It started with the commissioning and implementation of the SEC report
While all of us witnessed the Judicial Council’s administrative offices going rogue and wasting hundreds of millions of dollars our chief justice sought to delay the budgetary hammer coming down on her administrative offices by coming up with a three year plan of delay and obfuscation called the Strategic Evaluation Committee report. Judges and justices from all over the state would be tasked to look at the AOC and their various divisions and study them. Eventually they produced a report that ripped the administrative office a new orifice recommending radical change. Judicial Council leadership was stunned by the reports recommendations and indicated they would take them under advisement.
For those of us who wished to see real reform it was a major disappointment because it gave ample reason for the other two branches to keep on swinging that budget axe in an effort to send a message to San Francisco. Then our chief justice sought to measure how many people in the branch including justice partners outside of the branch supported reforms by putting the report out for an endless summer of comments. While hundreds and hundreds of comments from across the state rolled in supporting reforms, insiders on the council reached out to their grantees in a dishonorable attempt to stem the tide and push back on the report.
Judicial Council insiders like Justices Miller and Robie working through the state bar and the access to justice committee would provide a list of talking points to the grantees, usually legal aid organizations that rely in part on judicial council funding provided by a bloated AOC. In many cases, those grantees would not waste any time and just put the same talking points verbatim in their SEC responses. Others would actually change the wording of the talking points provided. The veiled threat here was that if the AOC did not exist in their current form, neither would their grants. We, among many others caught them red-handed in the act.
Despite the overwhelming comments demanding reform from entire benches and hundreds of judges and court workers from across the state, the all too powerful Executive Committee would indicate that the reforms went too far and that they would not accept the report. Again to save the budget axe swinging in the general direction of the council and their administrative offices, they were virtually bludgeoned into accepting the report and the conclusions therein by indicating they would put the study under study, review the recommendations and implement what they agreed with.
Over time, they would implement or partly implement SEC recommendations. Many of what we considered were the most important reforms would end up on the cutting room floor. This weeks adopted reforms of the legal services offices was the latest example. The Council rejected the notion that hundreds of staff lawyers could do the jobs they were being paid for and that they should continue to contract out to a myriad of law firms from across the state in an effort to continue conflicting them out on other matters under the auspices of more experienced expertise. Much like reorganizing the deck chairs on the titanic, the judicial council would rearrange the legal services office. There would remain hundreds of lawyers in the AOC and they would continue to contract legal services as the best strategy to defending the branch continues to be conflicting the law firms out of representing those that might otherwise pursue them.
Public Information Requests
In an effort to push back on public information requests, the AOC’s lobbyists and judicial council members vigorously lobbied the other two branches into rejecting the notion that the AOC should release information to the public codified as a rule of law by the legislature. In its stead they would foist up a rule of court that the were free to ignore and have ignored numerous times. To this day, no judge, legislator or even the state auditor has even seen, much less released an un-redacted version of the Deloitte contract for the California Case Management System.
Open Meeting Rules
Again in an effort to push back on open meeting rules, the AOC’s lobbists and Judicial Council members vigorously lobbied the other two branches into rejecting the imposition of the Brown open meeting act. In its stead, they would replace the rule with another rule of court that they were free to ignore because no one enforces the rules of court on the judicial council or the AOC. We would also find out this week what everyone suspected – that committee meetings are carefully choreographed by the Administrative Office of the Courts and appointed chairs into being little more than a rubber stamp program and a new rule would be promulgated that closes the meetings to the public for just about any reason they can dream up.
Outlandish security costs don’t match the threat
Meanwhile while the well-funded juggernaut we know as the judicial council and the AOC continues to rob trial court funds under the auspices of providing services, courts across the state have gone beyond the flesh and are cutting into the bone of their operations statewide. We would learn from News 10 in San Diego that over 21 million dollars per year is spent chauffeuring justices around and presiding justices to and from work. This would be in addition to their in-house security forces that we know as emergency response and security that News 10 didn’t get the opportunity to cover.
Outlandish Court Construction and Maintenance Costs Continue Unabated
We would learn this past week that the real house that george built would be the most expensive courthouse in the world in Long Beach and we would learn that annual rent payments are coming in at about a million dollars more per month than advertised by the council. You would think a bunch of judges and hundreds of lawyers would get a contract like the one with long beach judicial partners right so that the taxpayers weren’t on the hook for it. Unfortunately the contract reads like a KBR contract for gulf war support where just sneezing in the general direction of LBJP would cost the state dearly for years to come. Worse, the county of Los Angeles would file suit to collect property taxes from the private entity that owns the courthouse and the AOC would contractually reimburse those taxes paid if a judicial council paid and strategized legal defense was unsuccessful. In any case, this will amount to significant other state funds being diverted to the long beach courthouse at the cost of the construction program. And of course, the AOC is still paying a quarter million dollars for audience seating in a courtroom of a preferred court while other courthouses that didn’t suck-up as well deploy the bucket brigades in the building every time it rains.
The numbers don’t add up and it does not seem to matter in Sacramento.
When you fairly subtract the long beach courthouse from the authorized bond money for the entire court construction program, you come to the realization that the Judicial Council and the AOC are about to go hundreds of millions, if not billions over budget. So why are they not sending the state auditor into the construction program and coming to the same conclusion that we can easily add up on a piece of paper? What kind of future pain must be endured by the courts because the judicial council has been fundamentally dishonest with not only every one in the branch but the other two branches of government?
The Facts and other common sense reforms
After four years of the same bullshit is high time to stop messing with rearranging the Titanics deck chairs and cut the councils administrative office down to a few hundred people and limit their reach, limit the funding and bring an end to the rampant fraud,waste and abuse.
The fact of the matter is that all of this is not only untenable but it is unsustainable and demands that a May revise that should result in the state of California cutting their losses by redirecting all funds away from the judicial council and the AOC and to the trial courts directly by gutting most of their programs which most to be nonessential anyways.
