Last week the Alliance of California Judges celebrated its fourth anniversary.
The Alliance was formed by 28 judges from around the state on September 11, 2009, after a handpicked Judicial Council had unanimously voted for the first time in history to close the state’s trial courts one day each month. That vote masked the real reason behind closing courtrooms. While the state budget was imploding due to the recession, those same Council members were diverting millions of dollars from our local courts to fund the most expensive computer debacle in California history, CCMS, a project designed to put the trial courts more and more under the control of the Administrative Office of the Courts and a few select judges. This move was accompanied by a secretly drafted trailer bill at the close of that year’s budget designed to completely undo the priority of local court administration. The Alliance brought these efforts into the arena of public scrutiny.
The Alliance is now a group of 500 judges of this state. The Alliance continues to grow because we are dedicated to being a voice for the independent judges of this state in ensuring responsible local management of our courts by elected judges. We are committed to making open courts, meaningful access and the fair adjudication of disputes the first priorities of the Judicial Branch. In leading the way for reform, we have demonstrated the need for a group of judges who think independently and who recognize that the idea of “speaking with one voice” is too often a mantra for stifling dissent and covering up incompetence.
The Alliance was a key player in achieving a vote of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee that resulted in an audit of the CCMS project. This devastating audit eventually brought the ill-conceived and poorly executed project to an end, although that did not happen until the Judicial Council had wasted more than half a billion dollars of public money over the continuing objections of the Alliance.
The CCMS fiasco was only possible because the Judicial Council spent funds appropriated for trial court operations on statewide projects without the consent of the affected courts, even though the authorizing statute required otherwise. This led to the Alliance sponsoring AB 1208 to limit Judicial Council discretion over trial court funds. This initiative, bitterly opposed by the Chief Justice and her unelected Judicial Council, successfully resulted in new legislation within last year’s Budget Act that required that money approved for trial court operations be delivered to the trial courts unless otherwise specifically approved by the Legislature. This budget bill also officially ended CCMS. Further, the bill required for the first time that the Judicial Council separately reveal the budget items where trial court trust funds were used for statewide purposes, as opposed to delivery to the local courts.
The Alliance brought to light many abuses and inefficiencies of the Judicial Facilities Construction Program which were later detailed in part by the Pegasus report. Our complaints about the bloat and excess of the AOC led to the formation of the Chief Justice’s Strategic Evaluation Committee, whose report vindicated the Alliance criticisms and has prompted some initial efforts at reform.
Your Board of Directors thanks you for your support. The task is not done. Although the SEC Report was a beginning, the AOC continues to be an overfunded and bloated organization that has grown far beyond its intended purpose. The AOC continues to consume funds and resources that need to be redirected to local trial court operations.
The state has terminated over 2500 local court employees and closed 80 courthouses. In the next year we will continue to advocate for a complete reevaluation of the function of the AOC and Judicial Council with respect to trial court funding. We will urge a complete audit of the funds in AOC control. The statutory mandates of the AOC have never been thoroughly reviewed.
Our message is simple. Every program must be reevaluated to ask the question, “Is this function more important than keeping our local courts open?” If the answer is “No,” then that function needs to be decommissioned or reduced, and the available funds promptly redirected to local court funding.
The following audit questions demand an answer: (1) how is money specifically allocated by program or purpose, (2) is each program or purpose economically administered in line with comparable agency and business best practices, and (3) should this program have priority equal to or greater than trial court funding? The Chief Justice’s handpicked Judicial Council has proven itself wholly incapable of asking these important questions.
As we mature and grow as an organization we will endeavor to keep you and our fellow judges informed and involved. The elected judges of this state will be held responsible for the adequate functions of our branch and we must accept that responsibility. The days of unelected bureaucrats and appointed Judicial Council members placing their favored programs and misplaced priorities ahead of open courtrooms and meaningful access to justice must end. We will continue to ask your support in achieving that goal through a detailed audit of the AOC and democratization of the Judicial Council.
Directors, Alliance of California Judges
Alliance of California Judges
P.O. Box 2877, Sacramento, CA 95812
______________________________________________________________________________________________
We wish to thank the Alliance of California Judges for being the voice for so many that are silenced by circumstance and for their continuing efforts to fight the good fight in an effort to preserve access to our justice system. While we had hoped to already have witnessed radical transformation in the Judicial Council and the AOC all we’ve witnessed is a game of musical chairs and change that no one believes in.
We have a Yugo stripped of its engine and up on jack stands being passed off as a Ferrari in the garage that we can’t afford the gas to.
