August 2, 2012
Dear Members and Others:
We include for your consideration a commentary by Mr. Bill Girdner of the Courthouse News Service on the recent (but certainly not the last) SEC public comment period. Once again, the Courthouse News gets it exactly right. No wonder the AOC had a blanket policy of refusing to publish Courthouse News pieces in their now defunct “ENews” service. We also include a link to the public comment of the California Trial Courts Consortium that undoubtedly gave a severe case of heartburn to those who love trying to split judges apart by wrongly painting the issue as small courts vs. large courts.
Directors,
Alliance of California Judges
_______________________________________
To Dither or Not to Dither
By BILL GIRDNER – Courthouse News Service
In an email conversation with a judge, I commented that the outpouring of website commentary from California judges felt like a rebellion. He emailed back, saying it was good to see the judges at last standing up on their own two feet. Looking at the website again, I still want to rub my eyes in reaction to the breadth and sheer volume of the commenters whose names are preceded by “Hon.” Hundreds of judges are practically shouting for reform of the system. When I looked today, the name at the top of the list, with the most recent comment, was from Judge Lance Ito. He wants to know who is behind the manipulation of the pension system within the court administrative office and who in the office of the general counsel approved that manipulation.
Ito concludes with one word: “WHO?”
His comment brought immediately to mind a conference in Long Beach a year ago, a period that, with all the intervening events, seems like an eternity, where judges were indeed shouting.
The judges at the California Judge Association conference were asking for a different name, that of the person behind a tricky maneuver that would have removed trial court administrators from the supervision of the trial court’s presiding judge, thus transferring all administrative power in the courthouse to the centralized bureaucracy. The gambit, an amendment to a trailer bill in the Legislature, failed. But Ito and other judges wanted to know who was behind it.
You could hear the anger in their shouts. They were head hunting.
They did not get their answer. But in the months since then, California’s chief justice set up an evaluation committee that in turn issued a massive report recommending sweeping and fundamental reforms to the Administrative Office of the Courts.
The reforms include a radical downsizing of the bureaucracy that has ballooned in the last two decades. The large number of proposed changes also included a fundamental reversal of the basic role of the agency, saying the administrators should return to the role they had in the past, that of serving the judges rather than trying to lord over them.
The reforms are the topic for comment on the current website, where so many judges are posting their opinions. The margin in favor moving forward with the reforms is about 90%. The comments are also shot through with suspicion that the administrators along with a compliant and weak-kneed Judicial Council will try to slow down and derail the reform train. “The 400-plus judges who responded shed anonymity and openly stood behind their statements critical of ‘business as usual,'” wrote Judge Kevin McCormick in Sacramento.
He added, “The results are nothing short of a resounding and emphatic demand for implementation of reform and an unambiguous expression of the exasperation of judges to the endless excuses for delaying long overdue reforms.”
Appeals Court Justice Arthur Gilbert wrote, “To dither is to wither. It is time to act, now, not after more unnecessary deliberation.”
In looking down the list of more than 400 judges who have posted comments, I was curious about the judges from smaller trial courts, in the sparsely populated north of California or along the central coast.
Much has been made of the division between the smaller courts who are said to largely depend on the bureaucracy, and therefore be more likely to support it, and the bigger courts like the behemoth Los Angeles that are powerful enough to battle the mandarins from the central office.
But I found no such division in reading the comments. Judges in small courts and the judges in big courts joined together in urging that the deep reforms recommended by the evaluation committee be put into action.
From Placer County, Judge Alan Pineschi urged adoption of the proposed reforms “with all due speed.”
From the gold rush county of Amador, Judge David Richmond wrote, “The past failed structure can no longer be tolerated.”
From the central coast county of San Luis Obispo, Judge Dodie Harman quoted John F. Kennedy in saying, “There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction.”
Related articles
- Next AOC director described as “insider” by many (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- ACJ Message: Courthouse News Article Regarding Budget (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- ACJ Article: SFCHRON:-AOC Needs a Trim. AOC e-news: Fair and transparent? (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
Nathaniel Woodhull
August 2, 2012
Nothing else really needs to be said!
Dan Dydzak
August 2, 2012
Very good post. The voices of the fairminded and honorable and honest are being heard.
Update on Dydzak v. Dunn
Regrettably (and AMAZINGLY),
Judge Gregory Munoz of OCSC has refused to disqualify himself and improperly ruled on his own disqualification. Appropriate remedies will be taken against him and other parties having improper ex parte communications and contacts to “rig” my case. I cannot explain further at this point but will elucidate later when pleadings are filed.
