Last week, the Judicial Council voted unanimously to deny emergency funding to the Del Norte, Siskiyou, and Mono Superior Courts. All three counties had bought into the Council’s predictions of a more generous judicial branch budget; now they find themselves running on empty. Del Norte was looking for $300,000, Mono for $82,000, and Siskiyou for just $72,000. Siskiyou was asking to get back nothing more than the money it had contributed to the statewide reserve. Maria Dinzeo’s article from Courthouse News lays out the details. In voting to deny the funds, Council member Kenneth So of San Diego said, “A lot of courts are in the position of those three counties. And I think that’s one of the reasons why we have this rule. And the rule is there needs to be a demonstrated, unavoidable funding shortage.”
Without the emergency money, more court employees are going to lose their jobs or be furloughed, and more courts will have to reduce their hours of service. We urge you to read another article that Maria Dinzeo wrote for Courthouse News, this one on the alarming statewide trend toward whittling down courtroom hours for budget reasons.
Could the Council possibly make cuts to other programs in order to come up with the $454,000 to help out these three rural counties?
A quick look at the Judicial Council’s vendor payments for the first half of 2014 suggests a number of areas in which the Council can save some money. The Council spent over $7 million for “Consultants-Information Systems.” The Council also paid outside law firms over $1.5 million for “Legal Services-Litigation.” The California Highway Patrol got over $2.4 million for security in just the first half of this year—including security for the Commission on Judicial Performance. Surely our leaders could find $454,000 in there somewhere to keep rural courtrooms open.
Maybe the Council can shed some of its staff members rather than requiring the trial courts to lay off even more of theirs. According to its latest set of staffing metrics, the Council employs the equivalent of 164 full-time employees in Information Technology alone, including 54 contractors. CJER has the equivalent of 44 full-time staffers. In fact, while courts have continued to cut staffing, the number of Judicial Council full-time employee positions increased from 779 in March to 798 in September.
A review of the Judicial Council’s Supplementary Schedule of Operating Expenses and Equipment reveals even more potential savings. The Council estimates that in this fiscal year, it will spend over $2 million for in-state travel; over $1.5 million for “communications”; over $16.5 million for outside consultants and “professional services.”
The Council did vote to give $509,000 to Kings County to help it replace its case management system. Why did Kings get the money while the other three counties didn’t? According to the Council, only Kings demonstrated an “unavoidable funding shortfall.” That’s ironic. This particular funding shortfall actually could have been avoided—had the Council’s half-billion-dollar CCMS project actually worked.
So this is what state funding has reduced us to. We are treated to the spectacle of trial court officials, hats in hand, asking to get their own money back, only to get nickel-and-dimed by an unrepresentative Judicial Council.
After she heard the pleas of the executive officers from the rejected counties, the Chief Justice felt moved to say: “This is exactly the reason why Judicial Council is a statewide policy-making body and that we are not built and structured like the Legislature with representatives who come from districts. . . . It is essential that the branch speak unified [sic] about funding the judiciary as a branch.” You can hear the audio of her remarks here.
We see it differently. First, the Judicial Council is not a statewide policy-making body for the courts; it’s a statewide policy-recommending body for the courts. It says so right in the California Constitution, at Article VI, § 6. Second, it is exactly because the Judicial Council is an unrepresentative institution that it has failed as an oversight body. And it is precisely because it has failed as an oversight body that it has no credibility with the Governor and the Legislature.
Our message is simple. Democratize the Council. Cut the Judicial Council staff. Fund the courts.
Very Truly Yours,
Directors, Alliance of California Judges
Judicial Council Watcher 
wearyant
November 5, 2014
Another excellent missive from the Alliance of California Judges, simply stated and should be easily understood by the simplest of minds.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“A quick look at the Judicial Council’s vendor payments for the first half of 2014 suggests a number of areas in which the Council can save some money. The Council spent over $7 million for ‘Consultants-Information Systems.’ The Council also paid outside law firms over $1.5 million for ‘Legal Services-Litigation.’ The California Highway Patrol got over $2.4 million for security in just the first half of this year—including security for the Commission on Judicial Performance. Surely our leaders could find $454,000 in there somewhere to keep rural courtrooms open.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It is painfully apparent that the present configuration of top-heavy administration of the courts is not working. A flood of public funds would not rescue our feckless chief justice and her overwhelming concern for her cronies as opposed to support of the trial courts and the public they serve. It’s far past time for democratization of the judicial council. This over-weight administration has got to go, along with their unnecessary programs. Fund our trial courts so they may serve the taxpayers.
