Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for September 2011

Child Support System Eliminates Due Process: “No Judicial Signature Required” court orders, Built-in Conflicts of Interest, etc.

with 3 comments

Excerpt from a savvy mother’s letter to a Congressman requesting cuts to OCSE funding:

Support Congressman _____’s proposed deep cuts to the $4 billion of untraceable funding in the HHS TANF budget used to keep these pork barrell programs going unchecked. OCSE is encouraging support enforcement agencies to illegally usurp judicial authority on cases like mine to improperly capitalize on grant money. The federal HHS Office of Child Support Enforcement funding guidelines provide that the more families fight, the more federal money DCSS and the Court will receive. The Court is in charge of awarding these federal funds to the nonprofits, but also orders litigants to retain their services. Court and child support programs are required to collaborate with fathers rights nonprofits which service the courts, which gives these nonprofits a vested interest in the outcome of the cases. This incentivizes extortion, corruption, and fraud.

Anonymous (to you…) recent letter.  The reasons we should stop funding this — it’s untraceable, it funds litigation that destroys families and it literally does incentivize extortion, corruption and fraud.   I’ll quote more at the end of the post.

Today’s 5th most popular post, just now, was my “Let’s Eliminate the OCSE“, which begins:

No, that’s not a joke.  I’m serious.

Or, we could just continue to watch this institution gradually eliminate the Bill of Rights, and the U.S. Constitution, in fact the entire concept of individual rights whatsoever, in favor of social(ism) science run amok.

This post also ran amok (as you can see) but the links are valuable.

The OCSE has to go.  It’s out of control, and is hurting men, women, and children — generation after generation– while loudly proclaiming it is, instead, helping society, families and kids.

WHAT DO YOU WANT — A SOCIAL SCIENCE SOCIETY, OR LIBERTY?

Obviously, it’s either/or, not Compromise/And.  Even the experts know this

Good choice in posts…  This system fuels the courts, and is controlled financially by the HHS/OCSE (Federal Gov’t) which takes no real responsibility for what happens to the $4 billion or so (per year) enforcement expenditures after it hits the states, except as pertains to getting its investments back.  It also takes very little responsibility (if any) for actually getting “Undistributed/able Collected” child support to the children.  Moreover, in California, late 1990s, when an individual attorney tax advocate (employed by Los Angeles) DID take responsibility, filing a class action lawsuit to say (to the District Attorney)– start distributing those $14 million!  California apparently managed to somehow eventually dismiss the case, jail and disbar the 69 year old attorney (for a year and a half, solitary confinement).

As part of the last decade to 15 years of this single attorney’s work (Obviously not alone, but the cases he was on), it came out that the counties were paying the judges in the form of benefits (not only health insurance) — resulting in the Los Angeles judges among the highest in the nation, while some California counties paid their judges zero benefits.  These payments were in violation of the California Constitution as judges are to be paid by states, not counties.  They are state employees:  “no problem.”  A law granting retroactive immunity and (essentially) reversing the impact of the case won stating, counties are NOT to be

So, here are litigants, and almost every single parent in a custody “dispute” (battle) is going to have a child support order, if not issues with arrearages — and these are set at the County, not state, level.  At the county level also are diversionary and social experimentation programs (assigned by whoever oversees these matters, which would be a county employee) which can bring funds into the county and benefits to those running the programs (also often county employees) and here comes a man and a woman (generally speaking) with children; and unlikely that either one knows that these programs represent income to the people they are standing in front of (up to and possibly including the judge).  A court-appointed, county-paid mediator (or evaluator) is a county employee.  One who does regular business as an independent contractor with the court has a vested interest in decision-making that doesn’t undermine this person (or organization’s) own income.  Court transcriptionists are often county employee, and a transcript serves as a witness in a proceeding; it provides a record that can be read into following proceedings.

When the District Attorney’s office pursued child support on the basis that child support was an order, not an administrative glitch, there was more distance.  Unfortunately, at least in Los Angeles, that factor was abused.

Moreover, if the man (not the woman) is the noncustodial parent, there are wheelings and dealings surrounded the fatherhood grants which can affect how much child support reaches the other household. . . and I’ve already proved, neither HHS and a lot of states, knows the difference between what Dad paid and what Mom got, as filtered through the county.

Moreover, if the man is eligible for compromise of arrearages — which apparently there is a form to solicit — he can get it without a court order or a judge’s signature, because the form is an administrative form, not the result of a hearing.  (I’ve seen the form and will try & upload one; this also happened in my case, while children were in my household.  I was not informed, and when I tried to get full information, it was verbal and not written.  Had this been an actual hearing there would have to have been minutes and a record).   The employees deciding this are county employees — whether attorney, or child support official, or whomever.

There are multiple issues in the highly-charged matter of child support which are NOT conducive to due process on either side — obligor or obligee.  However, it’s clear that the federal influence is strong, and the federal influence at this point is highly “fatherhood” (fatherhood programs, that is), oriented.  And without due process, an essence of the U.S. justice system, not to mention the Bill of Rights to our Constitution, is gone.   What are we fighting for on foreign soils when we’ve lost it on our own?

MULTITUDE OF NEW OFFICES, JUDGES DEPENDENT ON HIS WILL, FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERING FORMS OF GOVERNMENT, MOCK TRIALS FOR MURDER.

Here’s a snippet of our snipped up, shredded, and basically shelved-by-technology “Declaration of Independence.”  This Declaration is UNIQUE to the U.S.A. and part of its heritage, even as organizations actually running and running around the courts continue to boast about how international they are, sharing practices with countries that are either socialist, or monarchies, which I find a little disturbing (I’m referring to the AFCC, Kids’ Turn, etc. and “affiliates”):

from The Declaration of Independence

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

Think about the importance of an impartial judiciary.  Because in this post we are going to talk about how California judges were funded, and what happened one person, in particular, who challenged the built-in conflict of interest, and how the California legislature responded to that challenge:  State vs. County control.  Or both.   And how this affects people whose issue — such as child support — is ruled upon at the County level.   We don’t have a ruling King (I think), or a ruling religion (I think) or a Pope. This country exists because those methods of government were rejected; the writers of this Declaration rejected rulership by religion, by tyrant or even benevolent monarchy; they’d seen enough.  They noticed who was paying the judges!

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

I think most Americans would now agree with this, excepting only who the “He” might be in this century.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

and, . . . for example:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

..the following comment doesn’t apply specifically to this statement in the Declaration.  However, it is a comparison to the compromise against punishment for crimes inherent in the family law venue.

…  {{It wasn’t a murder because they were related; it was a family dispute.  The courts drove him to it.  He was beside himself for loss of his wife and children; financial distress drove him to it.

Mourad Samaan {A recent California custody battle-murder-suicide} disgraced his family’s name by failing to stick around and take responsibility (go to prison, face the death penalty perhaps) for murdering his innocent two-year old daughter,  what kind of cowardice is that, to kill a toddler?  What kind of man would do that?  On the other hand, he was not the only factor that enabled this.  He had almost fifty years of life; she not even three.  It also wasn’t a real abduction, just a parental one, which means the FBI (acc. to its rules) waited before sending out the alert, by which time it was already too late.}}

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

This has been intentional when it comes to family law, and the pace of alternation has been picking up speed; multiplying with the help of the internet and through various associations, mostly subdivisions of themselves based around the next business plan concocted during their conferences and/or trainings, which are then also sold on the internet or at conferences.  Part of the business plan includes selling product through the courts to start with.      My post today will discuss this.

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

A word about “suspending Legislatures”

While our Legislatures have not been suspended, the process by which laws passed by them get circumvented has just about virtually suspended the entire judicial system — in certain categories of law.  I can’t speak to all categories, I am speaking FAMILY law.  The laws are (deceptively, to the naive) actually still on the books.  The “thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness” type laws.     So are the rules to protect and restrict abuse of judicial power and conflicts of interest  (to my understanding).  But they are not respected, often not known –rights we don’t know we have are unlikely to get respected just by existing, on paper (and electronically), SOMEwhere — and when they are known, what’s not known enough is how many forces are against their just and impartial enforcement in any given case.

AFCC takes credit for changing Divorce Process

Here’s an AFCC recruitment flyer.  It boasts 50 years of innovations in the court, “generating major reforms in separation and divorce.”

For almost 50 years, AFCC and its members have served as a catalyst for generating major reforms in separation and divorce. Dispute resolution processes such as child custody mediation, parenting coordination and divorce education are just a few of the innovative ideas developed by AFCC members.

Developed by AFCC members, but paid for by the public who did not vote on them, and was not included in the discussion of these ideas.  Possibly because the parents also most involved in the courts cannot afford the airfare and hotel accommodations (which, if they could, would not be tax deductible under “continuing education” as they are for court-professionals) if they even are alerted to who AFCC is and what they do to start with.  Paid for by the public includes through the IRS, and through Child Support system.  Mediation, Parenting Coordination and (mandated) Divorce Education – – alter the form of government.

The flyer is too modest.  Family law appears to have been conceived (pun intended) somewhere between (childless) Roger Alton Pfaff, a judge, and Meyer Elkin, a psychologist, somewhere shortly after women got the vote.   See “Shady Shaky Foundations” page, to the right.  In 1941, Pfaff was a California Assemblyperson.  By 1951 he was a Los Angeles area traffic judge.  (humorous article on the Judge getting stung by a traffic violation himself, 1959 from 2009 viewpoint).   (more of his speeches as L.A. Sup. Ct. Judge)  He was born 1907 in Iowa, unmarried, Republican, California legislator 1940-1942, and had visited every continent but South Africa (South Africa is a continent?) per “One Voter Project: One Voter | ElectionVolunteer | JoinCalifornia
Copyright © 2005-2011 Alex Vassar & Shane Meyers”

He was a legislator, then a judge.   AFCC “about us/history” page begins with a quote from Pfaff:

A Legacy of Innovation and Collaboration

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) took root in California in the spring of 1963 with the creation of the California Conciliation Courts Quarterly, the first publication to promote the interchange of ideas between California’s conciliation courts. Judge Roger Alton Pfaff, presiding judge of the Superior Court of Los Angeles, wrote:

California has become a model for conciliation services as a part of the judicial function for other states to emulate and each year we find jurisdictions creating such services

I do believe I finally looked up their various incorporations (after the IRS and FTB started taking interest) and assure us that it wasn’t in 1963 this group at least incorporated, and began to actually pay taxes…  A 1994 Obit of Meyer Elkin credits him with founding the L.A. County “Conciliation Court”, and describes it, and his life:

Meyer Elkin; Founder of L.A. County Conciliation Court

April 15, 1994  (latimes)

Meyer Elkin, 78, founder of the Los Angeles County Conciliation Court. The unusual mediation unit, which he set up in 1955 as a part of Los Angeles County Superior Court, handles divorce and custody disputes and provides court-ordered counseling for the families involved. Elkin also founded and edited the professional journal Conciliation Courts Review and helped to found the Assn. of Family Conciliation Courts. After growing up in Brooklyn, N.Y., he began his career as a parole officer in Tuscon. A social worker deeply involved in community social problems, Elkin worked throughout his life to aid families and young people. After his retirement in 1977, he devoted his attention to what is now El Nido Family Centers in Los Angeles. He served on the board, as president and as an adviser to the nonprofit family counseling agency. Elkin earned the Koshland Award, California’s top accolade for achievement in social work, and the Leadership Award of the American Assn. of Marriage and Family Counselors. On March 17 in Beverly Hills of emphysema

OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT ALTERED GOVERNMENTAL FORMS & INFLUENCES:

Add to this there have been serious concerns raised by a Los Angeles-area man about the dual system of docketing; in other words, good luck trying to even read your own court order and get the original one.  Or, your own docket activity — register of actions in a particular case.  This man’s name is Joseph Zernik, and that’s not today’s topic.  But it is in the background.  This article mentions both the docketing and

  • The recent revelation in the San Bernardino County Sentinel that many California judges are receiving large and unexplained property “loans” which are possibly redolent of bribes and payoffs

(reminder:  Probate and family court are closely related).  Also, the inability to inspect one’s own record is outrageous!

