Jerry Pfab is the phearless leader of the facilities maintenance unit in the Judicial Council. Several months ago we described to you how Jerry is setting public funds ablaze so that he can place a little pick-axe representing the prospectors award on his various printed materials and business cards. The judicial council even recognized him last year when he was awarded a runner-up for the award.
As we described some time ago, the chase for the California Council for Excellence and the California Award for Performance Excellence’s “prospector award” (nice: shooting for the bottom rung….) remains job # 1 for Mr. Pfab. More and more facilities maintenance personnel are complaining to us about Jerry’s expenditures in this department, alleging meetings in Sacramento where everyone is flown in and given a rental car and lodging with catered working lunches that last two to three days at a time.
The real purpose of these meetings is to coach everyone on what to say to evaluators when evaluations for this award start.
Our media partner Yen Interactive inquired about the expenditures of this program with a public information request. Specifically, Yen wanted to know what was being spent on achieving this award in terms of consultants, cash, man hours and expenses like travel, lodging and food.
What was being reported to us were figures that probably totalled into several million dollars by facilities maintenance personnel when you add up what was being alleged. If facilities maintenance personnel can effectively estimate what was being spent to date and send that to us that would be far more helpful in ascertaining how much money is being wasted while our courthouses crumble due to years of deferred maintenance.
The (then AOC’s) response was that this public information request for expenditures related to this program would require research and that the (then AOC) had no obligation to conduct research in an effort to provide an answer to this public information request.
In other words, no one has the right to know how much is being spent!
Meanwhile, bucket brigades are still deployed in some courthouses when it rains. Overpriced, sole source contracting related to building maintenance has become a norm rather than the exception and deferred maintenance is still being deferred, yet they are imposing all of this neglect with leadership and excellence……
Just Plain Leah
October 16, 2014
So now that the last honest man in the AOC, Grant Walker has passed away who will be there to to keep Mad Man Mike Quinones from hauling away every last piece of equipment that’s not nailed down?
I guess it’s safe as long as the Giant’s are in the playoffs and he and his boyfriend Judnick can cash in on the free tickets they scam from vendors.
Peppermint Pattie
October 16, 2014
This matter was reported to law enforcement, with documentation and proof. Law enforcement couldn’t have cared less.
wearyant
October 17, 2014
I guess some people are just “special” and above us all! In that case, Jer should get a raise and promotion and his retirement fully paid by the taxpayers! Wheeee!
unionman575
October 16, 2014
unionman575
October 16, 2014
unionman575
October 16, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/68106-plumas-sierra-20140827.pdf
Effective November 3, 2014 the Plumas/Sierra Regional Courthouse location of the Plumas and Sierra Superior Court will be closed. Beginning on November 3rd all current and future traffic and small claims cases for the Plumas Superior Court will be processed and heard at the Quincy Courthouse, 520 Main St., Quincy, CA 95971. Telephone (530) 283-6232. For information on all current and future traffic cases for the Sierra Superior Court please contact the Sierra Superior Court at (530) 289-3698.
JusticeCalifornia
October 17, 2014
ummmm….. so tell me again why the soon-to-be closed Plumas/Sierra Regional Courthouse was such a Judicial Council priority?
Politics? Or politics?
LOL. ENOUGH ALREADY with the CJ/JC and others depriving the public of much needed basic court services while spending precious public servant time and public funds awarding stupid awards (and expensive contracts and perqs and positions) to, or trying to acquire stupid awards (and expensive contracts and perqs and positions) for, patently compromised individuals/entities who have acted against the public interest on the public dime.
Our Chief Justice so wants adoration ( but you can’t always get what you want). . . .and attention– which I think she will ultimately get–LOL. Accordingly, I vote that Sakauye ultimately receives the top nomination for a TMZ/Perez Hilton-equivalent award for “most arrogant and least effective of CA’s worst top public servants”.
Just my opinion.
katy
October 18, 2014
So what happened? What was the reason given for closing it?
Herbert
October 19, 2014
BRAVO JCW –
Give yourself a hearty, well deserved pat on the back!!!
You have single-handedly chased the Judicial Council, running scared, away from the one extra ordinarily cost effective way of improvement through self-evaluation and assessment.
That’s quite a feat, considering that in fact the program you condemn was obviously never researched. Not to mention the fact that the blog contained a drop of truth swirled into an ocean of lies.