We’ve just completed what is likely the worlds most expensive courthouse in terms of what is paid monthly and no one will ever see a return on that investment except for the private investors.
We have discovered that the AOC is paying millions of dollars to corporations, LLC’s and LLP’s that don’t even legally exist.
The work of reforming this bloated bureaucracy is far from over and any change requires your continued support of those trying to make a difference, be it your local union, your judicial alliance or just being a reader here at JCW.
Related articles
- AOC pay raises hurt branch credibility, undermine efforts to restore court funding (judicialcouncilwatcher.com)
- AOC’s Proposed Wish List Excludes Additional Trial Court Staffing, Includes Additional AOC Staffing (judicialcouncilwatcher.com)
- Is the AOC is contracting with entities that don’t appear to legally exist? (judicialcouncilwatcher.com)
Judicial Council Watcher 
Wendy Darling
September 18, 2013
“The AOC continues to be an overfunded and bloated organization that has grown far beyond its intended purpose. The AOC continues to consume funds and resources that need to be redirected to local trial court operations.”
Yep and yep. The AOC also continues to be a place where a lack of ethics is essential for promotion, misappropriation of public funds is a best practice, and a willingness to break the law is a highly desired and rewarded job skill.
And a place where diluting the autonomy of the trial courts continues to be the number one priority.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
MaxRebo5
September 18, 2013
Great post and happy 4th to the Alliance of CA Judges! As one of the 2,500 local court employees laid off in the past few years I am very glad the Alliance continues to speak out about the waste at AOC the the JC. Keep it up!
I hope college students and law students start to follow this page. The next time you see the Chief on your campus maybe stop asking her softball questions like “How can I become the Chief Justice someday?” Asking the Chief how she got her job is sort of like asking a lottery winner how he/she did it. Pretty much dumb luck was involved and the odds it will happen to you are very very low. Course in Tani’s case Ron George was heavily involved in selecting his successor (highly unusual).
Instead, I suggest asking her some questions that affect all CA residents using the California Courts, expose hypocracy, or that relate to regular court employees which you might have a realistic chance to become one day (assuming trial courts can get back to being funded properly). For example, how do you defend the fact that all of the members of Judicial Councl are appointed by the Chief Justice alone? Doesn’t that lead to round table of yes men and cheerleaders who support whatever the Chief or his/her unelected bureaucrats at the AOC want done? Whatever her answer is some follow up questions are:
Didn’t that system lead to the Judicial Council seeking 2 billion for a computer sytem (CCMS) and the legislature funded $500 million but had to pull the plug because the state auditor found it was so mismanaged? Hasn’t this left the courts without a case management system? Won’t the CA taxpayers have to pay for something else now in addition to the $500 million already wasted?
Didn’t the legislature tell you to seek Bill Vicrkey’s resignation over CCMS and then you got mad at them for telling you how to manage your branch? Why didn’t you promote Ron Overholt to be the next State Court Administrator? He was the Deputy Director for like 10 years wasn’t he? Was he too tainted by CCMS and ties to Vickrey’s style? If those two had to go, why did you then name the JC conference room after Bill Vickrey and create an award in his honor? Do you ever think this sends a mixed message to future generations (the legislature wanted them fired and you wanted them honored)? Do you ever feel bad $500 million was wasted leaving the CA courts without a computer system? How is this policy making system that you control 100% working well for the people of CA? What is so important that you are unwilling to democratize the judicial council? How come you don’t talk about these mistakes of the past openly to the Legislature in your state of the Judiciary address?
Or try this: Didn’t the JC approve pushing for 5 billion in bonds to build courthouses during the great recession and didn’t you get that money? Do you think that action to push for funding for new courthouses made it harder to protect the 2,500 court employees who got laid off at the trial court level? Do you ever feel bad like the JC threw loyal court employees and their families under the bus with that approach? If you do feel bad, what efforts are you making to try and rehire those 2,500 employees who where laid off, through no fault of their own, as the economy slowly improves? Do you ever feel bad that 1 billion of the five you got is going to pay for one courthouse (Long Beach)?
Didn’t your own SEC Report call for the AOC to be moved out of San Francisco to more affordable office space in Sacramento? Whatever happened with that idea? Was there ever a public report on the cost benefits of such a move for the taxpayers of CA? Or did you just shelve that idea and pretend like it was never made? The Alliance wants the JC to ask, “Is this function more important than keeping our local courts open?” Seems reasonable. Do you think the AOC in SF can survive this basic queston? If you did just shelve this part of the SEC report, do you ever feel bad that there will be less jobs at local trial courts and less access for the public to fund a few really highly paid AOC employees and expensive office space in San Francisco?
