomfortable after a couple of weeks sitting there, but believe me I have it worse than they do. I am forced to sit week after week listening to many cases about nothing. What does all that sitting promote… hemorrhoids! Well, for all of you who may suffer from hemorrhoids, may I suggest Preparation-H. Yes, Preparation-H soothes and cools those awful symptoms. Why, we could even give out discount coupons to jurors.
Following this plan, the Judicial Branch could fund themselves without having to look to the Legislature for handouts. Tani…are you taking all this down???
Want to bet that something like this is proposed in the next few months at a Judicial Council meeting????
Good luck everyone, I think it is finally time to retire.
Wendy Darling
June 23, 2012
Actually, General Woodhull, from yesterday’s Judicial Council meeting, the idea was actually floated about changing the State Constitution to limit jury trials as a “cost-saving” measure. Because in the view of current judicial branch leadership it is far more important to have CCMS than it is to have civil rights and serve the public. Next thing you know, they’ll probably float the idea of just doing away with juries all together. That way no one’s opinion will matter but their own. Which is apparently exactly what they want.
Recall the Chief Justice.
Long live the ACJ.
disgusted
June 23, 2012
Wendy, let’s just go all the way. Force settlements, no juries, no reporters, no record. Let’s use ER with a nice big ERASE button for those oops moments. Sound like a third world country? It’s happening. Oh, but the courts will have some great stats in pushing cases through the system and that’s what it’s all about. So put your right foot in, put your right foot out, watch them do the hokey-pokey and turn us all about.
Wendy Darling
June 23, 2012
They’re good at putting their foot in it at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Disgusted. Really, really good at ti.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
June 23, 2012
Yikes! I can see it now. The CJ and her DOG SPOT, aka, Kim Turner, will realize, wow, all that wasted space on the courtroom walls and juror seats. Why not put advertisements there? Another revenue stream! Preparation H ads on the jurors’ seats and God knows what ads they would choose to put all over the courtroom walls!! Gotta get that money flowing in …
George Washington
June 23, 2012
On what planet is this objective commentary from members of the bench: “The (SEC) committee (called) for a complete overhaul and drastic downsizing of the organization, a campaign to restore credibility to an organization almost universally distrusted, and an abandonment of the “culture of control” mindset they found permeated the agency.” You are merely creating your own propaganda and are clearly biased. The report makes specific recommendations, which you can advocate for or against. Promulgating hysteria is not a path to reform.
wearyant
June 23, 2012
Don’t worry, be happy. The report is likely buried for good. It’s not hysteria IMHP. You either laugh or cry.
JusticeCalifornia
June 23, 2012
And of course it cannot be lost on anyone that according to Jody Patel, she– without long, drawn out public or stakeholder comment– or the judicial council’s discussion or permission– already started or completed the implementation of 57 of the147 SEC recommendations. From her “status report”:
Total number of SEC recommendations on AOC: 147
(An additional four recommendations are directed to
Judicial Council oversight.)
Total number of areas similarly identified by the AOC,
in whole, in part, or a modified version: 74
Total recommendations in progress or already completed
by the AOC: 57
I am not complaining about the implementation of the SEC recommendations, I am calling attention to the hypocrisy involved with the SELECTIVE unilateral implementation of those recommendations the AOC finds relatively unobjectionable, and the use of the Judicial Council to obtain the calculated tabling of others. . . . Top leadership, as usual, is speaking out of both sides of its mouth.
I guess this week’s machinations about the SEC report has created the interesting situation where the AOC cannot fire that telecommuting lawyer in Switzerland because Miller’s committee has to study that recommendation, and the JC is uncomfortable piecemeal adopting the SEC recommendations.
courtflea
June 23, 2012
N. Woodhull, if you care about the branch and public service is in your blood, retirement will not give you relief.
Wendy, I like these quotes for the crap/arrogance that was demonstrated in the last couple of days and what hopefully will be a vision for the future:
“We will bury you.”
— Nikita Kruschev, Soviet Premier, predicting Soviet communism will win over
U.S. capitalism, 1958
“Everyone acquainted with the subject will recognize it as a conspicuous failure.”
— Henry Morton, president of the Stevens Institute of Technology, on Edison’s
light bulb, 1880
And a excellent quote that will predict the future:
Screw the AOC, they no longer have a role in the judicial branch except to kiss the Judges and employees of the branch arses – Courtflea🙂 2012
Wendy Darling
June 23, 2012
I especially like that last one, Flea.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
June 23, 2012
http://www.courts.ca.gov/18471.htm
The OBT
June 24, 2012
Wendy, you are brilliant. The many statements that J Bruiners made claiming CCMS was ready to be deployed remain a mystery to me. Statements like those have undermined the credibility of an entire branch of government. Equally concerning are comments made by J Zelon about the AOC ensuring access to our courts. I guess when you live life in the Tower you miss things like the courthouse closures in Fresno, the hundreds of employees who lost their jobs in LA, the 10 or so Commissioners who got fired in San Francisco , the closing of numerous civil courtrooms around the state, the loss of court reporters in civil jury trials and the resulting severe reduction in services to the public . The cashier at Jack in the Box was complaining last week to me about how far he had to drive to pay a traffic ticket and he is just one person of thousands that have been adversely effected by the arrogant and wasteful spending practices of the JC/AOC. We need to get the Judicial Council out of the Tower. We need to democratize the Council as it is our last and best hope to end this mess. And by the way General Woodhull please don’t retire. We need you and all the other great contributors here to press on so that the tyranny created by HRH 1 and supported by HRH 2 can finally be reformed and changed.
Lando
June 24, 2012
Many of us have predicted the demise of the CJA for some time. Sadly one can lay blame to their current woes on failed leadership who felt it was more important to curry favor with Ron George than to represent their members. The sad part is that CJA was once a vibrant and positive force providing outstanding judicial education programs and ethics advice. Much of the reason for that was the first class management of CJA provided by Connie Dove. I know it is not good to live in the past, but I miss the days when the California judiciary was independent, fair, strong and represented the people that elected them and not burdened by a bloated self imposed bureaucracy , the AOC and out of control CJP working out of the dark hallways of 455 Golden Gate . I happen to agree with General Woodhull. Given the anti democratic changes imposed on us it is time to retire and decamp to a state where democracy hasn’t been forgotten.
Wendy Darling
June 24, 2012
Friedman was the worst thing that ever happened to the CJA.
