Only four years ago, amid great fanfare, the former AOC heralded the opening of the Plumas/Sierra Regional Courthouse in Portola. This 6500-square-foot courthouse, which features a “prominent transparent glazed entry vestibule and tall clerestoried lobby” along with its single courtroom, was built at a cost of $4.7 million. In the AOC’s words, it “exemplifies the state of California’s efforts towards a more sustainable future.”
If this building exemplifies our future, we’re in big trouble. Apparently, the building itself can no longer be sustained. It’s closing next month.
Of the over 200 courtrooms that have been shuttered across the state since 2008, the closure of this one courtroom bears a particular significance. This building was “the first trial courthouse completed from start to finish by the California Administrative Office of the Courts.” It was supposed to represent a new era of state-directed courthouse construction, one in which our centralized branch administration would bring to bear its greater expertise and financial wherewithal to build smarter buildings for less money in places that truly needed them. Now this model project is a white elephant.
The Plumas/Sierra courthouse doesn’t just stand for bad planning and wasteful spending. As the first multi-jurisdictional courthouse in the state, it also stood for a philosophy. The sign in the front, as seen in this Court News video, reads, “Superior Court of California”—with no county designation.
The rapid demise of the Portola courthouse raises a host of questions: How did a one-room courthouse that was open only four days a month take priority over so many other desperately needed construction projects? How much more did it cost the branch to build and operate this one facility than it did to run the two modest facilities it replaced in Portola and Loyalton? How much is it going to cost for the judicial branch to maintain an empty cedar-sided courthouse deep in the heart of snow country?
Very Truly Yours,
Alliance of California Judges
Judicial Council Watcher 
sharonkramer
October 24, 2014
Wow! So what’s the back story? Who owned the land? Who brokered the deal? Were there redevelopment funds involved? Who got the construction contract?
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Nice work once again ACJ & JCW.
😉
Sue Holthaus
October 24, 2014
San Diego has the dubious distinction of being AOC’s pet project for 2014-2016 with half a billion dollars being spent on our new courthouse. It’s a daily reminder every day watching this structure being built when we all know $550 million could be used in better places including saving jobs (mine included). I don’t mind the old courthouse. What’s a few rats, bad plumbing and an earthquake fault?
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Tunnel? What tunnel?
wearyant
October 24, 2014
Always good to hear from the side of sanity, the ACJ. Thanks for sharing the letter, JCW. The situation again calls for the construction *program* being run by the entity formerly known as the infamous AOC with all the questionable judgment and *know-how* exhibited by this ethically challenged group.
Rats in the courthouse? Plumbing issues? Yes, it goes along with the territory. Earthquake fault? Well, yes, in California we all *deal* with it, going about our daily lives.
Another tale by an oldster from the courts in decades past. Our management in all their wisdom decided they would cut back on janitors, the group of employees who could least defend themselves. These pencil-pushers in court management thought they were innovative and progressive when they decided they would lay off all these hard-working janitors, who earned very little, BTW, as we all know. Great savings galore! 😦 Frontline trial court workers were informed we were to dump our own trash from our cubicles into one main barrel in our *main room* daily, I think. Large barrels were quickly supplied on all floors. Then the greatly decimated staff of beleaguered janitors would come by very infrequently to pick up from the main barrel. 😀 Soon we had mice, lots of ’em, all the way up to the third and fourth floors. Insects too! Strange, tiny bites on ankles and wrists. Perhaps they were fleas brought in by the mice. I forget how it all ended, whether there was some sort of strange compromise, because bureaucrats NEVER back down or apologize for their bonehead efforts. The janitors were royally screwed without the romance!
Just like the time it was thought to be a great idea and save in overtime and weekend hours for maintenance workers to repair the roof (leaks, leaks, whenever the mist would come from the ocean or a slight rainfall). It was a common sight to see pans, cooking pans, handles and all, all sorts and varieties, in hallways in public areas and in chambers alike. Trash baskets were utilized also. The workers were attempting to repair something *up there* whilst all manner or workaday life in the courts continued, trials included, to contain the problem; and, long story short, we were all “gassed” by some retch-impelling, noxious fumes zipping in through the recycled air vents, another most stupid idea to have in an area where the ocean breezes are wondrous and plentiful; but, no, we had to have recycled air shared with employees, the public, gawd knows what-all and locked-up hapless prisoners. And, yes, the *court officials* were nonrepentant and uptight in that case also. The move should really begin to audit the construction *program* with an eye to shut it down!
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
October 24, 2014
Oh, forgot to mention, the noxious fumes drove everyone out to the parking lot and vistas in front of the courts in the middle of the day. All work ceased, trials stopped, no *savings* realized by cutting the workers from any after hours or weekend work. So hare brained!