Thanks for the forum JCW. Happy Birthday Alliance of California Judges. Fight on!
Wendy Darling
September 18, 2013
Why do you continue to tolerate, endorse, support, and ratify the conduct of AOC administration for punishing people for telling the truth?
Long live the ACJ.
R. Campomadera
September 18, 2013
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2013-09-18/
Here’s the question I would ask the Chief Justice if I had the chance:
Has it ever occurred to you that if you were to actually reform the JC and AOC and, in every other action you take, do what’s truly right for the California Judiciary, that you would be hailed as the greatest Chief Justice in recent memory? No, I guess not. Well then…go ahead…live in the shadow of the former chief judge and continue to sink into disgrace along with him. I can assure you that history will view his administration, and your fatuous emulation thereof, as the absolute low ebb of the California Judiciary. Carry on.
Wendy Darling
September 18, 2013
Well said and exactly right, R. Campomadera. Especially the “continue to sink into disgrace” part.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
R. Campomadera
September 18, 2013
Obviously, I meant “Chief Justice”, not Chief Judge.
The OBT
September 18, 2013
All great posts and comments above. MaxRebo nailed it as no one at the Judicial Council or AOC will ever accept any amount of responsibility for any of their numerous blunders. All here should remember that HRH-1 and his supporters including J Bruiners actively sought to derail the proposal to audit CCMS. Had they prevented that audit the Judicial Council and AOC would have continued to waste millions on their failed software system. When CCMS crashed and burned did anyone at the Judicial Council or AOC accept responsibility for the waste of 500 million dollars ? 500 million dollars ! Had that money not been wasted would 2,500 hardworking trial court employees have lost their jobs ? Would courthouses been closed all over the state? Would vital and needed services trial courts provide to the public been radically reduced? I think we know the answers to those questions. The solution is simple yet powerful. Defund the Judicial Council and AOC and direct branch funding directly to the trial courts.
Lando
September 19, 2013
Btw what ever happened to the SEC recommendation to close down the crystal palace at 455 Golden Gate and move to more modest digs in Sacramento? What about the waste of $ spent on the Long Beach courthouse? I have learned recently that Patel and company travel quite extensively on the taxpayers dime. What and where are they going too? Why do they travel at all when the trial courts are constantly reduced ? OBT is right the solution is easy neat and clean. Pull the AOC’s funding and reduce the Judicial Council to a chattering class of elites with no money and therefore no further power. .
unionman575
September 19, 2013
Defund the AOC.
Recall Tani.
R. Campomadera
September 19, 2013
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/09/19/5748091/viewpoints-we-need-more-civic.html
Dear Chief Justice,
I think it is wonderful that you are so concerned about the education of coming generations in the intricacies and complexities of our republican form of government. It’s obviously a passion for you. In normal times, it might be a perfectly noble and wonderful thing for the Chief Justice of the largest court system in the nation to be doing. But these aren’t normal times.
The problem is, you weren’t appointed to be a high school civics teacher. The branch that you are the administrative head of is falling apart under your leadership. While you’re out proselytizing the youth of the Republic to pay more attention to Ben Franklin than their video games, 2,500 court employees have lost their jobs, dozens of courthouses have been shuttered, hundreds of millions of dollars have been completely wasted on a misguided computer system, services to litigants and the general public have been drastically curtailed, and a bloated, ineffective bureaucracy, with its executive staff flitting all over the state, continues to waste money that could be redirected to the trial courts.
I’m pretty sure Ben Franklin, were he still kicking around, would tell you to tend to your assigned responsibilities before taking on extra-curricular activities, noble though they might be.
Sincerely yours,
A Concerned Citizen
Wendy Darling
September 19, 2013
Just remember, R Campomadera, that nothing has happened in the California Judicial Branch in the last three plus years without the consent, blessing, endorsement, and approval of the Office of the Chief Justice. Nothing.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
R. Campomadera
September 19, 2013
Well, that is the flip side of being a dictator, isn’t it? She should spend less time spouting off about how to be a responsible citizen of the republic and instead spend more time studying her history books…she would discover that dictatorships never turn out well.