Nathaniel Woodhull
June 24, 2012
Jim Mize started it and was a close second to Friedman. Mize was actually the one who struck the initial deal with Ronald George, Vickrey and Overholt. Mize invited Vickrey and Overholt to attend the CJA Executive Board’s Summer Executive Conference, designed to plan the years goals, without ever giving forewarning to the members of the Board. The difference between the two being that when the Sacramento judges finally figured out what Mize was doing, they stuck him in a closet. Watch out however, for Jerry Brown will reward him for being a good partisan Democrat over the past thirty years and place him on the Third District.
Nathaniel Woodhull
June 24, 2012
Lando,
The difficulty in responding to some of the newer contributors is that they seemingly have no context to the situation we all face; nor an appreciation of the history that lead us here. Having given years of our lives, given up any hopes for advancement (as I can assure you that merit plays little part in the system over the past twenty years,) and facing the deafening silence to our continued pleas to focus on issues and provide assistance in reaching positive solutions to those issues, we are left to humor (albeit some in bad taste) and a true sense of hopelessness.
Anyone who believes that the Judicial Branch administration can be “fixed” from within is terribly naive. There were few problems within the Branch until the arrival of Bill Vickrey and Ronald George and their master plan to grab power and build an empire. For those of us who actually deliver services to the public, (between the two of us Lando we have well over almost three-quarters of a Century,) our focus has been on just that, service to the public. Chief George and Vickrey started from a fundamentally flawed premise; that being that the Judicial Branch was “broken” upon their arrival and they needed to fix it. While those of us in the trenches were actually working with our constituents and interested groups to develop innovative programs to promote and provide greater access to justice, the empire at 455 GGA continued to grow. With little opportunity for effective input, were constantly barraged with “new and improved” forms. Simple four-page forms grew to thirteen-pages, packed with 8-point type that no one can read or comprehend. Under the guise of ensuring “access to justice” protocols and procedures were instituted that have resulted in a lack of flexibility and hindered access to many. Over the past ten to twelve years, local trial courts have also been subjected to responding to countless “studies” at the request of the AOC. Valuable employee time was diverted to responding to these mindless studies. Many of which it turns out were stopped mid-stream, or the information derived from them was simply placed on a shelf within the Crystal Palace. Judicial needs studies and time-management studies were assigned to trial courts that became roads to nowhere. Part of this is a result of the employment of countless non-practicing lawyers, many of whom have never worked inside a courtroom, developing countless staff-driven programs that have no true benefit for any of the trial courts end-users.
Anyone raising questions with new policies or procedures, including making reasoned and thoughtful suggestions for improvement, were either: 1) ignored; or 2) called names and told that we didn’t know what we were talking about. When the Chief and Vickrey took over the CJA in 2005-06, the only remaining “Independent Voice of the Judiciary” was lost. Dissent and expressions of any contrary opinions were not to be tolerated. We were actually told at the CJA conference by Chief George that efforts to seek certain safeguards would be deemed as a declaration of war.
The centerpiece that demonstrates the disaster running this Branch can be seen in CCMS. No one can honestly say who proposed the idea that became CCMS nor can they provide any real information about the history of its development. It would appear that entries have been placed in the Judicial Council Minutes indicating that a discussion was had sometime around 2002 where the concept underlying CCMS was discussed. Chief George tries to pass the buck to former Governor Davis, insisting that the Judicial Branch was directed to develop CCMS. CCMS should be a mandated study for everyone seeking an MPA degree. The members of the judiciary, Legislature and public were repeated informed by hand-picked folks such as Justice Bruiniers that CCMS worked and was viable. For all of us who pointed out specific concerns long before $500 Million was wasted, we were told that we were “shrill”, “uninformed” and “ants along the trail.”
Management personnel within the AOC have been provided with benefits packages undreamt of in the history of public service. Extremely high compensation packages, plus Cadillac retirement benefits without employees having to make any contributions whatsoever. Lawyers living in Europe who allegedly “telecommute” to San Francisco. Given their legal specialties, I don’t see what possible service they could be performing for the benefit of the AOC.
Calling for the SEC report came about in a moment of panic. The then new Chief Justice found herself being challenged from all sides. Her calling for this report was applauded by many, myself included, because it appeared she might actually be interested in changing the focus of the State’s Judicial Administration. Justice Scotland’s sudden departure as the head of the SEC Committee evidenced that Chief Sakauye was not happy with the initial draft he submitted to her. The subsequent Chair recently noted to the Council that the report presented could have been much harsher than it was, indicating that Justice Scotland’s draft was significantly toned down.
Now we’re told that the SEC report is a mere “snapshot in time” and that the content is not reflective of current operations at the AOC or within the Judicial Council. It is clear that there is no intent to take the content of the SEC report seriously nor make the significant democratic changes necessary to change the course of this branch of our government.
Am I dispensing “propaganda”? Not in the literal sense. Am i “biased”? Yes.
I have long since given up any personal desire to “advance” within this organization. My sole motivation is in providing the highest level of service to the public whom I serve and before whom I stand for election. Clearly the purposes behind the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act have not been met. I have watched as courts around me have lost almost half their staffing, cut their hours of service and been forced to cancel many innovative programs. Sadly, this is just the start. I realize that the economic downturn in California is partially to blame. However, many of us realize that we are a giant target to the Governor and Legislature. There is no justification for the mega-bureaucracy created in San Francisco, nor the lack of oversight in spending and the wasting of hundreds of millions of dollars. Proposals to sweep local reserves only further serve to punish courts that have proven themselves to be fiscally prudent. It lowers the bar to the lowest common denominator. More cuts are to follow. It is likely that in the months to come, judges will no longer have assigned courtroom staff, subordinate judicial officers will be a thing of the past (except Title IV-D Commissioners) and the those members of the public seeking access to justice are the ones who will truly suffer.
To some of you, the issues raised by JCW or frequent contributors may seem unimportant or “biased”. Sometimes our comments come from frustration…frustration which is borne from having lived through this nightmare for well over a decade. Those of us who predicted the current problems and issue and proposed thoughtful and well-reasoned solutions to some of these issues are simply tired of beating our heads against the wall.
The sad reality is that things are going to get much worse before they get better. California’s economy is no where near the bottom of this trough. Those leading the Judicial Branch are not democratically elected, rather they are people, the majority of whom have been “selected” by a Chief Justice. Unless and until the fundamental and undemocratic management structure of the Judicial Branch is changed, there is little hope for true positive changes.