And a disclaimer. Of course this building was not put together by the infamous AOC, I grudgingly admit. I do love to bash the thugs there! 😀
unionman575
October 24, 2014
😀
Judicial Council Watcher
October 24, 2014
The AOC intends to double down on their bad investment by building a new Quincy courthouse, though it’s been delayed indefinitely. By all accounts, the existing county owned courthouse is adequate and well maintained. Everyone is satisfied with it except the courts and the AOC. The reason Plumas gets two new courthouses while others are left begging is because of judicial council darling Ira Kaufman. A new Quincy courthouse should never be built much like the portola-loyalton courthouse, manned only 4 days a month should have never been built.
.
sharonkramer
October 24, 2014
Click to access ccn092010.pdf
Hon. Ira Kaufman, Plumas Superior Court Presiding Judge “The smartest thing we could do in terms of economy, efficiency is to build one courthouse in this region. And this is a unique idea. There are no other courthouses in the state that have a regional concept in terms of two counties occupying one courthouse.”
Hon. William Pangman, Sierra Superior Court Presiding Judge “This would not have happened without so much cooperation between the counties, the two courts, and the AOC.”
Ron Overholt, Deputy Director, Administrative Office of the Courts “Whether the population is along the county line or in the county seat or wherever it is, our mission is to be where the people are so that anyone who needs access to justice has access to justice.”
courtflea
October 24, 2014
Another project that seemed like a good idea at the time. ….
unionman575
October 24, 2014
http://www.metnews.com/articles/2014/snippets102414.htm
Friday, October 24, 2014
Page 11
SNIPPETS (Column)
Alliance Faults AOC for Opening, Closing $4.7 Million Courthouse
Although the Administrative Office of the Courts no longer exists—now being referred to simply as the Judicial Council’s staff—the Alliance of California Judges is continuing in its attacks on the AOC, yesterday accusing it of “bad planning and wasteful spending” in connection with a short-lived courthouse in Portola, a sparsely populated city in Plumas County.
It says in a statement that the Plumas/Sierra Regional Courthouse was opened “[o]nly four years ago, amid great fanfare,” and comments:
“This 6500-square-foot courthouse, which features a ‘prominent transparent glazed entry vestibule and tall clerestoried lobby’ along with its single courtroom, was built at a cost of $4.7 million. In the AOC’s words, it ‘exemplifies the state of California’s efforts towards a more sustainable future.’
“If this building exemplifies our future, we’re in big trouble. Apparently, the building itself can no longer be sustained. It’s closing next month.”
The statement continues:
“Of the over 200 courtrooms that have been shuttered across the state since 2008, the closure of this one courtroom bears a particular significance. This building was “the first trial courthouse completed from start to finish by the California Administrative Office of the Courts.”
It was supposed to represent a new era of state-directed courthouse construction, one in which our centralized branch administration would bring to bear its greater expertise and financial wherewithal to build smarter buildings for less money in places that truly needed them. Now this model project is a white elephant.”
The Alliance poses these questions:
“How did a one-room courthouse that was open only four days a month take priority over so many other desperately needed construction projects? How much more did it cost the branch to build and operate this one facility than it did to run the two modest facilities it replaced in Portola and Loyalton? How much is it going to cost for the judicial branch to maintain an empty cedar-sided courthouse deep in the heart of snow country?”
Plumas Presiding Judge Ira Kaufman is quoted in the Plumas County News as saying:
“We hope to reopen the courthouse and return to a normal work schedule once funding is restored to the judicial branch and the courts.”
😉
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Ira Kaufman? + Vodka Tonic=
courtflea
October 24, 2014
Heck u man he don’t need no stinking booze for that 😉
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Click to access cscac-20141030-notice.pdf
unionman575
October 24, 2014
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ZZH72HF
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Governor George Deukmejian Courthouse, Long Beach, CA, USA (Developer: Long Beach Judicial Partners LLC/Meridiam Infrastructure; Designer: AECOM) – An environmentally friendly, public building delivered through an innovative public-private partnership.
http://uli.org/press-release/2014-global-awards-excellence/
unionman575
October 24, 2014
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article3326044.html
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Click to access jc_org_chart.pdf
New Death Star org chart Oct 2014
sharonkramer
October 25, 2014
What’s the deal with the dotted line from Admin Director to Legal Services while going around the Chief of Staff?
Click to access jc_org_chart.pdf
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Click to access hr-staffing-metrics-1415-09.pdf
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Hark, I hear a word from Hot Rod:
Click to access 68106-san-diego-20141022.pdf
sharonkramer
October 25, 2014
Wow. This must make those soon to be laid off San Diego court employees feel really betrayed when they see the gazillions of dollars being spent on the new courthouse.
unionman575
October 24, 2014
Click to access 68106-Calaveras-20141021.pdf
Public service you say?
