COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO - California · 2008-09-25 · JUDGES OF THE SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT 2004 Front Row: ... Hon. Raymond Cadei, Hon. Michael Garcia, ... ing resources based on

C O U N T Y O F S A C R A M E N T O

S U P E R I O R C O U R T O F C A L I F O R N I A

J U D G E S O F T H E S A C R A M E N T O S U P E R I O R C O U R T 2 0 0 4

Front Row: Hon. Jeffrey Gunther, Hon. Richard Park, Hon. Steven Rodda, Hon. Michael Virga, Presiding Judge,

Hon. James Long, Hon. Kenneth Hake, Hon. Jack Sapunor, Hon. Gail Ohanesian

Second Row: Hon. Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Hon. David De Alba, Hon. Jane Ure, Hon. Thomas Cecil, Hon. Shelleyanne

Chang, Hon. John Mendez, Hon. Jerilyn Borack

Third Row: Hon. Patricia Esgro, Hon. Trena Burger-Plavan, Hon. Lloyd Connelly, Hon. Judy Holzer Hersher, Hon.

Patrick Marlette, Hon. John Winn, Hon. Maryanne Gilliard

Fourth Row: Hon. Cheryl Chun Meegan, Hon. Pamela Smith-Steward, Hon. Renard Shepard, Hon. Emily Vasquez,

Hon. Russell Hom, Hon. Steve White, Hon. Brian Van Camp

Fifth Row: Hon. Greta Curtis Fall, Hon. Talmadge Jones, Hon. Gerald Bakarich, Hon. Richard Gilmour, Hon.

Kenneth Peterson, Hon. David Abbott, Hon. Robert Hight, Hon. Allen Sumner, Hon. Robert Shuman

Back Row: Hon. Roland Candee, Hon. Michael Kenny, Hon. Loren McMaster, Hon. Gary Mullen, Hon. Troy

Nunley, Hon. Peter McBrien, Hon. Timothy Frawley

Not Present: Hon. Raymond Cadei, Hon. Michael Garcia, Hon. James Henke, Hon. Charles Kobayashi, Hon. James Mize

OUR MISSION IS TO ASSURE JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND FAIRNESS FOR ALL UNDER THE LAW.


1

Overview from the Presiding Judge and Executive Officer .................................................................. 2

Family Law and Probate Division ....................................................................................................... 4

Criminal Division .............................................................................................................................. 6

Civil and Trial Support Division ......................................................................................................... 8

Civil Support Unit ............................................................................................................................ 8

Trial Support ..................................................................................................................................... 9

Interpreter Unit ................................................................................................................................. 9

Juvenile Division ................................................................................................................................ 11

Dependency ....................................................................................................................................... 11

Delinquency ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Carol Miller Justice Center Division ................................................................................................. 14

Traffic ................................................................................................................................................. 14

Small Claims ...................................................................................................................................... 15

Unlawful Detainers ............................................................................................................................ 15

Court Administration ......................................................................................................................... 17

General Services Division .................................................................................................................. 17

Human Resources Office .................................................................................................................. 18

Finance Division ................................................................................................................................ 19

Management Information Systems Division ...................................................................................... 21

Customer Support Unit ..................................................................................................................... 21

Network Services Unit ...................................................................................................................... 21

Applications Development Unit ........................................................................................................ 22

Business Solutions Unit ..................................................................................................................... 22

Research and Evaluation Division ..................................................................................................... 23

Analytical Services Unit ..................................................................................................................... 23

Reengineering Unit .......................................................................................................................... 24


2

The past two years

have been exciting and

productive for this

court. In spite of two

consecutive years of

fiscal uncertainty, our

court was able to make

noteworthy progress

toward improving the

administration of jus-

tice throughout the

community. Our fore-

most priority has been

to provide access to

quality justice for all

users of the court. This

goal was reached in

large par t by the

court’s ability to main-

tain financial stability

despite California’s

fluctuating fiscal situ-

ation. We remain eco-

nomically strong be-

cause of continuous

monitoring and adjustment. Because of our fi-

nancial stability, this court has avoided the dras-

tic measures other courts have taken to meet

budget such as reducing public counter hours

and furloughing court employees.

Our stability can be attributed to proactive evalu-

ation and adjustment of business practices, con-

structive partnerships with outside agencies, and

the many contributions of staff.

The Reengineering

Unit has been integral

to the adjustment of

business practices

throughout the court.

In concert with the

Administrative Office

of the Courts Re-

source Allocation

Study, the Reengi-

neering unit continues

to evaluate staff

resources needed to

process cases. This

information allows

management to ascer-

tain whether vacancies

should be filled versus

simply shifting exist-

ing resources based

on workload. The

reengineering process

was highlighted in the

Judicial Council’s 2003

Year in Review. Simi-

larly, clarifying expec-

tations of employees at

all levels of the organization is underway. Duty

statements have been completed for most court

positions. These documents are necessary to

manage change in the organization.

Furthermore, cooperation between court

and county administrators has resulted in

several successful projects this year. Both enti-

ties were able to reach agreement on a memo-

randum of understanding. This is the first such

Overview From the

Presiding Judge and

Executive Officer

“Our foremost priority has been to

provide access to quality justice for all

users of the court...despite California’s

fluctuating fiscal situation.”


3

agreement since the onset of Trial Court Fund-

ing in 1997-1998. Additionally, the court and

county are working together to build the new

B.T. Collins Juvenile Courthouse, scheduled to

open in 2005.

