Chief judges want to control court tech dollars Jan Pudlow Senior Editor It may be only $2 collected from each court filing fee, but it’s piling up into a high-stakes debate about who should have control of millions of dollars for an integrated court technology system.Right now, the counties have control of the money, with little direction from the legislature on how to spend it for court technology needs in circuits that cross county lines.When the Article V Technology Board met in Tallahassee September 23, Second Circuit Chief Judge Charlie Francis temporarily suspended his role as chair of the group to argue passionately that the chief judge of each circuit should take control of one integrated court computer system that serves everyone’s needs.“It is the chief judge who has the responsibility of how cases are processed. That’s the bottom line,” Francis said. “As the chief judge, as the constitution says, they look to me, and the buck stops here as to whether a case makes it through the system or not.”Judge Francis spoke against a motion made by 15th Judicial Circuit Public Defender Carey Haughwout that proposed money generated by the $2 filing fee be administered at the circuit level by a joint committee of the state attorney, public defender, and chief judge.Fifth Circuit State Attorney Brad King said he had concerns about “the idea of the chief judge being the sole decision-maker where the money is spent, even after consultation” with the others.“and large, the court’s role should be a neutral one and not taking an active role in the management of cases,” King said.But Judge Francis stressed that he, as chief judge, has a constitutional charge to supervise the court system, and that should include technology that enables one division of the courts to talk to another, as well as receive and share information from a variety of state agencies needed to make decisions in cases.Francis said he has “no problem with some kind of review process if judges are not handling things right.” But he believes the chief judge needs to be in charge of setting court system priorities.“Right now, in most civil cases, there is no record of what happens other than the court taking notes in chambers. Clerks don’t have that ability. We depend on judges’ handwritten notes to know what’s going on in 60 percent of our court system,” Judge Francis said with frustration. “My job is to make sure the whole court system is working correctly.”The committee tabled the discussion until the next meeting, October 21, when they hope to have hard numbers on just how much the $2 fee is generating and how it is being spent. Francis said he does not think the $2 fee is sufficient to cover court technology costs.Statewide, Florida spent a total of $1.35 billion on all technology in 2003-04.“That’s a chunk of money to be spent on technology and the legislature has legitimate concerns if it is being spent properly,” Francis told committee members. “Our job is to recommend a funding model or models to the legislature.”It was clear from public testimony that confusion is swirling about the $2 fee enacted by the legislature last year, as part of a combo of county/state/and fee-generated funding for the courts.The legislature passed a $4 hike in filing fees on official records, of which $2 is set aside for the clerks. But the other half goes to fund the public defenders, state attorneys, and the court.“The legislature did not give enough clear direction to the counties as to how to utilize that fund,” said State Court Technology Officer Mike Love. “They set it aside and said, ‘Clerk, you capture it. You then pass it to the board of county commissioners.’ The board of county commissioners, with little direction thereafter, is to use their discretion in supporting the technology requirements of the state court system.”Exactly how much money the $2 fee is generating was unclear, but likely it is not enough.“I know that three years ago, when this was being contemplated, each dollar would generate $26 million. So there’s at least $100 million bucks we’re talking about. The clerk gets half of it and the other players get to split the other half,” Love said.“The reason you see there’s discontent is because there is not enough money in the $2.”Some of that discontent was detailed by those who testified before the board:• Third Circuit Chief Judge Julian Collins, of Lake City, said: “We need a circuit-wide system, not seven separate counties. We need centralized control over our $2 portion of the $4 surcharge” in order to have “reliable funding and an opportunity for centralized planning. Some counties are so small they won’t generate enough funds for technology.”• Jon Lin, court technology officer for the Fifth Judicial Circuit, handles five counties from his office in Ocala and he wishes he could prepare one circuit-wide budget. “I don’t have the ability to actually move equipment where I need it, when it needs to be transferred to another county,” he said. “I’d like to see our county employees for technology, who are funded out of the $2 fee, become state employees.”• Britt Beasley, court administrator for the Fourth Judicial Circuit, of Duval, Clay, and Nassau counties, said, “We’re experiencing somewhat of a crisis in funding. One of the problems is that with the $2 fee going directly to the local government, the local government is experiencing budgetary problems, and they are somewhat reluctant to dispense the money—or there seems to be a lack of understanding of what the money should be used for.” Beasely proposed that “we could actually fund 20 circuit systems totally for perhaps less than you can fund 67 county systems.”• Ken Nelson, chief technology officer for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Pinellas and Pasco counties, said, “We would like to recommend that the $2 of the $4 fee be returned to the circuit so that it could be administered as a circuit-wide fund, preferably by the chief judge.. . . Right now, we are in a situation where both of our counties micromanage everything we spend, right down to having us have our equipment authorized by the local IT departments. It becomes a real problem.”• Sheldon Gusky, executive director of the Florida Public Defender Association, said the biggest concern of its members is how best to resolve conflicts when they crop up. “Everybody has talked about funding, but nobody has talked about costs. Where are we today? What is the liability out there for the various entities on costs? What is the demand that is not being met?” Chief judges want to control court tech dollars October 15, 2005 Senior Editor Regular News
17SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr,Amanda Reed Web: www.CUInsight.com Details “It’s kind of fun to do the impossible.” – Walt DisneyWhen you start thinking about digital transformation, it can be easy to go down the rabbit hole and feel overwhelmed with all the details that might entail. To start, take a step back and look at the job that needs to be done instead. When you look at the big picture, and you ask the right questions, it’s not scary at all. It’s exhilarating.Today at THiNK17, we focused on determining what exactly what is it that we are trying to accomplish – for ourselves, for our employees, for our members. If we don’t know what it is that we are trying to solve, what our real job is, then we are never going to be able to transform. To help you through the process let’s take a cue from Disney…A few years ago Disney released the now iconic Magic Bands. They have a variety of purposes but it all started when they began listening to guest complaints. They didn’t like waiting in line or keeping up with hotel keys, things like that. Now it would’ve been easy(ier) to solve these problems individually, but instead Disney took a step back to look at the big picture. What was causing friction in an otherwise “Magical Experience”? But it isn’t just about accomplishing a task for a guest or a member, it’s about creating a better overall experience that helps employees as well. What they found was that moving to this system allowed their employees to focus on the interaction and creating a special moment, instead of just making one transaction with them.Today as you go about your work day, take a moment to think about the deeper needs of your members. Why is it that they are looking to you to complete a specific task and how can you help ease the friction in their daily lives so that you can move them from feeling ordinary to extraordinary. Once you start that thinking process, then you’re already on the path to digital transformation.
9SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr continue reading » $1.6 billion Sunova Credit Union, Selkirk, Manitoba, boasts one of the youngest, most energized (and top performing) credit union teams in North America. Year after year, they’re leaders in sales generation and member satisfaction. Turnover is low (9.43 percent in 2016), and the CU’s work environment conducive to growth and collaboration.Unlike models built around the C-suite, success stems from a business model that recognizes and rewards front-line staff first and eliminates unintended barriers (perceived or otherwise) between the corporate office and branches.“You can choose to compete in price, product or service delivery, but not all three,” reflects CEO Edward Bergen, CCD, CCE, a CUES member. “Being the lowest in price is difficult, and since associates are often the first point of contact with members, we wouldn’t want them to be the lowest paid. We recognize their value and have built a business model focused on fostering long-term, mutually beneficial relationships and delivering exceptional service.”
Over the last few years, the offense of the Pittsburgh Steelers has been considered somewhat of a “sleeping giant” especially when it came to basically playing down to their opponents or just plain sleep walking until they were well into the second half. Quick question: What does Monsieur Ben Roethlisberger have in common with Aaron Rodgers, Robert Griffin III, Alex Smith, Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, Tom Brady and Russell Wilson? Answer: Absolutely nothing. Why you ask? Because first and foremost, five of the teams that are directed by the aforementioned signal callers will be making some “playoff” dough while Roethlisberger will be out Christmas shopping spending the Steelers dough. Oh, also two of the QBs mentioned are rookies Robert Griffin III and Russell Wilson and both of them at least at the time that I wrote this column have the distinct possibility of being invited to the NFLs big dance.Roethlisberger still doesn’t get it. His ego is far, far, bigger than his “enormous” talent. The Steelers need to bring in some younger, less egotistical hungry quarterbacks. In the last two games Roethlisberger has thrown two game ending, game losing picks. Now check out the wah, wah, wah, wah, wah, wah, wah wah, wah wah, wah, wah syndrome. The following are actual post-game responses from “Big” Ben. [Hey Ben], what were you feeling as you were leaving the field? Ben said, “Disappointment, pain, letting a lot of people down, and it doesn’t feel good.” Kum bah yah, my lord; uh, huh. Tell us what happened on the final interception? He had the audacity to say, “There is nothing to talk about. You saw it, I threw it to them.” Nothing to talk about? The game ending pick that you threw in Dallas still needs some “splainin” and you say there is nothing to talk about?Oh let’s get back to one of my original points of the Black and Gold sleepwalking. Mr. Roethlisberger had this to say. “We have to do better. We have to start moving the ball, and stop getting behind the chains making it hard on ourselves. I have to play better.”Has this boy lost his ever loving mind? After the Steelers play the Browns in a meaningless rubber game for both teams, Ben will be sitting at home on the couch playing video games “getting better.” Another one sentence quote from the Steelers wunderkind was, “they are a good team that played well and we didn’t.”Although the Steelers defense played well, they toed the company line. Safety Ryan Clark was asked this question: “Is it fair when you have a short field all the time when the offense turns the ball over?”“We have no control over how we take the field,” he said.“But we do have control over how we defend it. It’s with all-out effort; it’s with 100 percent tenacity. I think we did that today. I think we went out and we played well. I say it every time we lose but it’s the truth. We needed one more play. We needed not to let them get in field goal range at the end of the fourth. And they did.”Ryan there is no reason that you should hang any of this loss around the necks of the Steelers defense. If Ben Roethlisberger does not throw two picks that the Bengals turned into 10 points, all the Steelers would have had to do this weekend would be to beat the Browns at Heinz Field.Now let’s get to the very, very, very, suspect NFL officiating. What is more heinous than a corrupt police chief? As far as I am concerned, it is the crooked cops that are subordinate to his rule. One of the first questionable calls was the “unsportsmanlike conduct” call on Steelers defensive lineman Brett Kiesel in the first quarter after he sacked Bengals quarterback Andy Dalton.Finally, Roethlisberger has been quietly feuding with