To use a euphemism cited by one of our posters courtflea, chickenshit is contagious. Thus far the mostly 18,000+ rank and file employees left in California’s judicial branch and many judges have been nonplussed thus far by the lackluster and carefree attitude that the AG’s office has had when it comes to Judicial Council and AOC indiscretions. Time and time again the AG’s office, weather under the wing of Jerry Brown or Kamala Harris has let all of us honest, ethical and hard-working employees down while the well connected criminals running this show at the top are issued free pass after free pass. In effect, it has now been two AG’s that have extended the equivalent of absolute judicial immunity for administrative acts to those who work for the Administrative Office of the Courts.
Under AG Brown and a District Attorney Kamala Harris, we all know that a hundred thousand dollar embezzlement took place in the human resources department of the AOC because Bill Vickrey told us as much when he sat in front of a committee on accountability and administrative review . To use Mr. Vickrey’s own words, “The D.A. (Harris) chose not to prosecute” yet for the life of us, not one of us could locate any crime report anywhere that indicated that a crime was committed or reported.
Realistically AG Harris, we don’t think you declined to prosecute a hundred thousand dollar embezzlement of public funds. We think that the co-conspirators at the AOC who also had their hand in the public cookie jar did not want anyone poking around so they buried it and blamed it on you of all people. About a half-dozen journalists and another half-dozen judicial branch employees all well-connected to the legal community tried to locate this crime report that you are alleged to have chosen to not prosecute. We checked with the CHP. No crime report. We checked with the Judicial Protection Unit. No crime report. We checked with the San Francisco Sheriffs office. No crime report. We checked with SFPD. No crime report. And yet you allowed the former executive director of the AOC pin the responsibility of a hundred thousand dollar embezzlement of public funds on you as a failure to prosecute.
Then we had the unlicensed contractor debacle wherein five unlicensed contractors were permitted to stay on the job at the AOC while your former AOC lawyers that now work for the AG’s office provided ample legal and political cover for more Administrative Office of the Courts misdeeds. Only this time, there would be some judicial council culpability, for it was the judicial council themselves that approved many of these arrangements and agreements under the recommendations of the AOC. Except for a lack of oversight over their administrative offices, neither the rank and file, nor the journalists really believe that the judicial council was the responsible party here. Unless of course, some of those judicial council members were the recipients of some free or heavily discounted construction or remodeling work in exchange for the gross overcharging that this group of unlicensed contractors were engaged in. Everybody knows it. It is no secret to hundreds of state judges or thousands of court employees. Court employees that are today losing their jobs due in part to the misdeeds of those who appear to have absolute judicial immunity for their administrative acts.
They keep their jobs while all of us lose our jobs.
Is that fair Ms. Harris or Mr. Brown?
Is it fair that everyone else (the public, the taxpayers, other judicial branch employees) pays the price for misdeeds of those who appear to have absolute judicial immunity for their administrative acts? A reminder Ms. Harris that the statute of limitations on these misdeeds has not yet passed, but they will pass under your watch.
Insofar as legislators having some culpability here, we’ve heard from over a dozen legislative aides that they assume that the FBI is investigating these matters, so they continue to dole out billions to the very people who have been accused and where there exists ample evidence to cause a broad investigation and yes, prosecution. Sure, those stellar minds occupying those chairs in the capital did indeed turn down the spigot that is fueling this mess, but they turned off the cold water spigot that keeps our courts afloat, not the hot water spigot that is scalding us with scandal after scandal, boondoggle after boondoggle. When will it ever end and by the way, what is the procedure for state insolvency just in case….
At a state level, we should be taking out our own garbage and not relying on the federal government to do it for us but this reliance on the feds seems to be the only time anything gets done. Prison overcrowding, inhumane conditions, no medical care. Let the federal courts solve the problem for us by making Kelso an AOC employee. No court interpreters? Well that’s just too bad. We can’t get reimbursed from the AOC for the interpreters we hire and it is the AOC that gets the funding so we just won’t hire any interpreters. Who cares if someones civil matter isn’t fairly heard or adjudicated because of language barriers? It’s not our fault, it is the fault of that giant sucking sound coming out of San Francisco called the AOC. But it takes a USDOJ probe to cause the chief justice to declare that she wishes to dispel these urban legends of not getting reimbursed from the AOC for hiring court interpreters. Just set aside the observation that the AOC is sweeping the unspent funds for their own operations because we’re going to discourage that going forward and present it to the legislature as yet another big budget hit. Go forth and hire hundreds of court interpreters!
.