Wendy Darling
June 24, 2012
“Anyone who believes that the Judicial Branch administration can be “fixed” from within is terribly naive.”
Agreed. General Woodhull. Until, and unless, there is a legislative correction, nothing will really change at 455 Golden Gate Avenue. Nothing.
“Smetimes our comments come from frustration…frustration which is borne from having lived through this nightmare for well over a decade. Those of us who predicted the current problems and issue and proposed thoughtful and well-reasoned solutions to some of these issues are simply tired of beating our heads against the wall.”
Sometimes, most of the time in fact, our comments come from the consistent, and intentional, failure of the current judicial branch administration to tell the truth. Many of us here have personally experienced the unrestrained retaliation of those in charge at 455 Golden Gate Avenue for the simple act of telling the truth, and we are tired and fed up with being lied to and being punished for being truthful. These are judges and state attorneys, in the California Judicial Branch, and hold themselves out as branch “leadership.” It is not leadership for those responsible for judicial branch administration to lie and to punish those who tell the truth.
It is unacceptable.
Recall the Chief Justice.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
June 24, 2012
Indeed, Wendy, the consistent, obvious, “intentional failure of the current judicial branch administration to tell the truth” is the root problem of what is going down in the branch, financially and otherwise. . . .most particularly in the branch’s utter lack of credibility.
How tragic that the biggest judiciary in the Western World suffers from a prolonged, pronounced, pervasive, self-induced lack of credibility.
Until ethical, credible leadership takes the helm of the branch, the branch will continue to break down.
I am waiting for the 2,000 strong branch members to speak up and out. The corrupt among you are taking ALL of you, and branch employees, and the bar, and the public the branch is supposed to serve, and of course, justice, down. Laughing all the way to the bank.
unionman575
June 24, 2012
Truth is the most valuable thing we have.
Let us economize it.
-Mark Twain
Dan Dydzak
June 24, 2012
Not surprisingly, Eric M. George finally responded to my lawsuit before default could be entered but then did not VERIFY his General Denial. Therefore, I have filed a motion to strike his unverified lawsuit and reserved the issue of sanctions. Furthermore, Eric M. George has indicated that he will not appear for his deposition Friday in Century City, so I will have to take a certificate of non-appearance and make a motion to compel. All these actions are tantamount to obstruction of justice and sanctionable.
Some of the new commentators (i.e, members of Team George, including likely the state bar attorney who is illegally using her government services for private individuals) have tried to smear me and other good honest commentators on this blog. Realitychick is likely one Danielle A. Lee, Esq. , an attorney who is in the office of general counsel. She is the one representing illegally defendants/individuals in their private capacities. Appropriate motions are being brought, one to disqualify her and her office. She falsely claims her clients are government employees who are exempt from filing fees of some $ 4,000 plus–I have filed a motion to strike their pending motions, on the issue, among others, that they failed to pay the filing fees and are defrauding the Orange County Superior Court.
Of well, as Robert Frost wrote in one of his poems, I believe, the truth will out.
In the course of discovery, I will be asking for where the monies went, headed by Vickrey, Overholt and Ronald M. George. In addition, Ronald M. George, Eric M. George and his family trust have actually 5 properties, my sources advise.
(1) Three houses in Beverly Hills
(2) Nob Hill ritzy condo
(3) Maibu beach pad
That’s a lot of MULTIMILLION DOLLAR real estate for the former Chief Justice and his son Eric to afford given that he was apparently relying mostly on his income as a judge.??? Ronald George’s deposition will be taken. As well, Tan Cantil-Sakauye’s will be taken and I will of course want to know if monies are being diverted off shore or outside the country on her part. I will depose of course the “swiss” regulatory attorney on the AOC payroll. His name and bar number are valuable info. Thanks.
I anticipate that realitychick will get a whole lot of people in her ranks to write negative things about me and others, but I do believe in truth and honesty. Distortions should not be the order of the day. Thanks anna for pointing out that realitychick is likely a state bar operative with her dishonest and unethical agenda.
courtflea
June 24, 2012
Bravo, NW!! It would be interesting to compile all of the years of experience amongst us bloggers. And yes, banging your head against a wall describes at least my feelings after nearly 25 years in the branch. Should we have a “head bangers” ball? Sorry never saw the movie but the title seems to fit🙂
I’d like to say that for one, I have really enjoyed the ability to vent and comment appropriately or not, on the current events of our sad situation.
I think NW is right, t is going to take something really big to blow the lid off of the AOC crapper.
I have apologized many times in the past for my blutness and yes, down right crudeness, but having been trained to be diplomatic, a concensus builder, team player, yada, yada, yada. I just can’t anymore guys.
After that mea culpa, I’d like to give my 2 cents worth on how CCMS was spawned: for Sheila Gonzales/whatever her last name is now to do some king making/power building herself with a few added “bonuses” on the side from the Deloitte folks. And you can quote me🙂
unionman575
June 24, 2012
unionman575
June 24, 2012
Flea you are just keeping it real!
🙂
wearyant
June 24, 2012
Benjamin Franklin: ‘When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.’
Recall Tani
Pass and implement AB 1208
Long live the ACJ
wearyant
June 24, 2012
Your latest post, Nathaniel Woodhull is so valuable, so well thought out! The whole content should be inscribed in stone and placed within the monstrous and gilded halls of 455 Golden Gate — with the ability to move it to the new digs in Sacto, God willing these miscreants be moved. The eight-point type could be used since the AOC likes it so much.
Yeah, I’m originally from L.A. and we move big boulders there so why not?!
This is what I personally suffered when I toiled for the trial courts, these inane requests while I was trying to do real work:
“Over the past ten to twelve years, local trial courts have also been subjected to responding to countless ‘studies’ at the request of the AOC. Valuable employee time was diverted to responding to these mindless studies. Many of which it turns out were stopped mid-stream, or the information derived from them was simply placed on a shelf within the Crystal Palace. Judicial needs studies and time-management studies were assigned to trial courts that became roads to nowhere. Part of this is a result of the employment of countless non-practicing lawyers, many of whom have never worked inside a courtroom, developing countless staff-driven programs that have no true benefit for any of the trial courts end-users.”
