Justice Ron George Announces Retirement

Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 14, 2010

(07-14) 13:21 PDT SAN FRANCISCO — California Chief Justice Ronald George, a judge for 38 years and author of the 2008 ruling that briefly legalized same-sex marriage in the state, said today he will not seek re-election in November and will retire from the bench in January.

George, 70, was appointed to the state Supreme Court in 1991 by Gov. Pete Wilson, who then named him chief justice five years later. George won a new 12-year term in 1998 despite opposition by anti-abortion groups because of his ruling overturning a state law that required parental consent for minors’ abortions.

Some opponents of same-sex marriage had discussed mounting a campaign against George after he wrote the 4-3 ruling in May 2008 striking down state laws that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman. He said the laws discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation and violated gays’ and lesbians’ fundamental right to marry the partner of their choice.

Voters overturned the ruling by passing Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment, in November 2008. George wrote the court’s 6-1 ruling in May 2009 that upheld Prop. 8 while criticizing rules that make it easy to qualify and enact initiatives affecting basic rights.

His announcement today came as a surprise. He had given several interviews in which he indicated he would seek a new term in November.

In a statement, George said he had decided that “now is the right time – while I am still at the top of my game – to leave while the proverbial music still plays and return to private life.”

He said he was making the announcement in time for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who also leaves office in January, to nominate a successor.

George, a former deputy state attorney general, was appointed to the Los Angeles Municipal Court by Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1972. He was promoted to the Superior Court by Gov. Jerry Brown in 1977 and to a state appeals court by Gov. George Deukmejian in 1987.

44 responses to “Justice Ron George Announces Retirement

  1. The last lines of “While the Music Plays On” are:

    But I am not allowed to show the crowd
    What happens when romance has gone
    I must hid my fears singing through the tears
    While the music plays on.

  2. Wendy Darling

    From the Sacramento Bee website:

    UPDATE 4:52 p.m.: Schwarzenegger issued a statement saying his office will begin immediately the search for a nominee, who must then be confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments. Voters will decide Nov. 2 whether to elect the appointed justice for a full 12-year term.

    Schwarzenegger also thanked George for demonstrating “tremendous commitment to justice with extraordinary dedication to upholding impartiality under the law.”

    Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/07/chief-justice-ronald-george-to.html#ixzz0tiCKVzve

  3. JusticeCalifornia

    The Governor has the power to calm the waters or feed the fury.

    This may be one of the most important decisions he makes in his administration. This is a marvelous opportunity for him to play real-life hero and be a pivotal part of an historic and positive adjustment to the biggest judiciary in the Western world.

    In selecting a new Chief Justice in the aftermath of this debacle, let’s hope all voices are heard, politics are put aside and the choice is a strong leader who all agree has been and remains dedicated to the basics — namely integrity, fairness, truth, justice, and the rule of law. History is being written.

    Let’s hope the Governor, the members of legislature, and the entire judicial branch understand how important this is.

    This is a big story and perhaps our faithful journalists– especially those who have been following it for a long time– will do it justice in the coming days. (pun intended).

  4. Wendy,

    It would also be important to note the parties who actually sit on the Commission on Judicial Appointments.

    “The commission has three members: the Chief Justice, the Attorney General, and the senior presiding justice of the Court of Appeal of the affected appellate district.”

    Any public hearing held by said commission will definitely be on my personal calendar!


  5. Quick question. Is the Judicial Council meeting set for tomorrow, Thursday, or is it Friday? On the “2010 Business Meeting Dates” schedule prepared 2/9/10, it states: “July 15 or July 16” and while the footnote says the meeting agenda is posted at least seven days before the meeting on the public web site at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courtadmin/jc/ I don’t see that meeting agenda notice posted.

    Am I going blind and missing it?

  6. latimes.com
    California Supreme Court chief to retire
    Ronald George, 70, will step down in January. He is likely to be most remembered for his 2008 ruling that gave gays the right to marry, which state voters later rescinded.
    By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times

    July 15, 2010

    Reporting from San Francisco


    California Chief Justice Ronald M. George, who presided over the often turbulent restructuring of state courts and wrote the ruling that temporarily gave gays the right to marry, said Wednesday he would step down in January after a 38-year career in the California court system.