Beginning in 2002, Zernik began to scrutinize government and corporate data base systems, first in schools and later in banks and in courts. In 2007, he began researching how court computer systems, such as “Sustain,” installed at the Los Angeles Superior Court and PACER/CM/ECF, installed at the federal courts, have circumvented some of the basic and fundamental processes which we have previously taken as sacrosanct.

Around 1985, the Los Angeles Superior court installed “Sustain” as its first civil case management system, to replace the previous paper-based operations. The federal courts began computerizing their systems around the early nineties, according to a spokesperson for PACER, which is the Public Access system of the federal courts, developed under the guidance of the Administrative Office of the US Courts. Actually, the federal court installed TWO systems. One, called PACER, was for general public access. The other system, CM/ECF, is accessible only for the court itself and for court authorized attorneys. However, even on such attorneys restrictions of access were placed and authorization was granted only to view certain records.

In other words, alleges Zernik, there are now two separate systems in place –one for the public and one for the elite tier of lawyers and officers of the court. The courts therefore created two docketing systems, separate and unequal, and asserted the right to segregate persons into one system or the other. As a result, the public right to inspect public documents was severely mitigated. The spokesperson for PACER stated that there were indeed two systems in place, one for public access and one for filing.

Moreover, here (scroll down some) is an account of what happened to Zernik after this was publicized —

On January 31, 2010, this reporter (link above; Janet Phelan), having toiled over pages
>         of Zernik’s evidence, agreed to write an article summarizing
>         his findings. Within a week, Joseph Zernik was arrested and
>         jailed at Twin Towers in Los Angeles. Joseph Zernik had never
>         been jailed before.

Note:  at this time, Richard Fine was still in solitary coercive confinement, of indefinite duration Los Angeles….

>         Zernik reports being pulled over on February 6, 2010 by the
>         LaVerne police. Zernik relates that the police did not inform 
>         him he had broken a traffic law nor did they write him a 
>         ticket. Instead, he states that he was asked if he were indeed
>         Joseph Zernik. When he replied affirmatively, he was told that
>         there were two outstanding bench warrants for his arrest and
>         that he was being taken into custody. The warrants, as it
>         turned out, were for minor vehicle related infractions that
>         were about two years old and which Zernik believed had been
>         resolved. Zernik, who drives an unusual and easily
>         distinguishable make and model of car, thinks he may have been
>         under surveillance.

>         What happened then and in a subsequent arrest on February 19th
>         is tantamount to a Disneyland “Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride,” littered
>         with court documents issued from non-existent courts, finessed 
>         records and computer irregularities of the type which Zernik
>         had previously pigeonholed as fraudulent in other cases.

The signs are everywhere that the legal/enforcement system has gone amok, and done around the simple topic of money.

Conflicts of interest:

It’s understood by the fact that judges actually must file a “disclosure” statement that “conflict of interest” compromises the judicial pro  cess.  NO PROBLEM!   Whether or not those on file are completely accurate, so much of the decision-making is outsourced anyhow, removing that stipulation, and setting up a labyrinthe of conflicts of interests players in the courts.

While these are many, they are most overtly funded by the huge, Title-IV (Welfare) Entitlement-Involved, and Federally Centralized (starting in the 1990s, the centralization escalated) Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), a Program Office of the gigantic “Health and Human Services” (HHS) Branch of the Executive Branch of the US Government.

OCSE is parallel to the IRS in that it has the legal right to garnish your wages, tax intercepts, and jail you if you don’t pay up.  It also has the discretion to not enforce – at all — and compromise arrears without bothering to notify the parent whose household the children are in.  Courts then have the discretion to also bargain-down the amount owed (which accumulates at 10% per year, payments applied to interest only, at least in California) if the (father) participates in a wonderful federally-supported program of some sort — ALMOST any sort (parenting education, fatherhood, abstinence education, marriage promotion,).

The other programs supported by “Access Visitation” in particular are funding the industries and market niches I’ve been reporting on — parenting education, parent coordination, supervised visitation, mediation, counseling, and in general social science experimentation on captive audiences.  They are captive through extortion — either threat of financial destruction (to Noncustodial OR custodial parent, or both), and to the custodial parent, threat of financial destruction AND/or loss of children (or both).   Alternately, there is the option for REALLY bad parents (if one isn’t producing income to the counties from the federal programs) of sticking the child(ren) in someone else’s home, and attempt to get both parents to pay the state for this abuse.

The collected monies from child support system are NOT tracked properly and as I’ve shown, some states maintain an approximate balance (among the VERY few states, and VERy few counties within the states that, as far as I can see in GAO or HHS/OIG/OAS reports) of maybe $2 million at any time, but the same reports declare openly, they JUST DO NOT KNOW how much money is there.

UNMONITORED, OVERSEEN (sort of), UNDISTRIBUTED, UNKNOWN QUANTITIES of MISSING MONIES:

Among the multitude of nonprofits that are formed to catch this deluge of manna from (federal) heaven on a daily basis, we have been seeing how they are so excited about the opportunity that many of them “forget” to incorporate (and stay incorporated), register as nonprofits (which is the law in every state, as far as I know), they forget to file tax returns (federal) that the public can look at when income exceeds $100K and sometimes $1M per year.  The nonprofit use of “membership” corporations whose sole purpose is to start a new profession for their members — which will then take business from distressed families in a custody action — is increasing.  Attorneys, Mediators, sometimes judges, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, and people with previous, overt, connections to either the COURTS or the COUNTIES — form these organizations, which (again) are not properly monitored and do not obviously give a complete accounting of their monies to even the counties distributing the funds. Money transfers from hand to hand in unknown quantities to enable the specific oppression of individuals who otherwise, would be about their lives without feeling driven to stalk, harass, and/or kill each other, sometimes with a stranger (or police officer) or so in the process.  which in this environment, they now do.

TO REVIEW:  1990s-2011, Marv Byer, Richard Fine, Sturgeon v. L.A.. Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court funding, SBX2 11 (retroactive immunity quickly voted for unconstitutional behavior by Counties towards Judges) and

Who’s Paying For These Courthouse Buildings?

When Marv Byer (seems like aeons ago) had some checks subpoenaed, checks were found written out to one organization, but cashed by another.  This would not have been discovered without seeing (subpoenaing) the front and back of the checks.  

Here’s the article.  It’s been posted before, it’s not new, but my point is — it took an accountant stuck in the courts to finally “check the checks.”

 “Is Justice for Sale in L.A.“?

by Kelly Patricia O’Meara, “insight on the news,” May 3, 1999:

Private bank accounts that benefit judges are at the heart of this brewing scandal — one that state and local agencies resolutely have failed to investigate, adding further suspicion. Bank accounts funded in part by fees from local lawyers and others involved in the family-court system are troubling litigants. Many feel it is impossible to know whether they’re facing a judge who has benefited financially from an attorney appearing before the court.

By the end of this post, it will be further clarified:

Former presiding judge Robert Parkin tells Insight that an account critics dub a slush fund is nothing more than “coffee-and-flowers” cash for the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association, or LASCJA. But documents obtained by Insight show the bank account served a great many purposes and that the judges’ association, a private organization, did not pay taxes on funds run through the account for the benefit of its members — who also would be subject to taxes.

“Documents obtained . . . show that the bank account …..”  They would not have known this without obtaining the documents.  How many of similar nonprofits, or judges’ associations (etc.), of this nature, are still around, and no one has even thought to obtain the documents, or done so?

Please review the next few paragraphs, which are varying accounts of what the “LASCJA” fund was for, and where it got its money from.  The first two speakers (Parkin and Maillano) were Presiding Judges (former, and then-current):

Judges often participated on their own time in writing articles for various bar groups and assisted in lawyer-orientation programs, seminars and the like with various bar associations. Often when judges declined payment for these services, the bar associations made donations to the judges’ association,” Mallano said. Former presiding judge Parkin confirms Mallano’s explanation of the LASCJA account to Insight, adding, “I think one judge edited a book or something and contributed the $20,000 he made into the account.” According to Parkin, taxes never were paid on any of the funds going into the account.

Parkin and Mallano’s description ignores a great deal of money moved to the LASCJA accounts — from direct payments by attorneys and other court personnel for minimum continuing legal education, or MCLE, classes to assorted “seminars” conducted by Superior Court judges — according to copies of banking records obtained by Insight.

The process by which the checks were being collected and deposited into the judges’ account raises still more questions about the LASCJA and highlights the perceived conflict that arises from the judges’ financial relationship to other child-custody professionals who work for the court.

Dozens of checks, obtained by Insight, deposited in the LASCJA account were made out to several other institutions, including the Judges Miscellaneous Expense Fund, the Judges Trust Fund, the Family Court Services Special Fund and the Family Court Services. These organizations are not registered with the IRS or the California State Franchise Tax Board, and if the Bank of America has accounts for any of them, the checks were not deposited in those accounts.

(Guess who gave me the original idea to actually check whether corporations doing business and collecting fees, exist?)

Not only were attorneys who argue cases before the family court making payments to the judges’ fund, but so were the court monitors — appointed by the judges and paid a professional fee of as much as $240 a day as observers during child visitations. These monitors qualify for their jobs by paying to take a training and certification course from the judges, with the check going to the fund, whereupon they are placed on the exclusive list the judges use when assigning monitors.

The Los Angeles County Bar Association’s contributions to the fund were payments to the judges run through a joint partnership with the court on MCLE classes. They split the proceeds from legal and professional seminars.

So, in addition to the ethical issues involved in how the bank account has been maintained, its funding also raises numerous legal issues, according to attorney Richard I. Fine, a taxpayers’ advocate. “If a private group [the LASCJA] is using a public building and everything associated with that private group is being paid for with taxpayers’ dollars, then it is clearly fraudulent,” Fine contends.

That’s the Richard Fine that got de-“Esq.’d” and thrown into solitary confinement for 18 months, after reporting this (and the $14 million of collected but not distributed child support that the local District Attorney’s Office was sitting on….Silva v. Garcetti . . .  for which the California Legislature then passed a law specifically to grant retroactive immunity (SBX 211) let the entire California Judicial System have to be shut down for taking bribes from the county in cases involving the county, sitting under judges which were paid, in part, by the counties.

Jan. 3, 2011, a “Lawrence John II” Riverside (CA) “Civil Rights examiner” (on-line reporter) writes of this SBX2 11:

In the recent Human Rights report presented by the United Nations in the year 2010, historically documented the hypocrisy of the United States of America.

It mentioned in its documentation, the Human Rights Complaint that I wrote on behalf of Dr. Richard Fine, documenting the torturous treatment of an American Citizen; Dr. Richard Fine at the hands of the California Judicial System and the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. 