Taking the money away is the only method available to stop fueling the rampant fraud waste and abuse.
After all, the council is constitutionally only an advise and report body, not the head of a branch of government. If you were to come to the unlikely constitutional conclusion that the judicial council is the policy making head of the branch like they claim, they remain derelict in their duties of the courts they purport to serve and it has cost the people of the state of California over 200 closed courtrooms, billions in fees that traffic scofflaws can’t afford to pay and outlandish delays.
We do want to see more money for the trial courts and like most courts, court workers and judges from across the state, we believe that the largest chunk of more money should come from redirecting most funding away from the council and gutting their administrative offices and programs. The money should be sent directly to the trial courts just to stop the damage they’re doing to the judicial branch’s future. This remains just a start. Let the trial courts prove that they are better off without the juggernaut in San Francisco taking their pound of taxpayer flesh first and passing down what’s left.
Only then will judicial council democracy begin to look like an attractive option to the chief justice.
katy
April 27, 2014
“Only then will judicial council democracy begin to look like an attractive option to the chief justice.”…as opposed to her other option of a jail cell for conspiring to defraud the taxpayer.
NewsViews
April 27, 2014
Reblogged this on News and Views Riverside Superior Court and National Family Law Abuse and commented:
What is the point of allowing judges and justices from the entire State to provide recommendations to the AOC as to an effective management of the AOC based on their grass roots experience with the current court system in place when the executive committee disregards all of their feedback. Effective leadership takes into account a needs based evaluation of the conditions and circumstances that our judiciary has to deal with on a daily basis. A similar mechanism should be open to the average person on the street as to what our experience is with the current court system in place. Effective leadership does not disregard these recommendations merely to cover up their own incompetence.
unionman575
April 27, 2014
JCW very nice piece.
My History teacher father would be proud.
Hammer away JCW! Beautiful!
Shut the AOC down and redirect those $$$ to Trial Courts now.
I remember when Sacramento Judge Steve White spoke those words a few years back when I attended a JC “special budge meeting” with him a few years back in the AOC North Sacramento location.
I again want to thank Judge White, all other ACJ Directors and ACJ Members for their ongoing and vocal support.
And of course, I want to thank all of you right here on JCW for continuing to crow like roosters about all the graft, corruption, and malfeasance we see every day form the Death Star and its minions.
Elaine Howle and Co., you have a massive shit enchilada to dig through when you dig through the JC/AOC cooked books and records. I wish you and your staff well. Go for it!
😉
unionman575
April 29, 2014
All hail the house that Steve Nash built while he was CEO in the very understaffed Inland Empire.
Behold!
unionman575
April 30, 2014
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=video&cd=4&ved=0CD0QtwIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhQE_Z0ETpXw&ei=tqBhU73dCoGOyASJgoGgCQ&usg=AFQjCNELz6Sfe21ql9uis6YZJRJLx0UXIw&sig2=QDNKGz7PRzFL6H5C9QEKMg&bvm=bv.65636070,d.aWw
unionman575
April 30, 2014
http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_25655460/san-rafael-appearance-california-chief-justice-stumps-more?source=rss
unionman575
April 30, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/25835.htm
Come on down for a spot of tea, what say ye?
Rumor has it that special guest former AOC Money Man, former SB CEO, and current Contra Costa CEO will be there to receive the ceremonial handjob for his “assistance” during his SB tenure as an Inland Empire Trial Court CEO.
😉
Wow that was a lotta cash for that there Palace in the Inland Empire.
YOu gotta admire graft and corruption when ya see it.
BRB time for another Vodka Tonic…
😉
unionman575
April 30, 2014
And..I know it when I see it. So does Howle and Co.
Bring it home momma.
Guest
May 1, 2014
Can’t imagine Nash will get a warm reception from the employees in SB. They hated him. They rarely saw him and they found out soon that Nash knows nothing about running a court. Judges love him because he BS’s with them and the judges think Nash comes with money. I hear that it didn’t take long for the CC employees to already form an opinion of their new CEO. Apparently Nash is making the CC employees start to miss Kiri Torre, and they absolutely hated her.
Lando
April 30, 2014
Queen Feckless stumping in Marin County. That sure is going to help save our trial courts. I guess she didn’t mention she was no doubt driven there by the CHP as part of their 21 million dollar elite Justices security detail. You are right Unionman , it is time for another Vodka Tonic.
The OBT
April 30, 2014
Thanks unionman for all the info on the new SB courthouse. When we get a new one , I have to remember to ask for a “multi story atrium” to connect the administrative base with the 11 story tower. Lol. You really can’t make this stuff up.
wearyant
May 1, 2014
Thanks for posting, Unionman. Those pointy-headed bureaucrats in the AOC are really in another world, aren’t they? I cannot believe the gall. It’s breath-taking! Dreaming of one-way trips to Mars for our judicial “leaders” much sooner than 2025 …
sharonkramer
May 1, 2014
When do we get to see the scope of the BSA audit?
unionman575
May 1, 2014
“BRANCH EFFICIENCIES”
unionman575
May 1, 2014
https://careers.jud.ca.gov/psc/recruit1/EMPLOYEE/PSFT_HR/c/HRS_HRAM.HRS_CE.GBL?FolderPath=PORTAL_ROOT_OBJECT.HC_HRS_CE_GBL2&IsFolder=false&IgnoreParamTempl=FolderPath%2cIsFolder&
Facilities Manager (Facilities Management Administrator)
Salary Range $6,693- $8,133 per month
The OBT
May 2, 2014
Too bad they couldn’t have used HRH-1, Vickrey, Tonto , the telecommuting lawyer from Europe, HRH-2, and any other current Crystal Palace insider like my favs, J Miler or J Hull, for the Gray Goose ad.We could have flown them to France complete with their CHP escorts to get all that done Lol.
unionman575
May 3, 2014
That would be a great ad.