    George, 70, a moderate Republican who was often the swing vote on the state high court, said he wants to retire while he is “in the prime of physical and mental health.”

    George’s decision stunned his colleagues at the court when he informed them Wednesday during a closed, sometimes tearful meeting. George has often said he had the only job he would want.

    Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has until Sept. 16 to appoint a new chief justice, who would then face a retention vote on the November ballot. George said he had recommended that Schwarzenegger nominate a judge with administrative court experience.

    “This will be one of the most important legacies that Gov. Schwarzenegger has to leave,” he said.

    George, who has served as chief for 14 years, oversaw the blending of municipal and superior courts into a single trial court system and its transfer from county control to the state judicial branch.

    On the bench, George has been an extremely influential jurist, leading the court from the center and frequently casting the vote that determined whether the conservative or the liberal wing prevailed. He tended to vote more often with the conservatives on law-and-order cases and with the liberals on social issues.

    His judicial legacy is likely to be shaped most profoundly by his 4-3 ruling in May 2008 to overturn a ban on same-sex marriage as a violation of the state Constitution. Three justices favored overturning the ban, and three wanted to keep it in place. George’s vote decided the issue.

    George said he made up his mind after studying legal precedent, talking with his law clerks and reflecting on the history of discrimination in the United States. The landmark ruling elevated the constitutional status of sexual orientation, but voters took away the rights of gays to marry later that year when they passed Proposition 8.

    George then wrote the 6-1 ruling that upheld Proposition 8, rejecting an argument that same-sex marriage could not be abolished by a constitutional amendment. A federal court judge is now considering a federal challenge to the 2008 ballot measure.

    As chief, George often appointed himself to write the rulings that would be the most controversial. One of his most contentious was a ruling that overturned a state law requiring minors to obtain consent from a parent or a judge to have an abortion. Anti-abortion forces tried unsuccessfully to defeat him at the ballot.

    Other notable rulings: Loder vs. Glendale, which said city employees cannot be routinely subjected to drug testing for promotions; and Aguilar vs. Avis Rent-a-Car, which said that racial epithets can be banned in the workplace despite the 1st Amendment.

    George’s administrative overhaul of the courts often provoked anger from judges on the trial courts, especially in Los Angeles, where the jurists were accustomed to great autonomy and generous benefits. His critics in Los Angeles dubbed him “King George.”

    “There are things that I wish had gone smoother,” George reflected, “but in the end they turned out quite fine.”

    In fact, he cited his administrative work as one of his biggest accomplishments because it made the courts “a coequal, independent branch of government” and improved services.

    Legal analysts said Wednesday that George would rank with the late Chief Justice Phil Gibson as one of the court’s most successful administrators.

    The transfer of courts from counties to the state has “just been a remarkable transformation, and it has gone remarkably smoothly because of his leadership,” said University of Santa Clara law professor Gerald Uelmen, a longtime observer of the state high court.

    He said George also improved relations between the Legislature and the judiciary and made the courts more accessible to the public and the news media.

    But George fared less well in reforming capital punishment. Although George called the state’s system “dysfunctional,” he “has been powerless to do anything about it,” Uelmen said.

    He tried to make death row defense work more appealing, but there remain large numbers of inmates without lawyers, and the appeals process continues to be sluggish.

    In a relaxed meeting with reporters in his chambers, George cited jury reforms — such as one-day, one-trial service — greater juror pay and instructions “in plain English” as among his successes.

    George said in the interview that his family prompted him to consider retirement when he turned 70 on March 11 by asking what more he hoped to accomplish during the next 12 years. He said he began to consider the quality of his life.

    “Virtually all my daylight hours were consumed with my administrative and case-related chores, and my workload — and I am not complaining — literally tripled when I went from being an associate justice to chief,” he said. “It was getting difficult to get more than five minutes of pleasure reading before I went to bed.”

    The time to file for retention started this week, and George said he did not want to run and then retire six to eight months after his election.