And to think, all this time I thought your nonsensical blog was dedicated to influencing the improvement of the way things are done. Pretty much shot yourself in the foot on this one, but go ahead and celebrate the results of your misspent efforts.
Again – Bravo to you!
Judicial Council Watcher
October 20, 2014
LOL!
Does that mean that the new executive director of the AOC terminated the effort? If so, good for him and the rest of the facilities management unit (or whatever you call yourselves these days)
Maybe now those workers can get something done other than attend those dumb meetings where they’re coached on what answers to give in that “self-assessment”
Wendy Darling
October 20, 2014
“You have single-handedly chased the Judicial Council, running scared.”
Whoo hoooo! Yipee! Yeah! Madly doing the happy dance!!!
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
October 20, 2014
One has to either laugh or cry at the state of California’s judicial branch now so please see http://www.dilbert.com for today, October 20, 2014. Scott Adams must be channeling the infamous agency once known as the Administrative Office of the Courts.
Hello, Wendy Darling! How’s tricks nowadays?
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
October 20, 2014
“We trained them to be that way by punishing honesty.” The real motto of 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
And the pointy-haired guy is a dead-ringer for Sofa Man, aka, “Little Ernie”.
Long live the ACJ.
Judicial Council Watcher
October 20, 2014
From the realm of the private message window at https:\\forms.hush.com\judicialcouncilwatcher
This is paraphrased (and commented on) to protect the source…
Coaching answers for the purposes of ‘sugarcoating’ probably violated the integrity and ethics provisions of the CAPE process. Jerry’s kids will be lucky if they’re not booted out of the council for coaching the kids how to answer the questions (commentary: assuming they’ve finally been caught.)
http://www.calexcellence.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=opcndBEfce8%3d&tabid=75&mid=585
A ton of money has been expended in this process including membership and consulting fees not to mention AOC travel expenses or flying everyone to disneyland for last years awards ceremony. A mickey mouse award for a goofy expensive effort like this.
Comment: One of the main themes of this award is how you measure up against your competition yet Jerry and his kids are a monopoly For the most part, most courts lack the authority to go out on their own and get bids that might be a whole lot less expensive than what’s being proposed by the AOC.
The big question is how did these huge expenditures benefit the courts and is it even legal (according to either policy or law) to spend trial court funds in this manner?
Comment: Lastly, will Jerry still have a job come the end of the month and are we finally going to see some of that new judicial council accountability?
unionman575
October 20, 2014
Jerry will be looking for work real soon…
😉
wearyant
October 20, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/epmeetings.htm
Emergency 24-hour notice E&P meeting scheduled for tomorrow. What’s the haps, folks? Indigestion time, perhaps? Heh heh. I’d like to say, “Be well,” but I can’t.
Long live the ACJ
JusticeCalifornia
October 20, 2014
I wonder if it has anything to do with the requests made to E&P to speak at the October Judicial Council meeting during the public comment period? And Clifford Alumbo’s various emails sent today as follows:
“This message is sent to acknowledge receipt of your request to address the Judicial Council during its business meeting on October 27–28 in San Francisco. You will receive a follow-up reply with detailed information shortly. Please contact me in the event of any changes regarding your request or if you need additional assistance. Thank you.”
For the Judicial Council the chickens are coming home to roost.
unionman575
October 20, 2014
It does.
The chickens are coming home to roost and soon.
😉
unionman575
October 20, 2014
Indigestion time for the Death Star…enjoy you Death Star management humps.
😉
unionman575
October 20, 2014
Oh Ant, you old tease you…give it to the people here RAW. You know I love your help on here Ant…
Why deprive us of the Death Star’s last minute chicanery?
Notice of Open Meeting with Closed Session of the
Executive and Planning Committee’
THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED BY ELECTRONIC MEANS
Meeting Date:
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Time:
12:10 to 1:10 p.m.
Public Call-In Number:
877-820-7831; passcode 846-8947 (listen only)
In accordance with California Rules of Court, rule 10.75(e)(1), public notice is hereby given that the Executive and Planning Committee will hold a meeting open to the public on Tuesday, October 21, 2014, from 12:10 to 1:10 p.m. A portion of the meeting will be closed pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 10.75(d)(1). A copy of the agenda for this meeting is available on the advisory body web page on the California Courts website listed above.