Not today…
😉
local observer
October 25, 2014
The land was given to the State. The AOC had the opportunity to share the building and staffing with the Sheriff and the City but they wouldn’t consider those options. Hard they cooperated the Court could have maintained some limited use and shared building operating expenses. Instead, it sits vacant
Wendy Darling
October 25, 2014
455 Golden Gate Avenue doesn’t “share”. Anything. They only know how to hoard and waste. And perpetually demand “more money.” Sharing isn’t in the playbook.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
October 25, 2014
Click to access famjuv-20141103-notice.pdf
unionman575
October 25, 2014
http://www.courts.ca.gov/tcbac.htm
November 5, 2014 Meeting (Teleconference)
12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.
unionman575
October 25, 2014
Court Technology Advisory Committee (CTAC) Meeting
Date: Friday, October 31, 2014
Time: 10:00 a.m. to 11:20 a.m. Public Meeting
11:20 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Nonpublic Meeting
Location: Teleconference
Call-In Number: 1-877-820-7831 Public Access Code # 4348559 (listen only)
Click to access ctac-20141031-notice.pdf
unionman575
October 25, 2014
Click to access jc-20141028-itemI.pdf
unionman575
October 25, 2014
Click to access jc-20141028-itemM.pdf
unionman575
October 25, 2014
Follow the money…I do…
Click to access jc-20141028-itemN.pdf
unionman575
October 25, 2014
Click to access jc-20141028-info1.pdf
Here’s a newsflash: I give you an “F” Death Star.
I know, I know, you gave yourself and “A”.
unionman575
October 25, 2014
I would say there is a huge amount of service reductions:
Click to access jc-20141028-info2.pdf
unionman575
October 25, 2014
A laundry list of messed up, unmaintained courthouses that are ready to fall down.
Meanwhile we build big new Taj Majals that are gonna close real soon.
Click to access jc-20141028-info4.pdf
Judicial Council Watcher
February 11, 2015
You’ll note that the Judicial Council’s Ministry of Truth & Enlightenment marked private the video in our post that promoted with great fanfare the opening of the Plumas-Sierra regional courthouse.
This just happened and is a precursor to what we can expect from the Judicial Council staff under the leadership of Martin Hoshino.
unionman575
February 11, 2015
“Private”.
Nice!
😉
unionman575
February 11, 2015
http://www.sierracourt.org/generalinfo/tabid/55/default.aspx
PUBLIC NOTICE
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 68106
August 27, 2014
Currently the Plumas/Sierra Regional Courthouse court location of the Superior Court of California, Counties of Plumas and Sierra (in Portola, CA) is open Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., excluding court holidays. The telephone lines are answered Monday through Thursday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and Friday 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
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.
The courts find this action necessary due to the continuing and ongoing budget reductions to the local trial courts. The budget reduction to the local trial courts in the current fiscal year has demanded that the courts examine all phases of their operations and make reductions in service levels. If the budget for the courts increases in future years, the courts would work to re-open the regional courthouse.
We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause. If you would like to submit comments on the closure of the Regional Courthouse court location, please submit them in writing to Deborah Norrie, Court Executive Officer, Plumas Superior Court, 520 Main St., Room 104, Quincy, CA 95971 or Lee Kirby, Court Executive Officer, Sierra Superior Court, P.O. Box 476, Downieville, CA 95936.
😉
JusticeCalifornia
February 11, 2015
Marie Antoinette Sakauye and Hoshino (her whipping boy of the moment) closing down information available on the web. . . . .circling the wagons? Getting ready for that inevitable court construction audit?
Marie Antoinette changes court administrators and favorites like…..ummm…. what is that Katy Perry song I am sure all current and former Judicial Council whipping boys and girls sing?
So many believe that the court construction and other judicial council programs work via pay for play. You pay homage, you give lip service to the CJ, and you get to play. You don’t, you are out in the cold.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/20706.htm
Auntie Bureaucrat
February 11, 2015
If they’re worried about the inevitable court construction audit, they’re going to have to do more than make a video disappear.
Maybe the next over-paid private contractor they call in should be David Copperfield. To make the building disappear.
wearyant
February 11, 2015
As much as these thugs at the AOC wish to pretend they are within the private sector, they are not. They are financed by the public. The public, the great unwashed, teeming horde of which I am one of the lowly types, we have all paid our dues and have already paid to play. The queen keeps forgetting, as do her esteemed followers, they are backed by taxpayer dollars. Yet, in some courts they don’t even take the calls from the public. How much worse can this trainwreck get?!
As for their “private” video, I’ll bet it’s back up again once their highly paid eggheads figure out how to snag a list of all IPs wanting to sneak a peek. 🙂
Wendy Darling
February 11, 2015
“The queen keeps forgetting, as do her esteemed followers, they are backed by taxpayer dollars.”
Let me know, Ant, when someone, anyone, in a position of authority and responsibility is going to do something about that.
Long live the ACJ.