    Like most others, Uelmen was surprised by George’s decision, but “looking ahead could not be a pretty picture,” the professor said. “He is not at a point of looking forward to being able to coast a little and enjoy the fruits of his labor. The job just gets harder every year. When you have to manage a system by cutting budgets, it

    Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

  7. Wendy Darling

    “George said he made up his mind after studying legal precedent, talking with his law clerks and reflecting on the history of discrimination in the United States.”

    While George was “reflecting on the history of discrimination in the United States” it’s too bad he didn’t also take the time to reflect on, and do something about, the history of discrimination, retaliation, and unethical conduct that was, and is, going on in his own house at the AOC, especially in the AOC’s HR Division under Director Fuentes and Assistant Director Couch.

  8. Oh all of these guys like Uelman are just a bunch of arm chair quarterbacks lick spittles who do not know squat about what has been happening in the branch other than what George told them.
    Maybe his family did want him to retire but heck if he was lucky to have “five minutes to read before he went to bed” since when did he give a damn about his family in his relentless pursuit for power? What a bunch of pap. He knew that there was a good chance he would have a contenious retention battle and he probably would have won but the damage caused by such a would be irrepairable especially to his image that he has cultivated with the legislature and the executive branch. Finally, George has done the right thing for the branch….getting lost. I suspect those who cried and the private meeting he had with staff today were the ones that knew that with his retirement their days at the AOC and as demigods on the JC were numbered. Sniff!
    So George recommended to the gov a new CJ with admin experience. I respect that but we need here is a consensus builder and someone who wants the best for the branch and not just for themselves and their cronies.

    • Wendy Darling

      A consensus builder who will understand that the time to democratize the Judicial Council and the administration of the Branch has come, a true leader who has the ethics and integrity to firstly and always will set the example and lead the way, who others can serve on behalf of the public with honor, who will not simply say one thing but do another, but will act for and demand true accountability and authentic transparency, first of themselves, as well as of the Branch, the Judicial Council, and the AOC.

      Any nominees? ACJ, what say you?

      And please don’t forget the women and others who are less represented on the bench.

  9. Okay, I’m reading the Governor’s press release on the Chief announcing his retirement

    (see: http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/15597)

    and notice this: “The candidate must also be submitted to the State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation to provide it an opportunity for evaluation, as time permits.”

    Hmmmmm…..as time permits?

    Anyhow, here is a list of the State Bar’s Commission roster and, yes, it’s time for a few more emails.

  10. Wendy Darling

    As posted tonight, July 14th, on SF Gate, the website for the San Francisco Chronicle:

    State Chief Justice Ronald George to retire
    Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
    Wednesday, July 14, 2010

    Corrigan on list?
    Six of the seven current justices were chosen by Republican governors, including George and Justice Carol Corrigan, Schwarzenegger’s lone appointee. Corrigan, 61, a former Alameda County prosecutor with a moderately conservative record since joining the court in 2006, could be on the short list as George’s successor.

    “I’d look carefully at Corrigan” as a candidate, said Gerald Uelmen, a Santa Clara University law professor and an expert on the court’s history. “She has moved to the top rank of productiveness.”

    If Schwarzenegger chooses Corrigan or another current justice to replace George as chief justice, he would also get to nominate that justice’s successor, who would go through the same confirmation process.

    George is the third-longest-serving chief justice in California history and one of the most influential judicial figures in recent decades.
    He wrote important rulings on abortion, sex discrimination and racial slurs in the workplace, but his most notable and controversial decision was the 4-3 majority opinion two years ago that declared the right of gays and lesbians to marry.

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/14/BAIL1EEC0G.DTL#ixzz0tjIxZF66

    “He wrote important rulings on … sex discrimination and racial slurs in the workplace …”.

    Too bad the Chief Justice didn’t apply or hold AOC executives, Directors, or management to the same principles the Chief Justice apparently gave to others, or to any standards of conduct at all for that matter.

  11. Equal Justice For All

    Let’s hope that the Gov. has the stones to choose an outsider that will actually have some positive impact on the court.. The choice of chief may in fact be the most important decision. The club think in the court must be changed.

  12. Equal Justice For All

    Yikes- I plead guilty to guilty of multi-tasking.. Above should have read – The choice of Chief may in fact be the most important decision the Gov. ever makes…

    • Michael Paul

      An outsider, I believe, is essential.