😉
Lando
May 3, 2014
Fly beyond HRH-2. Her arrogance and Gray Goose are a perfect match. Have a great weekend everyone !
The OBT
May 3, 2014
To all the great Justices like J Baxter and J Corrigan. Please don’t ever forget that we at the trial court just keep working away trying to do the right thing. Arrogance and the quest for power which define the Chief Justice and her “insiders” are nothing we are about. You were appointed by a man who cared about the values of a strong democracy. If either of you had become Chief Justice we would have never been in the messed up dire situation we are in now,
unionman575
May 3, 2014
http://www.pe.com/local-news/columns/cassie-macduff-headlines/20140501-san-bernardino-new-340-million-courthouse-unveiled.ece
Behold!
A series of photos of the “House that Steve Nash Built”…
Ha ya likin’ CC Superior Stevie?
unionman575
May 3, 2014
Here’s one to tuck under pillow boys and girls…let’s do CCMS II…Shall we?
unionman575
May 3, 2014
Just say “no”.
The OBT
May 3, 2014
340 million for a courthouse. Think of how many court employees could still be working with a more modest facility. Thanks Unionman for the link. The Palm Trees look great along with the judicial tower but the PE left out any and all pictures of the three story atrium . Somebody should make a request from J Hull to get the records of how much Queen Feckless spent on either flying or driving down to the desert with her 21 million dollar security detail. As always her garbled words and off base stump speech make for great entertainment especially with a Gray Goose Vodka tonic.Lol. You can’t make any of this up. Really.
Lando
May 4, 2014
HRH-1 and HRH-2 perfect for Gray Goose elevator ride. Two of the most arrogant and out of touch public officials any of us will ever see or have to work with.
Wendy Darling
May 4, 2014
What Lando said. And unethical.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
May 6, 2014
As California Courts Monitor so aptly puts it: “The ‘Tani Tour’ continues”:
http://californiacourtsmonitor.com/community/chief-justice-continues-funding-push/
Starring her loyal cheerleader Kim from wealthy Marin county. Marin, of course, will be spared any real stark pain from the budget squeeze that the poorer population will endure. So nothing new there! Similar to the haves and havenots; the JC/AOC/CJ versus the trial courts 😦
unionman575
May 6, 2014
The rich get richer at the Death Star…and we trial court slum dogs get a hand job.
😉
Wendy Darling
May 6, 2014
From The Recorder, the on-line publication of CalLaw, by Cheryl Miller.
If I were Governor Brown, or any member of the State Legislature, the only way I would endorse giving branch “leadership” this much additional money is if Queen Feckless also tendered her resignation. Otherwise, it’s just throwing good money after bad.
Lawmakers United in Plea for Court Budget Boost
Cheryl Miller, The Recorder
SACRAMENTO — A bipartisan group of state legislators has asked Gov. Jerry Brown to restore “adequate funding” to California’s courts in his revised budget, which is scheduled to be released next week.
In separate letters, expected to be delivered to Brown’s office on Monday, senators and Assembly members request that the governor go beyond the $100 million budget boost he included for the courts in his original January spending plan.
The Assembly letter seeks an additional $236 million, which would give the judiciary enough to keep court operations at their current levels and to cover an anticipated $70 million shortfall in fee revenues. Senators did not ask for a specific amount, just enough to restore “adequate funding” to the branch.
“We recognize that a fair and independent judicial branch is the cornerstone of our democracy,” said a letter signed by 35 of the 40 senators. “Absent sufficient funding, the courts will be further crippled and unable to fulfill their obligations to the people of the state of California.”
Lawmakers’ pleas for additional court funding come as the governor preaches a message of spending prudence and the need to set aside surplus money to pay off debt and build a so-called rainy day fund. In a rare appearance before a legislative budget committee last week, Brown endorsed a November ballot initiative proposal to mandate a state reserve, saying it provided “a great opportunity to exercise restraint on an ongoing basis.”
Department of Finance spokesman H.D. Palmer declined to comment specifically on the letters or the upcoming May revision release. He acknowledged that the judiciary has been hard hit by years of general fund cuts and internal fund borrowing.
“But unlike most other budgets that took General Fund reductions during that period, we were able to mitigate the General Fund reductions to the judiciary through a combination of offsets—such as special fund transfers, fee increases, and use of reserves—to keep the judiciary’s operating budget at a fairly stable level,” Palmer said.
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye in January released a three-year budget blueprint that called for an additional $612 million in funding in the next fiscal year to start rebuilding “a fully functioning” judicial branch. In recent months, Judicial Council members, Administrative Office of the Courts lobbyists and judges have pressed lawmakers individually for additional money to reopen closed courthouses and end trial court employee layoffs, noting the local impacts of judicial branch cuts.
http://www.therecorder.com/home/id=1202654104503/Lawmakers+United+in+Plea+for+Court+Budget+Boost%3Fmcode=1202617072607&curindex=3#
Long live the ACJ.
sharonkramer
May 6, 2014
“We recognize that a fair and independent judicial branch is the cornerstone of our democracy,’ said a letter signed by 35 of the 40 senators”… However, we really don’t give a damn about a fair and independent judicial branch or we wouldn’t have signed the letter.
For 35 of 40 senators to sign such a misguided letter, there has got to be some nasty politics going on. Wonder who the main lobbying firm is?
Wendy Darling
May 6, 2014
It’s time for the annual May Revise, Sharon. There’s always nasty politics going on.
And it’s an election year.
Long live the ACJ.
sharonkramer
May 6, 2014
Wendy, yes on the continuing nasty politics. But something is up with this one for 35 Senators to call for an increased judicial branch budget in a letter to the governor. Wonder what magic words were said to get them to sign that letter and if there were any campaign contributions involved. Its a good thing Brown is so old and has no viable contenders for the governor’s office.
unionman575
May 6, 2014
The Guv will give us the budgetary back of his hand (again).