And further, it documented that the California Judicial System is “out of control.”  The citizenry of California just kept their eyes closed when it’s Governor and Attorney General (now Governor) signed off on SBX-211.  If the ideological statement attributed to the legal mindset of the Judicial Branch of this Nation rings true…. “As does California, so does the Nation…”  Then California’s SBX-211 should be remembered as by its true name: Charon.  “Charon”, from Greek mythology is the Ferryman bringing the dead across the river Stix to hades.  For California’s SBX-211 was the deathblow to the once Honorable Judicial Branch of the United State Government.

That being the case, will the distant possibly of a “ninth civil rights act”, reaffirm what the United States Government can and cannot do?  Thus rendering the US Constitution as nothing more then an old, ink stained paper full of lofty ideals and impossible vision?  And if that comes to pass….  So does the Bill of Rights, for one cannot survive in its idealism and vision without the other.
Continue reading on Examiner.com The funny thing about Civil Rights… – Riverside Civil Rights | 

:

Letter from California Judges Association Opposes Elimination of Extra Judicial Benefits

Written by David GreenwaldWednesday, 21 July 2010 05:30

(in which they argue for extension of actually stopping these payments because it’s “arduous” to transition from county to state government.

Catch some of the comments; I posted 3 here:

“Alphonso” 7/21/2010:

Judicial salaries have been equalized throughout California and, at the direction of the legislature, the Branch has been working diligently to resolve the inconsistencies in judicial benefits,” he continued.”

I want him to explain why 17 years is not enough time. All of the County paid for benefits should be eliminated – that might improve the focus on completing the “Study”. This is nothing short of delay tactics so they can continue collecting money they are not entitled to and it is easy to consider that a form of stealing.

“Neutral”

The termination shall not be effective as to any judge during his or her current term while that judge continues to serve as a judge in that court or, at the election of the county, when that judge leaves office.

So how – *exactly* – will the decision affect any sitting judge? (Hint: it won’t.)

“courtwatch” 8/01/10: (almost entire comment):

The base salary of California judges already makes them the highest paid judges in the nation. Number One. Numero Uno. Here is the official National Judicial Compensation Survey performed by the National Center for State Courts:

http://contentdm.ncsconline.org/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/judicial&CISOPTR=288

Of the $30,388,289 million total in extra benefits paid by counties to their judges, $23,482,932 is paid to Los Angeles judges. Many counties pay no extra benefits to their judges. This is in a December 15, 2009 Judicial Council report which was required by SBX 211. The summary of benefits paid, by county, can be found in Appendix D to the report, most specifically pages D-10 to D-14. See:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/jc/documents/reports/121509item12.pdf

SBX 211 is highly controversial, as it legalized payments made by counties to judges which were formerly deemed illegal, and granted retroactive immunity to those who had paid and received the benefits. Perhaps most controversial is the fact that Los Angeles attorney Richard Fine — the most determined and vocal critic of the hefty LA county benefits, has been disbarred and jailed since March of 2009, without formal charges, without a trial, without an end to his incarceration in sight. 

Sept. 18, 2010 (about two months after this article, and perhaps symbolically, on Yom Kippur), Richard Fine was released by Judge Yaffe:

Fine, the 70-year old lawyer and self-styled taxpayer advocate sent to jail ‘indefinitely’ by a ticked-off Superior Court judge (was) released abruptly last night.”  (see link for more discussion, including Fine’s speculations on why Yaffe let him go).  A YEAR AND A HALF for a 70 year old attorney that was in his work, saving the taxpayers millions of $$.

The Fine case is a growing public relations nightmare that is not going away–and the story has been featured on CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/jailed.lawyer.richard.fine/index.html

The public outrage about the county benefits, and about Fine’s incarceration (whatever they accuse him of, give him a trial for heaven’s sake!), is growing:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6DuQgQokLM 

SB 11 as chaptered February 2009.  Note, Fine was jailed on March 4, 2009, right from the courthouse in handcuffs, as described here (the “freerichardfine” petition site has incredible detail on the various cases, and a timeline)

    Since the late 1980s, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, acting on behalf of Los Angeles County, has illegally paid huge (over 25%) bonuses to Los Angeles County Superior Court judges (now  totaling about $57,000 per year each, on top of their already overly-generous State compensation) “to attract and retain quality judges to serve in [Los Angeles] county,” giving each judge a gross salary of more than a quarter of a million dollars ($260,000+) each year, in flagrant violation of California’s Constitution, which defines such judges as elected employees to be compensated only by the State.  (By comparison, the highest ranking judge in all America, the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, makes only $218,000 yearly, and Federal District Judges receive only $157.000.)

The Supervisor’s stated justifications for awarding the bonuses, “to attract and retain quality judges” is nonsensical.  There is no need to “attract” judges; thousands of attorneys would eagerly take any judicial opening, gladly accepting far less as a salary just because they would be honored to hold the position and serve the County’s citizens.  “Retaining” judges is an even worse argument; judges are elected, the only way to use money to “retain” them would be to contribute to their re-election campaigns, an illegal use of taxpayers’ funds.

As of 2009, Los Angeles County taxpayers have lost over $300 million dollars in being made to foot the costs of these judges’ bonuses.

What were the Supervisor’s true motives?  Did the judges do anything improper for the County in exchange?

. . .

Has the world gone mad?  Is it, or is it not, improper for a judge to accept a large sum of money from a litigant who is before him in numerous cases,  And if you found that the judge consistently ruled in favor of that party?  Richard Fine took the obvious position that “yes,” it’s most certainly improper … and so his troubles began.

Mr. Fine, an almost 70-year-old attorney with a long and very distinguished career as the one-time head of the Los Angeles City Attorney’s anti-trust unit and counsel for plaintiffs in a number of highly publicized class actions and taxpayer suits, a man who has saved California taxpayers almost $1 billion dollars so far, found himself jailed on trumped-up contempt charges on March 4, 2009, at the end of a running clash with certain judges since 1999 who refuse to concede the impropriety of their  appearance of bias when deciding cases concerning the County at the same time they were receiving hefty payments from the County (who isn’t their employer).

Read the Drama & Chronology (from the freerichardfine site):

This time line here (in form of a spreadsheet, with years being Column 1) may help “turn the lights on” to the various judges’ behaviors after having their failure to disclose conflicts of interest (as required by law) and ruling on cases involving Los Angeles County — and involving fine.  There is retaliatory action building (including refusal to pay claims on cases won, or attorneys’ fees where he was the lead plaintiff’s counsel in a winning case, etc.).   In this timeframe, CHILD SUPPORT CASE (Silva v. Garcetti) is also involved. Trial court funding act, ca. 1997; by 2005 the Silva v Garcetti is being dismissed, (suit was for illegally withholding $14 million of child and spousal support payments)….  The judge dismissing the case had received county payments…  the judge; this went to the California Supreme Court.  Afterwards, it was found that an appellate judge (Todd) had recently been a superior court judge, and received county payments….(and failed to disclose).

etc.  It’s the extent of the “etc.’s” that makes one wonder why those ruling on the law do not seem to believe they, too, should be subject to it.

Among the details (in this chronology linked above, and I note the spreadsheet also contains reference links), somewhere inbetween having shot down Silva v. Garcetti (around 2005) on child support, and Sturgeon v. Los Angeles County going through, an attempt actually started by a commissioner (not a judge) to get Richard Fine disbarred (and bankrupt him — kind of like what happens in a family law case), there is some fast action beween the California Judges Association (which is a nonprofit we support with taxes at the county level, if I’m not mistaken) lobbyist, and the State legislature Senate President pro tem, Darrell Steinberg, & the California Judicial Council, a plan to pass this SBX2 11 was hatched and carried out.  In a VERY few short months (end of 2008, beginning of 2009).  It was handled apparently in a “sneaker” session,

As introduced on 2/11/2009, no mention of judges’ pay was in the bill.  Legislative digest reads, in sparse terms:

SB 11, as introduced, Ducheny. Budget Act of 2008. This bill would express the intent of the Legislature to enact statutory

changes relating to the Budget Act of 2008.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

1 SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature to enact statutory 2 changes relating to the Budget Act of 2008.

Does that mention anything about judges?

"SBx2-11 was amended in the Senate on 2/14/09 and purportedly introduced by President Steinberg as: 
 ""An act to add Sections 68220, 68221, and 68222 to the Government Code, relating to judges."" 
 In the amended version, all references to the original intent of SB 11 were stricken."

History of the bill, in part, available at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sbx2_11_bill_20090220_history.html  It appears that there were also some oddities in the bill; for example, an amendment (3 days later) appears to have stricken the original purpose of the bill and replaced it with another, i.e., the intent of it was concealed from the public, who would’ve had to be VERY alert to catch this.  A “Rule 29” was suspended.    This rule pertains to not sneaking in amendments to a:

“bill, constitutional amendment, concurrent resolution, joint resolution, or Senate resolution”

after the last day they are allowed to for the year.  Rules 29.3, .4 & .5 protect from a midnight-hour ramrodding legislation through, or from changing proposed (categories above) without having at least a copy of the changes on the legislator’s desk!  In other words, they know what they’re voting on.  This bill was a “Senate Rule 29.3(b) suspended.  NOTE — though in the US, not a state senate, the “Access Visitation” wording in welfare code was (I heard) a similar deal — beyond midnight hour, and Ron Haskins, in particular did this.  The Access Visitation wording occurs in Title IV and gives the HHS Secretary extraordinary powers to affect the use of (as I’m recalling it) child support enforcement funding — that $4billion we keep talking about here….

29.3. (a) The consideration of a bill, constitutional amendment, concurrent resolution, joint resolution, or Senate resolution that has been amended by amendments offered from the floor, except committee amendments reported with measures or amendments offered with a motion to amend and rerefer to committee, is not in order until the amended measure has been in print for not less than one legislative day. Any measure so amended shall be placed on the second reading file.

(b) A bill, constitutional amendment, concurrent resolution, joint resolution, or Senate resolution shall not be recommended for amendment by any committee after the last day specified in the Joint Rules for the 2011–12 Regular Session to amend bills on the floor, as specified in paragraph (13) of subdivision (a) of Joint Rule 61 for odd-numbered years, and in paragraph (16) of subdivision (b) of Joint Rule 61 for even-numbered years.

Bills Approving Memoranda of Understanding

29.4. The Senate may not pass a bill that approves a memorandum of understanding, for purposes of Section 3517.5 and following of the Government Code, until the final version of the subject memorandum of understanding is received by the Secretary of the Senate and made available for review for seven legislative days and its availability for review noted in the Senate Daily Journal for that period.

Amended Forms of Measures

29.5. No bill, constitutional amendment, concurrent resolution, joint resolution, or Senate resolution may be considered for passage unless and until a copy of the measure as last amended is on the desk of each Member in printed or electronic form.

In looking for this rule, I found the “Senate rule 29.3(b) suspended motions included a lot from Human Services and Education Financing.

SO, the legislature passed the retroactive immunizing bill at the 9th hour (beyond it), deceptively deleting the original text and within 3 days amending it to serve a different purpose than as introduced.  AS I understand it from this (brief!) reading….

So it was first, “cya” (cover your behinds) and then, get the whistleblower:

Here’s the text, first the Legislative Digest, then the Bill, which names names that provoked it:

Senate Bill No. 11

CHAPTER 9

An act to add Sections 68220, 68221, and 68222 to the Government Code, relating to judges.

[Approved by Governor February 20, 2009. Filed with Secretary of State February 20, 2009.]

legislative counsel’s digest

SB 11, Steinberg. Judges: employment benefits.