the Steelers offensive coordinator Todd Haley. No one seems to mind that Roethlisberger can be arrogant, insolent and insubordinate to Haley, who has remained graceful and classy under the most difficult of circumstances. The Steelers are very lucky to have landed him. I hope that he remains after this season. Trust me, there are many teams that would love to run his “dink and dunk” offense, especially if it meant relieving pressure on a quarterback who holds the ball too long in order to perpetuate, “guts and glory.” Has Roethlisberger taken too many hits over the years that his judgment has become clouded by maybe, just maybe one too many blows to the head? The Steelers had better start a serious youth movement because if they don’t, in forty years they will be celebrating the “Immaculate Interception” and “Immaculate Deception” instead of the sacred ‘Immaculate Reception’.Note: I am saddened to inform all of my readers and listeners that after almost a decade of radio appearances on WCWA Fox Sports Toledo my last appearance was Thursday. Close to ten years ago, I initially appeared on the Troy Neff show as an NFL pregame analyst. When that show was cancelled I was then invited to appear as a regular co-host on the “Odd Couple Sports Show” produced and hosted by one of the former producers of the ‘Troy Neff’ show Adam Ragle. I reported from three Super Bowls, two Thanksgiving Day games and two NFL Pro Bowls. I am forever grateful that Troy Neff, Adam Ragle, Chris Shmidbauer and Fox Sports radio gave me the opportunity to reach thousands of listeners in the Toledo, Ohio and Detroit Michigan markets.(Aubrey Bruce can be reached at email@example.com or 412-583-6741.)
The top song of 1979 was My Sharona by The Knack.That same year the Montreal Canadiens won the Stanley Cup and the Boston Bruins retired Bobby Orr’s Number “4”.That was also the last time the Kimberley Dynamiters won the Kootenay International Junior Hockey League Championship.The Nitros snapped the 36-year drought by ousting the Kamloops Storm 4-2 in the best-of-seven KIJHL Final Sunday in Spoolmak Country.Four players each had two points to spark the Dynamiters to a 5-1 series-clinching win.The victory came on the heels of a thrilling 3-2 overtime win Friday in Kimberley. Trevor Van Steinburg scored twice and Jordan Busch, Justin Meler and Jason Richter each had singles to lead Kimberley.Busch, Braden Saretsky, and Richter also finished with two points.The story of the game, and most of the playoffs, was the play between the pipes by goalie Tyson Brouwer.The native of Lethbridge, Alta. stopped 33 of 34 shots in the game to register his 16th win of the playoffs for Kimberley in 20 games.During the playoffs Brouwer had a 1.78 goals against average and a .949 save percentage to finish second to Brock Lefebvre of Columbia Valley.The big difference is Lefebvre played only three games to 20 for Brouwer.Kimberley now represents the KIJHL at upcoming Cyclone Taylor Cup April 3-6 in Mission.The KIJHL is the defending champion after Beaver Valley Nitehawks won the title last year in Nelson.Kimberley opens play Friday against the host Mission City Outlaws.
– ARCADIA, Calif. (Jan. 30, 2016)–In her first-ever try on turf, heavily favored Pacific Heat responded with a resounding 5 ¼ length win in Saturday’s $200,000 California Cup Oaks for 3-year-old fillies. Ridden by Flavien Prat and trained by Peter Eurton, the California-bred daughter of Unusual Heat got one mile in 1:35.75.Attentive to the pace throughout, Pacific Heat took command going to the quarter pole and the Oaks was, for all intents and purposes, over.“She was relaxed going down the backside,” said Prat. “But when a horse came up on her outside (Run Like the Boss, with Joe Talamo), she grabbed the bit and was a little bit aggressive after that. I think it was just because she is a ton of horse and she doesn’t know much yet. She’s pretty impressive.”Off at 4-5 in a field of eight, she paid $3.80, $2.80 and $2.20.“The way she was training, it (a dominating performance) wasn’t surprising,” said Eurton. “The biggest question to me was not the turf, but whether she could get two turns and there was no question about that today.”Owned by Alesia, Burns and Ciaglia Racing, LLC, Pacific Heat got her third win from four starts and with the winner’s share of $110,000, increased her earnings to $250,250.Ridden by Rafael Bejarano, Patriotic Diamond put in a good bid around the far turn, but was second best. Off at 4-1, she paid $3.60 and $2.40 while finishing 2 ¼ lengths in front of Eurton’s second entrant, Cheekaboo.Ridden by Mario Gutierrez, Cheekaboo was off at 7-1 and paid $3.40 to show.Fractions on the race were 22.48, 46.77, 1:11.13 and 1:22.28.Pacific Heat was bred in California by Harris Farms and Donald Valpredo.