Can you blame him as he looks at the “leadership” in SF?
Lando
May 6, 2014
Wendy’s right. Queen Feckless has so badly damaged branch credibility nothing is going to change with the May revise. The latest news about wasting 21 million on Justice’s security is just another reason why the trial courts will continue to pay the price for the continued out of touch leadership at 455 Golden Gate. Must be nice to Fly Beyond with a Gray Goose or two while the rest of us at the trial courts slog away buried in paper and backlogs .
Delilah
May 8, 2014
In Surprise Move, Committee Votes to Boost Trial Court Budget by $262 Million
Cheryl Miller, The Recorder
May 7, 2014
SACRAMENTO — Over the objections of the governor’s office, an Assembly subcommittee on Wednesday voted unanimously to bump the judiciary budget by $262.1 million in the upcoming 2014-15 fiscal year.
The committee recommendation would add $157 million—all of it for California’s 58 trial courts—to the $105 million Gov. Jerry Brown already proposed to supplement the judicial budget with in his January spending plan.
The surprise vote by the three Democrats and one Republican was not foreshadowed on the subcommittee’s agenda, which simply listed a discussion of judicial branch funding issues. The meeting was dominated by a long line of trial court presiding judges, who individually thanked the Assembly members for signing on to a letter delivered to the governor Monday that pleaded for more court funding.
Unexpectedly, Assemblyman Freddie Rodriguez, D-Pomona, made a motion to give the courts another $262 million—with a familiar caveat. None of the money could be spent, he said, on statewide computer projects, a nod to the Court Case Management System, the dismantled judiciary IT project that has become synonymous with expensive, failed IT projects in the state. Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer, D-Los Angeles, said he also wanted “performance” language added into the budget to measure how efficiently courts spent their funding.
Madelynn McClain, a budget analyst with the governor’s Department of Finance, quickly objected, arguing that Brown’s $105 million proposal was more sustainable “given that the state is just emerging from a recession.” But the committee moved to a vote without any more discussion.
“We appreciate the budget subcommittee’s support for the chief justice’s request to reinvest in the judicial branch,” Justice Douglas Miller, who chairs the Judicial Council’s executive planning committee, said after Wednesday’s vote. “It’s an encouraging step.”
The court funding issue will eventually go to a legislative conference committee with the Senate, which is expected to be just as supportive of providing additional dollars for the branch. The final decision on any extra funding, however, will be hammered out in closed-door negotiations between legislative leaders and the governor. And Brown has been adamant that the state must curtail new spending and add to its reserves.
The $262.1 million appears to be a figure derived from the $266 million that Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said would be needed in 2014-15 to maintain existing levels of court services. Budget watchers say they believe lawmakers subtracted costs for increased rents and personnel costs in the appellate courts and at the AOC—never as politically popular as the trial courts—to reach the $262.1 million figure.
Read more: http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202654459237/In-Surprise-Move%2C-Committee-Votes-to-Boost-Trial-Court-Budget-by-%24262-Million#ixzz318SO3zS0
sharonkramer
May 8, 2014
“The $262.1 million appears to be a figure derived from the $266 million that Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said would be needed in 2014-15 to maintain existing levels of court services.”
And therein lays the problem: Allocating multi-millions to those who have committed fraud, waste and abuse; so they may continue to maintain their existing levels of services to the courts.
JC/AOC, “We PROMISE we won’t steal from you this time if you let us have access to more of your money.”
If you knew that someone pilfered your bank account, would you deposit more money so they could do it again?
MaxRebo5
May 8, 2014
Way to go Madelynn McClain! I think it was a big mistake by the Assembly to give no pause when the Department of Finance’s budget analyst objected to spending so much taxpayer money. I thought the Republicans were for fiscal responsibility but they seemed to blow her off and play along with spending this time. My other thought is let the State Auditor do her job and find the waste at the top first. The Auditor’s report is due in October of 2014.
Part of the State Auditor’s job is to look into seeing how much money can be redirected from the AOC to local courts. The Assembly appears to not be willing to wait for the Auditor to try and reform the AOC and save the public some money. Instead they are just allocating additional money the public can’t afford to spend.
Don’t get me wrong, I do like that money is being directed to the local level and not to CCMS (and the AOC). However, this funding will also help the Chief/AOC maintain control of the judges in CA courts by bringing home the bacon politcally. It will hurt the reform efforts needed within the branch to change the dictatorial style of the Chief, to democratize the Judicial Council, and to reduce the size/scope of the AOC.
CA’s Legislature considers this increased spending at a time of repeated scandals by it’s own members and as the state has really big money problems to address. This is a national article that I read just today on CA’s unfunded debts:
http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20140507&id=17597903
The Legislature’s own non partisan analyst was the basis for the figures in the above article. I find it ironic the Assembly is proposing spending more taxpayer money on CA Courts, with full knowledge of these mounting public debts, and while the AOC is being audited to see if there is waste at the top that could be redirected to local courts. Hopefully the Governor will back up his Department of Finance staff and fight to end the waste at the top in CA Court’s before allowing this amount larger than needed amount to be spent.
unionman575
May 8, 2014
Trial Court Operations Funding
L E G I S L A T I V E A N A L Y S T ’ S O F F I C E
Presented to:
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on Public Safety
Hon. Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
katy
May 8, 2014
I don’t understand this. Is Jones-Sawyer saying stick with the $100M or allocate more?
unionman575
May 9, 2014
The final decision on any extra funding, however, will be hammered out in closed-door negotiations between legislative leaders and the governor. And Brown has been adamant that the state must curtail new spending and add to its reserves.
Don’t look for any $ above Gov Brown’s 105 mil.
Gov won’t approve additional $.
Watch.
😉
katy
May 9, 2014
Dunno, Unionman, its an election year and logic seems to fly out the window as people jockey for position.
Are any other state judicial races getting as much media attention as the race for San Diego County jurist seat 20? Here’s the latest on the race from SD Free Press, citing lots of other media publications on it. It mentions the ACJ.