The California Constitution requires the Legislature to prescribe compensation for judges of courts of record. Existing law authorizes a county to deem judges and court employees as county employees for purposes of providing employment benefits. These provisions were held unconstitutional as an impermissible delegation of the obligation of the Legislature to prescribe the compensation of judges of courts of record.

Why I’m belaboring this point:  If Judges are County Employees and Child Support Attorneys & agency employees obviously are, then in ANY child support case, practically, there is a built-in conflict of interest.  Now continue reading and notice how this was de-fanging the situation, letting sitting judges receiving benefits continue doing so, including after retirement, and so forth, and further delaying STOPPING the illegal payments til a further study could be done.  (how highly paid are judges?  Remember the Wall Street 24/7 — along with psychologists with advanced degrees, it showed up as one of the top 9 highest-paid for least-hours of work professions around, unlike (for example), medical doctors.  The judges could’ve afforded to moderate their lifestyles, I’m sure.  Moreover, this didn’t even address the moonlighting and other businesses they were still able to partake in, plus stocks, real estate investments, and functioning as landlords, or on boards of directors of nonprofits…   Was there really any excuse not to simply stop the illegal payments?

This bill would provide that judges who received (unconstitutional) supplemental judicial benefits provided by a county or court, or both, as of July 1, 2008, shall continue to receive supplemental benefits from the county or court then paying the benefits on the same terms and conditions as were in effect on that date. The bill would authorize a county to terminate its obligation to provide benefits upon providing 180 days’ written notice to the Administrative Director of the Courts and the impacted judges, but that termination would not be effective as to any judge during his or her current term while that judge continues to serve as a judge in that court or, at the election of the county, when that judge leaves office. The bill also would authorize the county to elect to provide benefits for all judges in that county. The bill would require the Judicial Council to report to the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, the Assembly Committee on Budget, and both the Senate and Assembly Committees on Judiciary on or before December 31, 2009, analyzing the statewide benefits inconsistencies.

This bill would provide that no governmental entity, or officer or employee of a governmental entity, shall incur any liability or be subject to prosecution or disciplinary action because of benefits provided to a judge under the official action of a governmental entity prior to the effective date of the bill on the ground that those benefits were not authorized under law.

This bill would provide that nothing in its provisions shall require the Judicial Council to increase funding to a court for the purpose of paying judicial benefits or obligate the state or the Judicial Council to pay for benefits previously provided by the county, city and county, or the court

AND….

Ch. 9 2

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) It is the intent of the Legislature to address the decision of the Court of Appeal in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 630, regarding county-provided benefits for judges.

(b) These county-provided benefits were considered by the Legislature in enacting the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act of 1997, in which counties could receive a reduction in the county’s maintenance of effort obligations if counties elected to provide benefits pursuant to paragraph (l) of subdivision (c) of Section 77201 of the Government Code for trial court judges of that county.

(c) Numerous counties and courts established local or court supplemental benefits to retain qualified applicants for judicial office, and trial court judges relied upon** the existence of these longstanding supplemental benefits provided by the counties or the court.

SEC. 2. Section 68220 is added to the Government Code, to read:

(see site, similar to digest, above):

SEC. 7. The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

**judges relied on their benefits?   what a shame.  Some of our children also relied on child support orders, including child support orders directing a parent to provide medical coverage (“benefits”), not having been alerted to the “compromise of arrears” and similar programs with an incentive to  NOT disburse them, and to extort the fathers into participation in federally-supported programs which support benefitted the states and counties financially, while we were sitting at time sin front of state-paid judges and county-paid CS agencies

Here’s JUST a little more publicity on how Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles did not survive appeal, and comments on this bill.  You don’t live in California, though?  Trust me — what we do here,  IS affecting your state’s courts and practices outside the courts!  Birds of a feather fly together.

Metropolitan News-EnterpriseThursday, March 17, 2011  Page 1

S.C. Won’t Hear Challenge to Ruling on Judicial Benefits

 By KENNETH OFGANG, Staff Writer

The California Supreme Court yesterday declined to review a Fourth District Court of Appeal ruling upholding the right of counties to pay benefits to local trial judges.

The high court, at its weekly conference in San Francisco, voted 6-0 to deny review in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, 191 Cal.App.4th 344. The court has one vacancy due to the recent retirement of Justice Carlos Moreno.

The court’s order leaves intact a measure enacted at a special session of the Legislature to continue county payments of benefits to local trial judges, over and their state salaries.

Why should they hear it, when SBX2 11 (sorry I keep getting the labeling of this wrong, but it’s posted above)? ??   Pass the buck to the legislature.

The Fourth District’s Div. One, in an opinion by Justice Patricia Benke, said SBX2 11 adequately addressed the deficiencies which caused the court to declare the benefits unconstitutional in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 630.

Harold P. Sturgeon, whose taxpayer suit resulted in the 2008 ruling, sued again after lawmakers enacted SBX2 11 at a special session called to, among other things, “consider and act upon legislation to address the economy, including but not limited to efforts to stimulate California’s economy, create and retain jobs, and streamline the operations of state and local governments.”

The bill also immunized all public entities and officers against any liability resulting from past payment of local judicial benefits. Judges in other counties have long complained that their benefits are far less generous than those paid by Los Angeles County, which include participation in the county’s “MegaFlex” cafeteria benefits program—which allows a beneficiary to receive additional taxable income equal to 19 percent of salary, or benefits costing the county an equal amount—along with a “professional development allowance” and a 401(k) match of up to four percent of the judge’s salary.

Professional development allowance.  Yes, the City & County of SF, for example, is going to pay child support nonprofit association membership, and expenses to attend training at the child support conference.  Similarly, at least some judges are paid to attend training at their judicial conferences run by the nonprofit association.

More from Metropolitan New on this topic (June 24, 2011).  Now the

Metropolitan News-EnterpriseFriday, June 24, 2011 Page 1

A.G. Seeks Input on Questions Regarding Judicial Benefits

 By SHERRI M. OKAMOTO, Staff Writer

Attorney General Kamala D. Harris is soliciting judicial organizations and others to weigh in on the question of whether judges may be disciplined for authorizing supplemental compensation to be paid to themselves from public funds, it was learned yesterday.

The Commission on Judicial Performance submitted two questions to Harris in late May, inquiring whether lawmakers would have the authority to pass a measure which “purports to preclude the [CJP] from disciplining California superior court judges for authorizing supplemental compensation to be paid to themselves from public funds, and/or receiving that supplemental compensation, on the ground that such benefits were or are not authorized by law.”

Sounds like they are fishing for an excuse, or more immunity.

Harris was also asked to address the scope of SBX2 11, special legislation passed in 2009 which the Fourth District last year said adequately addressed the deficiencies which had led it to declare the supplemental benefits unconstitutional in Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 630.

Oh yes notice — SBX2 11 was not the topic the special legislative session was called for, it says:

The CJP spokesperson declined give a specific reason for why the group had posed the questions to Harris, except to say “we wanted to know what she thought.”

Sturgeon and Judicial Watch had also unsuccessfully challenged the passage of SBX2 11, contending the Legislature had lacked authority to enact the measure because it addressed a subject—judicial compensation—that was not among the specified subjects for which the governor called the Legislature into session. That case was Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, 191 Cal.App.4th 344.

Copyright 2011, Metropolitan News Company

He adds that “unless the public entity has passed an ordinance specifically allowing the private group to exist and specifically stating that the public will bear the costs — separate phones, leasing office space, furniture, computers, etc. — then it should be paid for by the private organization.”

LOCKYER-ISENBERG TRIAL COURT FUNDING ACT, SUMMARIZED as $5 Billion Construction Boom for California

(supported by Court fines and fees  . . . . . . )  Authority, and eventually facilities, are transferred from the counties (which can’t afford to rennovate) to the State.  Notice that around this same time (1997) the child support also was transitioning from local to State Control when it comes to disbursement, and intravenously hooked up to the welfare system (Title IV-D), which as of 1996 reforms, included more provisions for alternate uses of both TANF and OCSE’s federal funds:

I’m putting many of the paragraphs out to give the overview. Published in a business magazine, apparently around April 2011:

Thursday, September 22, 2011

FEATURE: APRIL 2011


Halls of Justice

Crumbling courthouses create construction opportunities

Story by Bill Romanelli | Photo by Anne Chadwick Williams

Roughly 70 percent of California’s 530 trial court facilities were built before 1980. Few counties have had the resources to keep the buildings updated or well maintained, and the result is that many of them simply don’t serve the public or the court well. According to a report by the Task Force on Court Facilities, 90 percent of the state’s trial courts need significant renovations, 90 percent were built before 1988 seismic codes took effect and 25 percent lack space to assemble jurors. More disturbing, the task force published its report in 2001; the situation has only gotten worse in the ensuing decade.

“We have these Perry Mason visions of wood-paneled rooms where justice is being administered, but it’s not like that at all,” says S. Ernest Swickard, assistant director of design and construction services for the state Office of Court Construction and Management. “In reality, we’ve got some cases being tried in portable buildings or trailers in dirt parking lots.”

Recognizing the need, state legislators began a systematic process as far back as 1997 to create a process and funding mechanism for uniform courthouse standards. It took almost a decade, and it couldn’t have come at a better time for California’s battered construction industry.

The process all began with the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act of 1997. That legislation represented a change in government operations as it shifted the responsibility for funding trial court operations from the counties to the state. It also created the Task Force on Court Facilities to identify facility needs and likely funding mechanisms. As part of its 2001 report, the task force went a step further and recommended that both the funding and operation of the facilities be shifted from the counties to the state.

In 2002, the Trial Court Facilities Act was the legislative vehicle for shifting trial court facilities — operations, maintenance and modifications — from county to state governance under the direction of the Judicial Council.

Minor detail.  This one:

In 2003, the Administrative Office of the Courts, essentially the staff agency to the council, created the OCCM to conduct the laborious process of transferring the facilities from all 58 counties to the state. That process was finally completed in December 2009. While that was in process, Gov. Schwarzenegger in 2008 signed Don Perata’s Senate Bill 1407, which provided $5 billion in revenue bonds to build and renovate California courthouses.

None of the bill’s $5 billion comes from general fund revenues; the funds are provided entirely by court fees and fines. But these billions aren’t entirely for construction costs. Land acquisition, operations, maintenance and other costs are included, but there’s no doubt it’s helping the state’s construction industry.

Between June 2006 and June 2010, the state’s construction industry lost 405,000 jobs, according to the Associated General Contractors of America. Bearing in mind that California is lagging behind the rest of the nation, the national unemployment rate of 22 percent in the construction industry is disturbing at best.

“I’d say this is very welcome work for the design community and the construction industry,” says Chuck Cunningham, president of Cunningham Engineering Corp. “It’s one of the few areas where there’s both a clear need and dedicated source of funding.”

… most of the building is centered around the state capitol, Sacramento:

The OCCM says it’s currently managing 52 capital projects valued at more than $6 billion, with an estimated direct and indirect job generation of 134,000 (not all in construction, however). There are also more than 4,700 modification/renovation projects completed or under way at an estimated value of $107 million. These range from construction of new, 70-courtroom buildings to minor renovations of one- to two-courtroom facilities. 

The Capital Region is among the chief beneficiaries of this aggressive program. Of the 52 high-priority projects currently in progress, eight are within the six-county area, representing a combined budget of more than $1.1 billion. Three of those, including a planned $500 million Sacramento County criminal courthouse, a new $165 million courthouse in Woodland and a new $270 million courthouse in San Joaquin County are among the more notable. 