Several administrative improvements have oc-

curred during this fiscal period including con-

tinuing efforts to document administrative poli-

cies and procedures (Human Resources,

Accounting, and Financial Policies and Proce-

dures). As part of that effort, the court has been

successful in working with United Public Em-

ployees Union to adopt many human resource

policies. Likewise, the court has adopted a com-

munication plan that will foster accurate, thor-

ough information sharing throughout the court.

Further, the court has developed an operational

plan that parallels that of the Judicial Council

for Fiscal Years 2003-2004 through 2005-2006.

The plan includes reviewing services provided

to self-represented litigants, improving manage-

ment of jurors, and improving dependency and

delinquency case processing.

This court is highly-regarded among state courts

and actively participates on many committees

that affect policy and direction for trial courts

statewide. Committees include California Case

Management System, Trial Court Executive

Budget Working Group, Judicial Branch

Budget Advisory Committee, Judicial Branch

Resource Allocation Working Group, and

Judicial Council Collaborative Court-County

Working Group on Enhanced Collections,

among others.

This court has been integral to the develop-

ment of the California Case Management

System. In partnership with select trial courts,

the AOC is developing case management sys-

tems for civil, small claims, and probate that will

eventually be utilized by all trial courts.

Staff and judicial officers have been remarkably

industrious during this biennial period. Eight

judges were appointed in Fiscal Year 2002-03

and three more in Fiscal Year 2003-2004. In spite

of the whirlwind of seemingly endless change,

staff has performed a fine job in providing ex-

cellent customer service.

The focus for this court in the next few years

will be to improve communications, implement

reengineering recommendations, complete im-

proved case management system endeavors, con-

clude documentation of policies and procedures

in operational and administrative areas, increase

staff development opportunities, maintain the

outstanding level of customer service, and con-

tinue to lead the state trial courts in productiv-

ity and creativity. The accomplishments of this

court over Fiscal Years 2002-03 and 2003-04

are extraordinary, and our aspirations for the up-

coming years are equally exceptional. Congratu-

lations to staff and judicial officers alike on up-

holding our court’s tradition as one of the finest

in the state.


4

The Family Law and

Probate Division is

located at the William

R. Ridgeway Family

Relations Courthouse

(WRRFRC) and in-

cludes the following

units: Family Law,

Family Court Services,

Family Law Facilitator’s

Office and Probate.

During this fiscal pe-

riod, Family Law and

Probate Units have fo-

cused on three pri-

mary areas: 1) process

improvement through re-engineering; 2) increas-

ing access and quality of services to pro per liti-

gants; and 3) maximizing community partnerships.

Overall, filings and dispositions remained fairly

stable over the past two fiscal periods. Between

dissolution, legal separation, and nullity cases,

total family law filings for Fiscal Year 2003-04

have remained practi-

cally unchanged over

Fiscal Year 2002-03 at

6,699 and 6,691, re-

spectively. Disposi-

tions declined from

5,891 in Fiscal Year

2002-03 to 4,905 in

Fiscal Year 2003-04.

Paternity cases were

relatively stable with

government paternity

cases increasing and

private paternity cases

decreasing at about

the same rate (see

Figure 2). Complaints declined 11 percent and

petitions increased five percent from the previ-

ous Fiscal Year (see Figure 3). Probate filings in-

creased five percent whereas dispositions increased

11 percent from Fiscal Year 2002-03 to 2003-04

(see Figure 4).

With the assistance of reengineering, staff has been

Family Law and Probate

“[The] Collaborative Tri-Court

Committee...continues to improve

the delivery of court related

services to families...”


5

able to streamline processes, increase efficiencies,

and improve customer service. In order to better

serve the high volume of customers, a new family

law department was added. Consequently, probate

matters are now heard in three departments rather

than the previous one. The Pro Bono Mediation

Program, which includes private mediators who

volunteer three days a week, has been integral in

processing the large volume of pro bono custom-

ers. In addition to the Pro Bono Mediation group,

the Family Law Custody Sub-Committee assists

the court in developing and sponsoring training

programs on state and local issues regarding child

custody and visitation.

The Family Law and Probate Division continues

to work with community groups including;

WEAVE, Kids Turn, Department of Health and

Human Services, Department of Child Support,

California State University of Sacramento, National

University, and the local Bar Association to coor-

dinate services and educate the public on family

related matters. Likewise, the collaborative Tri-

Court Committee comprised of judicial officers

and staff from Family Law, Probate and Juvenile

Courts, and representatives from County Coun-

sel, Department of Health and Human Services,

and Probation, continues to improve the delivery

of court-related services to families by coordinat-

ing processes, procedures, and information.


6

The Criminal Division

consists of the follow-

ing units: Criminal

Support, Exhibits/

Records Retention,

and Pre-Trial Services.

Criminal cases are

handled in the Gordon

D. Schaber Courthouse

and the Lorenzo Patino

Hall of Justice. Felony

filings in Fiscal Year

2003-04 (12,561) in-

creased three percent

compared to 2002-03

(12,160). Felony dispo-

sitions increased one

percent over the previ-

ous fiscal period from 11,906 to 12,117. Misde-

meanor disposition data is currently ununavailable1 .

A primary goal for the Criminal Division has been

updating practices and procedures in the support

areas; therefore,

reengineering com-

menced in the Crimi-

nal Support Unit, home

courts, and misde-

meanor calendar courts.