Long live the ACJ.
R. Campomadera
November 5, 2014
CJ responding to the rejected counties: “This is exactly the reason why Judicial Council is a statewide policy-making body and that we are not built and structured like the Legislature with representatives who come from districts. . . . It is essential that the branch speak unified [sic] about funding the judiciary as a branch.”
Translation: The JC will be democratized over my dead body.
unionman575
November 5, 2014
😉
Nathaniel Woodhull
November 5, 2014
Hi kids!
Glad to see the Alliance is back in the game.
The General has now retired and moved to a secure remote location.
With well over 40 years of public service I sometimes have felt like the U.S.S. Arizona.
The only solution to California’s judicial woes will be to democratize the Judicial Council,
something that I have been calling for throughout my tenure in office, at least since Ronald George arrived. Sadly, I view California as a lost cause.
I have now established residence in a State where individual accountability and freedom still means something. Having been there for Jerry Brown’s first tour, I can assure you that nothing will improve until he is gone. He does not believe that the Judicial Branch is an actual Third Branch of government. Tani does not have the political acumen or basic abilities to mount any type of campaign against Brown.
I feel so sorry for my colleagues and staff who worked so hard to provide service to the public.
In California those days are over.
Good luck my friends.
Nat
‘
Wendy Darling
November 5, 2014
“Sadly, I view California as a lost cause.”
Sadly, I also now view California as a lost cause. But the current state of affairs in the California Judicial Branch isn’t due to a lack of political acumen, but an absence of accountability and ethics. Simply put, the California Judicial Branch doesn’t conduct itself as an actual Third Branch of State government, which in turn has resulted in the branch not being respected as an actual Third Branch of State government. And deservedly so.
If and when 455 Golden Gate Avenue and the Office of the Chief Justice decides to put an end to its practice and unequivocal stance of running itself with the absolute control of a fiefdom, excepting only for its perpetual cries of poverty and “more money” to the State Legislature and the Governor, and start conducting itself with co-equal accountability, co-equal responsibility, co-equal (& actual) transparency, and shared democracy in branch governance, then, and only then, will the branch deserve to be treated and viewed as an actual Third Branch of State government.
The latest harping by the Chief Justice that “it is essential that the branch speak” in a unified voice, aka the continued perpetuation of “Speak With One Voice”, should be a clear indicator to everyone that this isn’t going to happen. Not soon. Not ever.
Because as far as the Chief Justice is concerned things are just great in the branch. Just “great”. Well, except for the money thing. But she is certain that if she can just get everyone in the branch to just keep repeating the mnemonic incantation of “more money, more money, more money” to everyone in Sacramento, eventually more money will magically appear. You know, because they’re so fiscally responsible at 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
And we can all see how well that strategy has been working out for the Chief Justice so far.
Not.
Meanwhile, granting the requests for funds to keep a couple of rural trial courts open and running and serving their communities sends the “wrong message.”
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
sharonkramer
November 5, 2014
Bottom line: NOPE! The courts of California cannot be a lost cause. Too many lives depend on it being made to function properly. Period. End of story.
JusticeCalifornia
November 6, 2014
LOL that you got a thumbs down on that optimistic post Sharon. Perhaps it was inadvertent. California is not a lost cause. It is going to be a model for the world, but not in the way the gambling barmaid and her ilk hope it will be.
Democratize the Judicial Council.
Add representatives of the public to the Judicial Council to give it some real-life street smarts.
Power to the people.
sharonkramer
November 5, 2014
“The Council also paid outside law firms over $1.5 million for ‘Legal Services-Litigation.”
Seems to me that what the JC could do to curtail this expense, is stop acting like some big corporate law firm who denies, denies, denies; and start acting like a government body which is here to protect the public from fraud, waste and abuse.
A prime example of misdirecting funds for the defense of the non-defendable is the Emily Gallop case. Ms. Gallop won her whistleblower lawsuit in the lower court — for retaliation when she refused to go along with systemic fraud, waste and abuse in the Cal judicial system.
Instead of admitting the problem — which needs to be corrected across the board — the JC and its staff (formerly known as Prince) have chosen to appeal with the use of our tax dollars as the system fraud plays on to harm us all in many ways.