The AOC involved in these so-called studies could be laid off immediately. It appears no one in the JC/AOC/CJ is willing to really start cutting to the bone. It has to be done. The trial courts are being forced to cut through to the bone marrow. The public wants and really needs access to the courts, and many valuable trial court employees who are on the front lines are being laid off. PLEASE lay off these people at the AOC who produce nothing of value to the California citizens. There must be 100 of these paper-churning people who are at the AOC who merely take up space and provide so-called justification for the needless managers there. Get rid of the many managers too. It makes no sense to keep these people languishing at their desks, especially when there are no more trial court employees to foist their mind-numbing requests for data upon, which may or may not be input into useless studies later.
George Washington
June 24, 2012
“These people”? The level of hatred and hostile dialogue tolerated here is unbearable. Also, WebMaster (if there is one) I would delete posts that name individuals who may be innocent victims of some vexatious litigant’s delusions. Thank you.
Judicial Council Watcher
June 24, 2012
Mr. “Washington”, our simple, plain language moderation policy was developed by experienced social networking professionals. We’re told that If we don’t consistently apply that policy, then we risk losing readers and posters.
While we appreciate the moderation suggestions, we’ll also be leaving the determination of guilt, innocence and of vexatious litigants to the court system.
wearyant
June 25, 2012
George Washington, not just “these people.” It’s “these people who produce nothing of value.” They should be kept on so their feelings aren’t hurt? What about the hundreds of trial court workers who are wanted and needed by their employers and the public, who have been given their walking papers?
unionman575
June 25, 2012
“What about the hundreds of trial court workers who are wanted and needed by their employers and the public, who have been given their walking papers?
Exactly!
Michael Paul
June 25, 2012
George, a member of the EOP brain trust may wish to turn off his hovercard. (Doh!) Other than that I also welcome a hearty debate about divergent view points and the real issues. I don’t see any hatred Mr. DGD. I see seething anger over waste and mismanagement where everyone but the wasters and mis-managers pay the price.
A little accountability would have gone a really long ways. Like most revolutions, this one was sparked by a lack of accountability.
The OBT
June 24, 2012
Hi GW, While I respectfully disagree with some of your ideas I for one like to see this site encourage all different points of view and it is good you are here. Having been around awhile the many ideas that have been expressed here really are consistent with the SEC report and the conclusions they reach. The concerns raised here by many hard working and caring people within our branch can no longer be labeled as the viewpoints of “clowns” or those of the “shrill and uninformed” . The Chief Justice has a great opportunity here to bring the branch together by implementing the SEC report recommendations. GW, I really do hope the branch can be healed and would like to hear what your ideas are for bringing things together. Thanks.
Lando
June 25, 2012
Thanks General Woodhull for the powerful, cogent and honest summary of how our branch has reached this point of crisis. Those of us who been here a long time remember the original role of the AOC which was to provide support to the trial courts not control them. As Woodhull points out things in the trial court courts were not broken before Ronald George arrived on the scene. While the culture of each court may have been different each was allowed to innovate and respond to the unique issues confronting them. CJA and CJER were vibrant relevant organizations as they were independent and worked hard to insure California Judges were kept up to date and provided with the best ethical guidance when needed. While things would get rough at times as the economy ebbed and flowed local government financing certainly never led to the train wreck we have now experienced. What Ronald George and Bill V missed was that the best government is the one closet to the people, not one created out of some centralized bureaucracy that answers to itself. My work environment is modest and I have always felt that was fine as we are stewards of the taxpayers funds. The first time I walked into the crystal palace at 455 Golden Gate I was shocked at the waste I saw right down to the cherry wood and glass at the Judicial Council meeting room.
Lando
June 25, 2012
The SEC report commissioned by the Chief Justice confirms all that Woodhull and the many thoughtful bloggers here have been saying for years. The bottom line is that the arrogance of power concentrated in the hands of a few has failed and failed miserably. How ironic is it that in our great democracy an entire branch of government is run by an insular group largely appointed by 1 person. 1208 needs to pass , the Judicial Council needs to be democratized , this Chief Justice needs to be recalled, the AOC should be reduced by 75% and the crystal palace as a symbol of arrogance and abuse , auctioned off .
Wendy Darling
June 25, 2012
And those responsible need to be indicted, tried, and judged by a jury of their peers.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
June 25, 2012
Very well said, as usual, by Lando.
unionman575
June 25, 2012
We have all now reached a stip to Judge Steve White’s recommended 75% cut to the AOC budget.
🙂
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2012
I was googling “EOP” to try to decipher Mr. Paul’s response to George W., and guess what came up?
A little walk down memory lane about where we all were, and what we were talking about, exactly two years ago on AOC Watcher leading up to and including the announcement that Ron George was leaving.
http://aocwatcher.wordpress.com/2010/06/15/discussion-thread-for-aoc-employees/
I don’t know who “WBF” was, but he or she predicted what would happen with respect to the selection of the next cj:
“WBF | July 14, 2010 at 2:21 pm |
At the risk of sounding cynical –
Do you really think that someone with as much political savvy as the CJ would resign without first cutting a deal with the Governator to protect his legacy? The CJ might not care about what happens to Ron and Bill after he leaves (although I think he probably does), but he would not leave if there was a possibility his successor would pull the plug on CCMS, $1,000 sq. ft. courthouses, etc.
Hate to rain on the parade, but I expect whoever the Governor nominates will continue to carry out the policies of the current CJ. I don’t think Ron and Bill have much to worry about”.
WBF was right. As we are seeing, notwithstanding the SEC committee and report, Team George architects remain in control under Sakauye, and Sakauye and her thugs have been fighting tooth and nail to keep CCMS and those expensive courthouses in the pipeline. . . .
It is the efforts of the ACJ, the legislature, the CJA (re CCMS) and others (JCW! for example) that are forcing change. What is really too bad is that the last 18 months have necessarily been spent playing watchdog and calling out Team George waste and deception that continues to close courthouses and take down the branch. . . .not rebuilding the branch from the Ron George wreckage.
What an amazing waste of time and money has gone down, at the expense of the branch and the public.
I daresay the majority of bench officers in this state would grant a request for a receiver if they saw this kind of ongoing deceit, waste and mismanagement with respect to a business involved in a case to which they were assigned.
Top leadership under Sakauye continues to spit into the wind, inviting further budget cuts, while the “biggest judiciary in the Western World” is being dismantled, piece by piece, courthouse by courthouse, employee by employee, service by service. . . .courts are closed, court reporters are no longer available for important civil matters, and jury trials are on the chopping block.
Why the prolonged tolerance for this behavior by top leadership of an entire branch of government, at the expense of the public?
Members of all three branches — but especially the judicial branch– need to step up and demand a stop to the madness.
