Good morning California,
It’s been a few days since we’ve commented on the news and yet there’s been so much of it. Most of California is still experiencing shell shock over the quarter million dollar per day AOC expenditures on CCMS for a program that’s ostensibly finished. It’s obvious to all by now that Mr. Mark Moore knew what he was running from and got out while the getting was good. Mark left behind our favorite CCMS pinata, one Justice Terence Bruniers because as we know only a justice has enough juice to be credibly dishonest –
– credible dishonesty is a subject of intense immersion currently being practiced by our current Chief Justice with the “forget about all the tainted people in my administration because they were tainted before I took office, so you can just go ahead and forget about what they did before because I now occupy the chiefs chair” attitude.
– credible dishonesty is practiced by our chief justice when she indicates she is willing to do anything to keep the doors of courthouses open right before a vote to close them by choosing to fund and mothball for a year CCMS instead.
– credible dishonesty is practiced by our chief justice when she compares CCMS to a Ferrari in the garage that we can’t afford gas and insurance for. If it looks like a 1972 chevy vega and belches smoke like a 1978 olds diesel chances are it was imported from Detroit or Mumbai and not “Developed in Silicon Valley”
Of the thousands of software designers and firms located in her virtual Silicon Valley headquarters that could have taken this project on and delivered a functional application for a couple million dollars, an elaborate RFP that defines only a few providers is issued and only one of those, the most controversial one, is selected as sole source provider at a burn rate of nearly a quarter million dollars per day.
Is this the kind of administration we wish to hang our hats on and count on them to administer justice?
There’s speculation that the justice has moved her position to move away from CCMS because they (we) can’t afford it, yet just a few months ago her and others on the council were touting that they could not think of a better investment in the California court system. Will the council now reverse their position in light of the dire financial straits the courts are in now and how much worse they will be if another three years of a quarter million a day is spent?
Will the trial court or legislative troys buy that the AB1208 horse on wheels just outside their gates is safe to drag in from the cold as the ‘unnecessary’ spoils of war when it appears that the CCMS navy is sailing away?
Remember, this Chief Justice has said she wouldn’t close the courts before she voted to do just that. We’ve experienced a year of a CCMS “pause” voted on by the council that amounts to a quarter million dollars a day that underscores how dysfunctional judicial branch governance really is – and how it needs to be democratized. Do you really expect that on the 27th of March that two dozen council cheerleaders will change course or will they be changing course just long enough to give others reason to defeat AB1208?
Related articles
- Judge Rosenberg takes the point and is picked off.. (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- Tani’s Civics Lesson: The responsibility of the legislature (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- And I ran, I ran so far away…. (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- While CSLB busts ten for contracting without a license, judicial branch unlicensed contractors get a free pass (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
- The Rosenberg rebuttal – By Judge Robert Dukes (judicialcouncilwatcher.wordpress.com)
Judicial Council Watcher 
Nathaniel Woodhull
March 7, 2012
I listened to the Chief Justice’s address to the Commonwealth Club on January 25, 2012. It really confirms what JCW has said about credible dishonesty. It is clear from her recent public comments here and in Southern California, that HRH has absolutely no intention of addressing the fundamental problems facing the Judicial Branch. HRH makes clear that she does not believe it is the appropriate time to even look at “governance” issues within the Branch.
We are spending over $270,000 a day on CCMS, when even HRH admits that the system is going to be shelved. In her recent address, HRH said she and the Judicial Council are awaiting the report that will be delivered to the Judicial Council later this month on the feasibility of rolling out CCMS. Her comment: “Do we have the money, to save the money, today.” The answer was I don’t think so. She claims that we have only spent $400 Million on a system that “works”, “is efficient” “it’s exciting” and “we own it”. HRH then acknowledges that the Judicial Council will learn that they probably will not have the money to deploy CCMS. Why then are we spending $270,000 a day when that money could go to the trial courts?????
Her explanation of AB 1208 and the impacts that the legislation will have on the Judicial Branch is another example of credible dishonesty.
All I can say is, JCW you have made some great points, ones which are really sad..
Wendy Darling
March 7, 2012
“Do you really expect that on the 27th of March that two dozen council cheerleaders will change course or will they be changing course just long enough to give others reason to defeat AB1208?”
I’m going with changing course just long enough to give others reason to defeat AB 1208. And so is anyone else with active brain cells.