Meanwhile, the cold water spigot feeding the trial courts is still turned off so while we will probably have far more court interpreters in the near future, they will be balanced out by the scalding hot water of other cuts. More courtrooms and whole courthouses closed. More employees of other classifications laid off. And where was this problem generated? Well that donkey tail can be pinned on those that tout excellence in leadership and administration at the AOC. And the beat goes on.
The CCMS boondoggle stole funds from trial courts in exchange for the air we breathe. Such a deal! The Long Beach PPP project stands to steal the funds for four other courthouses across the state and is being delivered to us at a price that is, at 792 million dollars in projects set aside, is nearly 120% more expensive than a federal courthouse across town of the same square footage that will be built on Spring Street in downtown Los Angeles. Since it is the feds we put so much reliance upon to solve our problems, maybe we should just transfer the responsibility for courthouse construction to the U.S. General Services Administration across the street from the AOC. At least then we could see some value from this program. Meanwhile, more courthouses close and more court employees continue to pay the price for poor decisions made by the AOC.
Today we have the situation of an unelected judge assigned by the AOC under the AOC-run Assigned Judges Program that has been reassigned to the same Shasta bench 208 times and for 19 consecutive, virtually uninterrupted years. Governor Brown could never make such an appointment without it being challenged, yet consecutive chief justices who have delegated the operations of this program to the AOC have permitted this abomination to occur for nineteen consecutive years and through three judicial election cycles. We’ve been questioning the efficacy of this since our inception. We’ve been copied letters about it that were written to consecutive chief justices so they’ve clearly known it’s been an issue for some time. It is only when a brave retiree living on social security in Shasta County challenges this abomination that everyone chooses to take notice. And how do they take notice? By saying the unelected judge does not currently have those responsibilities, even though Shasta County continues to hold him out as a judge in their court as of this very minute and even though the chief justices letter removing him from his assigned duties leaves the door open to reappoint this unelected judge back to the bench.
You will be hard pressed to find a single rank and file employee in the branch that would agree with this course of action on behalf of either the chief justice or your office. Rather, we all look at it as just another AOC exception to the constitution and the rule of law.
It is so not surprising that yet another former AOC attorney has been handed this case on behalf of the AG’s office and that the responsibility to enforce and uphold the constitution and the laws of this state is proxied through a 79 year old social security recipient that can’t even afford to take on the battle. And everyone knows this so that is why they intend to kick the ball back to the new state top law enforcer, 79 year old Mr. Charles Wagner, yet have complete control of the suit so that it dies on the vine and Mr. Wagner carries the ball on all fees and costs.
Chickenshit is indeed contagious.
Ms. Harris, you have big shoes to fill as the states top law enforcement officer. The media is watching how this will be handled by your office. And this time, make no mistake, you will own the decision. Handing the case back to the relator is the same thing as saying that the people of Shasta County have no suffrage rights….. and your office knows it.
JusticeCalifornia
January 8, 2013
Bravo, JCW.
OF COURSE the decades-long use of the Assigned Judges Program by the Office of the Chief Justice, the AOC, trial court presiding judges, and assigned judges to strip the public of fundamental Constitutional voting rights should be addressed by the Attorney General.
And OF COURSE a 79-year-old retiree existing on Social Security cannot fund such a battle..
This is not an issue limited to Shasta County. In 2011 the AOC estimated that one-third of the assigned judges are “long term”. The AOC would not identify the long-term judges without charging thousands of dollars for research.
For 13 years Butte County had an assigned retired judge who commuted down from Mendocino to Chico. The public was required to pay commuting costs, and for the Chico hotel the judge stayed in each work week, because assigned judges don’t have to live in the counties in which they work.
http://www.newsreview.com/chico/while-judge-post-goes-vacant-temp-judges-remain/content?oid=5118
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/oroville-ca/TNLMBOAGU6VRQ9M6E
People have been complaining about the unconstitutional abuse of the Assigned Judges Program for decades, and no one has done a damn thing about it.
But now, it is squarely before the AG. The Governor and various legislators have been put on notice about it and asked to take action. Let’s see what happens.
Been There
January 9, 2013
Tip of the iceberg, Justice California! Years ago two northern California judges shared the assigned judge “gig” at the Palm Springs court. I really knew little about the program then, but my Asst. Director explained that with the commuting and housing $$ these guys were raking in, they were getting the State to cover the costs of their longterm golf holidays in exchange for showing up at the courthouse during the week. Indeed, my Asst. director told me that one of the judges had moved his family down to Palm Springs since he spent so much time there! Shasta and Butte are not the only examples of abuse within the program, and I can only wonder how many others there are.