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2012
george w (ddenton according to your gravatar profile), you were once very outspoken.
http://aocwatcher.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/sacramento-bee-editorial-calls-aocs-administration-of-ccms-shockingly-inept/
I wonder what changes you have seen within the AOC in the last three years?
Dan Dydzak
June 25, 2012
Everyone is free to comment. This is the United States of America. The quotation from B. Franklin is on point. Brilliant man, Franklin. A motion to appoint receiver, or, in the alternative, conduct an independent audit and other related remedies will be brought shortly in my lawsuit. It is relevant to the subject matter of my litigation as well as addresses the concerns of many of the commentators here.
lobstahsmaht
June 26, 2012
No, everyone is not free to comment. My comment was just pulled on your treatment of Geo. Washington. This site is very biased. And no my comment did not have inappropriate language though I have seen plenty of that here. Doubt if this will get posted to.
Judicial Council Watcher
June 26, 2012
courtflea
June 25, 2012
Oh don’t even get me started on the AOC “surveys”, the started back in the early 90’s even before unification, consolidation, or whatever you want to call it. The only good I hoped to see come of this was best practices for the branch and cost savings if possible and where appropriate. call me a sucker.
I thought EOP (Michael correct me if I am wrong) is the accroynm for the committee that the SEC report was punted to..Executive and Planning….or is that E&P? Crap, the AOC has more accroynms than a defunct aerospace company!!
wearyant
June 25, 2012
Flea, I like to hit a beehive with a stick! Let’s talk about surveys from the AOC.
I remember them being very time-consuming when an employee’s time was a valued commodity. And the surveys were nit-picking and painful. AND it got back to us somehow, even though we constituted the unwashed, common folk, that the majority of our feedback to their demands was shelved! Yeah, the bad-old, good ol’ days. I miss ’em like I miss a bout of pneumonia.
Sorry about this gratuitous post, JCW followers. I was just back at the AOCWatcher reading around the time the Big Kahuna finally decided to vacate the throne. 😉
Wendy Darling
June 25, 2012
The Big Kahuna may have vacated the throne, Ant, but he hasn’t vacated the palace.
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
June 25, 2012
EOP =’s the AOC’s “Executive Office Program.”
Long live the ACJ.
courtflea
June 25, 2012
Or is it Executive Office Programs???
Wendy Darling
June 25, 2012
Published today, Monday, June 25, from The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw, by Cheryl Miller:
Trial Courts May Get to Hold Onto Their Reserves for Another Year
By Cheryl Miller
SACRAMENTO — California’s trial courts would have two years instead of one to hold on to their reserves before a 1 percent cap goes into effect, according to budget language formally released by state lawmakers on Monday.
Full article is subscription access only: http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202560775763&Trial_Courts_May_Get_to_Hold_Onto_Their_Reserves_for_Another_Year&slreturn=1
Long live the ACJ.
George Washington
June 25, 2012
Several changes, Barbara. Can no longer post here. Thanks.
Michael Paul
June 25, 2012
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Wash, rinse, spin, repeat, sigh.
Michael Paul
June 25, 2012
That was not a reply to you DD, though it looks that way. Just a general statement on the state of affairs.
unionman575
June 25, 2012
“Truth is the greatest enemy of the state”
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2012
Would have liked to hear about the changes from your perspective.
Wendy Darling
June 25, 2012
With sincere thanks to the JCW viewer who thoughtfully shared Cheryl Miller’s article for the benefit of all:
Trial Courts May Get to Hold Onto Their Reserves for Another Year
By Cheryl Miller
SACRAMENTO – California’s trial courts would have two years instead of one to hold on to their reserves before a 1 percent cap goes into effect, according to budget language formally released by state lawmakers Monday.
The so-called budget trailer bill would give courts until June 30, 2014, to carry a fund balance, a full year longer than originally contemplated by draft language circulating as late as last week. The change occurred in the wake of judges’ complaints that the significant policy shift change did not give them enough time to adapt.
“Two years is really important to have as a glide path toward getting to the 1 percent” cap, said Curtis Child, the Judicial Council’s lobbyist. “It gives the trial courts an opportunity to plan.”
The bill also bars further Judicial Council spending on the Court Case Management System without legislative approval. Child said he isn’t sure what that means for the $8 million the council allocated for “wind down” work on the halted project.
The rest of the court trailer bill largely reflects details previously released by the Legislature and other sources. If approved by the governor, as expected, the bill would raise a number of filing, criminal, appellate and court reporting fees to help fund court operations. A new Judicial Council-controlled reserve fund would be created to provide money to needy courts – once in March and again in October. The council would be prohibited from spending Trial Court Trust Fund money on statewide projects without legislative consent. And the Legislature urges, in symbolic language, that “budget cuts not fall disproportionately on civil cases.”
New language was added that would automatically reduce trial bar-approved fee increases if the state cuts trial court funding by more than 10 percent. But such language has been included and later deleted in past budgets when cuts threatened courtroom closures. The Legislature is expected to vote on the budget trailer bills, including the court legislation on Wednesday.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202560775763&Trial_Courts_May_Get_to_Hold_Onto_Their_Reserves_for_Another_Year
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
June 25, 2012
From Cheryl Miller’s article above:
“The bill also bars further Judicial Council spending on the Court Case Management System without legislative approval. Child said he isn’t sure what that means for the $8 million the council allocated for “wind down” work on the halted project.”
I’ll be happy to explain it to Curt Childs, but I doubt he wants to hear from Wearyant about that — or anything. In the good ol’ days, he’d probably construe any ambiguity to mean — full speed ahead, SPEND that eight mil! Yaaa hooo! I gathered from recent comments in the news and here that only one million may be up for grabs by the AOC for the professed “wind-down.”
My conspiracy theory is that now the vendor is squeaking about owning the code, i.e., their proprietary rights, even after ten years of failing at finishing CCMS. So now the JC/AOC/CJ is stuck with only eight million (and now a helluva lot less) to shaddup the vendor, plus get them to install some sort of CMS system for SLO, thus claiming they have leveraged SOMETHING out of this half a billion loss of taxpayer funds! And it’s not going smoothly for them …
The AOC should sue Deloitte.
Wendy Darling
June 25, 2012
That’s what Levi Straus and Marin County, and others, did. But then, Levi Straus and Marin County weren’t in bed with the vendor.
Long live the ACJ.
Commercial IT
June 26, 2012
Wendy. Look at the second lawsuit filed by Marin County. The one naming Ernest Culver as a defendent. Conflict of interest and collusion theory.