This meeting is being held under urgent circumstances because the committee chair has determined that the matters to be discussed during this meeting require prompt action.
Audio Recording
Members of the public seeking to make an audio recording of the open portion of the meeting must submit a written request at least two business days before the meeting. Requests can be e-mailed to executiveandplanning@jud.ca.gov.
Posted on: October 20, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/epmeetings.htm
executiveandplanning@jud.ca.gov
😉
unionman575
October 20, 2014
Hark I see another JC meeting on the horizon
http://www.courts.ca.gov/27469.htm
I’ll give the agenda & related materials a quick study and get back to yall tomorrow night close to the midnight hour…
Meanwhile, I have an appt with my next Vodka Tonic
😉
Ant — you and I gotta do drinks after I retire in March 2015.
I am buying.
wearyant
October 20, 2014
Well … since you’re buyin’ ! 😀 Please continue to “work” here at JCW, UMan! Congrats on workin’ the frontlines before and during the total meltdown of the trial courts by Queen Feckless and her minions!!
unionman575
October 20, 2014
Meanwhile here is a taste as we embark on CCMS II…Time to make some noise and say HELL NO!
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jc-20141028-item3.pdf
Executive Summary
The Judicial Council Technology Committee recommends that the Judicial Council adopt the
updated Court Technology Governance and Strategic Plan. This document outlines a new
judicial branch technology governance and funding model, strategic plan, and tactical plan,
which will provide a comprehensive and cohesive technology strategy, with clear, measurable
goals and objectives at the branch level. The Governance and Strategic Plan was submitted to the
Judicial Council at the August 2014 meeting with the understanding that updates to reflect the
importance of language access as a component of the plan would be added to the plan and
distributed at the October 2014 meeting.
Calling Michael Paul to the rescue….as I am not the tech guru that you are big guy…
😉
unionman575
October 20, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jc-20141028-info1.pdf
Judicial Council: Implementation of Judicial
Council Directives on Judicial Council Staff
Restructuring
Restructure this:
JusticeCalifornia
October 20, 2014
If not the AG or the Guv. . . .Who’s responsible? Straight from the OGC’s Bob Buckley:
Okay, stop ROTFL. It’s not funny. That is why the branch has zero credibility.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jc-20141028-itemB.pdf
Look at Table 1, under the categories for which there is a “data not available” notation.
It’s a question of priorities. . . .Sakauye would rather spend public money on name changes, awards to those who least deserve them, SWOV, maintaining absolute power. . .and of course being driven around on the public dime. . . .
JusticeCalifornia
October 20, 2014
(If the video link doesn’t work. . . .the bottom line is Bob’s answer on tape is the CJ.)
Wendy Darling
October 20, 2014
Queen Feckless won’t accept responsibility for anything. And she couldn’t care less about the demise of branch credibility or violations of law committed by branch “leadership” or branch administrators.
As I have said before: I knew everything I ever needed to know about Tani Cantil Sakauye when the State Legislature demanded that Bill Vickrey be fired, and Sakauye not only figuratively flipped the Legislature off, but also praised and exalted Vickrey, and named an annual Judicial Branch award for “excellence” in administration in his perpetual honor. One of the biggest crooks in the history of California government and public service, and this is who she defends and exalts.
Can anyone name even one — just one — act of leadership by Tani Cantil Sayauye in the last four, now nearly five, years that is worthy of following?
(Crickets chirping)
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
October 21, 2014
SAME AS IS EVER WAS.
Look at: Cal. Gov’t. Code §77001.5.
“On or before November 1, 2007, the Judicial Council shall adopt, and shall report to the Legislature annually thereafter upon, judicial administration standards and measures that promote the fair and efficient administration of justice, including, but not limited to, the following subjects:
(1)Providing equal access to courts and respectful treatment for all court participants.
(2)Case processing, including the efficient use of judicial resources.
(3)General court administration.”
Then look at: http://www.courts.ca.gov/4629.htm
Stated Judicial Council Strategic and Operational Planning Goal 1: Access Fairness Diversity
“The branch is working to ensure that the courts are free from both bias and the appearance of bias, meeting the needs of increasing numbers of self-represented litigants, remaining receptive to the needs of all branch constituents, ensuring that court procedures are fair and understandable, and providing culturally responsive programs and services.”