“San Diego Goddam! The June 3rd Election And Why You Should Care”
http://sandiegofreepress.org/2014/05/san-diego-goddam-the-june-3rd-election-and-why-you-should-care/
unionman575
May 10, 2014
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-court-cuts-20140511-story.html
Wendy Darling
May 11, 2014
More money isn’t going to fix what is really wrong with the California Judicial Branch.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
May 11, 2014
Excellent article in the LATimes, Unionman. Thanks for posting. What’s poignant too is the “moment” that Queen Feckless felt humiliation because she heard Kings county hosted a garage sale. Not that the superior court had a garage sale and were doing something to help themselves and the public; just the “moment” of *her* humiliation when she learned of it. Don’t worry, Queen. Just have another classy sip of your Grey Goose cocktail laced with your own Kool-Aid and the momentary pain will be long gone. I’m still remembering the 90s before your little entourage stepped in to *fix* our state courts — the courts with all their courthouses and courtroom were all open and functioning! And I have no Grey Goose to kill my pain!
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians; long live the ACJ
unionman575
May 11, 2014
😉
wearyant
May 11, 2014
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/05/california-senate-to-consider-whistleblower-protection-for-staff.html
Let’s include the JC/AOC/CJ office within whistleblower protection, maybe with a trailer bill if necessary, while the knee-jerk reactions to the latest CA senate scandals are on.
Lando
May 11, 2014
The LA Times article was fascinating to read. I sit here amazed that those who complain about what has happened to our court system never connect the dots back to the anti-democratic rule of Ron George’s and now Queen Feckless’s Judicial Council. Wendy is again correct, the problems within our branch cannot be fixed by throwing more money around. The solution ? Ending the elitist and power grabbing centralized control imposed by the “insiders” at 455 Golden Gate by creating a democratic Judicial Council. If our Queen really cared about anything more than preserving her power, she would take the steps necessary to open the branch up and end a dictatorship that no one in California ever approved of. Before Ron George and Queen Tani the courts worked just fine. No long lines, no reduced court hours, no closed courthouses, no employee furloughs, no stacks of unfilled papers, no waste of billions of taxpayer dollars on failed computer systems or overbuilt courthouses.
The OBT
May 11, 2014
So true. The problem is in fact that HRH-1 and HRH-2 enjoy their power at the expense of everything else. They have imposed a Gray Goose culture of arrogance and elitism on our courts and believe only in their own mantra ” the extraordinary belongs to those who make it ” . Sadly all they have created is a train wreck of a once proud, strong and ethical court system that actually served the citizens of California.
sharonkramer
May 12, 2014
NOTHING is going to change in the near future until some criminal prosecutions for the near past, take place.
Big dogs will continue to eat midsized dogs who will eat little dogs who will eat minatures –until the perverse midset that this is okay along as you and your dawgs are the ones eating; is removed from the California judicial branch.
Makes no difference what size dog you are. If you don’t stop the feeding frenzy everywhere, you can’t expect for it to stop anywhere, including for the big dogs. You will continue to be just part of the spoiled food chain as you get eaten by bigger dogs.
Anyone who saw San Diego 10 News last Friday night, knows exactly what I am talking about.
unionman575
May 12, 2014
I like your style.
😉
sharonkramer
May 12, 2014
Thanks, Union Man! See latest from San Diego Union Trib on the big and little dogs chasing their tales while trying eat each other. (We all know I cna’t slpel ro tpye. But this time, I meant to write t-a-l-e-s) http://wp.me/plYPz-3MT
wearyant
May 12, 2014
Said so well, Lando and The OBT. Said so well!
unionman575
May 12, 2014
My, my, my time for another May Revise…
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/
Hey Gov…any trial court cash?
5-9-2014
SACRAMENTO – Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. will release his revised 2014-15 budget proposal on Tuesday at news conferences in Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego.
Ahead of Tuesday’s news conferences, Governor Brown and the state’s legislative leaders announced a bipartisan agreement to create a Rainy Day Fund that allows the state to save for the future, while paying down its debts and unfunded liabilities.
Sacramento
When: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 at approx. 9:00 a.m.
Where: California State Capitol, Governor’s Press Conference Room, Room 1190, Sacramento, CA 95814
Los Angeles
When: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 at approx. 12:15 p.m.
Where: Ronald Reagan State Building, Governor’s Press Conference Room, 16th Floor, 300 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90013
San Diego
When: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 at approx. 2:45 p.m.
Where: San Diego City Administration Building, Media Room, 13th floor, 202 C Street, San Diego, CA 92101
**NOTE: These events are open to credentialed media only. The Sacramento news conference will be webcast at http://www.calchannel.com.
http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18519
😉
unionman575
May 12, 2014
“Pay Per View”
http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_25748317/alameda-county-courts-now-charging-online-access
😉
unionman575
May 12, 2014
“”This represents a significant barrier to low-income and marginalized people who already have problems accessing the courts and accessing justice,” said Tirien Steinbach, an attorney who directs the East Bay Community Law Center.”
wearyant
May 13, 2014
Ol’ Jer wants a rainy day fund to save for the future while he sweeps the trial courts’ reserves? It looks like the trial courts “get it” coming and going with the AOC taking their skim off the top and the guv brooming the courts’ reserves. C’mon, Guv, if you give the courts some cash directly, they’ll promise not to let the AOC even smell it. I think I’ll play Gordon Lightfoots’ Rainy Day People whilst listening to the guv speak at noon. Thanks for the posts, Unionman.
Long live the ACJ
unionman575
May 13, 2014
wearyant
May 14, 2014
Thanks, UMan! We’re all rainy day people at JCW until the current regime is upset. ;-/
wearyant
May 13, 2014
Unionman was so right about no additional public funds for the courts. Maybe it’s time to look at getting rid of the judicial council along with their high-priced admin arm, the AOC. They’ve had a fun run since the early 1900s, but since the 90s, the royalty seekers have spoiled it all for everyone, the public, the trial court workers and the judges. “Go local” is the latest craze. The centralized creeps ruling from SanFran are outta step and outta time and irrelevant to today’s situations. OUT with ’em all!