It is deliciously ironic that she goes all over the state preaching the blessings of democracy, while carrying out her administrative duties as Chief Justice in a most undemocratic fashion. Sort of diminishes the impact of her message, don’t you think? Too bad more people don’t realize what a total hypocrite she really is.
unionman575
September 19, 2013
http://www.metnews.com/articles/2013/stats091813.htm
MaxRebo5
September 19, 2013
Metnews has a nice story about the workload of the courts. Great to see some press on the cases courts have to deal with. They do a good job of not editorializing stories so it was a little dry for my taste. It failed to mention that trial courts around the state are getting by with the same case levels but have 2.500 fewer staff to process them, most courts also have fewer hours to serve the public, fewer courthouses are actually open at all, and no new computer system is there to help in any of them. Tani will likely give out a Vickrey award (I suggest it be a statue of a person dropping dollar bills and a computer into a toilet) to someone at the AOC sometime soon for all the yes responses that person gave out. Tani will of couse say “Great job team! Raises for all at I can help at the AOC!!! Hang in here everyone during the tough times till I can get you back to telecommuting from home (or Europe) in earnest. By the way, this courthouse is kinda dull. Where’s a cool college scene I can hang out at? Gosh I could use some Grey Goose. Is it Friday yet? Kudos all around! ”
Cheers of approval erupt from the chamber. Post of puking appear on JCW. So it goes. lol
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Page 1
Court Filings Down, but Felonies, Mental Health Cases Continue to Rise—Judicial Council Report
By a MetNews Staff Writer
Filings in the California superior courts decreased in Fiscal Year 2011–2012 but remain unchanged over a 10-year period, according to a report released yesterday by the California Judicial Council.
The annual Court Statistics Report, available on the state courts website, says there were 8.5 million case filings for the year, down 9.8 percent from FY 2010-2011. But most of the decline was in the simplest types of cases—misdemeanors and infractions, and small claims and limited jurisdiction civil cases. Felony filings increased slightly, and filings in mental health cases increased by 11 percent, which represents a growing caseload for those case types over the last 10 years, the report said.
The chair of a major Judicial Council committee said it was too soon to draw conclusions about what the statistics mean in the context of the courts’ future.
“The Court Statistics Report is a useful reference document that provides an annual snapshot of statewide filings data and indicates multi-year trends,” Fourth District Court of Appeal Justice Douglas Miller, chair of the Executive and Planning Committee, said in a statement accompanying the release of the report.
“The raw data raises questions that require more in-depth analysis before drawing any conclusions,” Miller continued. “Although we’re uncertain about the conclusions, council members and our justice system partners are certain about how budget cuts have affected the public and have impacted access to justice—including reduced hours and closed courtrooms, fewer law enforcement officers on the street, and the reallocation of resources to focus on certain case types or services.”
Highlights of the report include:
•The state Supreme Court issued 87 written opinions during the fiscal year, 29 of them in death penalty cases. There were 18 death penalty appeals filed during that period.
•Nearly 22,000 contested matters were filed in the Court of Appeal, specifically 13,498 appeals with records and 8,396 original proceedings. A total of 24,215 matters—15,531 appeals and 8,684 original proceedings—were disposed of, including 10,097 appeals with written opinions, 3,485 appeals without written opinions, 1,949 appeals without a record filed, 572 original proceedings with written opinions, and 8,112 original proceedings without written opinion.
Eight percent of majority opinions were published.
•Superior court case filings across all case categories totaled 8,498,331. A total of 10,006 jury trials and 467,649 court trials were recorded across all case types, including 196,994 unlimited jurisdiction civil cases; 603,097 limited civil cases; 183,957 small claims cases; 243,270 felony cases; 1,047,594 misdemeanor cases; 5,607,727 infraction accusations; 160,593 marital cases; 277,207 other family law cases; 62,937 juvenile delinquency matters; 39,040 dependency cases; 5,008 appeals; 8,483 habeas corpus petitions; 19,643 mental health matters; and 42,781 probate matters.
•A total of 10,007 jury trials were recorded across all case types. Jury trials held in the superior courts included 5,300 felony; 3,002 misdemeanor; 1,172 civil unlimited; 509 civil limited; and 24 probate and mental health cases.
•A total of 467,649 court trials were recorded across all case types, excluding small claims. These included 615 felony; 368,093 misdemeanor and infraction; 23,323 civil unlimited,; 47,330 civil limited; and 28,288 probate and mental health cases. A total of 111,963 small claims court trials were recorded.
•The Los Angeles Superior Court recorded 2,524,252 case filings of all types, an average of 4,306 per fulltime judicial officer, ranking 17th among the 58 counties. Dispositions totaled 2,534,267, or 4,245 per fulltime judicial officer, ranking 14th.