Wendy Darling
June 26, 2012
There can always be one bad apple, Commercial IT. But at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, there is a whole bushel of them, and that makes the difference. One bad apple vs. institutionalized misconduct, malfeasance, and fraud.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
June 25, 2012
unionman575
June 25, 2012
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/El-Dorado-Reduced-Clerk-Office-Hours-Notice-2012-06-22.pdf
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/Nevada-reduced-hours-5-7-12.pdf
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/Shasta-reduced-hours-2012-06-13.pdf
unionman575
June 25, 2012
wearyant
June 25, 2012
Another report on Baxter’s view of sacred cows:
http://www.trialinsider.com/?p=1856
Really, why should our constitutional rights be dismantled because some fatheads in the ivory tower are feeling the pinch? This is outrageous!
unionman575
June 25, 2012
My. my, my. What is this SHIT…
“We are told we need to make structural changes but any time we try they are shot down by the lawyers,” said Ashmann-Gerst. “We should consider no jury trials in misdemeanor cases when the penalty will be less than six months in jail. Prisoners are doing about a minute and a half anyway,” she said.”
wearyant
June 26, 2012
Yeah, Unionman! This ivory tower idiot’s reasoning would lead to, why bother with law enforcement? The “prisoner” is sentenced to a minute and a half anyway. Ergo, why bother arresting the “prisoner”? Such a bother.
Ashmann-Gerst is taking a pot-shot at the trial court judges and the sentencing with that snotty comment. That’s a whole ‘nother arena that’s broke.
wearyant
June 26, 2012
Earth to Ashmann-Gerst: The structural changes should be within the JC/AOC/CJ office, especially the AOC! NOT within the California constitution! Wake up and smell the coffee, (your idiot!)! Clean up your own house!
Recall Tani!
Pass and implement AB 1208!
Long live the ACJ!
disgusted
June 26, 2012
You have to utilize AOC math: 2 wrongs make 1 right.
Wendy Darling
June 26, 2012
The very people who now propose to limit the right to jury trials, and other civil rights, which they trivialize as “sacred cows,” are the very same people who have looted the California Judicial Branch, wasted over a half billion dollars on the biggest failure of a public IT project in the history of California, been caught lying time and time again, can’t change a lightbulb in any courthouse in the state for anything except for just under $500 a pop, have flushed the integrity of the judicial branch down the sewer, and will never be held accountable for any of it. After all, if you can loot the judicial branch and get away with it, the law really doesn’t matter any more, so why bother to care about incarcerating people without the right to a jury trial? How could that possibly matter?
Recall the Chief Justice/
Long live the ACJ.
anna
June 26, 2012
Jury trials are a constitutional right!. Who the fuck are these people? A right, is now a sacred cow? Rights are just that. They cannot be “taken” away. Just who the hell do these people think they are? They are NOT the legislature. Fuck Them!
unionman575
June 26, 2012
This is such a sick joke–AOC Civics programs…
http://www.courts.ca.gov/programs-lawrelated.htm
Wendy Darling
June 26, 2012
From The Metropolitan News Enterprise, by Kenneth Ofgang:
Alliance Blasts Judicial Council’s Initial Response to SEC Report
By KENNETH OFGANG, Staff Writer
The Alliance of California Judges Friday blasted the Judicial Council for its lack of immediate action on the report of the Strategic Evaluation Committee.
The council met Thursday and Friday in San Francisco, and voted to establish a process for considering the SEC report, which was highly critical of the Administrative Office of the Courts. Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has said that she is committed to giving serious consideration to the report, but that it is in many ways reflective of past practices that no longer exist or are already in the process of being changed.
The alliance, in its release Friday, expressed disappointment in the council’s process, questioning—among other things, the need for a “rolling public comment period.”
The alliance directors commented:
“By our count, this will be the fourth public comment period—CJA’s, the Chief’s, and the SEC’s (which involved sending questionnaires to every current and former judge in the state, among others). The Council has without a doubt now put the matter of the implementation of the report’s recommendations on a piecemeal schedule which could literally take years to run its course.”
Praise for Wesley
The alliance praised Los Angeles Superior Court Assistant Presiding Judge David Wesley for having “gamely tried to salvage something from the meeting” by moving the council adopt SEC recommendation 4.1, which reads:
“The Judicial Council must take an active role in overseeing and monitoring the AOC and demanding transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the AOC’s operations and practices.”
The motion “caused obvious discomfort among the Council members,” the alliance said, leading to a lengthy period of “useless chatter” about parliamentary procedure before a vote in which the motion received only one vote.
“Perhaps the SEC committee members, most of whom had shown up to see their report received by the council, were surprised by today’s outcome,” the alliance said. “We were not, having witnessed more than our share of these meetings over the past few years.”
In its own release Friday, the AOC explained that the report’s recommendations on Judicial Council oversight of the AOC will be discussed at a council meeting scheduled for the last two days of August.
Other Action
In other action Friday, the council unanimously voted to allocate up to up to $3.36 million from the Trial Court Trust Fund to assist the San Luis Obispo Superior Court in acquiring a case management system.
“The council recognized that the San Luis Obispo court needs to replace its two failing 30+ years-old case management systems which have no vendor support, suffer from intermittent failures, and could fail permanently at any time,” the AOC said in its release.
The AOC explained that he San Luis Obispo court had volunteered to be one of the “early adopter” courts for the California Court Case Management System “and spent a significant amount of time and resources preparing to implement the system” before the council pulled the plug on CCMS in March.
Funds previously set aside to reimburse the Ventura Superior Court for costs it would have incurred in the deployment of CCMS will now go to the San Luis Obispo court, which will be responsible for maintenance and operations costs.
“This court has gone out on a limb three different times in terms of case management systems only to have that limb sawed off, not through any fault of their own,” Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge James E. Herman, chair of the CCMS Internal Committee—which has been renamed the Technology Committee—explained.
Court of Appeal Justice Judith Ashmann-Gerst of this district was quoted as pointing that the San Luis Obispo system will serve as a “template” for other courts looking to replace their case management system.
Also, the newly renamed Technology Committee said it has created a new working group to “work on developing a roadmap for case management systems, e-filing, and other court technology.” The committee said that six courts need new systems now and 22 more will need them within five years.
http://www.metnews.com/
Long live the ACJ.