… with the input of judges on the construction process

Not to be overlooked, of course, is the role the judges themselves can, should and often insist on playing. They know how their courtrooms need to work, so the smart builders have learned to collaborate with them.

“It’s not just that judges have a lot of say, they have the last say,” says Stephen Allen, president of SW Allen Construction Inc. “The AOC has even gone as far as warning us if we get into an argument with the court, we’ve already lost; they’re not going to back us up. There’s nothing more important than keeping the court happy.”

Courts: The Judicial Branch of California

Summarized

Questions and Answers Concerning Implementation of AB 233 (December 1997, PDF, 103 KB)
Answers to significant questions raised by counties and courts about implementation of AB 233, the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act of 1997 (Stats. 1997, ch. 850),.

Special Report on Trial Court Funding (September 1997, PDF, 168 KB)
General-audience newsletter about the trial court funding restructuring, including a summary of the bill, reactions to the legislation, an outline of key implementation issues, and a court funding timeline.

Trial Court Funding Resource Manual: “Ensuring Equal Access to Justice” (1998 edition, PDF, 582 KB)
Detailed information about AB233, the Lockyer-Isenberg Trial Court Funding Act, which provided for state funding of the California trial courts; also includes information about 1998 trial court funding legislation.

(FYI)…..  Major deal intersecting with the SBX2 11 and the issue of County v state funding.  Across the country, despite the recession, there are courthouse construction projects (and corporations) going up, often in the family law arena.

WELL we are in a budget crisis, and this text here is from one person’s letter to a Senator asking him to do something about it.  I thought it was an concise summary of the DCSS (Dept. of Child Support Services) being an administrative agency and some of the troubles with this.  I have permission to quote without identifying who.  the letter gave identifying information about a case, but also showed me the various forms that enable this administrative agency, DCSS, to literally function as judge, clerk, witness, litigant — you name it.  Child Support would’ve perhaps been better off under District Attorney’s offices, with insistence that they act strictly as enforcement and get the cash to the kids, not sell kids essentially for cash, through litigation.  The further we get from administering justice in places and under offices that have legislation limiting their rights, the better those rights are going to be.

As you are aware, DCSS is an administrative agency overseen by congress, and so if they are in the courtroom on any case, it is as attorneys representing the county’s interests. As is the case with any party to litigation, the County attorneys (eg. DCSS) cannot hold secret ex parte meetings with judges, act as court clerks, or issue judicial decisions as has become customary in the family courts.

   

The bigger problem here is that the judges are in fact county employees, DCSS is paid by the county, the transcriptionist is paid by the county, and they are all applying for funding together[from the county, state, and feds] for collaborative programs. As you can see from the blank DCSS arrears abatement form, no judicial approval is required to set aside, modify, or enforce these rogue court orders—which do not even get registered with the court, and the parties do not get notice either. There is no oversight because they are all in business together, and running up a huge tab at that.
These child support “incentive” programs (fatherhood, Access and Visitation) are illegal because ARRA funds cannot be used on programs which fund litigation and promote discrimination. Using child support services as the recruiting arm to extort fathers, these tax dollars are used to illegally fuel the nonprofits serving the family court “high conflict” litigation industry. Fathers pay support, but the kids don’t get it. If HHS can’t justify the money they already got last year, you should not vote in favor of doubling the budget for them this year. TANF is for NEEDY families, but these funds are not needs based and available all men regardless of income.
In a time when families are starving, unemployed, and losing homes, this money serves no legitimate purpose. We want courts and child support agencies deciding cases based on laws and facts. Poor people want things like jobs, education, childcare and housing. They do not want federally funded family court litigation and counseling from the court’s inbred nonprofit therapy industry. I can provide you with millions of dollars in reciepts demonstratrating abuse of ACF funding from families in [state] and around the country who have also been bankrupted and destroyed by these programs.

 

When people are incarcerating whistleblowers, we know that they know what’s happening is wrong & illegal.  

    Although “Family Justice Center” was not the topic, the same person (re: another nonprofit staffed almost entirely by public employees, including at least one judge) mentions she doesn’t understand:

why judges would recharacterize their court rooms as nonprofit organizations, then petition for $4mm in federal funding as board members, to pay them to decide cases as public servants which we already compensate them for.

 That’s seriously disturbing trend, but an old one, since Meyer Elkin (eventually of “AFCC”) set up a mediation unit in Los Angeles County Courthouse (see description above).      

There are all kinds of adjustments and tweaks.  Here’s one on the California State Site:

 

The Federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 – Implementation of the $25 Annual Service Fee

In the Federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Public Law 109-171, all states were instructed to impose a $25 Annual Service Fee to non-welfare families (never-assisted cases) who are disbursed $500 or more during the federal fiscal year. The mandate went into effect January 1, 2008.  As of October 1, 2010, the State will no longer pay the fee on behalf of families.

Beginning October 1, 2011, and every October 1 thereafter, DCSS will assess the $25 Annual Service Fee to all never-assisted cases that meet the criteria for assessment. The service fee will be withheld from the never-assisted custodial party’s next child support payment(s) until the $25 is fully recovered. Although the first disbursement(s) paid to the custodial party on or after October 1 will be reduced by $25, the NCP will get full credit for the amount of the collection received.

(For services received the custodial parent’s household loses a little $25 once a year, but it’s credited to the NCP’s account anyhow.  However for every new non-welfare case treated as a welfare case the state and fed share a $2 to $1 bonus anyhow).  Child Support Services is expansionist in nature.)

this also is in the news page of the California Statewide Site:

California Department of Child Support Services

Father’s Day 2011 – the President’s Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative

The mission of the California Department of Child Support Services is to make sure that children have the financial support they need to grow, learn and succeed. But other types of support are just as important. Our children’s lives are also shaped by the involvement of their parents.

Despite the “our” language, there’s a vast gap between the typical noncustodial parent with a child support order, and the children of legislators, judges, and county attorneys, not to mention President Obama and First Lady Michelle’s daughters.  Our childrena re not theirs, and their children are not mine.  I’m sure they’d be offended if I characterized their children as “ours” conversationally.  Why should I (we) not be equally disturbed when official government publications call our (real, biological) children, in conversation with someone whose wages are being garnished, perhaps, “our children” ??  Get real! !!!

To promote responsible fatherhood, President Obama has launched the President’s Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative. The initiative is a national call to action to address fatherlessness in America. DCSS encourages fathers to sign the pledge and receive articles, tips and resources on responsible fatherhood.

DCSS encourages fathers to sign the pledge and continue to justify the siphoning off of their kids’ futures (and their own income) into the more competent (??) fatherhood managers.  The more participation, the more grants and contracts can be “justified.”  For all this talk of “family” it seems pretty clear that the real “family” being encouraged is Papa Obama (substitute name of current US President; this began far back, with Clinton, continued with Bush, expanded with Obama, trillion$$ debt notwithstanding).

For more information on the President’s initiative and to sign the pledge, go to www.fatherhood.gov.

CHILD SUPPORT FORMS & LITERATURE EXPLICATING ONE TYPE OF COMPROMISE (of arrearages!) from another!

Final Statement of Reasons — “Update of Initial Statement of Reasons.

Among the “stakeholders” listed are several categories required to be consulted by DCSS.  The first one listed (and they’re not alphabetical) was “counties” which is the most important — because this is a moneymaker for the counties, evidently.    NOT ON THE LIST:  Custodial or noncustodial parents.  Only their “advocates” (??).

Here (for example) is a “Compromise of Arrears” application package from CA (current I believe APril, 2011).  It has all the forms.  There is no mention of making any notice to the custodial party, or any court hearing to be held in the matter.  The closest it comes to mentioning the custodial parent (who is obviously going to be affected!) is in fine print under a privacy notice, on about the next to last page:

The information in your case may be discussed with, or given to the State or other public agencies that can legally receive such information, and to the other parent or his/her attorney to the extent required by law.

The agency official responsible for maintenance of the form is your local child support agency. Legal references authorizing solicitation and maintenance of this personal information include Family Code Section 17440(c) and 17212. Copies of this form are maintained in confidential files of the Department of Child Support Services or local child support agencies for 4 years and 4 months after the closure of your child support case. You have the right of access to this form upon request by calling the local child support agency handling your case.

I was never informed that there’d been a Compromise of Arrears until after a custody-switch.  I had been repeatedly in the office seeking information on the case before and after that time.  I had put hours of call, help-seeking, and office time into this agency’s office to get them to fulfil their obligation to collect support when it was being systematically withheld to control my (then custodial parent) household, for example, if I made an independent, legal action of almost any sort on behalf of our children, or confronted the father on violating visitation orders.  I sought others to get the public agency to do its job in this case.  To my understanding, a seek-work order was never even issued!  It does appear, in retrospect, that the case was flagged from the start for potential fatherhood programs because it originally (briefly!) involved public assistance shortly after filing to escape the abuse, which had involved injury and death threats at the time.

The child support is now a moot point, and my children as well as hundreds and likely thousands of others – in our state — are experiencing the same mis-use of funds to collect child support to start and propagate diversionary activities which theoretically help child support, but in fact, support the likes of people who started Kids Turn and engaged in a lending (lien) situation with the San Francisco Trial Courts.

I did not pursue too far this post, but the proliferation of organizations (real and fake/”front” groups) makes it harder and harder to track them and easier and easier for checks both written out from AND deposited to certain of these groups’ bank accounts to simply be cashed by someone else.  There have been instances of a check written out to one group stamped (back of check) and endorsed by another which shouldn’t have a relationship with it.

The way to put a leash on the OCSE is not through begging them (and certainly not threatening), it’s through intelligent expose to one’s local legislator.  Before doing that, go to “National Fatherhood Initiative” and your local state and find out whether yours is already on a legislative task force (many are).  Even fathers should be doing this — because they need more liberty and freedom to pursue jobs, and less parenting education, reunification and access visitation social science demonstration project which their lives fund.

The other reaons OCSE needs an overhaul (or replacement, or having its function switched to a different US department) other than that they’ve been consistently abusing the privileges and have a clear gender preference in their program material (although more and more mothers are becoming noncustodial THROUGH these programs, to the detriment of the next generation) . . . . is that it’s claiming to be the solution to the welfare roles, while privately trying to increase them by making regular cases noncustodial.  Moreover, their fatherhood programs (and marriage promotion) are not limited to low-income personnel.  The system was, in fact, designed NOT by low-income fathers (or mothers) seeking help — but from the TOP (HHS appointees, White House Appointees) down with a princely attitude that they were better qualified to run society through strategic re-engineering of the household unit, aka family.

Behind them are corporate and private family foundations (wealth) who also would be more interested in ultra-competition for jobs in their factories (etc.), driving down wages . . . rather than lifting their subject material (families with child support orders or having been driven to welfare) up to their own understanding of how to become wealthy — which includes how to minimize (or dodge) paying taxes and hide — sometimes launder — money.  The poor suckers who have a job — but not job security — in a context where employers have to report all “New Hires” whether or not one of them is a noncustodial parent — sets a class distinction and inability to do the same thing that helped make others wealthy to start with.

In America, somehow that seems just wrong.  While I’ve been seriously de-mythologized (long ago) about justice in our country (being female and a mother after violence in the home and single because of that), I’m not ready to throw the whole “unalienable rights” concept out!