      That nominee should be well informed, well prepared and armed with all of the current controversy going on prior to accepting the position. Eyes wide open, with an eye on reform, transparency and true accountability.

      Lip service to these things is no longer acceptable.

      • Michael Paul

        Democratization of the Judicial Council is also essential. With a little more free time on my hands these days, I’ll be working towards the goal of raising public awareness and wish to work with others to establish a citizens’ committee on Judicial Council democratization.

        While I’m aware that there is a parallel effort underway to do this amongst the state judges, I am a litigant and understand that there might be issues working with a litigant to democratize an institution of government.

        As I understand things, this does not preclude retired judges or attorneys from participating in this effort. I am not a lawyer and don’t pretend to know all the ins and outs of the law or the structure of Calfornia’s judicial branch, or the relationships amongst the various entities.

        I tried to search muckety.com and this appears to be virgin territory for muckety.com. Understanding the various relationships of California’s legal system, the largest in the world, would also be an eye-opener.

        Should any party be interested in participating in this effort, I can be reached via email at michael_paul@michaelpaul.net or you may reach me by telephone. 510-684-8706.

        Regardless, if you don’t bring up my pending litigation, it does not exist and I will not discuss it if this happens to be an on-the-fence issue of the state judges and your canon of ethics.

  13. It’s often surprising what a person can find when searching within the wordpress website itself, as opposed to the various internet search engines.

    Here’s an interesting blog (The Elite Lawyers and Judges Whistleblower Network of America), and thought I would share this particular entry with you fine folks who took notice that Senator Corbett has been missing-in-action from watching the Judicial Council henhouse!


  14. The Chief Justice is not leaving office because he wanted to do so. He was forced from office.

    This is a man who has used all of his considerable energy for many decades to get to the top of the judicial heap. His entire persona has been invested in his job, his legacy and his ego.

    Think of what he is giving up come this January: he will no longer be picked up by two CHP guards and driven to work. He will lose his power to appoint members of the Judicial Council. He will lose his power to meet and address the members of the executive and legislative branches. There will be no more “meet with the Chief” sessions with the CJA. He will decide no cases. He will assign no cases. He will become a legal nobody.

    We are asked to believe that it was only last weekend, on a family trip to Lake Tahoe, that he came to the realization that he wanted to leave his 24/7 job and travel, read and spend time with his family because he had accomplished all that he set out to do. How many of you believe in the Tooth Fairy?

    The judicial branch is in a mess, a terrible mess.
    There is no budget. The State of California is close to broke and if anyone believes there is an extra 100 million hanging around for the judicial branch you are wrong. This could be a reason why the Chief left.

    We are now 387 or so million into CCMS. Everyone who uses the system knows that it takes more time and is more complex than the systems it replaces. There is no reasonable expectation that another billion or so will fix it.There will soon be an audit of CCMS and it will call into question every aspect of its development, deployment, and financial structure. Maybe this is why the Chief is leaving.

    The courthouse in Alpine County is being built for $1776.00 per square foot. Other courthouses are being built for about $1000.00 a square foot. Maybe this is why the Chief is leaving.

    Gifts have been given to the AOC and they have not been accounted for in any sort of an audit. Maybe this is why the Chief is leaving.

    While courts around the state are reducing the pay of their employees and giving some of them pink slips the AOC has hired a broken down Senator at $65,000 for less than a year’s work to advise the Chief, the Judicial Council, and the AOC as to how to get more money from the Legislature. Maybe this is why the Chief is leaving.

    There have been two whistleblowers within the AOC who have been forced to retire or they were fired. Perhaps the Chief knows that there are more like Michael and Paul and he fears what they will say. Maybe this is why The Chief is leaving

    There may have been a poll taken which would have shown, although he would retain his office, that the battle would have been brutal. Maybe this is why the Chief has decided not to seek to retain his office. He has lost the stomach for a real fight.

    Maybe the Chief just got tired: constant sniping by the ACJ; no real support in the judicial branch except from his minions; no widespread support from members of the Legislature; and a press that, until he retired, had nothing good to say about his administrative abilities.