•A total of 104,969 court trials were held in Los Angeles County, not including small claims. Thirty of these were in felony cases; 72,502 in misdemeanors and infractions; 181 in unlimited jurisdiction personal injury, property damage, or wrongful death cases; 4,972 in other unlimited civil cases; 15,241 in limited civil cases; and 12,043 in probate and mental health cases.
•There were 3,212 jury trials in the county, including 1,911 in felony cases; 678 for misdemeanors; 317 in unlimited jurisdiction personal injury, property damage, or wrongful death cases; 161 in other unlimited civil cases; and 145 in limited civil cases. There were no probate or mental health jury trials.
Copyright 2013, Metropolitan News Company
unionman575
September 19, 2013
MaxRebo5
September 19, 2013
Nice image unionman. Feeling like I’ve been twerked myself so I made my own version of the Miley Cyrus hit song “We Can’t Stop”. Download Miley’s song and sing along to the Tani version below. It’s pretty catchy. lol
It’s our courts we can do what we want
It’s our council we can say what we want
It’s our branch we can F*ck over who we want
We can dismiss who we want
We see what we want (2x)
Grey Goose and fancy meetings everywhere
Hands in the air with yes votes like Jahr head over there
Cause we came to have so much fun now
Bet somebody round the AOC might get a raise now
If you’re not onboard go home
Democratize the council? Can I get a hell no!
Cause our “meetings” go all night
Step on those ants. Alright!
So la da di da di, we like to party
“Working” for Tani
Doing whatever we want
This is our branch
This is our rules
And we can’t stop
And we won’t stop
Can’t you see it’s we who own the branch
Can’t you see it we who control it outright
And we can’t stop
And we won’t stop
We run things, Things don’t run we
Don’t take nothing from nobody, yeah
It’s our courts we can do what we want
It’s our council we can say what we want
It’s our branch we can F*ck over who we want
We can dismiss who we want
We see what we want (2x)
To my council members with their noses up my butt
That’s the only way to join this club
Remember only I can judge ya
Forget the Alliance cause I own ya
And everyone in line for promotions
Try to get a line going for promotions
We all so arrogant up here
Raise a fee on the press, yeah, yeah
So la da di da di, we like to party
“Working” for Tani
Doing whatever we want
This is our branch
This is our rules
And we can’t stop
And we won’t stop
Can’t you see it’s we who own the branch
Can’t you see it we who control it outright
And we can’t stop
And we won’t stop
We run things, Things don’t run we
We don’t take nothing from nobody
It’s our courts we can do what we want
It’s our council we can say what we want
It’s our branch we can F*ck over who we want
We can dismiss who we want
We choose to see what we want
It’s our courts we can do what we want to
It’s our council we can say what we want to
It’s our branch we can F*ck over who we want to
It’s your mouth better pucker up if I want you to get ahead
Yea, Yea, Yeah
And we can’t stop
And we won’t stop
Can’t you see it’s we who own the branch
Can’t you see its we who control it outright
And we can’t stop
And we won’t stop
We run things
Things don’t run we
We’re accountable to nobody
Yea, Yea, Yeah!
unionman575
September 21, 2013
I like it.
😉
Wendy Darling
September 19, 2013
That’s pretty funny, MaxRebo5.
It’d be funnier if it weren’t so true.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
September 21, 2013
And now a word from the Ministry of Truthiness…oh excuse me, the Death Star’s very own, very special, “Stranger to the Truth” Curt Child…way to go big guy…get me a bucket…
http://www.modbee.com/2013/09/19/2930197/court-officer-courthouse-site.html
Court officer: Courthouse site being handled correctly
Published: September 19, 2013
As noted in your Sept. 15 editorial, Stanislaus County urgently needs a new courthouse. Because of the state’s fiscal crisis, the Modesto project has undergone numerous delays. The site selection process has been reviewed by the court and the project’s community advisory group – which has been working with the state project team for nearly three years – as well as the State Public Works Board. The process has also been repeatedly covered in your newspaper. Restarting the process now would further delay this much-needed courthouse project, add to taxpayer expense and possibly jeopardize the project’s future funding.
The preferred site, which has numerous advantages for court users, underwent an environmental analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. The state found no significant environmental effects that would require expenditure of public dollars on a full environmental impact report. It is not accurate to say that the state “exempted themselves from CEQA,” as the state followed well-established CEQA guidelines.