Further, in view of recent developments, which show improper ex parte communications and contacts by Team George to fix my case of Dydzak v. Dunn et al., a new lawsuit will now be filed naming Ronald M. George and others engaged in new Rico activities. As well, Mary “the lizard” Roberts, along with Kamala Harris, Esq. and Peter A. Krause, Esq., have been active in RIco activities and will have to sued in this new lawsuit. Mr. Krause, a former AOC attorney, is actively participating with AG Harris in hiding the corruption and misuse of the 560 million mortgage crisis monies. Harris also was involved in the sham charity, California All, where 780 thousand disappeared in people’s pockets which were from the CA Bar Foundation. Many of George’s dishonest cronies have dipped into this money in the past, and much of it apparently went illegally to the first Obama Campaign. Ms. Harris refuses to account for the 560 million mortgage crisis fund, will not turn it over to Gov. Brown, and is actively concealing disbursements with her brother-in-law, Tony West, high up there with Eric Holder, Esq.
I am sure Senator Grasley,possibly future head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, would like to see my new lawsuit.
Although I am somewhat fatigued by the fixing of cases, I am now accustomed to same, and realize that an abridgment of my rights creates new lawsuits and new remedies. As Benjamin Franklin said, the pen is mightier than the sword. I will not give up, just like George Washington. A journalist has advised that Ronald M. George and his contacts show no hesitation in having improper ex parte communications with certain judges to fix the outcome of cases. E.g., Mary Roberts, Esq., Sarah Overton, Esq.Remember, he said, anyone who opposes me is tantamout to a declaration of war. And he did create an enemies list, as alleged in my lawsuit.
What is happening is that certain judges with an agenda (fortunately in the minority) are trying to avoid the rights and fairness factor of the Alliance judges. They are, for whatever reason, clinging to remnants of the George Regime. Fortunately, as things are developing, it appears that the Alliance Judges’ efforts to democracize are being heard. Keep up the fight. I am with others.
Thanks for hearing me out. Sometimes Don Quixote was disillusioned, but he never stopped loving Dulcinea. Now I know why unionman needs a drink once and awhile–to take a break from the chaos. My martini will have to wait. Like many on Judicial Watcher, I am busy working exposing the corruption.
Respectfully Dan
Dan Dydzak
August 2, 2012
To show the improper influence of the AOC and I quote verbatim in part from Minute Order dated July 26, 2012 in Dydzak v. Dunn re disqualification of Judge Gregory Munoz:
“The Court has contacted the legal department regarding the Notice of Disqualification…”
I.e.,
AOC Legal Department—and the judge is supposed to be independent and impartial.
All you judges, lawyers, legal scholars and smart people: we all know who the legal department is–Georges’ and Tani Cantil Sakauye’s attorneys. Since AOC personnel are named as parties in the lawsuit, and judges are supposed to exercise independent judgment, it was improper, unethical and plain wrong for Judge Munoz to have EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS with third party attorneys. End of story.
Is it any wonder that the present AOC crowd is curtailing coverage by Courthouse News. Or many SEC comments were not allowed. AOC must have George Orwell’s 1984 on their reading list–AOC–Big Brother–and I thought CA was different than Russian and China. Of course, if I lived there, I and many other Judicial Council Watchers would either be (1) killed; (2) tortured; (3) jailed; or (4) sent to the Siberia-like gulag…or any or all of the above.
I sincerely hope the new AOC head reads the comments every day, given that he was a long-time judge. He knows about the canons of ethics, and that he should not allow illegal activity or conversion of funds. Is he going to suggest that the swiss attorney–ie. assistant money-launderer–return home to the City by the Bay? Or is there still a lot of convereted monies in the Vatican Bank and other such financial venues? Why is Mr. Thor not fired?
Could the honorable judges of the Alliance ask for his immediate return, an accounting and an explaination of his spending, perks and salary? Or does the Chief Justice really care?
Respectfully, again, fighting for truth and justice, and the American way, Dan
JusticeCalifornia
August 3, 2012
The voices ROARING for a branch revolution are deafening, and growing ever louder. Unfortunately for branch leadership, the call for a change no longer comes just from a few isolated, internal dissidents and bloggers in jammies– it comes from the BSA, the legislature, the ACJ, the CJA, the SEC, those many hundreds of judges responding to the SEC, the unions, the public– and so many more. In other words, the call for change is mainstream. . . . .and those clinging desperately to the past need to step out of the way.
Only a band of fools would ignore or try to wait out the growing revolution. The ball is in the CJ/JC/AOC court. The next JC meeting is going to tell the tale.
Judicial Council Watcher
August 3, 2012
According to our notes, Mr. Miller and his committee will “begin reading” the public comments to the SEC survey in six days time. If you have not submitted a public comment, please do so at your earliest convenience as we believe that time is running out. There were no new comments posted yesterday and I would encourage everyone to do one last push and get out the vote, so to speak.
You have six days to be a part of history. Don’t let history leave you behind.
invitations@jud.ca.gov