    What about the law suits that the AOC seems to get involved with with increasing regularity? Maybe this is the reason the Chief is leaving.

    The Great Helmsman has driven the good ship, JUDICIAL BRANCH, upon the reefs of fiscal irresponsibility, failed computer projects, gifts, and grossly over priced courthouses. Now instead of staying with the ship and making sure the crew and cargo are properly taken care of the Great Helmsman has left his post and gone ashore to travel and read. He has deserted.

    The Chief has taken his legacy and dragged it through the gutter (masked ball anyone?) and then tossed it into the trash can. Just think of the crew he has left to pick up the pieces: Justice Chin, Justice Huffman, Messrs Vickrey and Overholt, and Ms. Calabro. Who amongst them can meet with the Governor and the Legislature so that there is proper funding for the Judicial Branch? Say what you want about the Chief, he is the only one amongst this crew who has the knowledge and charm to make the necessary contacts with the other two branches of government.

    Let us hope that the Governor does not listen to the Great Helmsman as who should now captain the good ship JUDICIAL BRANCH.

    Please give us a real captain: one who will bring adult supervision to the AOC; one who will insure that the courts remain open; one who will minimize statewide bureaucracy; one who will listen to critics; and finally one who will not abandon ship when the going gets tough.

  15. Welcome back Diogenes! Well said! But like I said before in a much more crude way: he is just a rat leaving a sinking ship (The HMS Power Trip) and since when (since he never has much time home for himself, much less his family according to his own statements) has he given a thought to his family? Yes, this is a huge ego buster for the soon MR GEORGE. “The top of his game” really means their still is a life boat for this rat to float off into the sunset on.
    What does sadden me was his good work on the bench. If he would have just stayed a supreme and not became the chief, in my mind he I wish he could stay on the bench.

  16. Yes, welcome back Diogenes!! Touché for your exceptionally well-done outline and assessment! It serves as a reminder to me of exactly why it’s imperative that we all be INVOLVED and ACTIVE in our process!

    In this situation, history should never be allowed to repeat itself!

  17. Please pardon my posting volume this morning, but my recent investigations have caused me to ponder matters that I believe are important to outline.

    One active week in California Judicial Branch history (based on my own personal internet research):

    1. 7/7/10 (Wednesday) = AG is served a courtesy copy of the complaint in Paul vs. AOC
    2. 7/9/10 (Friday) = Mr. Michael Paul is placed on administrative leave, to contemplate his judicial branch future
    3. 7/9/10 (Friday) = Chief Justice George travels to Lake Tahoe to contemplate his judicial branch future
    4. 7/12/10 (Monday) = Mr. Michael Paul is officially terminated by the AOC
    5. 7/13/10 (Tuesday) = Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. is served with the Paul vs. AOC complaint
    6. 7/14/10 (Wednesday) Chief Justice George announces his retirement

    After reviewing this particular active week in history, I was reflecting back on the article I remember Mr. Paul posted on 12/10/09 on the legal pad site on “Judicial Council sues its unlicensed contractors” wherein Mr. Paul wrote:

    “There will be a lot of my coworkers and people that know me that will read this article. To some I will be admired, others will wonder if I am brave or just stupid and to a third group, I represent something that can potentially rock the very foundation of an entire branch of government.”

    Am I the only one seeing the connections here? It would seem that Mr. Paul’s crystal ball has served him well. Hey, Mr. Paul, can you tell me what this week’s winning lottery numbers are?

    1. Project on Government Oversight (pogo.org)
    2. Mr. Paul’s post on AOC Watcher (and also pogo.org)
    3. Mercury News (mercurynews.com)
    4. Mr. Paul’s post on AOC Watcher (and also pogo.org)
    5. According to return of service filed 7/14/10 in case no. CGC-10-500520 on sfsuperiorcourt.org

    • Michael Paul

      I’m guessing these things are nothing more than fascinatingly coincidental mermaid.

      Diogenis – the AOC set a new benchmark on what some of the world’s most expensive public buildings will cost per square foot last week. The Placerville courthouse, all 15,000 feet of it will be built at $1,833.00 per square foot.