Long live the ACJ
Nathaniel Woodhull
May 13, 2014
The summary of the Governor’s May Revise Budget released today makes clear that Tani’s hallucination of “restoring” over a $1 Billion to the Branch is just that, a hallucination.
“The Administration has been clear that state-funded entities should not expect restorations of reductions – moving forward, government has to be done differently”
Wendy Darling
May 13, 2014
Queen Feckless will probably update herself on the Governor’s May Revise of the budget while being chauffeured to a party by her CHP driver, all paid for at public expense. You know, because they’re doing things so “differently” at 455 Golden Gate Avenue these days.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
May 13, 2014
Meanwhile, California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye said the governor’s budget was “encouraging because it identifies additional funding and recognizes the need for fiscal stability with a creative proposal for a two-year budgeting formula for the trial courts.”
However, she said, the trial courts will require new investment to adequately serve the public in the future. “I look forward to working with the Governor and the Legislature before the adoption of the Budget Act to ensure that all Californians have access to justice,” she said.
http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-legislative-leaders-on-governors-budget-20140513-story.html
😉
unionman575
May 13, 2014
Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, D-Fremont:
The Governor’s May Revise is a reflection of the economic growth and turnaround California has experienced in the past four years. Instead of facing a $26 billion deficit like we did in the Governor’s first year, our state is in a much stronger position to meet the challenges ahead. Through tough, but necessary savings and some targeted investments in key areas, we are now well positioned for the state’s fourth on-time budget in a row.
Restoring some vital services now can go a long way toward helping more people share in the prosperity our state is seeing and provide them with more opportunities in the future.
I applaud the Governor’s decision to better fund the teachers retirement pension system, but I believe we should move more aggressively to restore the deep cuts that were made to the Judicial Branch. More than 50 courthouses and 205 courtrooms have closed across the state, forcing parties, law enforcement, witnesses and jurors to travel longer distances just to have access to justice. The proposed $160 million for trial court funding is still less than half of what the third branch says it needs to avoid further cuts. While our courts should always seek ways to operate more efficiently, additional savings will fall far short of the $336 million that is needed to make them operate smoothly and provide the access to justice all Californians deserve.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/05/rapid-response-gov-jerry-browns-may-budget-revision.html#storylink=cpy
😉
unionman575
May 13, 2014
Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, D-South San Francisco:
Access to justice is obstructed when there are long lines for court services and closed court rooms. The Governor’s two-year strategy to stabilize trial court funding will allow the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council to evaluate the current system, modernize processes and improve access to justice.
Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/05/rapid-response-gov-jerry-browns-may-budget-revision.html#storylink=cpy
😉
unionman575
May 13, 2014
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2014/05/13/trial-courts-get-160m-in-budget-need-more-to.html
“I’m launching my blue ribbon commission on the future of the courts later this year and I believe this initiative dovetails with the governor’s desire that the judicial branch identify further efficiencies to promote access to justice,” Cantil-Sakauye said in a statement.”
Uh huh…
😉
May 13, 2014, 1:38pm PDT
Trial courts get $160M in budget; need more to maintain status quo
Sacramento Business Journal
Signs at the Sacramento County courthouse warn customers about delays. Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed May revision of the state budget increases new state spending for trial courts to $160 million, but that’s still not enough to maintain the status quo.
Kathy Robertson
Senior Staff Writer- Sacramento Business Journal
Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed May revision of the state budget increases new state spending for trial courts to $160 million — up $60 million from January — but that’s still not enough to maintain the status quo.
Socked by budget cuts of more than $1 billion over the last six years, the judicial branch needs $266 million to keep things the way they are, according to court officials.
The proposed budget revise points to a new workload-based funding model to allocate money where most needed. The document also expresses support for a two-year strategy to court stabilization that takes time to evaluate and modernize court operations.
Yet “the administration has been clear that state-funded entities should not expect restorations of reductions — moving forward, government has to be done differently,” the section of the budget summary on the judicial branch reads.
The budget document adds some money and takes some away to get to the $160 million in new state spending. It reduces pension funding for a year but proposes $86.3 million in new money to meet trial court obligations. The proposed revise considers backfilling for trial court trust fund shortfalls — but the money would not be paid out until next year.
In January, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said trial courts are expected to run out of money by 2015, and outlined a plan for court recovery over three years. Tuesday, she had a positive spin on the politics of the issue, saying the May revision is encouraging because it identifies additional funding and recognizes the need for fiscal stability via a two-year budgeting formula for trial courts.
“I’m launching my blue ribbon commission on the future of the courts later this year and I believe this initiative dovetails with the governor’s desire that the judicial branch identify further efficiencies to promote access to justice,” Cantil-Sakauye said in a statement.
Laying out a two-year budget helps courts plan for the future, said B.J. Susich, president of the Sacramento County Bar Association.
“However, it must be kept in mind that the additional funding is only half what was necessary just to maintain current court services. The bottom line is that we are still looking at unacceptable service reductions across the state.”
Wendy Darling
May 13, 2014
Published today, Tuesday, May 13, from Courthouse News Service, by Maria Dinzeo:
Revised California Budget Puts $60M More Into Courts
By MARIA DINZEO
(CN) – An additional $60 million for California’s trial courts in the revised budget Gov. Jerry Brown released today came with a demand that the Judicial Council aggressively cut court operating costs.
“More elegant and efficient ways of doing what they’re doing have to be discovered and created,” Brown said, referring to both the courts and the state university system. “It’s not going to be easy. This wrenching but creative process of adjusting downward the cost structure is the challenge but is needed going forward.”