Michael Paul
June 26, 2012
Everybody’s being taken for a ride because these people think they can get away with it. It is nice to see the judges call a spade a spade in regards to the SEC report but Justice California has a point when she highlights the san luis obispo debacle.
If I count the money correctly, they’re about to spend some 30 million dollars in refunds and trial court trust funds on CCMS by some other alternative name and deploy that alternative with some garbage that it is based on CCMS technology.
Now I know that Justice Judith Ashmann-Gerst and Judge Herman probably don’t do much brain surgery or systems design. Myself? I try to stay out of the judging business.
What I do know is that you normally don’t tear parts of a computer program away from each other and recompile them into something else. That might just cost you millions more than starting from scratch. Ask your own systems people. At best such a proposal would be a continuing change order debacle in the making with a company that has already milked these people for their extreme ignorance.
lobstahsmaht
June 26, 2012
And this is why no one will comment here. You just outed an AOC employee because he had a different opinion. Stop saying you will accept other’s opinons. You just proved beyond a doubt you don’t. What lack of character you all have.
Judicial Council Watcher
June 26, 2012
I think you’ll discover that, despite our numerous cautionary tidbits about how to remain anonymous, the icon in question, which we make no reference to in our reply here, couldn’t have been more obvious than if it were a billboard off the side of a highway. Your post(s) have been approved.
Lobstahsmaht
June 27, 2012
Thank you for posting my comments. I realize that if you dug down, you would see his name. That doesn’t mean that it had to be posted here in comments. It was threatening and takes away from the sincerity of your comments. It makes it look like more of a bullying site if you comment with different opinions. I repeat, there was no reason to out him.
Michael Paul
June 26, 2012
Let me repeat my alleged outing:
“George, a member of the EOP brain trust may wish to turn off his hovercard. (Doh!)”
Let us know when he’s turned out that neon light in his profile icon and we’ll all stop looking at it.
Peppermint Pattie
June 26, 2012
DDenton, George Washington, lobstahsmaht . . . a rose by any other name is still a rose.
Michael Paul
June 26, 2012
Easy Peppermint. I would like to see more AOC employees post over here including George. Just make sure you’re not an EOP or com troll on a mission.
Peppermint Pattie
June 26, 2012
The “AOC employee”, aka D Denton, aka “George Washington,” outed himself by not turning off his profile, which was under his own name.
Lobstahsmaht
June 27, 2012
It was not visible to this site. That was the point which obviously alludes you.
Official
June 26, 2012
You know, I would totally jump to “GW”s defense if he had ever made a factual oppositional argument in his posts and got slammed by regular bloggers. But from the minute he started posting, he has never made a point! He just attacks the post above him! He’s mad someone said “these people.” He asks “what planet” comments about the SEC report come from, but he doesn’t put forth any of his own ideas! We get you disagree with what we are saying… BUT WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? Give us a fact to consider or another point of view to ponder, and we’ll listen! And if you click the blast-from-the-past link that JusticeCalifornia provided, there are just more of the same complaints about our posts and cryptic rants from this person, but nothing proffered for us to consider! GW is actually proof that anyone can post here… even someone who contributes nothing. Make a point about the AOC or JC! State a fact! Offer an opinion! Politely disagree with comments you don’t like by using the “rate down” button!
Quote from Tombstone: “Christ Almighty! It’s like I’m sittin’ here playin’ cards with my brother’s kids or somethin!”
Michael Paul
June 26, 2012
~just laughs~ like he was on a mission.
Wendy Darling
June 26, 2012
Well said, Official. Very well said, indeed.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
June 26, 2012
Here’s the deal (no pun intended, ok well since our cj has been a gambling barmaid, and given Official’s video maybe.)
Most of those of us posting here have been watching things for ’bout a decade or — for some–going on darn near two or three or maybe even four decades– or so (sorry, I’ve gone rural, and am loving it, and highly recommend it).
Many of us have been outspoken and paid some pretty high dues, and have some pretty good documentation of Team George bull$$$$ to show for it.
That is why what is posted here is showing up, consistently, in official, and neutral, and even internal branch, investigations.
And that is why we all ask for specifics as to disagreements re the info posted here.
We all just want the facts. Whatever they may be, just give us the facts. Backed up by documentation. And if our facts are wrong, show us.
Commercial IT
June 27, 2012
I hear you, Official. Many attacks here. Many solutions possible. But getting everyone together to produce solutions that will work and will be embraced has so far been impossible. Many people might have to give a little to get more in return but are unwilling to follow that path. E.g., are court reporters willing to change their work some? I suspect you might be willing to do so but many are not. What if a solution put more of them back to work but working differently? Solutions often come about only after a disaster. That is just the way mankind/society works. First we need a real catastrophe to get people’s attention. We’re heading that direction now. Courtrooms are shutting down. Courthouses are being shuttered. Civil law is being squeezed out of existence because criminal cases take priority. That will eventully produce catastrophes, particularly in areas like family law, child custody, landlord/tenant law. Business will suffer and California will be shunned by the business community because courtrooms are necessary to resolve business disputes.
The next step on the way to some resolution is catastrophe.
Official
June 26, 2012
Dear Members of the California Judicial Council,
Consider this my “public comment” regarding the SEC recommendation. It’s a re-post from a blog called “The AOC Watcher.”
JusticeCalifornia | June 27, 2010 at 8:25 am
From the Declaration of Independence, which was written to express grievances against and independence from a different King George:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Thank you, JusticeCalifornia.
unionman575
June 26, 2012
http://www.courts.ca.gov/18488.htm
Video: Judicial Council Accepts Strategic Evaluation Committee’s Analysis
Oh my here I go again…
unionman575
June 26, 2012
http://www.courts.ca.gov/16794.htm
Item SP12-05 Response Form
Title: Strategic Evaluation Committee Report
The Strategic Evaluation Committee (SEC) was appointed by Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye in March 2011 to conduct an in-depth review of the AOC with a view toward promoting transparency, accountability, and efficiency. The Chief Justice received the report and recommendations on May 25. At its meeting on June 21, 2012, the Judicial Council accepted the report and directed that it be posted for public comment for 30 days. Comments received will be considered public and posted by name and organization.
PLEASE NOTE that all comments will be posted to the branch web site at http://www.courts.ca.gov as submitted by the commentator as soon as reasonably possible after receipt.
