On the heels of the former Chief Justice’s retirement, our branch leaders, including the current Chief Justice, asked for time to change the operations of the Judicial Council and the AOC. We were hopeful that the new regime would embrace and implement measures to ensure greater accountability and transparency. Unfortunately, it has become clear that the new regime is like the old regime in far too many respects.
We have documented many of these continued failures of leadership, too many to list here. Today we write about a troubling practice of our branch leaders that appears to be getting worse over time: the use of a Rule of Court to obfuscate and refuse to make available public records which reveal how public funds are being spent. We cannot discover and call attention to wasteful spending if our court leaders continue to hide the records that may reveal it. A recent example is illustrative.
In April Alliance director Judge Kevin McCormick requested a list of the current active contracts from the AOC. The AOC compiled this list previously and made it available to those who sought it, including judges and public employee associations. Instead, the AOC emailed to Judge McCormick approximately 400 pages of raw data, asserting that they do not maintain such a list in the regular course of business. On June 10, AOC staff member Chad Finke wrote to Judge McCormick in part:
“… as reported by Justice Douglas Miller at the Judicial Council’s October 2011 business meeting, the council directed AOC staff going forward from that date to comply strictly with the requirement of rule 10.500 and not to exceed those requirements in responding to requests made under this rule.”
Mr. Finke went on to state:
“Here, because we do not compile or assemble the requested data in the requested form for the AOC’s own use or for provision to other agencies, Judge Jahr has once again confirmed that the council’s October 2011 directive prevents us from running a custom update for you.” (Emphasis added.)
Judge McCormick then undertook an analysis of the voluminous “document dump” provided by the AOC, which raised a number of red flags concerning expenditures related to hotel stays. On May 31, Judge McCormick wrote to the Administrative Director of the Courts and staff member Finke:
“Rather than simply providing the “Active Contracts” as previously done you have sent me approximately 400 pages of raw data. I am again requesting you provide the “Active Contracts” information which you can easily generate in the form previously provided.”
Judge McCormick went on to add:
“In addition, the voluminous documents you did provide contained numerous charges I have interest in, but for now I am requesting additional information about hotel expenses. Hotel charges for the year 2010 as reflected in the documents provided total approximately $319,989. Hotel charges in 2011 totaled $274,233 and hotel expenses for 2012 were $911,950.”
Judge McCormick then requested documentation for these charges, as well as what they were incurred for such as seminars or educational conferences, the names of staff and participants that may have attended them, and if not for a conference or seminar, any reimbursements that may have been paid for those stays.
Judge McCormick observed: “It is of note that the documentation reflects over a 300% increase by the AOC and Judicial Council on what many would describe as discretionary spending at the same time court closures, layoffs and reduced hours at many of our courts were taking place.”
So, how did the new and improved AOC respond to this request from a judge? Rather than provide a responsive answer, AOC staff member Chad Finke responded on June 10:
“…we need to know which of the voluminous judicial administrative records we have provided to you over the past year support those figures and where those figures appear and/or how they were calculated. Once you provide that information, we will be able to evaluate that portion of your request and respond as required under rule 10.500.”
In other words: “Judge McCormick, show us the math you used on the non-responsive documents we provided and then we will see if you are entitled to anything further…but don’t hold your breath.”
Is this the new face of a reformed AOC? Are we to sit by quietly and simply accept that the public’s money is being spent prudently when we know from past experiences, as well as the Chief Justice’s own Strategic Evaluation Committee, that this is a bureaucracy run amok? Is there any doubt why the AOC would resist an audit of its functions as it did recently, citing the cost as a reason not to be audited even while a number of local courts were being audited at their own expense?
The Alliance will not accept business as usual at the AOC, nor will we be deterred by persistent refusals to accept oversight. We will keep you informed as we persist in seeking the information needed to stop wasteful bureaucratic spending at the expense of the trial courts and the credibility of the judicial branch.