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 23, 2011 at 10:29 am

Cooperative Parenting Institute aka Family Solutions, LLC and “Lack of Tort for Failure to Report”

with 2 comments

9/21/2011 note:

As I continue working on this post, the television has breaking news about “Georgia waiting to execute Troy Davis.”  Georgia also is home to the nonprofit hospital scandals (“Phoebe Factoids”), to a major Fatherhood Initiative at the Statewide level, and to several of these parenting coordination trainers.  So perhaps it’s appropriate to post for Georgia today — although on my area of interest, not the national news.

This post is in part my wish not to be a false-accuser of a business entity whose location and incorporation I just can’t seem to find, but who is clearly in business; and the business they are in is teaching parenting, as well as — for a good fee — training licensed trainers in how to teach parenting.    Allegedly in business since 1997:

It’s going to have several pieces:  As usual, I will get some jabs in at the concept of “parenting coordination” to start with, as well as incorporations, trademark registrations, another AFCC conference (showing the overlap of entities “collaborating” on how to devise more programs to send parents to), and so forth.

I will attempt to locate the corporate entities which the publicity material claims to exist.

I recommend that people stop doing business with entitites that can’t put their true names (or acknowledge an “aka”), state of incorporation, and if a nonprofit, their nonprofit EIN# (which then proves to be CURRENT) on the website.  If Children’s Rights Council can do this — and it does — then so can they, as advocates of similar philosophies to CRC, which is that a child must NEVER be separated from a parent – unless that parent has been difficult, high-conflict, or potentially alienating the child from its molester, abuser, or the parenting coordinator.  Seriously, that text does exist or at least did recently in a Parent Coordination Handbook of NH.

I’m a wordpress blog author, NOT a professional in law, psychology, or mediation, so take my “recommendations” with a grain of salt and don’t rely on them.  If you have a major problem involving any of the fields I’m commenting on, consult a professional in them (or, don’t), who probably has liability insurance, which I don’t. That’s my disclaimer!   

Per a “Trademark Registry” (I searched the US database for only the words “Cooperative Parenting” — and the record shows that the term was used for approximately TWO YEARS :   1997-1999 and was abandoned:

Serial Number Reg. Number Word Mark Check Status Live/Dead
1 77842321 3962630 NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PARENTING CENTER FOR THE CHILDREN TARR LIVE
2 75566159 COOPERATIVE PARENTING TARR DEAD

the 2nd link/row “Cooperative Parenting” clearly shows that this was Boyan & Termini:  Notice it was first used in 1992, 1994 — before the passage of the VAWA act, before the formation of National Fatherhood Institute, before welfare reform of 1996, which in part financially supports the use of parent education as a way to get increased noncustodial parent access, through the Welfare System:

Word Mark COOPERATIVE PARENTING
Goods and Services (ABANDONED) IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Videos, parent’s guides, group leader’s guides, parent coordinator’s guides, marketing and intake/assessment forms, are offered throughout USA. FIRST USE: 19970200. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19970604(ABANDONED) IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Cooperative parenting is a psychoeducational video-based program designed to improve the quality of relationships in situations of divorce Services are provided in Georgia and PA Training sessions are provided to professionals to use program in other states. FIRST USE: 19920800. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19940411
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 75566159
Filing Date August 24, 1998
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Owner (APPLICANT) Termini, Ann Marie UNKNOWN UNITED STATES 2801 Buford Highway Suite T70 Atlanta GEORGIA 30329(APPLICANT) Boyan, Susan B UNKNOWN UNITED STATES 2801 Buford Highway Suite T70 Atlanta GEORGIA 30329
Type of Mark TRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator DEAD
Abandonment Date October 22, 1999

If you click on the “status” (see chart), it will show this cause:  Abandonment, insufficient filing fees, and clearly again names Boyan/Termini:

Mark(words only): COOPERATIVE PARENTING

Standard Character claim: No

Current Status: Abandoned because the applicant failed to respond or filed a late response to an Office action. To view all documents in this file, click on the Trademark Document Retrieval link at the top of this page.

Date of Status: 2000-03-06

Filing Date: 1998-08-24

Transformed into a National Application: No

Date In Location: 2000-03-09


LAST APPLICANT(S)/OWNER(S) OF RECORD


1. Boyan, Susan B

Address: 
Boyan, Susan B
2801 Buford Highway Suite T70
Atlanta, GA 30329
United States
Legal Entity Type: Unknown
State or Country Where Organized: United States

2. Termini, Ann Marie

Address: 
Termini, Ann Marie
2801 Buford Highway Suite T70
Atlanta, GA 30329
United States
Legal Entity Type: Unknown
State or Country Where Organized: United States

“LEGAL ENTITY TYPE — UNKNOWN”


GOODS AND/OR SERVICES


International Class: 009
Class Status: Inactive – Insufficient Fee Received
Videos, parent’s guides, group leader’s guides, parent coordinator’s guides, marketing and intake/assessment forms, are offered throughout USA
Basis: 1(a)
First Use Date: 1997-02-00
First Use in Commerce Date: 1997-06-04

International Class: 042
Class Status: Active
Cooperative parenting is a psychoeducational video-based program designed to improve the quality of relationships in situations of divorce Services are provided in Georgia and PA Training sessions are provided to professionals to use program in other states

NOTE: To view any document referenced below, click on the link to “Trademark Document Retrieval” shown near the top of this page.

2000-03-06 – Abandonment – Failure To Respond Or Late Response

1999-04-22 – Non-final action mailed

1999-04-15 – Assigned To Examiner

 


THE OTHER TRADEMARK APPLICATION, WHICH NAME APPROXIMATES THESE TERMS IS FROM ANOTHER AFCC PROFESSIONAL:

The top row is Trademark for a logo, I guess, originator “Debra Carter” – a name I know from Florida AFCC :

Mark Image

This one became “live” last March, 2011 (see details here):

Word Mark NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PARENTING CENTER FOR THE CHILDREN
Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Education services, namely, providing training and continuing education for legal, mental health and lay persons in the field of parenting coordination, children’s issues, parenting plan development, child and family mental health and the family law process. FIRST USE: 20090101. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20090101
Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code 02.01.02 – Men depicted as shadows or silhouettes of men; Silhouettes of men
02.03.02 – Silhouettes of women; Women depicted as shadows or silhouettes of women
02.05.04 – Children, girl(s); Girls
02.05.05 – Boys; Children, boy(s)
02.05.24 – Stylized children, including children depicted in caricature form
02.07.04 – Families (adults and children); Groups, adults and children, including family groups
26.11.11 – Rectangles divided twice into three sections
26.11.21 – Rectangles that are completely or partially shaded
Serial Number 77842321
Filing Date October 6, 2009
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition December 21, 2010
Registration Number 3962630
Registration Date May 17, 2011
Owner (REGISTRANT) Carter, Debra INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 4835 27th Street West Bradenton FLORIDA 34207
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE “NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PARENTING CENTER FOR THE CHILDREN” APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Description of Mark The color(s) blue, black and white is/are claimed as a feature of the mark. The mark consists of the phrase “NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PARENTING CENTER FOR THE CHILDREN” in white on a dark blue background. To the left of the wording is the outline of a man and woman in white and a boy and girl in white outlined in black below, all on a light blue background.
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

DEBRA CARTER WORKS IN FLORIDA:

FLORIDA 2009 AFCC conference, “THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX — INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO FAMILIES IN THE COURTS.

Co-sponsored by

the Florida Bar Association & The “Office of the States Court Administrator”

Supported (financially?) by:

Supporters:

Association of Family Law Professionals of Southwest Florida

Carter Psychology Center Counseling Associates, P.A., Inc.

Silver Psychology Center

Twelfth Circuit Family Court Professional Collaborative

In Collaboration With:

Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, The Barry University Counseling Department, Florida Dispute Resolution Center, University of South Florida Conflict Resolution Collaborative

Whether they are Co-sponsoring, Supporting, or Collaborating with, one thing is for sure — more products and professional niches will be rehearsed, expounded, and tweaked for application in family court venue, which some of the presenters are helping run.

FROM “Carter Psychology Center

Families in Transition

Families in Transition

Family Therapy
Caregiver Education & Support
Child/Adolescent Interventions
Divorce & Separation Services
Parenting Coordination **

Parenting Coordination
Parenting Coordination is an alternative dispute resolution process that helps parents resolve issues and learn how to protect their children from the harmful effects of chronic exposure to parental conflict. When parents need an objective expert to help them co-parent more effectively, the parenting coordinator will help ensure that the children’s needs and best interests are met.”


{{yes, naturally a trained psychologist is objective, doesn’t the degree prove that?}}
Parenting Assessment

 

Here’s a rather different parental viewpoint from a mother (whose 12 year old evidently is now in Russia) on Dr. Carter — interesting.  But this person is not the focus of today’s post. Just indicators there are indeed problems with these court-appointees and their relationships with the judges.  Posting is from July, 2011 I pasted some text into the URL if you hover cursor over it.  The custody evaluation Dr. Carter provided cost $30,000.

 

PARENTING COORDINATION TRAINING

(Also known as Parenting Faciliation Training in Texas)

  

The Cooperative Parenting Institute

Leaders in the Field of Parenting Coordination

The Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI) is an internationally recognized leader providing high quality parenting coordination training programs.  Since 1997, the CPI has dominated the field of parenting coordination by creating the only comprehensive step-by-step PC training model. The Institute offers 20-24-26 hour parenting coordination/facilitation training opportunities each year.  A 12-hour advanced training is available for the experienced parenting coordinator.  The training programs meet the requirements established by state statutes.  In addition, the presenters are available for custom designed training in your local area.   Susan Boyan, LMFT and Ann Marie Termini, LPC are recognized leaders and innovative trainers.  As skilled parenting coordinators, since 1991 and 1993 respectively, Ann Marie and Susan have facilitated many complex and highly conflictual divorce cases.  They have drawn on their extensive experience, research and interactive approach to prepare professionals for the challenging role of parenting coordinator.  For more information on the presenters and to register visit www.cooperativeparenting.com    

Who wrote up this site material?

The field of “parenting coordination” isn’t exactly old, and to “dominate” the field (if this is true) simply means a person connected to whoever started this field (i.e., whichever AFCC members were admitted to have come up with the idea) has a good business savvy and knows a market niche when he/she sees one.  Wait 20 more years, and the up and coming AFCC-originated field will have a new name… the better to stress out your grandchildren with if one of their parents decides to separate from a partner and they (meaning one or more of the partners) can’t/won’t settle out of court.

 

But let’s talk what years it got started:  The site claims, “SINCE 1997, CPI has dominated”  

Below, I have posted (and linked to) an appellate decision from the State of Georgia in which Susan Boyan’s company was defendant; the decision is in 2006 and a certain footnote identifies “Cooperative Parenting Institute a/k/a Family Solutions, LLC.”    Family Solutions, LLC itself (in Georgia at least) is identified as an entity which began in 2007 — not 1997, and is run by a different person, Kathleen Shack (who also notes AFCC in her “Background” page).

Surely somewhere there is a reasonable explanation for when Family Solutions, LLC lost it’s “aka.”  Did Shack & Boyan/Termini originally work together and have a split?  Did someone sell the corporation?  Did it survive a merger, and where, pray tell, WHERE is the EIN# of this nonprofit currently residing.  Because an LLC, as we know, the purpose is to “limit liability.”

The training costs (this site) run from $350 go $475 depending on which package.   For this entrance fee, people can be qualified to get in on the business of parenting coordination, likely to be ordered by a family court judge.  The people applying are likely AFCC anyhow, because that is the primary association/nonprofit responsible for having engendered and set up the family law arena originally and to have continued transforming it to accommodate more and more “trainings” for cronies.