As a result, case process-

ing has been extensively

documented and stud-

ied, and preliminary rec-

ommendations have

been discussed. Recom-

mendations to change

the types of cases and

hearings assigned to

home courts have re-

sulted in dialogue with agencies involved in case

adjudication. Other changes include moving drug

court from the Lorenzo Patino Hall of Justice to

the Gordon D. Schaber Courthouse and imple-

menting a pilot project to eliminate unnecessary

trial setting conferences in home courts.

In addition, the new California Case Management

System Project (V2) for criminal and traffic cases

commenced. As part of that project, justice part-

ners have discussed potential obstacles the court

and related agencies may face when the court even-

tually withdraws from the current shared criminal

Criminal Division

“The Criminal Division continues

to improve case processing and

communications while meeting

ever-changing statutory mandates and

managing ongoing workload.”


7

database. Furthermore, the Criminal Division

continues to respond to case law and legislative

changes. For example, during the past Fiscal Year

case law effecting Penal Code 1203.4 filings re-

sulted in new procedures and calendar modifica-

tions. In addition legislative changes have resulted

in acceptance of out-of-county Proposition 36

cases. The Criminal Division continues to im-

prove case processing and communications while

meeting ever-changing statutory mandates and

managing ongoing workload.

1 A portion of misdemeanor caseload (criminal or traffic misde-

meanors included as part of a felony filing) is tracked in the Traf-

fic Case Management System (ICMS), and at this time misde-

meanor and traffic statistics cannot be extracted. Therefore, no

such statistics are available.


8

The Civil and Trial

Support Division con-

sists of the following

units: Civil Support,

Electronic Recording,

Court Attendants, In-

terpreters, Court Re-

porters, and Appeals.

Civil support consists

primarily of the clerical

staff that process civil

cases. Division workload

is reflected mainly by

civil filings and disposi-

tions. Civil cases are

handled in the Gordon

D. Schaber Courthouse,

the Erickson Building,

and the nearby offices at

800 9th Street.

Civil filings and dispo-

sitions have remained fairly stable over the past

two Fiscal Years (see Figure 6) and therefore

workload remains stable. Trial Support is made

up of all the other

units (Electronic Re-

cording, Court Atten-

dants, Interpreters,

Court Reporters, and

Appeals). The division

has undergone several

o r g a n i z a t i o n a l

changes over the past

Fiscal Year. The Civil

Support Unit was im-

pacted by new rules

governing the pro-

cessing of cases;

whereas, Trial Sup-

port Units have been

impacted by major

restructuring of units and supervisors resulting

in a more level distribution of workload.

Civil Support UnitCivil Support UnitCivil Support UnitCivil Support UnitCivil Support Unit

The Civil Case Management Program (CMP)

rules, adopted in December 2001, mandated that

each Court adopt a case management and cal-

endar system for general civil cases in order to

meet the requirements of Section 2, of the Cali-

fornia Standards of Judicial Administration. The

program was implemented in 2003 for new cases.

Because the new program rules affect such a

Civil & Trial Support“Trial Support Units have been

impacted by major restructuring of

units and supervisors resulting in a more

level distribution of workload.”


9

large number of cases, it has had a tremendous

impact on the division, judicial officers, court

staff, counsel, and parties. Also under Local Rule

11.00, pre-case management Accelerated Civil

Trial (ACT) cases will be converting to the Case

Management Program in early FY 2004/2005

Impacting approximately 6,500 affected cases.

The Civil Support Unit also completed the Civil

Support Review Project and implemented a new

mechanism to track incoming work. Now the unit

is able to capture all critical workload indicators -

including incoming and production – both weekly

and monthly. This tool enables the unit to process

its work more efficiently and expeditiously. These

efficiencies have been particularly important as the

unit responds to staffing reductions implemented

over the past Fiscal Year.

Trial SupportTrial SupportTrial SupportTrial SupportTrial Support

Several structural changes have occurred within

the Trial Support Unit. The Law and Motion

Departments were re-organized under the Mas-

ter Calendar Unit, Electronic Recording moved

under the Court Reporter Supervisor and the

Court Attendant Unit moved under the Court-

room Clerk Supervisors. Court Attendant du-

ties in many cases overlap with Courtroom

Clerks and therefore the centralization of these

resources are logical. In addition, the Appeals

Unit revised all manuals and commenced sys-

tematic improvement of all processes, procedures,

tasks, and forms associated with the processing

of appeals.

Interpreter UnitInterpreter UnitInterpreter UnitInterpreter UnitInterpreter Unit

The Interpreter Unit was significantly impacted

by SB371 which took effect January 1, 2003.

The bill established the Trial Court Interpreter

Employment and Labor Relations Act setting

for th provisions governing employment


10

and compensation of trial court interpreters, in-

cluding pro tempore court interpreters. The law

specifically limits the use of independent con-

tract interpreters that are certified or registered

to 100 days in a calendar year.

The greatest challenge in implementing the bill

has been the limits regarding the use of inde-

pendent contractors (i.e.: cannot exceed 100 days

of usage in a calendar year). Because of the high

demand for court pro tempore interpreters in

the Sacramento region, the 100-day limit was

reached by some interpreters several months be-

fore the end of the calendar year. The legislation

has constrained the court in dealing with the

chronic shortage of interpreters. If no interpreter

is available, the court, although rare, must dis-

miss a criminal case. Therefore, extensive efforts

have been made to expand the pool of available

interpreters by continuous advertising, sponsored

career fairs, and communication with commu-

nity leaders to recruit interpreters.