The site met the criteria for an infill exemption, so the state publicly filed a Notice of Exemption with the State Clearinghouse. The notice is easily accessible on the Office of Policy and Research’s website, the CEQAnet Database, at http://www.ceqanet.ca.gov/QueryForm.asp, using State Clearinghouse number 2013088383.
In addition, the state is completing on-site tests for any possible hazardous waste issues. However, results of these studies must remain confidential until real estate negotiations are completed. This is in keeping with the state’s Public Records Act, which exempts real estate records until transactions are completed. To get the best deal for the taxpayers and respect private property rights, particularly when private sellers are involved, some aspects of real estate negotiations must be held confidential while negotiations are in progress. The state, the Stanislaus Superior Court and the city of Modesto are working toward the best possible courthouse for Stanislaus County and Modesto residents.
Curtis L. Child
Chief Operating Officer,
Administrative Office of the Courts
Sacramento
unionman575
September 21, 2013
http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/article/20130918/NEWS/309180023/Dedication-set-new-Tulare-County-courthouse?gcheck=1&nclick_check=1
Tea time is at 11:00 a.m. on 10-7-13 at the new South County Justice Center at 300 E. Olive Ave. in Porterville.
😉
unionman575
September 21, 2013
This goes out to the 2500 + dedicated Trial Court Employees that are now unemployed thanks to Tani & Company’s branch mismanagement…
unionman575
September 21, 2013
And now a financial word from Mendocino Superior about LACK OF OPERATING FUNDS…
http://www.willitsnews.com/localnews/ci_24122943/mendocino-county-court-budget-figures-available
Mendocino County court budget figures available
By The Willits News staff
Posted: 09/18/2013 11:25:25 AM PDT
The Mendocino County Superior Court on Wednesday announced it has more than $7 million to pay for its countywide court operations for fiscal year 2013-14.
According to the court, the $7 million includes a carryover balance of $1.2 million left over from fiscal year 2012-13. The new budget forecasts a year end $687,000 fund balance as the court spends about $517,000 than it is taking in.
The court announced in November that, because of a lack of funds, it could no longer hold jury trials, hearings in felony cases, criminal proceedings with in-custody defendants or any juvenile matters at its Ten Mile branch in Fort Bragg. The court later rescinded the announcement in the face of a Mendocino Coast community-wide response opposing any reduction in court services on the coast.
Salaries account for $4.6 million of the new budget and operating expenses and equipment is $1.4 million. Jury costs are projected to be $36,000.
No budgeted expenditures were included for capital improvements in the budget as presented.
The notice and proposed budget are available at the court’s website, http://www.mendocino.courts.ca.gov.
The court will decide whether to adopt its 2013-14 budget on Sept. 20.
unionman575
September 21, 2013
Tunnel anyone?
“A tunnel will connect the courthouse to the Kings County Jail”
Who will pay for the Kings County Jail tunnel?
Hmm…perhaps the Tooth Fairy.
I seem to recall the White Elephant (Long Beach) does not have a tunnel and the jail birds are getting van rides from Long Beach PD to the White Elephant.
😉
http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/09/20/3508985/judges-hold-groundbreaking-for.html
Judges hold groundbreaking for Kings County courthouse
Published: September 20, 2013
By Lewis Griswold — The Fresno Bee
California Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvin Baxter joined Kings County judges Friday at a groundbreaking ceremony for a new courthouse in Hanford.
The planned four-story building with basement and secure parking will house 12 courtrooms. A tunnel will connect the courthouse to the Kings County Jail.
Construction of the $120 million project begins next month, and the courthouse is expected to open in spring 2015.
The state Administrative Office of the Courts is building several courthouses around the state, including the South Valley Justice Center in Porterville that opens next month. Construction costs are funded by court fees.
The Kings County courthouse is designed by DLR Group based in Orlando, Fla.; the builder is SUNDT Construction of Tempe, Ariz.
Judges from Fresno and Tulare counties attended the ceremony
Judicial Council Watcher
September 21, 2013
Tunnel, Anyone? Let’s see… tunnel promises in Long Beach and San Diego to win approval…Imagine Lucy as the AOC…..and kicking the football as a tunnel to the jail.
Wendy Darling
September 21, 2013
“Imagine Lucy as the AOC” . . . boy, that’s not hard at all. Especially one person in particular.
Long live the A C J.
unionman575
September 22, 2013
Perhaps the AOC can look here for tunnel work:
Tony Maino
September 24, 2013
During the past four years the Alliance of California Judges has squarely faced this question:
What does a judge or a justice do when judicial leadership is incompetent or inadequate?