And yes, General Woodhull, it is all really sad. The current Chief Justice and Judicial Branch administration are the disgrace of California State government, and they’re taking everyone down the sewer with them.
Long live the ACJ.
Wendy Darling
March 7, 2012
Here’s one thing to be thankful for in these dark days: Calderon, Judge Lampe, and the ACJ, know their not lemmings, and refuse behave like one and jump off the cliff of denial and failed leadership.
Published today, Wednesday, March 7, from Courthouse News Service, by Maria Dinzeo:
Author of Trial Court Funding Bill Calls for Meeting With Chief Justice
By MARIA DINZEO
(CN) – While the past few months have seen plenty of rancor on the issue of funding for California’s courts, the author of a controversial bill that would funnel more money directly to California’s trial courts has asked for a meeting later this month with California’s chief justice.
“There hasn’t been any meaningful communication. It’s all been posturing and tactics. I want to see if there’s a way that we can address the issues that are dividing the courts,” said Assembly Majority Leader Charles Calderon, author of AB 1208.
In addition to Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, he also invited Assembly Speaker John Perez and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, along with trial judges and labor union representatives. The bill has passed the Assembly, where Perez and Calderon hold a great deal of influence, and now awaits consideration in the state Senate where Steinberg holds sway.
The chief justice said late Wednesday she had received Calderon’s letter offering a meeting. “I was pleased to receive the letter and I’m looking into it,” said Cantil-Sakauye.
But Steinberg’s staff said they had not yet heard of the meeting, and Steinberg would be out of town on the proposed meeting date of March 15.
Calderon said in an interview that if the chief justice accepts his offer for a meeting, it will be the first serious discussion about the structural problems with court funding that led to the introduction of AB 1208 in the first place.
“I think it would be first time we’ve talked specifically about the problem,” Calderon said. “In our early discussions she was explaining to me that she was new and needed time to evaluate the issues at stake, and to try and find some way for her to address it, so we never discussed the issue specifically.”
“Now we have a bill, we have language, we have an approach,” he added. “Let’s have a specific discussion about that.”
One of the main forces behind the bill is a group of trial judges called the Alliance of California Judges. Kern County Superior Court Judge David Lampe said the alliance plans to accept the invitation.
“I’m not sure people are on the same page as to what the bill does,” Lampe said. “The first step is to have an actual discussion on the actual language of AB 1208.”
Read the entire article: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/07/44505.htm
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
March 7, 2012
Hey Wendy, let’s hope Tani takes a reality pill before meeting with Calderon.
Steinberg et al (most of whom are being termed out, if I am not mistaken, correct me if I am wrong) are huffing and puffing and flexing their muscles about putting off AB 1208, but Cantil Sakauye’s inexperienced, egotistical pity party rants and the documented massive waste of taxpayer dollars by her historically compromised BFF* Team George members are taxing the credibility of Sakauye’s (increasingly reluctant) “dutiful” supporters.
Let me repeat. Given what our elected officials and top leadership of all three branches know, It would be IRRESPONSIBLE, and a severe disservice to the public that elects and pays for all three branches, to let judicial branch “top leadership” business continue as usual.
*http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bff
Wendy Darling
March 7, 2012
It can safely be assumed at this point, Justice California, that the Chief Justice is too committed to drinking the Kool-Aid. Having drowned herself in it, it would take more than a single reality pill to counter the Kool-Aid’s effects.
Fortunately for all of us, the ACJ will be present in the meeting with Calderon, which can give us faith that the ACJ will attend with a reality check in hand. Probably more than one.
As always, long live the ACJ.
unionman575
March 7, 2012
They are strangers to the truth up there at the Borg.
unionman575
March 8, 2012
A reality pill, a strong cup of coffee, and bucket of ice water might be a start along with the passage of 1208. I don’r give a shit what we are told about CCMS (I have heard that bulsshit before). We do NEED 1208 NOW.