Hahahahahahaha– really? Let’s see how the Chief Justice is studying the access/fairness/diversity issues in an effort to meet the needs of court users in the face of decades-long complaints of bias, procedural misconduct, and intentional file tampering:
Cal Courtool Data gathered for the 2014 Judicial Council Report to the Legislature on
Judicial Administration Standards and Measures That Promote the Fair and Efficient
Administration of Justice (identical to 2013):
Access & Fairness Survey: No ongoing reporting N/A N/A (no data available)
Reliability and Integrity of Case Files: No ongoing reporting N/A N/A (no data available)
Our arrogant gambling barmaid’s approach to the legislative mandate to report to the legislature on the branch’s efforts to ensure fairness, equal access and respectful treatment for court participants, and sound court administration including protection of the reliability and integrity of case files:
DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL
SHOOT THE MESSENGERS
THE BEST DEFENSE IS A GOOD OFFENSE– DESTROY THE EVIDENCE AND REWARD THE WORST OFFENDERS
Court employee satisfaction is dealt with the same way in this latest Judicial Council report (no ongoing reporting, N/A N/A, no data available)
Heads should roll at the Judicial Council, starting with the woman in charge. After four long years, Tani Cantil Sakauye still appears clueless about the fact that she is a public servant, paid by the public to serve the public, not her vast ego.
This report –issued after Tani Cantil Sakauye has been Chief Justice for almost 4 years, is Exhibit “A” supporting the view of many that for the good of the branch this gambling barmaid needs to go. She should make it easy on everyone and resign “to spend more time with her family”.
JusticeCalifornia
October 21, 2014
Tani Cantil Sakauye and her administration have failed the public miserably. Did our chief justice know better? Did she and does she understand how key members of the legislature really feel– which is, the branch should be soliciting and responding to public input? Should she have spent the last four years as Chief Justice listening to the public concerns? Oh yeah. She has been a Judicial Council member since 2008.
Senator Darrell Steinberg, from comment 13 to the 12/2009 Commission for Impartial Courts Final Report found here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/cicfinalreport(1).pdf
“An impartial and independent judiciary is fundamental to the operation of our democracy and the dispensation of equal and fair justice under the law. Judicial accountability enhances public confidence in the judiciary, which is essential because of the crucial role the judiciary plays in adjudicating disputes and in preserving and protecting our democracy, our rule of law, and democratic processes. This I embrace wholeheartedly the goal of the Commission to study and recommend ways to strengthen the impartiality “.
“I wish to express concern over the glaring lack of significant discussion and recommendations for improving judicial accountability, which I see as the most important goal of the Commission’s work. Without judicial accountability, the public will not have confidence in its judiciary, no matter how qualified or impartial the judges appear to be. The report itself recognizes (p.72) that “independence and accountability are equal in the eyes of the public and that the road to independence is through accountability.” Yet, of the 109 recommendations proposed by the Commission, it fails to make a single recommendation for the mandatory adoption of ideas to enhance public accountability.”
“While I understand the judiciary’s discomfort with public judicial performance evaluations because of their subjective nature, the more the public has an opportunity to comment upon the operations of the court, the better the public will understand how a court works and have confidence in its proceedings. Simply educating the public as to how the court operates is a one-way communication; there is no ability to ascertain the public’s reception of that communication or to receive any public feedback. Correspondingly, the more the public is shut out of the process of developing better court systems, the less trust and confidence it will have in the courts because the extant processes will not reflect the concerns of the public. There are myriad methods for public judicial performance evaluations (JPEs) that can, and do, fairly measure performance, particularly those that use appropriate process-driven criteria to determine whether a judge handled a specific case in a balanced, fair, and efficient manner. JPEs, when designed and used properly, are but educational tools at their core. They can provide constructive feedback to judges and help them identify areas of strength and areas potentially in need of improvement, all for the greater good. I understand that JPEs are used in varying forms in 19 states, the District of Columbia and in Puerto Rico, with six states making the results available to the public. Surely, California’s judiciary should stand with those states that promote greater judicial accountability for the public and not less.”
JusticeCalifornia
October 21, 2014
10 fricking years ago the Judicial Council was put on notice–via its own commissioned research (set forth in a June 2005 Praxis report), about how the public REALLY feels about the branch.
http://www.coastalpost.com/07/01/03.html
“The strongest influence on public opinions of the courts is the perception of fairness in the procedures used by the courts. Factors that are associated with procedural fairness include (1) being unbiased in case decisions, (2) treating people with dignity and respect, (3) listening carefully to what people have to say, and (4) taking the needs of people into account.”