Brown’s proposed budget from January offered the judiciary $105 million, far less than the $266 million Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakuaye said was needed to keep trial courts from “treading water” for another year.
But Brown told reporters Tuesday morning that “you can’t just say we need more money or we shut down.”
The budget focuses on paying for California’s unfunded public school teacher pensions, increased Medi-Cal costs and $11 billion in state debt. It also establishes a $1.6 billion rainy day fund.
“We have to recognize we’ve done a lot already and we haven’t paid for a lot what we’ve already done,” Brown said.
The governor released the revised budget one week after state lawmakers sent two letters urging him to significantly increase the judiciary’s budget allocation to $336 million.
Bob Wieckowski, the Judiciary Committee chair who sent one of those letters, said there is still more work to do.
“I applaud the governor’s decision to better fund the teachers retirement pension system, but I believe we should move more aggressively to restore the deep cuts that were made to the Judicial Branch,” Wieckowski, a Democratic assemblyman for Fremont, said in a statement. “More than 50 courthouses and 205 courtrooms have closed across the state, forcing parties, law enforcement, witnesses and jurors to travel longer distances just to have access to justice. The proposed $160 million for trial court funding is still less than half of what the third branch says it needs to avoid further cuts. While our courts should always seek ways to operate more efficiently, additional savings will fall far short of the $336 million that is needed to make them operate smoothly and provide the access to justice all Californians deserve.”
Department of Finance Director Michael Cohen said the $160 million for the courts is part of a two-year strategy to stabilize court funding while the Judicial Council and the chief justice look for ways to tighten operating costs. Most of the additional funds will go toward paying court-employee pensions and benefits and backfilling a shortfall in filing-fee revenue.
“We expect the chief justice and Judicial Council to take the lead in finding new ways to operate, whether or not some of those courthouses should reopen or not, and find as many efficiencies as possible,” Cohen told reporters. “We really expect the Judicial Council as sort of an independent branch to take the lead on this effort, but we’ll be working with them as partners to help them find as many efficiencies as we can.”
Presiding Judge Robert Hight of Sacramento said courts are already sharing ideas on how to operate more efficiently. “All of the 58 courts have gotten together and put on our court websites 69 efficiencies, items that one court does that streamlines certain processes so they’re available to everybody,” Hight said.
But, he added, “most efficiencies cost money because they require some sort of computerization.”
Hight also addressed the idea of courthouses not reopening, when people are driving up to 50 miles to file cases or make appearances in some of the state’s more vast and rural counties. “Riverside and San Bernardino are an example of where they’ve closed courthouses and people have to drive a long ways to get to court,” Hight said. “I don’t know how you can make the argument those courthouses don’t need to reopen.”
Calling the additional $60 million a “nice start,” Hight added: “I’m hopeful that we can convince him that we still need more. He’s going in the right direction.”
At an Assembly hearing on the budget last week, Hight said the $105 million Brown had proposed in January would force his court to lay off 30 people.
“This looks like we’ll have just enough to stay absolutely flat without having to lay anybody off,” Hight said Tuesday. “That’s our best guess right now.”
Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye was optimistic in her comments on the budget, calling Brown’s proposal “encouraging.”
“The trial courts will require a reinvestment to provide adequate services for court users,” she said. “I look forward to working with the governor and the Legislature before the adoption of the Budget Act to ensure that all Californians have access to justice.”
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/05/13/67844.htm
Long live the ACJ.
katy
May 13, 2014
Looks like JC’s half-hearted reform got them a half-hearted budget increase. I like Howard Mintz’s writing style.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_25753500/california-courts-get-boost-governors-budget
After years of budget bloodletting, California’s courts received a $160 million bump in funding in Gov. Jerry Brown’s new budget plan — although with some strings attached and a stern warning that the state’s judicial leaders need to do more to tighten spending.
Brown, however, cautioned judicial leaders: “You can’t just say we need more money or we shut” courthouses.
sunlight
May 13, 2014
“All of the 58 courts have gotten together and put on our court websites 69 efficiencies, items that one court does that streamlines certain processes so they’re available to everybody.
does anyone at JC Watcher have access to the list of the 69 efficiencies referred to?
The OBT
May 13, 2014
Let me see if I understand this. Queen Tani said we needed 260 million for our courts to survive. Due to her effective lobbying and credibility the Governor only allocated 160 million. Yet according to our Queen it was great news to get this significantly smaller amount. How does that position enhance branch standing within the legislature or public ? Using the playbook Ron George used, Queen Feckless issued the following Soviet style comment: “I appreciate the Governor’s statement of continued confidence in the statewide leadership of the Judicial branch…” You Can’t make any of this up. Really.
Lando
May 13, 2014
Come on everyone. Don’t be too hard on Queen Feckless. All is well again as she is creating a “Blue Ribbon” Commission on the Future of the courts. I can only imagine what “insiders ” will be recycled to sit on this group. We can also guess that said Commission will be supported by at least 10 AOC staff at every meeting and that it will have 7 regional areas to meet in around the state so it’s members will get free CHP transport to all parts of California including the Crystal Palace. No doubt the State Center on Trial Courts will be hired to provide ” consulting” services. In the end the ” Blue Ribbon” Commission will praise all aspects of 455 Golden Gate and the absolute need to have “statewide leadership of the Judicial branch” . Gray Goose anyone?
Lando
May 13, 2014
Queen Tani for getting us that extra 60 million ” I have to Praise You Like I Should” Fatboy Slim Praise You. 1999. One of the great music videos of all time and so apt here as our Queen loves all the adulation and attention.
unionman575
May 14, 2014
I love the in house AOC memos…
AOC Director Jahr re the May Revise:
Date May 13, 2014
To Justices, Judges, and Subordinate Judicial Officers
Clerk/Administrators of the Appellate Courts
Executive Officers of the Superior Courts
From: Steven Jahr Administrative Director of the Courts
Subject Update on 2014–2015 Judicial Branch Budget—MayRevise
😉
wearyant
May 14, 2014
Yeah, let’s embrace doing things differently. Let’s review the whole dynamic of the whys and wherefores of the judicial council’s existence and be rid of their spoiled overpaid lackeys, the AOC. Do the same for 1407, the court construction joke, thus restoring those designated funds to the trial courts, where the actual workings of justice is served.