Referral to other PC /AFCC professionals on the “parenting coordination central” site:

P.C.  TRAINING  RESOURCES

The PCC does not endorse any training opportunties.  In an effort to share information to potential parenting coordinators, this resource will be updated as information is gathered.

2010  TORONTO, ONTARIO:  Dr. Barbara Fidler and Linda Chodos, MSW, RSW are offering basic and advanced parenting coordination training on the following dates:

  •  April 30, and May 1, 2010  Advanced-Small Group  ($829.50 for both dates)
  •  October 29-30, 2010 Foundations: A Small Group ($829.50 for both days)

TAMPA, FLORIDA University of Florida Conflict Resolution Collaborative are offering trainings on the following dates:

  • January 15-17 (basic)  Debra Carter and Judge Starnes**
  • March 6-7 (advance)   Debra Carter and Judge Starnes

 

**see above:  FL 2009 AFCC conference was “supported” by Carter’s group (Carter Psychology) and Judge Starnes’ group (Association of Family Law Professionals of Southwest Florida), giving a new meaning to ‘all in the family” when it comes to these conferences.  Sorry to bring up a bad pun/reference — but they are in fact incestuous and inbred, possibly why it’s so hard to come up with an original idea, and why they are running out of names for the same old, OLD ideas — that anyone seeking divorce, reporting abuse or domestic violence, or wishing to separate from violence and bad relationships must be mentally sick in the head, and  candidate for behavioral modification reprogramming at their own (or the public’s) expense.  See Phyllis Chesler’s “Women & Madness,” in the 1970s.  Same general concepts.

For how popular (or well-publicized) the group is, see this google search on — you got it, “Cooperative Parenting Institute”

  1. Cooperative Parenting Institute | Home

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/ – Cached

    Cooperative Parenting Institute is an organization whose mission is to promote the healing and enhancement of family relationships. The focus of the Institute …  (what follows are the sub-categories that put this at top of Search Engine results).

    Parenting Coordination Training

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/pctr
    The Cooperative Parenting 

    Divorce Products

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/div
    Cooperative Parenting Institute 

    Georgia

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/geo
    Susan Boyan L.M.F.T. is the co 

    Contact

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/cont
    Cooperative Parenting Institute 

    Cooperative Parenting Institute

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/…/P…
    COOPERATIVE PARENTING 

    CROSSROADS of Parenting 

    www.cooperativeparenting.com/cros
    Cooperative Parenting Institute 
  2. Cooperative Parenting Institute Atlanta, GA, 30329 – YP.com

    http://www.yellowpages.com/…/cooperativeparentinginstitute-15787181 – Cached

    Get directions, reviews, payment information on Cooperative Parenting Institute located at Atlanta, GA. Search for other Marriage, Family, 

  3. Cooperative Parenting Institute Business Review in Atlanta, GA 

    http://www.bbb.org/…/cooperativeparentinginstitute-in-atlanta-ga-60064… – Cached

    BBB’s Business Review for Cooperative Parenting Institute, Business Reviews and Ratings for Cooperative Parenting Institute in Atlanta, GA.

  4. Center for Cooperative Parenting – Home

    http://www.centerforcooperativeparenting.org/ – Cached

    Role and Mission of the Center The Center for Cooperative Parenting (CCP) is a non-profit agency providing a community-based continuum of educational and 

  5. Parenting Coordination Central: The Premier Resource on 

    www.parentingcoordinationcentral.com/pg18.cfm – Cached

    The Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI) is an internationally recognized leader providing high quality parenting coordination training programs. Since 1997 

  6. Cooperative Parenting Institute Counselor in Atlanta, GA 30329

    http://www.wellness.com/dir/4025286/…/cooperativeparentinginstitute – Cached

    Cooperative Parenting Institute is a Counselor at 2801 Buford Highway Northeast Atlanta, GA. Wellness.com provides reviews, contact information, 

  7. Staff :: Co-Parenting Solutions, Inc. :: Families Seeking Answers To 

    http://www.co-parentingsolutions.com/staff.html – Cached

    Carrie Beaird, M.A. is the Program Director and President of Co-Parenting  and is certified in Cooperative Parenting from the Cooperative Parenting Institute

  8. Cooperative Parenting Institute, Atlanta GA 30329 

    MerchantCircle.com — Cooperative Parenting Institute of 2801 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA. Phone: 404-315-7474. . Find coupons, blogs, and newsletters in 

Given the background bios of at least one presenter, this is going to also incorporate “parental alienation” legal strategy, i.e., how to minimize abuse and switch custody to the abuser, or at a minimum increase noncustodial parenting time.

I have been generally speaking disturbed by the speed of incorporation / losing corporate status /re-incorporation under a different name (or state) with the same personnel and same ideas borrowed from someone else, aka basically AFCC whose organizationally stated purpose is to change the “old” language of criminal law (although criminal law language still exists on the books, this organization has done SO much to change the practice of prosecuting crimes within the family, by carving out a “Safety Zone” for abusers, crooks & liars (not only some of the parents!), called “family law,” which unfortunately, trawling for prolonged litigation and tax-free income / rock-solid retirement income (for court professionals, that is) — has caught a lot of innocents, too.  Its wide-discretion, judicial immunity, and outsourcing of business to non-judicial players, it’s need for increasing funding by continuing to solicit grants-based program funding, etc. — has seriously impacted the average working family in the US, whether or not this family even has children!  (Because of the public expense factor)

LET’S TALK ABOUT WHAT are ALFRED ADLER & RUDOLPH DREIKURS THEORIES doing as marketed in the US, Sweden, Canada, Japan, Korea, and Kuwait.

(trademark search, US — not found.  There was an Active Muslim Parenting Mark found approximately 1996, from a nonprofit in Chicago, then abandoned):

Mark Image

??  Does this include Sharia law, and stoning for adultery, or over-Westernization?  Not on the books, I’m sure… Moving on….

Active Parenting Publishers…innovators of
video-based education programsClick for special topics:
About Dr. Popkin
About Our Programs
About the Authors & Consultants
Availability for Speaking Engagements
Contact Us
Active Parenting Publishers, Inc., was founded in 1980 by Dr. Michael H. Popkin, a former child and family therapist and Coordinator of Child and Family Services for Northside Community Mental Health Centers in Atlanta, Georgia.APP delivers quality education programs for parents, children and teachers to schools, hospitals, social services organizations, churches and the corporate market. ( so far: I’m sure more applications will be dreamed up once those markets are saturated...) The Active Parenting model is heavily based upon the theories of Alfred Adler and Rudolf Dreikurs (click here for more about Adlerian Psychology as it applies to Active Parenting).The most popular program is Active Parenting Now, for parents of children ages five to twelve. Active Parenting Publishers is recognized as an innovator in the educational market and is committed to our mission of developing human potential through our programs.APP operates out of Kennesaw, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta. Our products are distributed throughout the US as well as in Canada, Japan, Korea, Kuwait and Sweden.
Pioneers of the world’s first video-based parenting education programThe first three years of the company were devoted to research and development, as Dr. Popkin’s vision of integrating video and group discussion into advanced education programs evolved.

After reading more on this, I have identified what, in great part, so irritates me about adults who believe they have “the answers” and wish to teach the world how the world works.     This viewpoint, as we’re going to see, does not incorporate ethical or moral truths, right v. wrong, or even spirituality — which are some of the critical issues that philosophers and statesmen have debated for milennia.  However, through a captive audience, it could be possible for ONE philosophy of life to dominate and be imposed on whatever young — or raising young — population can be put in front of the Adlerian/Dreikuring viewpoint, which many Americans do not share, and have a right not to.  Read on:

ADLER & DREIKURS

Let’s look a bit about Alfred Adler and Ronald Dreikurs and why / if this viewpoint, which (contrary to most religions) indicates that there IS no moral judgment only “logical consequences.”  it is an attempt to control classrooms or intervene with problemmatice (children) through a different paradigm.

Descriptions, definitions, synonyms, organizer terms, types of

1. Biography

This social psychologist was born in Vienna, Austria on February 8, 1897. His contributions to society were plentiful up until his passing on May 25, 1972 in Chicago, Illinois. Dreikurs was a student and colleague of social pychologist Alfred Adler, who “believed that the central motivation of all humans is to belong and be accepted by others” (Wolfgang, 2001, p. 115). After his death, two writers continued to expand on his work. Linda Albert composed A Teacher’s Guide to Cooperative Discipline, while Donald Dinkmeyer produced Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (STEP).

The Encyclopedia Britannica depicts Dreikurs as an “American psychiatrist and educator who developed the Austrian psychologist Alfred Adler’s system of individual psychology into a pragmatic method for understanding the purposes of reprehensible behaviour in children and for stimulating cooperative behaviour without punishment or reward.

Basically, it’s behavioral control of unruly pupils  & Children, and if using “logical consequences” involving social isolation, it’s still a TRAINING manual.

Contrast with the work of, for example, Dr. Viktor Frankl (Concentration camp survivor) who wrote the classic “Man’s search for meaning.”

2. Historical background of Adler’s theory

The rash application of Freudian concepts and John Dewey’s progressive education caused extreme indulgence or ultra permissiveness in discipline and failed effectively dealing with children in new democratic society. For Adler, “what was needed was a willingness to understand the child and to stimulate his cooperation” (Dreikurs, 1968, p. 19) based on the responsibility.
3. Basics of Adler and Dreikurs’s social theory

① Adler’s Basic premises (Dreikurs, 1972, pp. 8-9)

i) Man is a social being and his main desire (the basic motivation) is to belong.

ii) All behavior is purposive. One cannot understand behavior of another person unless one knows to which goal it is directed, and it is always directed towards finding one’s place.

iii) Man is a decision-making organism.

iv) Man does not see reality as it is, but only as he perceives it, and his perception may be mistaken or biased.

Msn is a Social Being and a Decision-Making Organism.  Obviously, this view of man does not deal with spirit, purpose, and belief in life beyond death, which have motivated many (if not most) of the cultures of the world.  This basically states man is an animal — only.

Maybe he is.  Or maybe he isn’t.  However, “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” indicates people who believed he was NOt just an animal to be manipulated (although, according to “human nature” it’s clear that, while all animals were equal, some were to be designated more equal than others.  As we have already fought a major civil war in part over this issue (as well as whether those who disagreed could secede from the U.S.) perhaps it’s not time to toss the concept out through parenting programs borrowed from a Viennese psychologist, a few steps from Freud?

The setting for use of these philosophies is the classroom:

. Classroom Meetings
① Basic Idea

Students need to practice democratic principles in school in order to learn how to contribute later to society as a whole. The central process for carrying out this modeling of democracy is the use of the class meeting. Any problem child is a problem for the whole class, and the solution to the problem grows most naturally out of the helpful involvement of all class members (Dreikurs, 1972, p. 78).
② Purpose

Open classroom meetings create a context for developing empathy and group membership. Group discussions provide the teacher with an opportunity to help the children understand themselves, and to change their concept of themselves and others which will eventually change their motivations from hostile to cooperative living (Dreikurs, 1972, p. 79).

Source:   http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Dreikurs,_Rudolf

A little more on these (Wikipedia on Alfred Adler)

 Moreover, Freud did not share Adler’s socialist beliefsLeon Trotsky‘s biography mentions his having discussions with Alfred Adler in Vienna.

which may explain why Active Parenting ™  is doing well?  in Sweden?  Because of its tendency towards socialism?