Staff has worked with the AOC and Coopera-

tive Services to provide certification/registra-

tion exams, has sought support from other Cali-

fornia trial courts in identifying interpreter em-

ployees who are willing to travel to Sacramento,

and has installed telephone conference equip-

ment in numerous Departments (2, 3, 4, 8, 43,

60, 61, 62, and 63). The latter change allows in-

terpretation services to be provided by certified

interpreter employees of other trial courts. Fur-

thermore, a number of policies and procedures

have been developed to better manage inter-

preter resources and to assist judicial officers in

the appointment of interpreters.


11

The Juvenile Division

consists of two units:

Dependency and De-

linquency. Depen-

dency cases are pro-

cessed at the William

R. Ridgeway Family

Relations Court-

house; whereas, De-

linquency cases are

heard at the B.T.

Collins Juvenile Jus-

tice Center.

DependencyDependencyDependencyDependencyDependency

Original petition

filings increased mar-

ginally from 1,200 in Fiscal Year 2002-03 to

1,288 in 2003-04. Dispositions increased from

977 to 1,075 from Fiscal Year 2002-03 to 2003-

04. Subsequent petitions2 have dropped from

29 to 21 during the same period. Dispositions

of subsequent petitions dropped steeply from

206 to 131. Many important projects were

implemented and collaborations furthered in the

Dependency Unit during Fiscal Years 2002-03

and 2003-04. (See Figure 8)

Beginning in FY 2002-03, the Reengineering

Unit focused on Dependency. Reengineering

staff worked with operations and Management

Information Systems (MIS) to identify process

improvements that would eliminate redundan-

cies, enhances communication between

stakeholders, and increase the use of

automation. The final

report, approved in

January 2004, docu-

mented processes and

related workload re-

quirements, identified

opportunities for im-

provement, and devel-

oped recommenda-

tions. Dependency staff

has worked since that

time to implement the

recommendations.

One recommendation

which had an imme-

diate impact on opera-

tions was automation of the certificate of mail-

ing process. Prior to automating this function,

countless hours were spent manually typing names

and addresses for the multitude of required

mailings. The manual process resulted in extensive

backlogs. The new automated process reduced

the backlog and eliminated staff hours related to

the manual process.

Juvenile Division

“Since 1999, the Court and County have

been planning the new courthouse and

construction is well underway. ”


12

An important element in many of the recom-

mendations was modification of the existing

Juvenile Automation System (JAS). As such, in

the last quarter of FY 2003-04, the Dependency

Court with help from MIS, kicked off the “En-

terprise Project.” The project will examine, re-

fine and improve business processes through au-

tomation. Implementation of the Enterprise

Project is planned for July 2005.

Another focal point for the Dependency Court

during this fiscal period was maintenance of De-

pendency Drug Court. Dependency Court,

Child Protective Services, Alcohol and Drug

Services, Sacramento Child Advocates, Inc.

(SCA), Parents Advocates of Sacramento (PAS),

Dependency Associates of Sacramento (DAS),

Bridges, STARS (Specialized Treatment and Re-

covery Services) Program, and Sacramento treat-

ment providers operate this specialized court.

The court serves parents with substance abuse

problems who hope to reunify with their chil-

dren. The program has been a tremendous suc-

cess as parents in the program have been shown

to reunify more often and sooner than parents

in a comparison group; making our Dependency

Drug Court a model throughout the state and

across the nation.

DelinquencyDelinquencyDelinquencyDelinquencyDelinquency

Juvenile Delinquency filings (original) rose from

2,960 to 3,568 or approximately 21% from Fis-

cal Year 2002-03 to 2003-04. Dispositions for

original filings increased from 3,371 to 3,457

over the same period. Subsequent petition fil-

ings dropped marginally from 1,174 to 1,126

from Fiscal Year 2002-03 to 2003-04. Likewise,

subsequent petition dispositions dropped from

1,381 to 1,146 during the same period. (Figure 9)

As with Dependency, the Reengineering Unit

reviewed and documented business processes and

resulting workload requirements. Opportunities

for improvement were identified and recom-

mendations developed in the final report released

January 2004. One of the recommendations from

the report involved the utilization of an elec-

tronic data exchange between the Court and

criminal justice partners. Like Dependency, De-

linquency is involved in the Enterprise Project

which will work toward establishing such an ex-

change; therefore, Delinquency staff have been

working with MIS staff to define business and

system needs with the goal of developing an

improved case management system.


13

Another major project spanning the last several

years has been the Juvenile Delinquency Court’s

involvement in planning for a Delinquency Drug

Court. A working group comprised of repre-

sentatives from the Juvenile Court, Probation,

District Attorney, Public Defender, Sacramento

County Office of Education, and Sacramento

County Departments of Alcohol and Drug and

Mental Health, visited other counties’ programs

and attended trainings and conferences regard-

ing implementation of a Delinquency Drug

Court. Initially, it was hoped that a federal grant

would fund the Delinquency Drug Court, how-

ever, when the federal grant was awarded in

February 2004, it was not sufficient to fund the

program as initially designed. Therefore, the

original plan was scaled down and continues to

be refined so that it may be implemented utiliz-

ing existing resources. A Delinquency Drug

Court Pilot is slated to begin in December 2004,

to demonstrate to potential grant financiers the

benefits of a Juvenile Delinquency Drug Court

in Sacramento County.