Many judges are hooked on collegial solutions. Because of the semi- hierarchical nature of our profession we are loath to make waves and to take our judicial leadership to task. It is not in our natures to publically be in opposition to our leadership.
The ACJ exists because we refuse to be complicit in the decline of the judiciary. We refuse to speak with one voice with judicial leadership that has failed to serve the needs of all Californians. We know that each of us has an individual responsibility to work for a judiciary that is responsible, transparent, reasonably democratic and well run. We cannot avoid this individual responsibility because of our desire to get along with each other. We are not content to alter this responsibility by listening to and agreeing with our betters as they put forth some new fad, slogan. buzzword, or fact sheet which. to us, seems designed to distract the public from what is happening.
What is happening is that the judicial branch has lost the confidence of the public, the Governor, the Legislature, and the media. We are not trusted to spend the public’s money with prudence. We are not seen as a transparent branch of the government which is responsive to the needs of everyone in California.
I leave you all with this thought: to the best of my knowledge there is no judiciary in the United States that has a group of judges and justices who are publically in opposition to their Chief Justice, their Judicial Council or governing body, and to the bureaucracy that supports their Chief Justice and their governing body. The fact that we exist and thrive is proof that there is something deeply dysfunctional in our leadership.
I for one will welcome the day in which the ACJ does not need to exist. Many of us thought that with the end of the reign of Chief Justice Ronald George that prompt reform was possible and probable. This has not happened and it does not appear likely to happen so I suspect in another four years we will be talking about our eighth anniversary.
Tony Maino
San Diego
Wendy Darling
September 24, 2013
“What is happening is that the judicial branch has lost the confidence of the public, the Governor, the Legislature, and the media. We are not trusted to spend the public’s money with prudence. We are not seen as a transparent branch of the government which is responsive to the needs of everyone in California. ”
Sadly, Judge Maino, judicial branch administration (both past and current) has rightfully earned this reputation, because they have, and continue to, waste the public’s money, they are not transparent, and the public, the Governor, the Legislature, and the media, all know that current judicial branch administration is comprised of liars, thugs, and thieves.
Long live the ACJ.
Lando
September 24, 2013
Judge Maino is a a tremendous public servant. His fair and balanced comments say it all. No government structure that is essentially a dictatorship will ever succeed. Ronald George took and destroyed a judicial system of governance that was built upon Judges representing their communities. The decentralized system of governance was effective as it was close to the citizens we serve. Innovation, respect for local legal culture and acceptance of responsibility were the hallmarks of a judicial system that worked for hundreds of years. Ronald George and his minion Bill Vickrey and company changed all that for their own benefit and quest for power. The results- waste of billions of California taxpayer dollars and no acceptance of responsibility for that. Our current Chief, like Ronald George before her is only interested in maintaining power which has led to further failures, courthouse closures, layoffs of over 2,000 people, radical cutbacks in accessing the courts, continued waste of taxpayer dollars and a new system of blocking legitimate public information requests through the disgraceful actions of Justice Harry Hull.The legislature is aware of all of this. They need to act and the solution is the defunding of the Judicial Council and AOC. That would end the tyranny of a dictatorship that no one ever approved of or asked for.
The OBT
September 25, 2013
“A dictatorship that no one ever approved of or asked for” . So true Lando. HRH-1 highjacked the Trial Court funding legislation of 1998 for his own power creating an anti- democratic state judicial system . Any and all dissent was suppressed. Any calls for democracy were met with HRH-1’s claim that would be declaration of war on him. HRH-2 while claiming to be more transparent is equally obsessed with her power and belief she has to in her words protect the legacy of the “great Ron George”. She also allows and no doubt encourages the oppressive actions of her minion J Hull who appears to enjoy his role as HRH-2’s “enforcer”. What a disgrace to what was once a proud and strong judiciary.
unionman575
September 25, 2013
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/california/California-Drives-Up-Traffic-Fines-with-Fees-Earmarked-for-Projects-225113812.html
Judicial Council Watcher
September 25, 2013
Penalty assessments – a method of raising taxes by calling them something different, thereby setting aside the supermajority required to raise taxes.
As the article alludes to, as the fines grow, the lines grow and the state ends up collecting less and less from people who can least afford these whopping, overpriced fines.
R. Campomadera
September 25, 2013
It would be bad enough if the local courts were able to use these assessments to directly offset reductions in appropriated funds so as to keep the doors open and avoid layoffs of staff. Instead, they fuel the beast in San Francisco, allowing it continue to waste millions on ill-conceived pet projects. It’s an outrage from so many different perspectives.