“Statewide factors that influence perceptions of procedural fairness include (1) protecting constitutional rights, (2) ensuring public safety, (3) assisting those who want to act as their own attorney, (4) reporting to the public on job performance, and (5) making sure judges follow the rules…”
“Local factors that influence perceptions of procedural fairness include (1) conducting cases in a timely manner, (2) being open at convenient times, (3) judges being honest and fair, (4) judges who are independent (not influenced by political considerations), (5) the average citizen being able to understand what takes place in courts, (6) juries being representative of the community, (7) the courts being in touch with the community, (8) overcoming feelings of reluctance/uneasiness about going to court.. .”
“Experience in a court case other than a juror (e.g., litigant, witness, victim, respond to a jury summons) is associated with both lower approval ratings of the courts and lower ratings on procedural fairness.”
“Victims and litigants gave the lowest approval ratings of the courts.”
“Members of the public who are more familiar with the courts are the least positive/have the least confidence in the courts”
“Attorneys who do business with the courts on a daily basis tend to be the least positive in their assessments of the courts”
It is incredible that notwithstanding direction from the legislature and the enactment of Cal. Gov’t. Code §77001.5, NOTHING has changed. If anything, things are worse.
The Governor and the Legislature need to sit up and take notice of the fact that the last two Chief Justices have thumbed their noses at both the legislature, and the public that all three branches are supposed to be serving.
No more excuses by anybody. Sakauye has been on the Judicial Council for six years. She has been CJ for almost four. Drastic action must be taken by the Governor and the Legislature to protect the public from the ongoing and willful administrative failures of Tani Cantil Sakauye and her Judicial Council.
JusticeCalifornia
October 21, 2014
And all of the above is the prelude. . . . .drumroll. . . .to this. . . .
The Governor and the Attorney General have directed the public to take their concerns about the branch directly to the Judicial Council.
Accordingly, the public went to the Judicial Council and delivered a written request for a meeting with the Chair of the Judicial Council–she who they have been told is responsible for everything– and a public hearing, to discuss at least 28 enumerated public concerns.
Our Chief Justice–she who is responsible for everything– has responded as follows:
No meeting with the chief.
No public hearing.
Everyone from any of CA’s counties (16 counties were represented at the 9/19 protest) who has anything to say about any of those 28 topics — along with anyone who wants to speak about something else– has to do so within the 30 minutes total allotted for public comment at this month’s meeting.
Yeah baby. Gotta love the gambling barmaid’s arrogant transparency about her and her Judicial Council’s disdain for the public’s concerns, and their attempt to use Judicial Council protocol to shut the public down but quick.
ROTFL. You could not write a better set-up script for a take-down than this.
I wonder if E & P is going to address how to do damage control today?
REALLY looking forward to next week’s JC meeting.
sharonkramer
October 21, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jc-20141028-agenda.pdf
“Item 4 4:15–4:25 p.m.
Judicial Branch Administration: Update to Court Technology Governance and Strategic Plan (Action Required)
The Judicial Council Technology Committee recommends that the Judicial Council adopt the updated Court Technology Governance and Strategic Plan. This document outlines a new judicial branch technology governance and funding model, strategic plan, and tactical plan, which will provide a comprehensive and cohesive technology strategy, with clear, measurable goals and objectives at the branch level. The Governance and Strategic Plan was submitted to the Judicial Council at the August 2014 meeting with the understanding that updates to reflect the importance of language access as a component of the plan would be added to the plan and distributed at the October 2014 meeting.
Public Comment and Presentation (5 minutes) • Discussion (5 minutes)
Speaker: Hon. James E. Herman, Chair, Judicial Council Technology Committee”
What’s the “updated Court Technology Governance and Strategic Plan”?
wearyant
October 21, 2014
CCMS II! Until this rogue agency is stopped, they will continue with ill-advised disaster after disaster, the victims being the public who are supposed to be served. Ahh,well, sit down and get comfy with popcorn and G&T to wait and watch. These goofballs do not disappoint in their entertainment factor — that is, if you’re into ultra scary chillers with horrendous endings. This isn’t Hallmark Channel.