The Sacramento Juvenile Court has also led a

project with ten surrounding counties to estab-

lish a Transfer In/Out protocol to assist with

the timely transfer process of both dependents

and minors between jurisdictions. This project

originated in September 2003, after a “summit”

was held with the participating counties. After

the summit, the Sacramento Juvenile Court

(both Delinquency and Dependency Courts)

created a draft protocol modeled after the suc-

cessful Transfer In/Out Protocol between Placer

and Sacramento Counties instituted in 2002. The

next step is to bring the surrounding counties

together to review the protocol and adopt it for

use by Sacramento County and surrounding

communities.

Perhaps the project having the greatest potential

impact on the Juvenile Delinquency Court is the

construction of the new juvenile courthouse. Since

1999, the Court and County have been planning

the new courthouse and construction is well un-

derway. With the courthouse taking shape, Juve-

nile Court Judicial Officers and staff participated

in many tasks including the selection of three art

pieces for the new facility. Completion of the fa-

cility is scheduled for Winter 2005, with a move-

in date for juvenile court in late Spring 2005. The

facility will open with six courtrooms and the ca-

pacity to expand to eight.

2 Petitions filed by DHHS after the original petition has beensustained based on new facts or circumstances pursuant to Wel-fare and Institutions Code Section 300.


14

The Carol Miller Jus-

tice Center Division

(CMJC) includes the

Traffic, Small Claims,

and Unlawful De-

tainer sections. The

majority of cases are

handled at CMJC;

however, juvenile

non-traffic and misde-

meanor cases are heard

at the B.T. Collins Ju-

venile Justice Center

and DUI’s are heard at

the Gordon D. Schaber

Courthouse.

TrafficTrafficTrafficTrafficTraffic

Traffic has experienced an increase in filings of

more than 8% from Fiscal Year 2002-03 to Fiscal

Year 2003-04. Disposition data are not currently

available due to reporting deficiencies in the traf-

fic cases management system (ICMS). In FY 03-

04, the infraction arraignment calendar process was

modified so that defendants check-in at a desig-

nated window in the Room 100 Lobby and then

proceed to the courtroom for hearing. This new

process has resulted in more efficient courtroom

processing, improved customer service and redi-

rection of staff to other tasks.

During Fiscal Year 2003-04 the Traffic Unit

Carol Miller Justice Center

“Approximately 10,000 cases were

processed via trial by declaration which

resulted in over four million dollars being

referred to the Department of Revenue

Recovery (DRR) for collection. ”

participated in a Pro-

cess Improvement

Study. There were sev-

eral resulting recom-

mendations including

standard phone scripts,

correspondence tem-

plates, development of

a call center, and re-

alignment of re-

sources. Implementa-

tion of these recom-

mendations provides

more uniform and

consistent information

to the public. Stream-

lining processes and

reallocating resources virtually eliminated criti-

cal backlogs. In addition, an on-line Traffic Cus-

tomer Service Mailbox was added to the Court’s

website in FY 03-04 so that customers may E-

mail questions to traffic staff.


15

Two traffic projects can be credited for improved

collection of overdue fines. The first project ad-

dressed the backlog of unpaid civil assessment

cases. Approximately 10,000 cases were processed

via trial by declaration which resulted in over

four million dollars being referred to the De-

partment of Revenue Recovery (DRR) for col-

lection. The second project targeted failures to

pay. These cases are now sent to a contract col-

lection agency resulting in increased revenues.

Small ClaimsSmall ClaimsSmall ClaimsSmall ClaimsSmall Claims

Small Claims filings decreased slightly from Fis-

cal Year 2002-03 to 2003-04. Filings went from

10,923 to 10,321 and dispositions from 9,797

to 8,795. In Fiscal Year 2003-04, the Small Claims

unit underwent a process improvement study

resulting in streamlined processes and procedures

and improved workload allocation standards. This

effort allowed the unit to reduce staffing by al-

most 50 percent.

The on-site Small Claims Advisory Clinic as-

sisted 23,914 customers during Fiscal Year 2002-

03 and 23,837 during Fiscal Year 2003-04. Ser-

vices are provided for walk-in, telephone, and

mail inquiries. Mediators with the Small Claims

Mediation Program, who provide pre-trial and

day-of-trial services to litigants in contested and

pro per cases, facilitated 3,080 cases over the past

two years.

Unlawful DetainersUnlawful DetainersUnlawful DetainersUnlawful DetainersUnlawful Detainers

Unlawful Detainer (UD) filings increased slightly

from Fiscal Year 2002-03 to Fiscal Year 2003-04.

Filings went from 8,883 to 9,345 and disposi-

tions went from 6,639 to 9,660. This fluctua-

tion was captured by the Open Court System,

implemented in April 2003, which has the


16

capability of accurately reporting filings and dis-

positions. Similarly, there were slight increases

at the on-site UD Advisory Clinic which pro-

vides legal assistance to pro se litigants on a walk-

in basis. During FY 02-03, the clinic responded

to 12,739 public contacts (52 per day average).

The FY 03-04 totals decreased slightly to 11,731

(48.5 contacts per day average). Additionally, the

Unlawful Detainer Mediation program,

which offers pre-trial and day-of-trial services

to litigants in contested and pro se matters, as-

sisted more than 500 cases during the span of

Fiscal Years 02-03 and 03-04.

Further, UD implemented the Open Court

System (OCS), a paperless case management

system, in April 2003. The OCS system allows

document imaging and viewing by judicial of-

ficers, staff and public. The system eliminates un-

productive staff hours spent searching for lost

files and documents and speeds the preparation

and mailing of dispositions (within two days of

judicial decision).