In other words, when caught red handed f**king up, the JC could pay the money for damages caused by past misdeeds instead of paying more money to outside counsel to defend the proven fraud. They could recommend policy so it doesn’t happen in the future.
THAT would save a bundle in the long run.
Lando
November 5, 2014
Great to hear from you General. This mantra that it is essential that the branch speak unified (sic) is exactly what is wrong here. Where in the California Constitution does it say that and where did it give the Chief Justice those powers. By the way who elected Kenneth So to represent the trial courts in making actual state wide court policy including denying rural courts the money they need to offer basic services. No one. Layer over this the huge waste of taxpayer dollars on IT consultants and law firms and spending a billion dollars for a new courthouse in J So’s jurisdiction and one can see why the General and Wendy are right again. The once proud, strong and viable California Judicial branch is a lost cause.
unionman575
November 6, 2014
Criminal Law Advisory Committee
Purpose:
Makes recommendations to the council for improving the administration of justice in criminal proceedings.
November 10, 2014 Meeting (Closed)
4:00 p.m.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/clac.htm
.
JusticeCalifornia
November 6, 2014
The dream of a proud, viable branch is not a lost cause. The truth will out. Great chaos precedes great change.
Thanks to Kim Turner’s cozy relationship with the CJ and the JC notwithstanding her incredibly poor and scandal-ridden track record in court administration –now including the intentional creation/perpetuation of backdated false entries in the Marin register of actions. . .
…..there is growing interest in corruption at the highest levels of the branch.
The gambling barmaid likes starring in plays, but I don’t think she is going to like how this one plays out.
Wendy Darling
November 6, 2014
“. . . there is growing interest in corruption at the highest levels of the branch.”
I’ll believe it when I see it. And all that can be seen for now is what has been seen over and over and over again: the Teflon effect is in full force and effect.
It should be obvious by now that if anything was actually wrong with what is going on in the California Judicial branch someone. — anyone. — in a position of authority and responsibility would do something about it. No one is and no one will. In fact, they can’t run away fast enough in the opposite direction. So obviously, everything is just “great” in branch administration.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
November 6, 2014
I don’t know Wendy.
You get enough forces scraping away at a Teflon coating. . .and pretty soon the protective veneer is gone. All you have left is a useless pan that needs to be thrown away.
Let’s talk about Teflon. I looked it up and it appears the real threat is to those who take part in the manufacture of the Teflon coating.
See:
http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/teflon-and-perfluorooctanoic-acid–pfoa
“Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), also known as C8, is another man-made chemical. It is used in the process of making Teflon”
“The most recent study linked an increased risk of testicular cancer to PFOA exposure. The chance of having testicular cancer tended to increase as the level of exposure to PFOA increased.”
“Surgery is typically the first treatment for all testicular cancers.
Radical inguinal orchiectomy
As described in the section “How is testicular cancer diagnosed?”, this type of surgery removes the testicle (or testicles) containing the cancer. An incision is made just above the pubic area, and the testicle is gently removed from the scrotum through the opening. A cut is made through the spermatic cord that attaches the testicle to the abdomen. The surgeon ties off the blood and lymph vessels in the spermatic cord early in the operation and takes other special precautions to avoid spreading cancer cells into the surgical wound or dislodging them from the tumor into the bloodstream.
All stages of testicular cancer are typically treated with this surgery.”
Peppermint Pattie
November 6, 2014
For anyone who may be interested, Ken Couch is “retiring” and will be floating out of the building on a big, bright, golden parachute.
JusticeCalifornia
November 6, 2014
Isn’t he the idiot that illegally tormented Paula Negley, and instead of being bounced from the AOC he was protected by both George and Sakauye?
courtflea
November 6, 2014
The first casualty of the state auditor’s audit?
sharonkramer
November 6, 2014
JC,
In response to your comment “LOL that you got a thumbs down on that optimistic post Sharon. Perhaps it was inadvertent. California is not a lost cause. It is going to be a model for the world, but not in the way the gambling barmaid and her ilk hope it will be….’
Yep. C’est la vie on the stupid thumbs down. I have less than limited tolerance and respect for frivolous whiners.
Evil flourishes when good men stand by and do NOTHING..besides whine. “Long live ACJ but I think the world is coming to an end no matter what they do. Whah, whah, whah.”