To Submit Comments
Comments may be entered on this form or prepared in a letter format. If you are not submitting your comments directly on this form, please include the information requested below and the proposal number for identification purposes. Because all comments will be posted as submitted to the branch web site, please submit your comments by email, preferably as an attachment, to: invitations@jud.ca.gov
Please include the following information:
Name: Title:
Organization:
0 Commenting on behalf of an organization
General Comment:
Specific Comment – Recommendation/Chapter Number
:
WHEW SOMEONE NEEDS TO WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE:
:http://www.just-coffee.com/strong-coffee-recipe/
unionman575
June 26, 2012
Judicial Council Meetings
Friday July 27
The next big top circus is on Friday July 27, 2012:
The OBT
June 27, 2012
Thanks Unionman for posting the latest survey that Justice Miller’s E and P Committee is now overseeing. Let me see if I get this right. The Chief Justice appoints a committee made up of all Justices and Judges she selects to make a comprehensive review of the operations of the AOC. This is called the SEC report. Those Justices and Judges work tirelessly for over a year, without any staff to produce an honest and complete review of the AOC’s work. The SEC surveyed every Judge in California, and got input from every part of the branch. As we know the end result was a devastating indictment of the AOC and the Judicial Council’s lack of supervision and control. Incredibly many of the findings reflect what many in the branch including the ACJ and thoughtful bloggers have said here over the course of years. Apparently shocked, surprised and dismayed by the truth, the Chief Justice and her loyal minion J Miller have concluded we need to start all over again , including a new survey .Honestly everyone this is an outrage. The Chief’s own committee did their job and they did it well. Now because the insular and unelected crowd that runs the Judicial Council doesn’t like the result we are starting all over ? Our Chief Justice and her hand picked insiders at the Judicial Council have made a huge error in judgement. This attempt to bury the SEC report is fooling no on in the judiciary, legislature , loyal and dedicated trial court employees or the public .The end result here is that this Chief and her anti democratic Judicial Council are destroying the credibility of an entire branch of government. Whatever it is, the Chief Justice and her supporters removed from the sad reality of the devastating cutbacks of the trial courts aren’t getting it. In the now over three decades of public service to this branch I have to say we have reached a new low point. The Chief has missed a great opportunity to heal the branch by simply doing what is right and by implementing the SEC report. To end this dysfunction I am proposing we need a comprehensive constitutional amendment to 1. Democratize the Judicial Council.2. Mandate that the role of the AOC is to support the local trial courts not to run them .3 Limit all Legislative allocations of branch funds to the Judicial Council and AOC to 20% of the total allocated. 4. Require that all state court related offices be housed in Sacramento to control expenses. 5. The CJP be significantly reformed including placing term limits on their members and making clear that their jurisdiction not include legal errors which J McConnell has without basis converted or tried to convert into “ethical” violations. In summary my proposed constitutional amendments seek to rebalance a branch and system that has spun out of control to the detriment of the public we serve.
unionman575
June 27, 2012
Bingo!
wearyant
June 27, 2012
Totally agree with all OBT said, but …
“3 Limit all Legislative allocations of branch funds to the Judicial Council and AOC to 20% of the total allocated.”
Make the percentage 8 percent of the total allocated. Shall we document your proposals as a stipulation and all sign it? Yes!
Wendy Darling
June 27, 2012
Putting the SEC report “out for public comment” = stalling for time, and use it as an excuse to do nothing, in the hope that people’s attention will turn elsewhere,
Nothing will really change at 455 Golden Gate Avenue unless and until there is a legislative correction. Nothing.
Recall the Chief Justice.
Long live the ACJ.
Jimmy
June 27, 2012
When the SEC members sent out their surveys and spoke individually with those that requested a personal interview, confidentiality was assured. With the public comment process, the contributor must identify himself or herself, insuring that those who were concerned about retaliation will not provide further input. The powers that be will rally those that benefit from specific AOC programs to write comments against the SEC recommendations, and they will come out in droves, supplying the “data” necessary to encourage the Judicial Council not to make any meaningful changes. No matter how helpful public access programs might be, they are of no benefit to anyone if the courthouse doors aren’t open.
Official
June 27, 2012
Oh, my. I didn’t even think of that, Jimmy. Good point. The public comments calling for reform will be the same folks willing to go public with their comments, which will be dismissed as “the same old negative folks,” and all the AOC supporters will come out in droves. The JC will use the positive comments to counter the SEC report in favor of zero reform. What a way to thank the SEC panel, huh? What a thankless job. I just hope that on behalf of the trial courts Wachob & Co. will keep up the good fight. I fear they will get ticked off and resign from the council.
Curious
June 27, 2012
You are right, Jimmy. Much of the SEC report was based on reports from current AOC employees, who voiced their fear of retaliation to the SEC interviewers. The manner in which the survey process has been set up guarantees that they will, of necessity, remain silent.
Re: Your other point — right again. One only had to listen to the Council meeting on Thursday to imagine Miriam Krinsky, Baker, Terry Friedman, Erika Yew and others almost rushing for the doors to line up support for a myriad of AOC programs. These people believe (and have for over a decade been successful in institutionalizing that belief) that the AOC is a full-service social service agency rather than an agency with modest statutory powers, almost all of which are derivative of the likewise modest constitutional authority of the Council. They want to do everything from high school civics curriculum to monitoring complaints against judges (Center for Families and Children), to running art contests, etc. None of those programs are affordable, and there has never even been a discussion, with true judicial input, into the need for, advisability of, or authority for such a panoply of programs. Those things have simply been assumed by a core group of insiders, both in the AOC and within the judiciary. Good example of this melding was the Justice (whose name escapes me) who showed up to speak in firm support of the AOC and programs like the above. This is the Justice who found herself on the periphery of controversy last year when a staffer in the Office of General Council sent an email around urging people to nominate this Justice for an open spot on the Council, in admitted
contravention of AOC policy.
The AOC has been run by a small group who sees it as their tool, and the trial courts be damned. The agency has been hijacked, and it’s time for the trial judges to retake control.
The OBT
June 27, 2012
Yes I noticed the same. Given the tight connection between the Office of Chief Justice and the CJP you can bet this set up by J Miller and the Chief is designed to ” chill” meaningful honest comments about their failures. That way the Judicial Council will say ” all is well” and they will thank “Jody” for all her great non change changes. You really can’t make any of this up.
courtflea
June 27, 2012
The only thing I can suggest is that those of us that are willing to use our own names, make public comments expressing our ourtrage that the report is not being acted upon. That I will be doing.
wearyant
June 27, 2012
Oh, Flea! I may not be able to watch you walk the plank alone …