17

General ServicesGeneral ServicesGeneral ServicesGeneral ServicesGeneral Services

General Services in-

cludes the Facilities,

Purchasing and Busi-

ness Services Center

Units. The Facilities

Unit provides facili-

ties-related support

services throughout

the court including:

building maintenance,

trouble calls, and other

facilities requests for

11 court facilities and

more than 800 judi-

cial officers and staff.

Facilities is responsible for financial management

and oversight of court construction funding,

budget and expenditure tracking, coordination

of all court contract janitorial services, and mov-

ing all staff and judicial officers. In addition, the

Facilities Unit coordinates all court telephone

services, manages assets, monitors the court secu-

rity budget, tracks and reports energy conserva-

tion efforts and coordinates emergency actions.

The Purchasing Unit provides purchasing and

contracting support services including

development and execution of contracts and

purchase agreements and technical expertise in

reviewing Memoranda of Understanding and

other Agreements between the Court and other

parties. The Business Services Center Unit provides

services such as: mail

services (including

U.S. mail and express

mail services); copying,

printing, binding; main-

taining the internal

telephone directory, co-

ordinating updates for

external telephone di-

rectories, and coordi-

nating use of the State

Vehicle Program.

Some of the unit ac-

complishments during

FY 2003-04 include

completion of a $1.5 million upgrade of the

Downtown Courthouse Security System, upgrade

of the main courthouse inmate elevator and emer-

gency generator, completion of the Court Facili-

ties Master Plan, conversion of janitorial services

from county to commercial vendor, and signifi-

cant progress on the new Juvenile Courthouse

Project. Also, the division is responsible for con-

version of telephones to a new county switch and

major upgrade to digital phones.

Court Administration“Facilities Unit provides support

throughout the court including...11 court

facilities and more than 800 judicial

officers and staff.


18

Human ResourcesHuman ResourcesHuman ResourcesHuman ResourcesHuman Resources

The Human Re-

sources (HR Office)

provides a full range of

personnel and labor

relations services to

court staff as well as

providing court em-

ployment information

to the public. The of-

fice is responsible for

recruitment, testing,

job classification, salary

administration, perfor-

mance management, labor relations, various dis-

ability management programs, harassment inves-

tigations, discrimination, workplace violence,

training, employee development, and mainte-

nance of personnel and medical records. The

division reports to the Chief Deputy Executive

Officer and is staffed with nine employees.

During Fiscal Year 2002-2003, the HR Office

conducted a complete review of all classifica-

tions used by the Court to ensure compliance

with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), even-

tually moving a number of classifications to the

appropriate status. The HR Office developed

improved ergonomic standards for court em-

ployees in anticipation of transferring the work-

ers’ compensation program from county to court.

Upon closing the

South Sacramento

Courts, the HR Office

assisted in the place-

ment of all effected

employees to other fa-

cilities. In addition, the

office assisted with

transitioning employ-

ees displaced by the

closure of the Micro-

fiche Project at

the Records Reten-

tion Center with no

resulting layoffs.

Human Resources enhanced its webpage to

include information on job openings, on-line

job application forms, more accessible proce-

dures and forms, as well as information on up-

coming training opportunities. The HR Office

also coordinated the development and presen-

tation of workplace violence training for all

Court employees.

In Fiscal Year 2003-04, the HR Office was inte-

gral to negotiating a labor agreement affecting

the majority of Court employees. In addition,

the HR Office coordinated the development of

procedure manuals and training guides for civil

and criminal courtroom clerks and provided

training to downtown staff as well as new clerks.

“Developed improved ergonomic stan-

dards for court employees in anticipation

of transferring the workers’ compensa-

tion program from county to court”.


19

The manuals and training guides will eventu-

ally be used as part of a proposed Courtroom

Clerk Academy.

Human Resources also managed the transition

of the Court’s workers’ compensation program

from Sacramento County to the new Judicial

Council program. The Human Resources

Office trained managers and supervisors on the

preparation of duty statements and coordinated

the development of duty statements for all

Court employees.

FinanceFinanceFinanceFinanceFinance

The Finance Division includes the Accounting,

Audit, Budget, and Payroll Units. The Division

strives to protect the integrity of the public

monies both appropriated and collected, through

strong financial policies, procedures, and the uti-

lization of competent, skilled staff. The Divi-

sion provides fiscal leadership to the court, work-

ing to secure adequate resources, developing and

monitoring various budgets, processing and re-

cording financial transactions, developing re-

quired financial reports, and reviewing court fi-

nancial documents to assure the integrity and

validity of the data presented. Additionally, the

Division provides benefits and payroll services

to court staff.

The Accounting Unit provides the recording of

daily expenditures throughout the year, processes

installment payments to collect fines and fees

for court tracking of various court related ac-

tivities that require reimbursement or have mon-

etary thresholds, provides a proper safeguarding

of monies entrusted to the court, deposits monies

collected by the operations units in the three

courthouse locations, provides invoice process-

ing, and maintains the tracking and processing

of posted bonds.

The Audit Unit reviews court procedures, par-

ticularly financial procedures, to assess that ad-

equate internal controls exist to ensure assets

and data of the court are safeguarded, provides

financial expertise by developing simple and fair

financial procedures which adhere to the re-

spected governing authority, provides assurance

of the integrity of recorded financial informa-

tion and reports, and reviews court processes

for potential efficiency and economy changes.