Wendy Darling
May 14, 2014
Published today, Wednesday, May 14, from Courthouse News Service, by William Dotinga.
“The Legislature is constitutionally mandated to pass a balanced budget by June 15. “
Let the budget wars begin.
Spending Upped to $108B in Latest CA Budget
By WILLIAM DOTINGA
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) – After finding an extra $2.4 billion underneath the Golden State’s couch cushions, Gov. Jerry Brown unveiled his May budget revision that anticipates a record $107.8 billion in spending.
The general fund spending plan – which funds California’s day-to-day operations – is about a billion more than Brown’s preliminary budget released in January and represents a 24 percent increase from the budget approved for the 2011-12 fiscal year, the darkest days of California’s recession.
That year saw agency budgets gutted, school districts shortchanged and workers furloughed. What a difference a year makes, however: When this fiscal year ends June 30, the state expects a $4.4 billion surplus, thanks in large part to the aforementioned $2.4 billion in capital-gains taxes from a white-hot stock market last year.
Brown acknowledged, however, that capital gains are a fickle revenue source and vowed to start setting aside up to 10 percent of revenue in a rainy-day fund – starting with the 2015-16 budget, assuming voters approve the plan in November.
The governor’s revision also contains more money for the California Medical Assistance Program (Medi-Cal), since the federal Affordable Care Act has swelled that agency’s enrollment to 11.5 million – 30 percent of all Californians. And Brown promised the state’s beleaguered trial courts an additional $60 million, provided the Judicial Council slashes court-operating costs.
Brown also promised to pay down what he calls California’s “Wall of Debt” completely by 2018. His revised budget additionally tackles the severely underfunded teacher-pension system CalSTRS, which the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office said last week is upside-down by an estimated $75 billion.
It will take 30 years to right CalSTRS if legislators approve the plan – three years before the fund is expected to run dry, Brown said. His revised budget starts the process with a $450 million down payment in the upcoming fiscal year, and splits future costs between the state, school districts and teachers.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office also announced last week that California’s total debt and underfunded liabilities tops $340 billion – $8,500 for each of the state’s 38 million residents.
Despite this, Brown’s revised budget faces challenges in the Legislature where the Democratic majority wants to restore social programs cut during the Great Recession with the extra money under the state’s couch cushions.
“It’s a status quo budget,” Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said. “There’s a lot to talk about. All the concepts about rainy-day funds and paying down debt are sound, but there’s also a lot of unmet need in California.”
Republicans meanwhile criticized the governor for holding on to his high-speed-rail pipe dream – using carbon-tax money – and not spending enough on drought relief, even as the state faces an unprecedented shortage of rainfall.
“While I’m very pleased that our negotiated rainy day fund is included in the governor’s revised budget, I was surprised and disappointed that he didn’t address other important priorities – water storage and drought relief, higher education and other investments to help grow our economy,” Assemblywoman Kristen Olsen, R-Modesto, said.
Brown’s potential opponents in the November election sounded off with their disapproval as well.
“Gov. Brown just committed the earnings of our children and our children’s children to fuel this insatiable growth of government, which will prove over time to be unsustainable,” said Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, R-Hesperia, a candidate for governor. “Instead of securing the future of Californians, the governor’s actions have put them and their children’s future at even greater risk.”
Donnelly’s GOP opponent, Neel Kashkari, called Brown’s revised budget a crap shoot.
“He is crossing his fingers and hoping for a roaring stock market to deal with California’s unfunded liabilities,” Kashkari said. “Hope is not a strategy.”
The Legislature is constitutionally mandated to pass a balanced budget by June 15.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/05/14/67876.htm
Long live the ACJ.
Lando
May 14, 2014
Well Well Well what do we have here. Please check out http://www.news10.net/media/cinematic/video/9111851/ regarding our Queen being transported home by the CHP and the amount of money spent on this so called “security”. My favorite part is watching the poor CHP officer handing Tani her stuff from the trunk , ( I guess that would be too hard for her to do on her own lol) . Also check out news10’s exposing Queen Tani’s trips to Hawaii and Puerto Rico each with CHP escorts we the taxpayers pay for. I’m sorry but in the climate of closed courthouses , people losing their jobs, long lines , congested calendars and and reduced service to the public , their is no justification for this waste of taxpayer dollars. It really is time for this Chief Justice to do the right thing and resign.
Wendy Darling
May 14, 2014
But, Lando, they’re doing things “differently” now at 455 Golden Gate Avenue!
Not.
Still serving herself to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
katy
May 15, 2014
Lando,
The link you provided is down. Here’s another link of 10News helping to expose half-hearted reforming of the branch. wp.me/plYPz-3MV
unionman575
May 15, 2014
” It really is time for this Chief Justice to do the right thing and resign.”
It’s time!
😉
The OBT
May 14, 2014
Saw that report about an hour ago. 2 CHP officers paid to escort Queen Feckless to Hawaii? Then one more to a trip to San Juan? I’m sorry why are we paying taxpayer dollars for that and to drive her from Sacramento to San Francisco ? How many times does this go on every month? This is really just arrogance pure and simple. It sure is part of the Gray Goose mentality that governs all at 455 Golden Gate. As Wendy likes to say , You can’t make any of this up. Really.
Wendy Darling
May 14, 2014
” It really is time for this Chief Justice to do the right thing and resign.”
That would probably get the judicial branch another $100 million in the budget. But as she has consistently demonstrated, she isn’t at all interested in doing the right thing, so that probably isn’t going to happen.
Long live the ACJ.