R Campomadera
October 22, 2014
Sorry, Weary Ant…my fat finger accidentally hit the “thumbs down” button. Meant to hit the “thumbs up” button!!
wearyant
October 22, 2014
LOL!
Judicial Council Watcher
October 21, 2014
An email went out to the 60+ participants in the AOC’s CAPE awards program confirming that the plug has been pulled on the effort.
We’d like to sincerely thank the dedicated and conscientious employees of the (former) AOC for bringing this concern to us – and not that worthless heap of dung running internal audits.
At least we produce results and you don’t get fired in the process. 🙂
Wendy Darling
October 21, 2014
“An email went out to the 60+ participants in the AOC’s CAPE awards program confirming that the plug has been pulled on the effort.”
Whoo hoooo! Yipee! Yeah! Madly doing the happy dance!!! That it just pfabulous!!!!!
Wow, that’s twice in one week. Not used to madly doing the happy dance twice in one week when it comes to 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
Come to think of it, can’t remember ever madly doing the happy dance before when it comes to 455 Golden Gate Avenue. For any reason.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
October 22, 2014
“At least we produce results and you don’t get fired in the process.”
+++++++++++++++++++++
You are so totally cool, JCW! [smooches!]
unionman575
October 21, 2014
The history:
Judicial Council Technology Committee
Purpose:
Oversees the council’s policies concerning technology and is responsible in partnership with the courts for coordinating with the Administrative Director of the Courts and all internal committees, advisory committees, commissions, working groups, task forces, justice partners and stakeholders on technological issues relating to the branch and the courts.
Date Established:
April 2011 (as CCMS Internal Committee); officially renamed with a new purpose as the Judicial Council Technology Committee in June 2012
😉
.
Coming soon to a theater near you:
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jctc-20141027-NoticeofMeeting.pdf
Meeting Date: October 27, 2014
Time: 11:30 a.m. – 12:45 p.m.
Location: Redwood Room, 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
Public Call-In Number: 1-877-820-7831; Passcode: 351860
unionman575
October 21, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/27508.htm
Council to Consider Requests for Supplemental Funding
JusticeCalifornia
October 22, 2014
http://www.news10.net/story/news/investigations/2014/05/16/judicial-protection-section-chief-justice/9159905/
Remember this news report? Just a little reminder about the priorities of our “let them eat cake” gambling barmaid.
Her ostentatious and wasteful use of taxpayer money for chauffeurs and trips could help cover the supplemental funding requests of these four courts.
It could also fund an all-day public hearing so she could do her job and listen to what the people who pay her salary think about what is going on in the branch under her watch.
anonymous
October 21, 2014
To: Jerry
From: “The Kids”
It was an embarrassing waste of money you don’t have. And that’s a Two-Fer for JCW in saving the people of California money with respect to the the councils dumb ideas.
sharonkramer
October 22, 2014
Good job, Judicial Council Watcher!
unionman575
October 22, 2014
Yeah good job JCW, you are on your game.
😉
unionman575
October 23, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jc-20141028-info2.pdf
sharonkramer
October 23, 2014
Unionman,
Where’s the part in the link you provided which says, “Effective immediately, the Chief Justice will start taking a Greyhound bus to work.”? I must have missed it.
1. Effective October 14, 2014, the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County intends to
close the clerk’s office of the Solvang Division located at 1745 Mission Drive, Suite C,
Solvang.
2. The Superior Court of Solano County will have limited operation days on Wednesday,
November 26, 2014, Friday, December 26, 2014, and Friday, January 2, 2015.
3. Effective November 1, 2014, the Superior Court of Glenn County intends to reduce court
office and telephone hours until further notice by closing its offices at 3:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
4. Effective November 3, 2014, the Superior Court of Plumas County will reduce the
clerk’s office and telephone hours. All offices will close daily at 3:00 p.m. and telephones
will be answered between 8:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
5. Effective November 3, 2014, the Superior Courts of Plumas and Sierra Counties will
close the Plumas/Sierra Regional Courthouse location in Portola.
6. Effective October 31, 2014, the Superior Court of Mono County will close the Mammoth
Lakes Courthouse to the public every third Friday through the remainder of this fiscal
year (13 days).
7. Effective November 3, 2014, the Superior Court of Humboldt County will reduce the
hours the clerks’ office is available to the public.