The Budget Unit develops and administers multi-

year state and local budgets with various fund-

ing sources totaling more than $90 million per

year, prepares comprehensive reports for

the distribution of collections and revenues, re-

sponds to an array of fiscal-related drills from

the AOC throughout the year; provides budget

related information and assistance to judges, staff,

and the public; and, forecasts, monitors and

reports on expenditures and revenues for the

various budgets.


20

The Payroll Unit processes the court payroll in-

cluding maintaining the employee master file,

data entering actual work hours, distributing

paychecks, coordinating employee insurance

benefits, and implementing the Wellness/Health

program for the court, in coordination with

collective bargaining representatives.

The Finance Division has also been involved

with several major projects during Fiscal Years

2002-03 and 2003-04 years. Staff collaborated

with AOC Auditors in the review of the Court’s

Financial Policies and Procedures, identifying

areas/practices within the Court warranting

analysis and/or change. Staff assisted in the de-

velopment, implementation, and training of the

Court Position Control (CPC) application

which provides for the monitoring of person-

nel resources and enhances management’s abil-

ity to make informed personnel decisions. The

division implemented the “Time Track” system,

a county-operated electronic time sheet program

used by most court staff. Various division staff

assisted in the annual preparation and submis-

sion of the required Comprehensive Annual Fi-

nancial Report (CAFR) which reconciles the

accrual system of fund balance sheets in accor-

dance with Generally Accepted Accounting

Principles (GAAP). Staff also worked on the de-

velopment and finalization of both initial and

subsequent year Court-County Memorandum

of Understanding documents regarding services

provided to the court by the county. Division

staff continues to participate on the statewide

team responsible for development of account-

ing requirements for the California Case Manag

ement System (CCMS).


21

ManagementManagementManagementManagementManagementInformationInformationInformationInformationInformationSystemsSystemsSystemsSystemsSystems

Management Infor-

mation Systems (MIS)

consists of the follow-

ing units: Customer

Support, Network

Services, Applications

Development, and

Business Solutions.

Customer Support in-

cludes the help desk

and computer training

staff. Network Ser-

vices staff support the

network, servers,

email, and internet in-

frastructure. Applications Development staff sup-

port the court’s custom computer programs.

Business Solutions staff act as project managers

that work directly with operations’ staff on tech-

nology solutions to improve the efficiency and ef-

fectiveness of the Court.

The Customer Support Unit (CSU) handled over

5,300 help desk calls including judicial moves, new

and existing equipment moves and installs, and

equipment repairs. In addition, the unit imple-

mented new procedures for responding to emer-

gency courtroom outages, participated in the plan-

ning and testing for the court-wide upgrade to

Windows XP and Of-

fice 2003, upgraded all

laptop computers to

Windows XP, and

upgraded six judicial

software packages. The

Customer Support

Unit also worked with

the Facilities unit

to implement helpdesk

software for facilities

issues. The unit played

a role in almost every

deployment initiated

by Network Services

or Application Devel-

opment.

Network Services (NW) was responsible for relo-

cating the computer room from the Main

Courthouse to the OCIT building necessitat-

ing movement of 24 servers. This unit increased

the number of servers in the lab in order to

provide a more robust testing environment - es-

pecially important to the upgrade to Windows

XP. The Network Services Unit separated the

Court from the County Network and estab-

lished an independent network (LAN/WAN)

for the Court. This included: replacing and

readdressing all network equipment, adding

additional equipment, implementing new

“Business Solutions staff act as project

managers that work directly with

operations’ staff on technology solutions

to improve the efficiency and

effectiveness of the Court”


22

monitoring and security tools, establishing

a court connection to the internet, and

replacing all backup power supplies for the

network switches.

The unit also replaced eight servers as part of

the annual server replacement project. Network

Services upgraded the Mail Server software from

Exchange 2000 to Exchange 2003 and upgraded

most of the court servers from Windows 2000

to Windows 2003. Further, NW implemented

technology to allow outside agencies to access

court applications, specifically ICMS and JAS.

Applications Development (AD) has worked with

operations on numerous projects. For example,

AD worked with the following units: Traffic and

Accounting units to develop an automated in-

terface with GC Services (a third party collec-

tion agency); Unlawful Detainer Unit and AOC

on an interoperability project for the Second

Generation e-Filing Standards; Civil and the new

Civil Case Management Procedures nd imple-

mentation of a new application to automatically

upload filings from the California Employment

Development Department; and Juvenile Depen-

dency to automate certificates of mailing. Work-

ing with Accounting, AD replaced all outdated

cashiering equipment. The unit also assisted Le-

gal Research by implementing the ability to

image and retrieve documents and Human

Resources by developing the Court Position

Control application.

The Business Solutions Unit (or project manag-

ers) led most of the MIS projects. In addition

to all the projects listed in the units above, the

project managers (PMs) participated in various

other activities. The project managers act as liai-

sons between MIS and operational units par-

ticipating in various meetings in the operational

areas and advising on automation issues. In ad-

dition to participating in various reengineering

efforts, PMs participated in the California Case

Management System (CCMS) V3 vendor se-

lection process and on the CCMS V2 and V3

project teams.


23

ResearchResearchResearchResearchResearchand Evaluationand Evaluationand Evaluationand Evaluationand Evaluation

Research and Evalua-

tion consists of two

units: Analytical Ser-

vices and Reengi-

neering. The division

performs unbiased

planning, analysis, and

research regarding

court policies, pro-

grams, and operations.