I really despise ignorant, self defeating posts and stupid thumbs down on this board that say “And they have done bladie blah this and they have done bladie blah that, and poor pitiful me I am unable to cause change so the world is coming to an end… but still I just want my whiney ass to be heard on some chatboard. Boo hoo hoo. Woes is me. Back in my day, bladie blah blah blah.”
What part do you self-absorbed whiners not understand about this:
JC and I have them for CONCEALMENT of falsification of court docs — which is a felony. Hello? If they want to be known as the policy making body, then they better damn well establish policy to address this fraud upon the court or face liability for the damages.
GROW UP AND GET YOUR WHINEY ASS OUT OF NEVER NEVER LAND asap! Quit acting like the lost boys and come back into reality. You can be part of the solution or you can be part of the self-defeatist, whiney ass problem.
JusticeCalifornia
November 7, 2014
I would not presume to tell anyone on this blog what to do.
A lot of people have burned out trying to do the right thing. Other people pick up the baton and carry on.
And a lot of people have been burned terribly by the Judicial Council for trying to do the right thing. Paula Negley was one. The Judicial Council may one day have to answer for what they did to her. . .and explain why they let the things she reported go unresolved, and why they kept the bad actors like Couch who retaliated against her in human resources on the payroll for so long.
That is really becoming the focus: Why have George, Sakauye, and the Judicial Council kept such patently compromised individuals with terrible track records in leadership positions, on the payroll, on the Council, and on important committees?
The ACJ was exactly right in saying:
“First, the Judicial Council is not a statewide policy-making body for the courts; it’s a statewide policy-recommending body for the courts. It says so right in the California Constitution, at Article VI, § 6. Second, it is exactly because the Judicial Council is an unrepresentative institution that it has failed as an oversight body. And it is precisely because it has failed as an oversight body that it has no credibility with the Governor and the Legislature.”
Stuart Michael
November 7, 2014
You hit the nail right on the head again Justice California
Paula was just one of many victims
Change will eventually come – but maybe not for a long painful time
It won’t happen if everyone gives up
Keep on fighting
sharonkramer
November 8, 2014
I would presume to tell people on this board what to do. Particularly when they post anonymously, may not realize that their words can dampen the spirits/efforts of others, and there is no way to contact them off-board.
The first step in being defeated is believing you are defeated. The second step is telling others that they are defeated, too.
I’ve been doing grassroots stuff for over 35 years. There’s ALWAYS a way to solve a gov’t problem if people complain loud enough. You just have to find the right key to open the right door.
I got some great news last week from the Medical Director of OSHA. The scientifically void, public health policy paper that I first wrote of in 2005 of as being a key piece in fraudulent health marketing, is going to be sunsetted in Jan/Feb 2015. My 2005 writing is the writing for which McConnell, Huffman, et.al. framed me for libel and falsified court docs to keep the fraud going; then tried to shut me up of what they did via the use of more falsified court docs.
The sunsetting of this policy paper means much to me for the sake of the public. It is the last piece to fall into place, to save many lives by stopping the false concept in public health policy and in U.S. courts that it is proven microbial toxins in a water damaged building could never reach a level to harm. This is what I have spent 10 years of my life trying to accomplish at great personal expense to myself and my family. Had I given up, the Director never would have forced the issue the week before last; and the fraudulent policy would remain in effect — regardless of what true science establishes.
Point being: There are many ways to skin a cat. NEVER give up if you know you are right on a matter that is gravely important to many.
If the Judicial Council wants to deem themselves as the policy-writing body who acts in furtherance of justice in Cal; then they need to write policy of what they do to rectify the damage when Superior Court CEOs and Appellate Clerks are caught falsifying and concealing the falsification of court documents. California’s governor and attorney general have put it into writing that this is the JC’s responsibility. The JC claims it is their responsibility as the “policy-writing body”.
THIS is what I want:
I want the JC to write policy for THEMSELVES of what they do when officers of the court, clerks and administrators are caught red handed falsifying court documents. There is no reason why the JC cannot or should not write policy to stop criminal practices in the branch. WHEN this happens, many of the bad apples currently in Cal court leadership roles, will be gone. In the future, cronyism will be greatly curtailed.
Wendy & General Woodall, this is for you:
I and many others would never understand what we do about various ways to skin a cat, without you. Don’t feel defeated. YOU are winning at restoring integrity to California’s judicial branch. If we don’t stop them one way, together we will stop them another!