JusticeCalifornia
January 9, 2013
Thanks, Been There. I kind of remember something about that too. Maybe these two were even mentioned at one point on JCW? Weren’t those assigned judges in the probate division? And I wonder if those are the two Palm Springs assigned judges that were let go just six months ago? After Mike Feuer’s remark about gutting the program?
Yes, I do wonder how many long term assigned judges there have been and are. . . .
Marvie Votaw
January 8, 2013
God bless you.
Michael Paul
January 8, 2013
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983
Michael Paul
January 8, 2013
Or more broadly, the federal enforcement act of 1871.
Michael Paul
January 8, 2013
(They both wear robes, one black, one white) 🙂
Michael Paul
January 8, 2013
Judicial Council Watcher
January 9, 2013
Inaction or kicking back the suit to the relator appears to open the door to a federal law designed to fight the KKK. How big of a PR disaster would that be? I can see the headlines now…. “Laws designed to dismantle the KKK are being used against an unelected Shasta County judge”
Circumstances changed in 1961 when the Supreme Court of the United States articulated three purposes that underlay the statute: “1) ‘to override certain kinds of state laws’; 2) to provide ‘a remedy where state law was inadequate’; and 3) to provide ‘a federal remedy where the state remedy, though adequate in theory, was not available in practice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enforcement_Act_of_1871_(third_act)
courtflea
January 8, 2013
you tell em JCW!!
courtflea
January 8, 2013
I hope all take a minute and read the readers comments on the second article posted by my friend Justice CA. On of the readers did the math on the hotel per diem alone for one long term assigned judge in Butte County and it was astounding. Anyhow the coments make for an interesting read.
Wendy Darling
January 8, 2013
It shouldn’t be this hard to get a public official to do the right thing. Especially the State Attorney General.
You just can’t make this stuff up. Really.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
January 8, 2013
Indeed. How sad that we all are anticipating that state officials will continue to do the [easy] wrong thing.
courtflea
January 8, 2013
In memory of Huell Howser, this is the tarnishing of Californias gold. RIP Huell.
unionman575
January 8, 2013
Chickenshit is indeed contagious.
Yep.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 9, 2013
Goooooooooood morning California!
It is amazing how no thought is given about how demoralizing acts undertaken by the AOC and the Chief Justice are on the entire branch. The heroes are the few that fall on swords. The zeroes do everything possible to pretend situations don’t exist.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 9, 2013
From the realm of the private & anonymous message window at https:\\forms.hush.com\judicialcouncilwatcher
Several posters have suggested that the Governor “direct” the AG to proceed on the assigned judge issue. Please inform the readership that the Governor and the AG are independently elected constitutional officers and that the Governor is not empowered to “direct” the AG.
+++++++++
So it appears by this message that you own the ball Ms. Harris.
JusticeCalifornia
January 9, 2013
SECTION 803
An action may be brought by the attorney-general, in the name of the people of this state, upon his own information, or upon a complaint of a private party, against any person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises any public office, civil or military, or any franchise, or against any corporation, either de jure or de facto, which usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises any franchise, within this state. And the attorney-general must bring the action, whenever he has reason to believe that any such office or franchise has been usurped, intruded into, or unlawfully held or exercised by any person, or when he is directed to do so by the governor.
JusticeCalifornia
January 9, 2013
That would be Code of Civil Procedure section 803 that gives the Governor power to direct the Attorney General to bring a quo warranto action.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 9, 2013
It’s difficult to dispute the text of the law. Someone over my shoulder suggested that at one time they think the AG was an appointee of the governor?
Thanks Justice California.
On another subject, if you’ve been following our twitter feed or reading other online mediums, Governor Brown’s live within our means budget appears to have no good news for the courts… more details by 11AM tomorrow when his budget proposal goes online.
SpecialDistrict
January 9, 2013
Let’s not forget that in some locales, especially rural locales where the bench is chummy with local and county governments, where controversial decisions might be made that would steam the electorate, the assigned judge is the perfect hired gun brought in by the courts so that they can avoid making controversial decisions and being held accountable. District Attorneys, City Attorneys and Special Districts rely on assigned judges to deliver unpopular decisions.
courtflea
January 9, 2013
Special district, it is not a matter of unpopular decisions. In small towns everyone is related or knows each other practically, so there is many a matter that requires a judge from another jurisdiction. However, most small courts have cross assignment orders so they can help each other out. Most of the need for assigned judges in small courts are due to vacations or trainings for judges. At least that is my experience.
unionman575
January 9, 2013
Tomorrow this is where to find the Governor’s Proposed Budget:
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/
😉
unionman575
January 9, 2013
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-state-budget-20130110,0,746142.story
Court officials said they’ve been told to expect a $200-million cut. The court system’s administrative director, Judge Steven Jahr, called that scenario a “potential crisis that would further cripple our justice system.” Other officials warned of potential courthouse closures and reduced hours.