The Analytical Services

Unit (formerly called

Planning and Opera-

tional Support) pro-

vides support to court

executives, managers,

and staff . The unit

monitors new legislation and changes to rules

of court looking for potential impact upon court

operations. Analysts prepare and distribute

monthly workload and filing statistics to the

Judicial Council, write grants, manage and fa-

cilitate projects, develop policies and procedures,

support judicial committees and other analyti-

cal services as required. The Analytical Services

Unit is also responsible for coordinating and staff-

ing community outreach efforts on behalf of

the court.

For the Criminal Division, analysts developed

the Court Appointed Expert Certification Policy,

SOC Warrants Procedure, 1203.4 PC Procedure,

Ability of Indigent De-

fendants to Pay Survey,

Intermediate Punish-

ments Comprehensive

Annual Report,

Cr iminal Workload

Report (Prop 21), and

AOC Prisoner Cost

Survey (4750 PC). At

the Carol Miller Justice

Center, analysts helped

the Traffic Division by

assisting with the

award-winning Youth-

ful Visitation Program

as well as participating

in FileNet develop-

ment to implement

Panagon Document

Management (Imag-

ing) for the Open Court System.

Civil and Trial Support received help from Ana-

lytical Services staff who researched and/or re-

solved several issues related to sanctions in civil

cases and developed the Usage Data for Con-

tract Per Diem Interpreters Survey (per SB371),

the Jury Service Exit Survey, and the Customer

Service Survey for front counters. Staff assisted

Family Law, Probate, Delinquency and Depen-

dency in implementing reengineering recom-

mendations, tracking implementation progress,

and providing fiscal and operational assistance.

In addition, staff conducted and evaluated a pi-

“Analysts prepare and distribute

monthly workload and filing statistics

to the Judicial Council, write

grants, manage and facilitate projects,

develop policies and procedures, sup-

port judicial committees and other

analytical services”


24

lot project aimed at gathering details of Family

Court Services cases and mediation events. Unit

staff assisted Probate with SUSTAIN software

by developing new reports, notices, time stan-

dards, as well as providing training.

Furthermore, the Analytical Services Unit

developed a comprehensive court-wide forms

inventory, completed an in-depth study and re-

port regarding the courtroom clerk classifica-

tion, developed several human resource policies

(Real Time, Bilingual Pay, Catastrophic Leave,

Pepper Spray, and Commissioner/Referee Va-

cation policies) and published the Court-wide

Annual Report.

Staff conducted training for community-based

organizations cover ing Traffic, Unlawful

Detainers, Small Claims, Family Law, Probate

and Juvenile Dependency and developed four

“How it Works” brochures in Family Law, Traf-

fic, Unlawful Detainer, and Small Claims (avail-

able in seven languages). Staff also developed the

Judicial Community Outreach Program as well

as compiled a Legal Services Referral Listing

which is posted on the Internet site. Further-

more, staff established the Community Leaders’

Forum in September 2003 to continue the dia-

logue between the court and community.

The Reengineering Unit was created in August

2002 and is responsible for the court’s

Reengineering and Process Improvement

Program (program). This program involves the

periodic and structured review and evaluation

of all court processes for efficiency

and effectiveness while still maintaining or

expanding customer service. The court’s

reengineering program was highlighted in Ju-

dicial Council’s 2003 Year in Review and is be-

ing replicated by other courts in the State of

California. In the past two years the

Reengineering Unit has completed formal re-

views of Family Law, Probate, Unlawful

Detainers, and Juvenile Dependency and De-

linquency. Smaller-scale projects have also been

completed in Civil, Traffic, and Small Claims.

The successes of many of these efforts are noted

in the operation-specific areas of the Biennial

Report. The review of criminal court opera-

tions, including examining criminal calendar

configurations, criminal operations, coordination

of courtroom resources, and the Master Calen-

dar Unit was initiated in May 2004 and is ex-

pected to be complete in 2005. These efforts

have helped to define and streamline current

processes wherever possible, support more ef-

fective use of existing resources, and recommend

long term changes in technology. These projects

have been successful due to the support and co-

operation of the impacted operating units.

Reengineering analysts also responded to a staff-

ing study prepared by the Administrative Office

of the Courts. Unit analysts documented in great

detail the processes and time needed to com-

plete various tasks in civil, small claims, traffic,

appeals, records, law and motion, and other

areas within the court. This work was done to

both assist court executives in assessing the impact

of any changes recommended by the AOC study

and to create a foundation for assessing resource

needs by operating area.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTSMany thanks go to the individuals who assisted with the biennial report through

contribution, editing, presentation, and design.

Presiding Judge: Michael G. Virga

Executive Officer: Jody Patel Chief Deputy: Curt Soderlund

Editing: Jake Chatters, Lori Perras-Prizmich

Contributors: Pam Reynolds, Maureen Ashby, Kim Pedersen, Maureen Dumas, Meredith Bostian

Jeri Johnson, Jake Chatters, Doug Kauffroath, Chuck Robuck, Rick Beard, John Campbell

Photography: Gerald Root

Statistics: Ted Ternes

Project Manager: Lori Perras-Prizmich

Design and Presentation: KM Design Group


Documents

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO - California · 2008-09-25 · JUDGES OF THE SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT 2004 Front Row: ... Hon. Raymond Cadei, Hon. Michael Garcia, ... ing resources based on