      While it likely would have been “unpatriotic” to decry $1,776.00 per square foot, I think the AOC gave some critics of court construction some less patriotic ammunition. 😉

      • Michael Paul

        Of course, “fascinatingly” is a “truthiness” and coincidental simply implies that these events are likely unrelated.

  18. I know it was a bold post that nobody wants to touch (lol) but, hey, I was only pointing out a chain of factual events, and pondering it all on a personal level. Considering what has transpired thus far, and what is continuing to surface on a regular basis, I’d only suggest that “coincidences” not be so easily brushed under the carpet without first analyzing appropriately.

    Mr. Paul, you are saying the AOC announced or otherwise made known last week that the Placerville courthouse is going to be built for $1833.00 per square foot????????????

    That’s ridiculous! How can they possibly justify such a thing?? I sure hope someone is taking note of exactly how our judicial tax dollars are being spent! This money should be directed elsewhere within our judicial system! Based on their spending habits (CCMS, court construction, raises, etc.) they seem to have plenty of money, but are definitely not spending it wisely. Yet, always asking for more money…..where and when does this craziness stop??

    • Michael Paul

      Placerville (tahoe area courthouse) is on the courtinfo website available for all to see. It’s no secret. Given I was directly involved in most of the current projects, I cannot understand or make reason of these prices.

  19. Mermaid, in addition to your observations, I am certain there are many other reasons we probably will never know, why the chief is leaving. There is such a trail of scandals in his wake, he was sitting on a ticking time bomb.

  20. Suzanne Kingsbury

    I am a frequent reader of this site, but have never posted a comment. Michael Paul posted a comment yesterday indicating that there is a new Placerville Courthouse of 15,000 square feet was approved at a cost of $1833 per square foot. The courthouse mentioned by Mr. Paul is actually proposed for PLACER County in the Tahoe City area. El Dorado County has its own court project pending, which is proposed to be 6 courtrooms in size (not enough for our existing needs) at a cost of roughly $1000 per square foot. Still costly, but not to that extreme. There is no proposed project to bring a courthouse to South Lake Tahoe pending at this time.

  21. Suzanne Kingsbury

    Oops – should have proofread before sending. what I meant to say is that Michael Paul posted a comment yesterday indicating that there is a new Placerville Courthouse project of 15,000 square feet which was approved, at a cost of $1833 per square foot. The courthouse mentioned by Mr. Paul is actually proposed for PLACER County (Placerville is in El Dorado County) in the Tahoe City area. El Dorado County has its own project pending site acquisition, which is scheduled to be erected in the Placerville area, which is proposed to be six courtrooms in size (not enough for our existing needs) at a cost of roughly $1000 per square foot. Still costly, but not to that extreme. There is no proposed project to bring a new courthouse to the City of South Lake Tahoe at this time. Thanks for allowing me to make this correction!

    • Michael Paul

      *note to self – read better before you post and don’t confuse placer and placerville.

  22. Suzanne Kingsbury

    Don’t worry – happens all of the time! I was asked to go over to Tahoe City to take a verdict once upon a time because their judge was in another part of the county, and court was being held in a community center. There was a jazzercize class being held in another room and I found myself speaking in time with the music! No doubt they are in dire need of a facility in that location.

  23. Let us look at the gopher and not at the hole.

    $1776.00 for a courtroom in Alpine County is absurd as is any courthouse close to $1000.00 a square foot. The Feds, known for $200.00 toilet seats, do it for 1/3 rd of what the AOC pays.

    Thanks for posting Ms. Kingsbury. We need more posters whether they do it under their own names or their nom de plume..for us in the ACJ it is our nom de guerre.

    I hope we hear more from you.

    • The Hon. Suzanne Kingsbury is the PJ of the Placer County Superior Court.


    • Absurb expenditures under any circumstances. Even more so considering the CA budget crisis and how it has impacted the access of justice to individuals (i.e. we can close courthouses yet are paying out the nose to continue to build new ones! Hello reality check!??) What is really sad is the fact that many AOC employees have TRIED to show AOC how they can provide the same outcome much cheaper, but the AOC cares not to listen!