Directors, Alliance of California Judges
Related articles
- Alliance Budget Updates & Judge White speaks to legislators (judicialcouncilwatcher.com)
- Judicial Council Again Opposes Reform (judicialcouncilwatcher.com)
Lana Lane
July 10, 2013
As a person who is very familiar with the Oracle system at the AOC and travel reimbursement claims,Chad Finke can very easily get that information from each department head.I know for a fact that each department keeps track of monies spent monthly on hotel reimbursements for staff and committee members. So it would be very easy to breakdown how much was allocated to each meeting or seminar and how many staff members were reimbursed.
wearyant
July 10, 2013
A list of current active contracts. Sounds reasonable and fundamental to me, a layperson, one of the rude unwashed. The administrative arm of the courts cannot provide this? The AOC is running the courts business affairs blind? Is that it? The AOC’s past proves they are running amok and now they this inefficient? Then they can’t play with the big boys in the private sector, obviously, and pretend they have CEOs and CFOs, etc., instead of administrators and accountants. It was suggested here to me quite a while ago that poor management and stupidity does not necessarily malfeasance make. I respectfully disagree. It appears that’s the “out” that is being taken. That is how Calabro may have escaped the federal handcuffs and left with a golden handshake instead. “I’m so sorry, I’m just a silly idiot. I meant no harm when public funds were redirected from trial court operations to the unrepentant sewer known as CCMS in order the keep the steady stream of dollars pouring into this boondoggle.” Thank gawd the ACJ will not allow the JC/AOC/CJ Office to get away with this tact. “Make the move now, apologize later.” Correct, AOC humps? (apologies to Unionman575.)
I’m also thankful that Judge McCormick was not entirely put off by the garbage dump of 400 pages of data as the AOC must have thought he would be. They probably thought he would simply throw up his hands and give up, as they would have done. I would like to know what Justice Douglass Miller has to say about all this — stuff.
Thank you, ACJ, for continuing on against this growing blob of a JC/AOC/CJ Office that threatens the whole of the judiciary in California.
The AOC really must be audited to the inth degree going back a decade.
Wendy Darling
July 10, 2013
“asserting that they do not maintain such a list in the regular course of business.”
An admission of their own incompetency, in their own words no less. While essentially telling a judge to go f**k himself. And let us not forget that neither Chad Finke nor Jahr Head could be doing and saying any of this without the full knowledge, consent, and blessing of the Office of the Chief Justice. This is her “leadership.”
The ACJ has it exactly right — nothing has changed from the former regime to the present. It’s just Ron George in a skirt.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
July 10, 2013
Courthouse News by Maria Dinzao:
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – A $60 million budget boost to trial court budgets will keep courtrooms open and running, but it will do little to reverse the court closures and layoffs that have already taken place. Such was the consensus Monday from the 30 judges and court officials who make up the budget committee for California’s far flung trial courts.
“I don’t see this as getting $60 million but as getting $60 million less of a cut,” said Presiding Judge Barry Goode of Contra Costa County. “Our preliminary analysis is that this is a very small amount of money.”
The Trial Court Budget Advisory Committee is led by Sacramento Presiding Judge Laurie Earl who opened the meeting to press and public.
Budget committee meetings traditionally have not been open. Most committee decisions are not known until they are presented to the full Judicial Council.
This year, the state Legislature tried to mandate that the council open all its advisory committee and subcommittee meetings. But Governor Jerry Brown axed that provision when he signed this year’s budget bill.
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye lobbied against the provision to require open meetings, but said later that she planned to make more meetings public next year.
Any advisory committee meeting can currently be opened at the discretion of its chair. Earl said next month’s meeting will also be open and will include an opportunity for public comment.
The courts won’t see a cent of the $60 million boost until September 1, when a report is due to the Legislature detailing individual court plans to maintain or increase public access. At its meeting Tuesday the committee discussed the message to convey: that while the courts are grateful for the increase, it’s merely a drop in the bucket toward a fully-funded judiciary.
Some judges suggested the report should put an emphasis on the need for more.
“I would urge that the template capture the notion that perhaps we would not have to cut something additional as opposed to restoring services. It’s not clear to me that the Legislature understands that this will not enable us to restore services on a massive scale but to stave off further cuts,” Goode said.
“If you can restore some services, it would clearly be on a limited basis until you know what will happen next year,” Presiding Judge Marsha Slough of San Bernardino added.
“All that money is going to do is reduce our furlough days from 27 to 21,” Presiding Judge Thomas DeSantos of Kings County said. In an interview afterward, he added, “We understand that everyone is hurting, but we’re balancing the budget on the backs of our employees.”
Others pushed for greater emphasis on the positive.
“Report that you are increasing services because you are reducing furlough days,” Earl said. “Report it in the positive so they can see we’re able to eliminate certain furloughs which will enable us to get more work done, but it may be on a limited basis if we can’t get more money next year. This is an advocacy opportunity to show how the $60 million will impact us but it’s not quite enough — that we need more to be able to fully restore access to justice.”