Judicial Council Watcher
September 25, 2013
Since the amount of penalty assessments dwarf the fine for the offense maybe we should be calling traffic court the road tax court. It would be a more accurate description than traffic court.
MaxRebo5
September 25, 2013
Interesting editorial in the Sac Bee:
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/09/24/5762190/editorial-brown-should-veto-bill.html
I wish the Sac Bee would write an editorial condemning the Chief Justice for not democratizing the Judicial Council (JC). There is a great deal to talk about in terms of reform needed in the policy making body for the California Courts. There are many examples of how the current system is not working well. Here is my own short list and it could be much longer:
• CCMS – $500 million spent before the legislature stopped it
• Seeking to raising fees on the Press
• The closed nature of the Judicial Council to requests for information
• Attempting to eliminate the power of local Presiding Judges
• Long Beach Courthouse costs
• AOC telecommute scandal
• AOC raises
• AOC having 1,000 employees – very removed from processing cases and resolving disputes for the public.
• AOC leaders who don’t see themselves reporting to anyone
• Most of the AOC “leaders” who were in charge during the scandals are all still there with new titles
• The Chief not really implementing the SEC Report (for example moving the AOC to Sacramento to save $)
• The JC pushing for 5 billion in new courthouses and then trial courts had to close existing courts all over the state plus lay off over 2,000 trial court employees.
• The basic inappropriateness of a branch of government that is all about a fair process (not outcomes) having a dictatorship in its policy making body (which controls the branch budget, legislation, rules, facility $, etc).
I agree with Tony Maino’s great point that there is nothing like the ACJ in any other state and would add there is nothing like the JCW either as an online forum critical of the way CA Courts are being run. The point I would like the Bee or any other editorial boards to get is the JC opposing a bill means much less if it is a body controlled by one person. Currently the JC is not a body of independent judges who represent the various interests within the branch. They are appointed by the Chief for their loyalty and they vote accordingly. Look at the votes!
The Bee’s current editorial should simply state that the Chief Justice opposes a bill because that’s pretty much what it means to me when someone says the “Judicial Council” opposes a new law. The JC being dominated entirely by the Chief Justice is a bad fit for the judicial branch and it isn’t working well either! It’s also a far far bigger issue than one bill this year impacting a few court reporters.
Judicial Council Watcher
September 25, 2013
A few comments and replies were deleted by the request of their authors
As not to detract from the continuity of the thread, requests were groomed as well.
Yen Moderation Team
unionman575
September 25, 2013
http://www.courts.ca.gov/23539.htm
Get me a bucket.
unionman575
September 25, 2013
http://www.courts.ca.gov/23553.htm
Get me a second bucket.
unionman575
September 25, 2013
We interviewed a number of fine internal and external candidates for the position,” said Administrative Director of the Courts Steven Jahr. “Debbie’s legal acumen, experience, and leadership skills make her eminently well-qualified to serve as chief counsel. I’m confident that under her leadership, our Legal Services Office will continue to provide exemplary service to the Judicial Council, the courts, and the AOC.”
Wendy Darling
September 26, 2013
Proving once again, Unionman, that the more things “change” at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, the more things really just stay the same.
Long live the ACJ.
R. Campomadera
September 26, 2013
Here’s an interesting article by Jon Ortiz in this morning’s Sacramento Bee on the necessary environment for successful public sector IT programs. John Conomy, the top tech officer for the Ohio Department of Public Safety, says it’s fear. Having lead public sector IT efforts for decades, I think he’s spot on.
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/09/26/5768852/lessons-from-ohios-state-tech.html#storylink=cpy
It’s instructive that the aborted CCMS project fails Conomy’s criteria in every respect: there was no hard and fast deadline for its completion, there was effectively no limit on how much money the JC/AOC had to throw at the project, there was no sense of ownership by the judiciary as the heavy lifting was outsourced to a consultant, and it was designed and sold as the ultimate be-all, do-all solution.
In short, since judicial leaders knew no one would be held accountable should CCMS fail, there was no fear. Still isn’t. More than $500 million dollars has been utterly and completely wasted. Those responsible have not been held accountable. There is no fear.
Wendy Darling
September 26, 2013
“There is no fear.” Those in charge at 455 Golden Gate Avenue openly brag about how they are “accountable to no one”, R Campomadera. And so far, they’ve been right. That’s why there is no fear.
Long live the ACJ.
courtflea
September 26, 2013
having worked closely with Debbie Brown, I think she is a step in the right direction for Chief Counsel. I respect her a great deal.