8. The Superior Court of Fresno County will temporarily close the Main Criminal
Courthouse and B.F. Sisk Courthouse
9. The Superior Court of Kings County intends to reduce staffing and temporarily limit the
hours and operations of its Divisions and Departments between December 24, 2014, and
January 1, 2015.
10. In June of this year, the Superior Court of Fresno County provided notice of intent to
temporarily close the Family Support Courtrooms,
11. The Superior Court of Contra Costa County will have temporary reductions in service in
all court locations on December 29, 30, 31, 2014, and January 2, 2015.
12. Effective November 24, 2014, the Superior Court of Santa Clara County will reduce
business office and telephone hours by one hour at courthouses located in Palo Alto,
Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, San Jose, and Morgan Hill.
13. Effective November 24, 2014, the Superior Court of Amador County will further reduce
its hours of operations by closing the clerk’s office a half hour earlier Monday through
Thursday, and by closing the office every other Friday.
14. The Superior Court of Stanislaus County will temporarily reduce the clerk’s office hours
on the last two Wednesday’s of December 2014. The clerk’s office will be open from
8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., closing four hours early on Wednesday, December 24, 2014, and
Wednesday, December 31, 2014.
15. The Superior Court of Napa County will be closed on Wednesday, November 26, 2014,
Friday, December 26, 2014, and Friday, January 2, 2015. Additionally, the court will
continue its schedule of closing at 2:30 p.m. on each Friday. (Attachment P)
16. The Superior Court of Yolo County will temporarily close to the public on the following
dates and times:…
wearyant
October 23, 2014
WTF! Notices — multiple — of court hours of services shortened and fee increases. What a testament to the state of the California courts under feckless and her cronies. Gawd-awful.
On a side note, Blackwater and that utterly shameful episode in the news again. Another horrendous entity which found it advisable to change their name … they’re hoping to fade away, far away from the public’s recognition and awareness. Not on my watch!
You just can’t make this stuff up. Really.
Long live the ACJ and JCW
unionman575
October 23, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/pclc-20141028-notice.pdf
JusticeCalifornia
October 23, 2014
So how long has it been since there was public comment at a Judicial Council meeting? LOL.
Notice sent out by the Judicial Council today:
“This notice provides an update on the time for public comment on Monday, October 27, during the Judicial Council’s business meeting in San Francisco.
As previously indicated in the notice attached below, the Judicial Council agenda allocates a total of 30 minutes for all requests to speak. The time allotted for each speaker is dependent on the number of requests received by the day of the council meeting. Based on the number of requests already received, and to continue to allow opportunity for other requests, we anticipate that the time for individual remarks will generally be limited to no more than one minute.”
The Governor and the AG and OGC supervising attorney Bob Buckley have all advised those concerned about unethical acts and court crimes committed by those within the branch to go to Tani Cantil Sakauye and her hand-picked Judicial Council. Sakauye has responded by giving each person 60 seconds or less to speak.
Gotta love the priorities of our gambling barmaid and her Judicial Council. Don’t they get it yet? They are paid by the public, to serve the public, and they need to STAY ON TASK and follow state constitutional and legislative mandates to survey judicial business and report to the legislature.
The legislature has been pretty clear about its concerns about current “top leadership’s” leadership and priorities.
The responsible members of the Judicial Council need to call out and end the gambling barmaid’s expensive taxpayer-paid fancy trips and chauffeur service — if that is what it takes, LOL– in order to fund and schedule a public hearing about the public’s concerns about the branch.
sharonkramer
October 23, 2014
Less than a minute: “Me want you to end fraud upon the court. It criminal, hurt me and hurt everyone else. Governor, AG and OGC say you are responsible to make it stop. So do your job and stop it.”
In all seriousness, I find it to be a major step in the right direction that public comment is now permitted at JC meetings to discuss matters not on their agenda. This opens the door for matters that are typically swept under the rug to be brought to greater light. Light on a problem forces the acknowledgement that there is a problem. Acknowledgment is the first step to solving it.
JusticeCalifornia
October 23, 2014
http://www.news10.net/story/news/investigations/2014/05/16/judicial-protection-section-chief-justice/9159905/
Unclear on the concept of what “public service” means. That means serving the public, not having the public serve you.
Tell that to the blackjack dealer/cocktail waitress who is running the largest judiciary in the world— who thinks it means having a CHP chauffeur drive you home to your gated community, and hand you your purse and shopping bag on the public dime.
The chickens are coming home to roost.