Guest
January 10, 2013
Does anyone really believe that Mr. Jahr cares? He came out if retirement to collect a $250000/year salary and benefits while still collecting his judges retirement. He sees or feels no economic recession. And our cj is too dull to be aware that the governor and legislators know the “courts administrator” is a double-dipper and is taking out their displeasure of this with reducing all the courts funding.
unionman575
January 9, 2013
http://www.fontanaheraldnews.com/articles/2013/01/09/news/doc50eda7da64592286455854.txt
Busy Fontana Courthouse is becoming even more crowded because of huge budget cuts to San Bernardino Superior Court system
Published: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 9:32 AM PST
“Three experienced assigned judges were released in December.”
JusticeCalifornia
January 9, 2013
What is the judicial council/AOC budget, does anyone know?
Let’s look at just the latest third branch financial/legal/political debacles. Appointments of patently tarnished and/or unqualified Team George members to top AOC positions with salaries and benefits exceeding those of the Governor. The Long Beach courthouse, assigned judges, court reporters, and court interpreters fiascoes. Court leadership’s practice of circling the wagons, covering up/excusing/ignoring/prolonging/rewarding bad or unethical branch behavior, and then using after-the-fact band-aids to try to plug up longstanding gaping ethical wounds. Feathering personal and/or political nests at the expense of the public.When facing economic sanctions for all of the above, trying to pass the buck to and blame the legislature and governor for taking away the branch’s hefty allowance, WHICH FUNDED ALL OF THE ABOVE.
Get real. We all had parents and many of us are parents. We know how this works.
Tough love, baby.
The branch has been and is going to hell in a handbasket. You just gotta know that the other two branches are going to keep inflicting the pain until the third branch is CLEANED UP, and properly serving the public. So all you judges and court commissioners out there hoping you can sit on your hands and rely upon others to fix this mess need to understand– that plan just ain’t gonna work. Your court, or you, or your trusty clerk or court reporter, could be the next branch budget cut necessary to fund ongoing branch debacles.
courtflea
January 9, 2013
Justice CA if you go to the govs website and check out his last version of the budget you can find the numbers you want. I think unionman posted the site above for the numbers tomorrow.
Too bad all of those cuts won’t come out of the AOCs hide. Jahr head.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 9, 2013
Another incoming message from the realm of the private & anonymous message window. The subject of this message is… curious. Note that messages posted here via the private message window are the communications of those that wish to remain totally anonymous, yet still participate in the discussion. The private message window can be found at https:\\forms.hush.com\judicialcouncilwatcher
Comments: Position of Attorney General re “directive” power of Governor under CCP 803:
B. Discretion of the Attorney General in Granting or Denying Leave to Sue
The statutes grant the Attorney General’s Office broad discretion in its determination of proposed quo warranto actions. Code of Civil Procedure section 803 provides that the Attorney General “may” bring the action on his or her own information or on complaint of a private party, and it “must” be brought when the Attorney General “has reason to believe” that the appropriate conditions exist or when directed to do so by the Governor. The use of the word “must” in the latter portion of the provision does not create a mandatory duty due to the qualifying language that the Attorney General must have “reason to believe” that the appropriate conditions exist. (8 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (3d ed. 1985) Extraordinary Writs, � 7 at p. 646; International Association of Firefighters v. City of Oakland, supra, 174 Cal.App.3d at 697.) Hence, the Attorney General “has discretion to refuse to sue where the issue is debatable.” (Id. at 697.)