      I’m very pleased to see that the Honorable Kingsbury monitors this blog and would post here. For me, personally, it helps fuel my realization that Judges are, perhaps, actually taking notice of the facts on the ground….and that we have some serious current issues demanding attention.

      I know it’s a difficult and delicate situation for Judges, and your postings, however limited they are required to be, are greatly appreciated!

      BTW, do not mistake my recent silence as inactivity. Often times, the most productive, positive effort a citizen can make is in the background behind the scenes and, trust me, that’s exactly what I’m doing! I think some surprising events will transpire in the near future, and that’s all I feel comfortable saying at this point!

      To those with unclean hands, if ever there was a time to come clean and start fresh, it’s now. Otherwise, time, I believe is not your friend.

  24. The Hon. Suzanne Kingsbury is the PJ of the El Dorado Superior Court. Which is is where Placerville is located. So is South Lake Tahoe. But not Tahoe City.

  25. Michael Paul

    “The world’s most expensive public buildings on a per square foot basis”

    Simple, factual.

    • Michael Paul

      Whoops “Some of the world’s most expensive public buildings on a per square foot basis”

  26. Judge Kingsbury is way cool. I would add her to my short list of a new CJ. You go girl!

  27. Michael Paul

    The cost of all approved OCCM SB1407 capital projects on a per square foot basis

    Alpine/Markleeville – $1,776.91
    North Butte County – $1390.00
    Caleveras/San Andreas – $970.10
    East Contra Costa – $888.88
    El Dorado/Placerville – $1020.05
    Kern/Delano – $1053.29
    Kern/Mojave – $1036.28
    Kings/Hanford -$985.73
    Fresno/Sisk – unknown (renovation)
    Fresno/Main – $666.32 (renovation)
    Glenn/Willows – $1031.32 (renovation)
    Inyo – $1123.71
    Imperial/El Centro -$1432.01
    Lake/Lakeport -$1429.28
    LA/Long Beach – unknown
    LA/SouthEast -$1296.24
    LA/Eastlake -$1523.26
    LA/Glendale -$1244.57
    LA/Mental Health- $1,900.10
    LA/Santa Clarita -$1061.18
    Merced/Los Banos-$1104.67
    Mono/Mammoth Lakes-$1075.00
    Monterey/South County-$1381.35
    Nevada/Nevada City-$1288.22
    Placer/Tahoe City- $1833.33
    Plumas/Sierra-$855.26 (completed project)
    Riverside/Mid-County -$928.37
    Riverside/Indio Family-$1243.00
    Sacramento/Sacramento Criminal-$1082.94
    San Benito/Hollister-$872.28
    San Bernardino-$964.36
    San Diego/Central-$900.42
    San Joaquin/Juvenile -$206.66 (renovation/expansion)
    San Joaquin/Stockton- $919.14
    Santa Barbara/Criminal-$1562.51
    Santa Clara/San Jose Family-$1029.04
    Solano – indeterminate
    Sonoma/Santa Rosa Criminal-$1383.86**
    Tehama/Red Bluff-$1493.30

    Source: Courtinfo.ca.gov

  28. Equal Justice For All

    New Chief named- From the L.A. Times 7-21-10. FYI.
    I’m curious if any of y’all have an opinion on this appointment?

  29. Humm, never heard of her. Boy the name sure is a mouthful. It will be interesting to hear more about her from our fellow bloggers..

  30. Wendy Darling

    Ron Overholt attended a meeting of the AOC’s Executive Office Program (EOP) this afternoon around 3 p.m. and told the AOC employees in attendance that Governor Schwarzenegger’s nominee for Chief Justice, Tani Cantil-Sakauye, sits on the Judicial Council and “we’ve known her for about 5 years”, she is an advocate for CCMS and defended CCMS in the media with Justice Hill, that the employees don’t need to “worry about Bill and I”, they “know Tani” and we work very well with her, and he and Bill “aren’t planning on going anywhere.”

    Overholt was also asked about the cost and funding of the various courthouse construction projects, and Overholt indicated it was just going to be business as usual as far as courthouse construction.

    So, apparently, as indicated from the proverbial horse’s mouth, nothing is changing here and it’s Ron George II.