lando
March 8, 2012
I find it very troubling that the CJ doesn’t think it necessary to deal with branch governance issues and instead wants to focus on the budget. The problem of course is that both subjects go hand in hand with each other. My assumption is that the CJ thinks that if she can stall governance change off long enough, the economy may improve and the calls for change will die out once the branch is flush with money again. CCMS changed all of this. Spending half a billion dollars on a system that can’t and won’t ever work is Exhibit 1 in why our governance system needs to be changed. No one anywhere can find or locate the date that the Judicial Council voted to create a state wide case management system. My belief is that CCMS which was originally going to be a Southern California regional case management system ( that is why Ms Calebro was involved in overseeing it) morphed into a full statewide system at the direction of our former CJ who knew no one on his Judicial Council would ever question his decision. Indeed when one former member of the Council started asking questions about CCMS in 2004 2005 his concerns were ignored by the then CJ and Mr Vickrey and he was openly criticized.In stark contrast the Judicial Council AOC spin machine hailed CCMS and anyone questioning it was told to stand down. Our current CJ is “all in ” on CCMS as she strongly defended it as a member of the Council and then as CJ proclaimed that she would fix CCMS’s perceived ills by placing “subject matter” expert J Bruiners in charge of the program. Great choice. J Bruiners was the judge who testified against having a state audit of the CCMS system and who has made a number of contradictory statements about CCMS’s completion and or deployment dates. Most recently he had no idea how many hundreds of millions have been spent to get CCMS “finished”.Of course CCMS is no where near finished and never will be.As the CJ and her “insider” supporters are on the verge of going in full retreat on CCMS to stave off AB 1208, we hear from the CJ there is no need to talk about governance change. So to follow the CJ’s logic we should just all forget about how and why our branch of government just put a half billion dollars down a sewer while at the same time cash starved trial courts like LA are about to lay off hundreds of employees. CCMS and its complete history explain entirely how the insular and anti- democratic Judicial Council has failed the people we are charged with serving. AB 1208 is a great first step but we the public deserve a democratized Judicial Council and a full cleaning out of the management team at the crystal palace so meaningful reform can occur.
unionman575
March 8, 2012
Lando, I agree with “My assumption is that the CJ thinks that if she can stall governance change off long enough, the economy may improve and the calls for change will die out once the branch is flush with money again. CCMS changed all of this.”
But the CJ is in for a shocker, revenue will not “come back” for a couple of years. I wish her luck on that one.
We do need 1208 now.
unionman575
March 8, 2012
I am ordering “beer goggles” for the CCMS tech meeting on 3-27-12.
Anyone else need a pair?
JusticeCalifornia
March 8, 2012
The first 2:45 minutes of the following video tell the de-cliffing lemmings story.
JusticeCalifornia
March 8, 2012
So Steinberg is blustering about blocking AB 1208 at the moment.
What else is new? We all knew Tani would turn to him for help. She got herself into a messy pickle and needed a knight in shining armor to save her. (But don’t think for a moment he is doing it out of gallantry. This is all politics and business. He is going to collect on this debt, big time, when he terms out.)
It must be disappointing for those who thought, when Cantil Sakauye was selected to be CJ, that they were going to get this:
but instead they ended up with this:
Cantil Sakauye is not doing herself or her credibility any favors. She has yet to stand on her own two feet as chief justice. I wonder what the result of that would be. It certainly couldn’t be worse than what she has done so far. . . .
Meanwhile, let’s not forget that all the king’s horses, and all the king’s men (including Steinberg), couldn’t put King George back together again.
George’s reign is over.
unionman575
March 8, 2012
It’s nice to see the JC wants our comments.
There are no invitations to comment at this time.
Rest assured there will be plenty of comments for the 3-27-12 JC branch technology meeting.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/policyadmin-invitationstocomment.htm
Invitations to Comment
Proposals currently open for public comment
Submitting comments
Please note that comments received will become part of the public record. You may submit comments online, or mail or E-mail them as specified beneath each proposal below.
Proposals Open for Public Comment by Topic
expand all collapse a
versal-versal
March 8, 2012
Rumor has it that HRH 2 is not going to give up on CCMS. If true the harm to the courts could last for a decade if not more. Somebody about a year ago posted up a parody of the AOC and CCMS wherein the AOC representative kept saying just put the money in the bag. The satire was brilliant as was the insight expressed in the video, is this Case Management system worth dividing the judiciary? I would add to that is it worth seeing 300 people in LA Superior Court lose their jobs? Is it worth having 50 courtrooms closed down? Is it worth cutting back on essential services that effect lots of citizens like small claims and traffic court? These are the questions the legislature needs to address