—————————————————————————————————————–
And the AOC pukes will be seeking an augmentation to their already bloated bureaucratic team. The hubris is unmatched anywhere. What would benefit the majority of the people would be the restoration of the trial courts. Hey, Jer, have mercy, please. Funnel some money to the trial courts and bypassing the greedy gut admin. Yes, bypass the admin of the trial courts too …
Thank you for covering this continuing train wreck, Maria Dinzeo. Long live the ACJ!
unionman575
July 10, 2013
We are the gleam of John Henry’s hammer, pounding away at the dense collected shit ahead. We will hold all people and entities accountable for their deeds and maintain a level of integrity unmatched.
Understand it is mediocrity we disdain.
The OBT
July 11, 2013
Finke is not the bad guy in this story. Finke in my experience is always reasonable and friendly. He is just following orders. What the legislature, ACJ and public need to focus on are the roles of HRH-2, J Miller and J Hull in blocking legitimate requests for public information. There is no question that any member of the public is entitled to know how a government entity like the AOC spends public money.The fact that he AOC might look bad again doesn’t change the right to the information. Hull’s role in all this is even more troubling. He has no statutory mandate to be the gatekeeper of AOC secrets. He has no statutory mandate to delay and frustrate reasonable requests for public information. He is using his power as a Court of Appeal Justice to chill and suppress dissent in a what should be an open and democratic governmental process. Based on the above he has demeaned the role of the judiciary and therefore should be the subject of a full and complete CJP investigation. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for that to happen as the overlords and insiders at 455 Golden Gate always seem to get a pass for their ” misconduct” .
Lando
July 11, 2013
Wendy and OBT are right. None of this obstruction occurs without the full sanction and support of the Chief Justice. Her credibility is now in question all across the state. All of the above just fuels the fire about her competence and integrity. I know the legislature is watching. The efforts to block reasonable and legitimate public information requests are just further examples of why the JC/AOC needs to be radically defunded.
Michael Paul
July 11, 2013
It’s abundantly clear that she has no credibility. The SEC strategic delay coupled with authorizing a barely re-orged AOC with undertaking a workload and compensation study without a single person on the judicial council saying “Hey, wait a sec… shouldn’t we be waiting for full implementation of the SEC report” is shameful.
Attempts at floating concepts at the council level of being more transparent and more accountable are at best laughable when we learn almost daily that business as usual continues -or worse- they make a greater effort of being less transparent and less accountable by passing more draconian rules of court to shut down transparency and accountability.
This is all no secret to the thousands of court workers across the state or AOC employees – and even hundreds of judges and a few justices.Her administration has been as consistent as a bowel movement in touting transparency and accountability while delivering approximately the same end result.
While the FBI kicks in the doors of legislators and charter schools, the separate but equal branch seemingly gets a free pass while the 20,000 people below the leadership look on in utter disbelief wanting to know if our state government has gone so far down the corruption rabbit hole that we can’t even recognize all of the telltale signs anymore. We wonder if the other two branches and the feds are really that stupid.
Wendy Darling
July 11, 2013
“We wonder if the other two branches and the Feds are really that stupid.”
No, they are not that stupid. The other two branches and the Feds have all been fully informed of the fraud, both literal and administrative, going on in the judicial branch and have been provided with supporting documentation. Volumes of it. They have chosen to look the other way and not do anything about it. Intentionally. And those in charge at 455 Golden Gate Avenue know this, that they’re as good as Teflon and no one can touch them. It is exactly why branch “leadership” continues to act as they do. Such as with the ACJ’s public information requests, or anything else they don’t want to answer for. They act with impunity because they know that no one with any real authority won’t do anything about it.
Again, none of this is happening without the full knowledge, consent, approval, and blessing of the Office of the Chief Justice. This is her “leadership”.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
Note to the State Legislature: don’t be expecting any State employees at 455 Golden Gate Avenue to come forward anymore and report the unlawful behavior going on in the judicial branch. They have all witnessed what has happened to those that have tried, while all of you sat back and watched people’s lives ruined for telling the truth, like it was some kind of a sporting event.
unionman575
July 11, 2013
http://recalltani.wordpress.com/
unionman575
July 11, 2013
unionman575
July 11, 2013
http://www.metnews.com/articles/2013/alliance071113.htm