Judicial Council Watcher
January 9, 2013
That makes me want to run a poll on how many people have reason to believe that Mr. Halpin will be reappointed back to the bench as soon as this blows over…
Wendy Darling
January 9, 2013
“Mr. Halpin will be reappointed back to the bench as soon as this blows over…”
Yep.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
Lando
January 10, 2013
We all have to hope for good news later today. If we take a 200 million dollar further hit, the trial courts will be in total disarray. Meantime back at the crystal palace, the insiders are making further propaganda videos The latest video has plenty for everybody including one of the ultimate insiders Terry B Friedman, who while commenting on the JC/AOC says ” the more sunshine the better” . Honestly that has to be one of the most incredible comments of all time , given CCMS, Long Beach , telecommuting European lawyers, the SEC report, Justice Harry Hull’s embroilment, spiked management retirement benefits and the waste of huge amounts of taxpayer dollars on perks like hotels and Gray Goose. As awesome Wendy Darling likes to say, ” You can’t make this stuff up. Really”.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 10, 2013
It will no doubt be interesting to see what the governors budget proposal is later this morning. Without some additional money going to the trial courts, more people will lose their jobs, more courtrooms will close down. Courts have pretty much burned through reserves or have already planned how they will burn through what is left of their reserves. The systems are shutting down just as more people will be seeking the protection of new laws….new laws related to the homeowners rights act and a new series of complaints that will inundate the courts any day now related to people trying to stop their homes from being foreclosed.The foreclosure epicenters where people will be seeking this relief remain Riverside, San Bernardino and San Joaquin, all courts already challenged.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 10, 2013
An interesting article from the Redding Record-Searchlight-
Melissa Fowler-Bradley, Shasta County Superior Court’s executive officer, said she received the notice and Halpin is no longer serving in Shasta County, but she would not speculate on whether there was a connection to Kauffman’s proceedings.
The state determines when retired judges serve for counties, she said, so the notice for him to stop serving could just be a coincidence.
And, she said, that means the chief justice’s office could just as easily reinstate his authority to rule in Shasta County.
“Whatever the chief justice orders is what we follow,” she said.
So Shasta must have never requested an assigned judge and are just following the chief justices orders to give him cases…..
http://www.redding.com/news/2013/jan/09/retired-shasta-county-judge-barred-from-bench/?partner=RSS
unionman575
January 10, 2013
http://law.justia.com/cases/california/cal2d/42/399.html
Pickens v. Johnson
42 Cal. 2d 399
JusticeCalifornia
January 10, 2013
Halpin has been assigned for almost two decades because Shasta County Court presiding judges have been asking for his assignment.
It looks like the Shasta Court is essentially conceding that Halpin’s removal from the bench pursuant to the December 18, 2012 order does NOT render the quo warranto moot, as the AOC has argued, because the chief justice could “reinstate” him at anytime. . . .and the Shasta Court is still publicly holding him out as a Shasta County assigned retired judge. . . .and has set even more matters for hearing before him in January. . . .
It is almost like Halpin and the Court are daring the Governor and the Attorney General to try to interfere with Halpin’s reign. Or they already know the Governor and the Attorney General won’t.
Would love to know the backstory.
unionman575
January 10, 2013
Me too Justice.
JusticeCalifornia
January 10, 2013
JCW, I am sorry that I did not fully appreciate your bolded comments about what Shasta County Superior Court Executive Officer Melissa Fowler Bradley said to the press.
Let’s all look at them one more time.
“The state determines when retired judges serve.”
“Whatever the chief justice orders is what we follow,”
So reading between the lines, she is saying that regarding Jack Halpin the Shasta court has been and is doing what The State of California and the Office of the Chief Justice have been and are telling them to do.
Wow. Interesting concept.
One that Jack Halpin alludes to in his Response to the Quo Warranto suit.
“It is also clear that there are many agent/principal issues between Jack Halpin and the AOC”
Again, Wow.
Judicial Council Watcher
January 10, 2013
It pays to be well connected. Those statements want to make me request the 208 requests from shasta county that placed him there with the expectation that there is no such request generated by the court. It makes me wonder if the court themselves is also a victim (of let’s say, the man behind the curtain….) but fear to say anything.
JusticeCalifornia
January 10, 2013
The State of California and the Office of the Chief Justice have essentially been thrown under the bus by the Shasta courts, who claim the Halpin mess is all their fault.
The Governor and the Attorney General need to step up and clear this all up.
Because right now we are all watching the tawdry Assigned Judges reality show, also known as:
unionman575
January 10, 2013
Where to find the Governor’s Proposed Budget later this morning:
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/
Look for this budget item: 0250 Judicial Branch
Jimmy
January 10, 2013
If Shasta did not want Halpin to sit in their court on assignment, trust me, he would not be deployed there by the Assigned Judges Program. As I stated in a prior post, if an assigned judge does not meet the court’s needs, whether that is due to incompetence, infirmity, or simply not being a good fit, the court can ask the Assigned Judges Program not to send that judge in the future. Someone in Shasta wants Halpin there, or owes him something.
Been There
January 10, 2013
Someone like Jahr? Might explain some of those “agent/principal issues” between the AOC and Hapin.