Friday, April 27, 2012
$ taken from the CA Courthouses to fill the gaps elsewhere...rant coming on...beware. - kathologist@gmail.com
" In the current fiscal year, the Legislature used $750 million in court construction funds to address
the state’s overall budget shortfall. This included loans from court construction funds totaling
$440 million and a one-time redirection of court construction funds to the General Fund—not the
courts—of another $310 million, equivalent to an entire year’s worth of SB 1407 program
revenues. In response, the council canceled two courthouse projects, reduced budgets on all
others, and delayed several projects. In addition, $213 million of court facilities funds—
originally budgeted for both construction and facility modifications—were redirected to trial
court operations in the current fiscal year. "
Poor Alpine & Sierra Counties. They got cut out altogether.
Taking the money out of the construction fund to the General Fund. Who knows when they will pay it back.
Another chunk of money to the trial courts-again, when is it going to be paid back. This is why people are disgusted with signing any petitions for ballot measures for bonds. The money gets taken and used to fill a hole somewhere else instead of getting management the training and tools to reduce cost and ineffectiveness in their departments. Yet more committees to review what we already know.
I know, most of you know this. Seeing it in black and white has affected me more than just talking about it.
Now back to our regulary scheduled program.
Have a good weekend
the state’s overall budget shortfall. This included loans from court construction funds totaling
$440 million and a one-time redirection of court construction funds to the General Fund—not the
courts—of another $310 million, equivalent to an entire year’s worth of SB 1407 program
revenues. In response, the council canceled two courthouse projects, reduced budgets on all
others, and delayed several projects. In addition, $213 million of court facilities funds—
originally budgeted for both construction and facility modifications—were redirected to trial
court operations in the current fiscal year. "
Poor Alpine & Sierra Counties. They got cut out altogether.
Taking the money out of the construction fund to the General Fund. Who knows when they will pay it back.
Another chunk of money to the trial courts-again, when is it going to be paid back. This is why people are disgusted with signing any petitions for ballot measures for bonds. The money gets taken and used to fill a hole somewhere else instead of getting management the training and tools to reduce cost and ineffectiveness in their departments. Yet more committees to review what we already know.
I know, most of you know this. Seeing it in black and white has affected me more than just talking about it.
Now back to our regulary scheduled program.
Have a good weekend
Thursday, April 12, 2012
California Courts - Law Day 2012
California Courts - Law Day 2012
May 1, 2012-Check it out, even if you are not going to actively participate.
May 1, 2012-Check it out, even if you are not going to actively participate.
Friday, April 6, 2012
Editorial: Justice is loser as courts drop computer plan - Editorials - The Sacramento Bee
Editorial: Justice is loser as courts drop computer plan - Editorials - The Sacramento Bee
Court watchers may regard the vote as a victory for dissident judges, who had criticized the project as a boondoggle. It is not a victory. The failure of the decadelong effort to wean the judicial branch of government from paper and bring it into the electronic age is a setback for the administration of justice in California.
Court watchers may regard the vote as a victory for dissident judges, who had criticized the project as a boondoggle. It is not a victory. The failure of the decadelong effort to wean the judicial branch of government from paper and bring it into the electronic age is a setback for the administration of justice in California.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
We are now ALL guilty until proven innocent.
majority opinion in the 5 to 4 ruling [PDF file of the ruling]
That's right. The conservatives on the court and the "swing vote" Justice Kennedy took away your civil rights giving law enforcement the ability to take you to jail for any real or perceived infraction. The case it is based not only involved wrongful arrest, but the man was strip searched, cavity searched and unable to contact the outside world nor let his status in the penal system be known for SIX DAYS. His infraction? Not DWB [Driving while Black/Brown] but just being in a CAR driven by his WIFE. He had been pulled over so many times that he kept the document explaining the false information of the old warrent for a minor infraction in the past on him for just this reason.
I hope you are good and properly outraged:
The way he was treated
The way his family was treated
The fact 5 unelected people were able to do this.
I say it over and over: Law and Justice are two different animals.
That's right. The conservatives on the court and the "swing vote" Justice Kennedy took away your civil rights giving law enforcement the ability to take you to jail for any real or perceived infraction. The case it is based not only involved wrongful arrest, but the man was strip searched, cavity searched and unable to contact the outside world nor let his status in the penal system be known for SIX DAYS. His infraction? Not DWB [Driving while Black/Brown] but just being in a CAR driven by his WIFE. He had been pulled over so many times that he kept the document explaining the false information of the old warrent for a minor infraction in the past on him for just this reason.
I hope you are good and properly outraged:
The way he was treated
The way his family was treated
The fact 5 unelected people were able to do this.
I say it over and over: Law and Justice are two different animals.
Is "Self-Help" a Good Thing Or a Bad Thing?
Is "Self-Help" a Good Thing Or a Bad Thing?
Basically, it comes down to perspective and how to adapt to current market needs.
Basically, it comes down to perspective and how to adapt to current market needs.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
The 3 Foot Radius of the Law Library
3 Geeks and a Law Blog: The 3 Foot Radius of the Law Library
When you have time to sit quietly for about 20 minutes, read this article and see if any of it resonates with you.
-------
My opinion of course is my own. The sentence that stood out for me was this:
"It is not about the space, but about the service."
My opinion is: The LCLL needs to reach out to patrons, rather than waiting for them to come to the physical location of the Law Library. That would be a separate position/consultant to have the time and materials to go out to the public and government offices to train others to help themselves. It is simply too much of a burden for the solo librarian to do both.
In the mean time, as I improve my skillset I will look into any possible grants for this kind of activity.
I would like to bring this issue up at the April 19th BOT Mtg. but I am uncertain that this is the appropriate time or that perhaps there is another step or two before the BOT can addess this as a whole working in tandem with the Law Librarian.
Anticipating future needs and purpose of the public law library and to what means they can be met needs to be addressed and given time to be pondered and thought out. The writing is on the wall: More pro se AND Bar members are needing the services the LCLL offers regardless of its ability to provide it.
When you have time to sit quietly for about 20 minutes, read this article and see if any of it resonates with you.
-------
My opinion of course is my own. The sentence that stood out for me was this:
"It is not about the space, but about the service."
My opinion is: The LCLL needs to reach out to patrons, rather than waiting for them to come to the physical location of the Law Library. That would be a separate position/consultant to have the time and materials to go out to the public and government offices to train others to help themselves. It is simply too much of a burden for the solo librarian to do both.
In the mean time, as I improve my skillset I will look into any possible grants for this kind of activity.
I would like to bring this issue up at the April 19th BOT Mtg. but I am uncertain that this is the appropriate time or that perhaps there is another step or two before the BOT can addess this as a whole working in tandem with the Law Librarian.
Anticipating future needs and purpose of the public law library and to what means they can be met needs to be addressed and given time to be pondered and thought out. The writing is on the wall: More pro se AND Bar members are needing the services the LCLL offers regardless of its ability to provide it.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)