All the more reason his work should be “court-referred” in the United States family law system.  Parents need to be educated in how to raise the best kind of state worker…..(yeah, sure):

The Adlerian School

Following Adler’s break from Freud, he enjoyed considerable success and celebrity in building an independent school of psychotherapy and a unique personality theory. He traveled and lectured for a period of 25 years promoting his socially oriented approach. His intent was to build a movement that would rival, even supplant, others in psychology by arguing for the holistic integrity of psychological well-being with that of social equality.

I’ve noted how many “violence prevention” groups now toss around the word “holistic” in their approaches to getting laws passed and people to abide by them:  Don’t abuse your spouse and don’t molest your kids.  There are criminal laws against these things, but forget them (says AFCC), let’s take a more “holistic” approach.  When it comes to some areas (like health!), I’m as “holistic” as possible (versus the pharmaceutical symptom-oriented approach); however, when it comes to a person who’s done serious damage to my life, and there are existing laws saying Don’t! — then I’m for focusing on the fact that these laws exist, allegedly, as a deterrent to what their language says don’t do.  If we cannot make that clear — but instead must leave decisionmaking up to psychologists (while there are those who still allege that psychology is not a science) — then of course there’s going to be plenty of work for the mental health professionals.  Because the values are not written in law, and cannot be explained clearly.  They must be “negotiated” between social groups (one after another) until there’s no more energy to negotiate, between those with clear standards and priorities, and those without.

Adler’s efforts were halted by World War I, during which he served as a doctor with the Austrian Army. After the conclusion of the war, his influence increased greatly. In the 1930s, he established a number of child guidance clinics. From 1921 onwards, he was a frequent lecturer in Europe and the United States, becoming a visiting professor at Columbia University in 1927. His clinical treatment methods for adults were aimed at uncovering the hidden purpose of symptoms using the therapeutic functions of insight and meaning.

Adler v. FRANKL:

Viktor Frankl’s work immediately came to my mind when reading about Adler, but here’s a quote from Frankl contrasting the two:

Adler always retained a pragmatic approach that was task-oriented. These “Life tasks” are occupation/work, society/friendship, and love/sexuality. Their success depends on cooperation. The tasks of life are not to be considered in isolation since, as Adler famously commented, “they all throw cross-lights on one another”.[10]

In his bestselling book, Man’s Search for MeaningDr. Viktor E. Frankl compared his own “Third Viennese School of Psychotherapy” (after Freud’s and Adler’s schools) to Adler’s analysis:

According to logotherapy, the striving to find a meaning in one’s life is the primary motivational force in man. That is why I speak of a will to meaning in contrast to the “pleasure principle” (or, as we could also term it, the will to pleasure) on which Freudian psychoanalysis is centered, as well as in contrast to the will to power stressed by Adlerian psychology.[11]

Do we really want a world run by the peer-pressure model?  Is it really satisfying in life to live only for onesself — or the local group?  Then why are some of the most revered leaders historically people who were able to handle long periods of isolation, i.e., they could stand being outcasts or rejects?  They could even handle being falsely imprisoned, and transform that experience into something better for other generations…

Emigration

In the early 1930s, after most of Adler’s Austrian clinics had been closed due to his Jewish heritage (despite his conversion to Christianity), Adler left Austria for a professorship at the Long Island College of Medicine in the USA. Adler died from a heart attack in 1937 in Aberdeen, Scotland, during a lecture tour, although his cremains went missing and were unaccounted for until 2011.[12] His death was a temporary blow to the influence of his ideas, although a number of them were subsequently taken up by neo-Freudians. Through the work of Rudolf Dreikurs in the United States and many other adherents worldwide, Adlerian ideas and approaches remain strong and viable more than 70 years after Adler’s death.

 His allegiance to Marxism dissipated over time (he retained Marx’ssocial idealism yet distanced himself from Marx’s economic theories).

Adler was a very pragmatic man and believed that lay people could make practical use of the insights of psychology. He sought to construct a social movement united under the principles of “Gemeinschaftsgefühl” (community feeling) and social interest (the practical actions that are exercised for the social good)

Interesting.  Because wars and genocides have been committed in the name of “the common good.”  Think about it, particularly 1900 – 1950s!) In fact, that anthem has led to atrocities, right?

and Adler (wikipedia) Parent Education for producing more democratic children, which is better for society:

Parent education

Adler emphasized both treatment and prevention. As a psychodynamic psychology, Adlerians emphasize the foundational importance of childhood in developing personality and any tendency towards various forms of psychopathology. The best way to inoculate against what are now termed “personality disorders” (what Adler had called the “neurotic character”), or a tendency to various neurotic conditions (depression, anxiety, etc.), is to train a child to be and feel an equal part of the family. This entails developing a democratic character and the ability to exercise power reasonably rather than through compensation. (reward).    Hence Adler proselytized against corporal punishment and cautioned parents to refrain from the twin evils of pampering and neglect. The responsibility to the optimal development of the child is not limited to the Mother or Father but to teachers and society more broadly. Adler argued therefore that teachers, nurses, social workers, and so on require training in parent education in order to complement the work of the family in fostering a democratic character. When a child does not feel equal and is enacted upon (abused through pampering or neglect) they are likely to develop inferiority or superiority complexes and various accompanying compensation strategies.

I have spent a good fraction of my life in front of and working with children — while at the same time with adult professionals.  Most children KNOW when they are being demonstrated upon; they are very perceptive and pick up on this quickly,possibly because there are fewer theories cluttering up their faculties of intuition and observation.   “when a child does not feel equal and is enacted upon. . . . . ”     Teachers, social workers, nurses (a different category as this is a life -preservation situation) are obviously superior in size and authority to children.   The average public school classroom is anything BUT an ‘equal’ situation, as is the society that they will be launched into upon graduation (assuming graduation occurs).    This is a theory.  On the other hand if growing children observe the adults around them behaving ethically and with empathy, handling crises fairly, etc., they have role models of adults interacting WITH EACH OTHER in good ways.

The average education in the USA at least (I don’t know other countries’ systems) is basically calculated to instill a sense of superiority or, alternately, inferiority in the students regarding each other, based on sometimes arbitrary standards.  The concept that teachers and social workers who are part of this heirarchical system are somehow going to rescue children from it (while being part of the same system) is — to me — ridiculous.

These strategies exact a social toll by seeding higher divorce rates, the breakdown of the family, criminal tendencies, and subjective suffering in the various guises of psychopathology. Adlerians have long promoted parent education groups, especially those influenced by the famous Austrian/American Adlerian Rudolf Dreikurs (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

Here’s (by way of contrast in approach) a slice of the life of Viktor Frankl, whose book I happen to have run across at a young age, and inspired me as I was forming my own values independently of parents (high school/college years):  Man’s Search for Meaning.  It turns out to have been written in a mere 9 days, and has sold 9 million copies.   Possibly because it’s marked by his overcoming of despair in conditions most of us do NOT deal with, giving hope to others:  Frankl could’ve abandoned his parents and immigrated to America in 1939; later, he survived Theriesenstadt Ghetto and Auchshwitz (his parents, brother and wife did not) and dictated this book one year after release from Auschwitz.  He lived to be 95:

Source:   http://www.viktorfrankl.org/e/chronology.html

1937 Frankl opens a practice as Doctor of Neurology and Psychiatry.
1938 Invasion of Austria by the Hitler troops – the “Anschluss”.
1939 In his paper:
“PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOTHERAPY.
ON THE FOUNDATION OF AN EXISTENTIAL ANALYSIS”
he coins the expression “Existential Analysis”. Frankl obtains an immigration visa to America but lets it pass unused, not wanting to desert his old parents.
1940 – 1942 He becomes director of the Neurological Department of the Rothschild Hospital, a clinic for Jewish patients. In spite of the danger to his own life he sabotages Nazi procedures by making false diagnoses to prevent the euthanasia of mentally ill patients. He publishes several articles in Swiss medical journals, and starts writing the first version of his book”AERZTLICHE SEELSORGE” (THE DOCTOR AND THE SOUL) . In 1941 Frankl marries his first wife, Tilly Grosser.
1942 The nazis force the young couple to have their child aborted. In September Viktor and Tilly Frankl are arrested and together with his parents are deported to the Theresienstadt Ghetto, north of Prague. His sister Stella has shortly before escaped to Australia, and brother Walter and his wife are trying to escape via Italy. After half a year in Theresienstadt his father dies of exhaustion.
1944 Frankl and Tilly, and shortly later his 65 year old mother, are transported to the extinction camp Auschwitz. His mother is immediately murdered in the gas chamber, and Tilly is moved to Bergen-Belsen, where she is to die at the age of 24. In cattle cars Viktor Frankl is transported, via Vienna, to Kaufering and Türkheim (subsidiary camps of Dachau). Even under the extreme conditions of the camps Frankl finds his theses about fate and freedom corroborated.
top
1945 In the last camp he comes down with typhoid fever. To avoid fatal collapse during the nights he keeps himself awake by reconstructing his book manuscript on slips of paper stolen from the camp office. On April 27 the camp is liberated by U.S. troops. In August Frankl returns to Vienna, where he learns, within a span of a few days, about the death of his wife, his mother and his brother who has been murdered in Auschwitz together with his wife.
1946 Frankl overcomes his despair; he becomes director of the Vienna Neurological Policlinic, a position he holds for 25 years. With his reconstructed book “ÄRZTLICHE SEELSORGE” he attains his “Habilitation”, or teaching appointment, at the University of Vienna Medical School. He dictates, within 9 days, the book “EIN PSYCHOLOG ERLRBT DAS KONZENTRATIONSLAGER”, which is later translated into English and published as “MAN’S SEARCH FOR MEANING“. By 1997 more than 9 million copies of this book had been sold.

Using Frankl’s concepts with PTSD clients  (book by Jim Lantz)

“Viktor Frankl was one of the first mental health professionals who worked with and wrote about victims of trauma and terror. His existential treatment approach with Nazi death camp survivors has considerable value and usefulness with other kinds of PTSD clients. In Franklian psychotherapy, the PTSD client is helped to remember the details of their trauma experiences to identify meaning opportunities embedded in memories of trauma and terror and to make use of such meaning opportunities for self-transcendent giving to the world.”

(Amazon review of the book):

Man’s Search for Meaning by Viktor E. Frankl is among the most influential works of psychiatric literature since Freud. The book begins with a lengthy, austere, and deeply moving personal essay about Frankl’s imprisonment in Auschwitz and other concentration camps for five years, and his struggle during this time to find reasons to live. The second part of the book, called “Logotherapy in a Nutshell,” describes the psychotherapeutic method that Frankl pioneered as a result of his experiences in the concentration camps. Freud believed that sexual instincts and urges were the driving force of humanity’s life; Frankl, by contrast, believes that man’s deepest desire is to search for meaning and purpose. Frankl’s logotherapy, therefore, is much more compatible with Western religions than Freudian psychotherapy. This is a fascinating, sophisticated, and very human book. At times, Frankl’s personal and professional discourses merge into a style of tremendous power. “Our generation is realistic, for we have come to know man as he really is,” Frankl writes. “After all, man is that being who invented the gas chambers of Auschwitz; however, he is also that being who entered those gas chambers upright, with the Lord’s Prayer or the Shema Yisrael on his lips.”

Gerald F. Kreyche De Paul University Man’s Search for Meaning is the story of a man who became a number who became a person. Today Frankl is one of the most famous and gifted of all psychiatrists. Frankl developed his ideas now generally known as the Third School of Viennese Psychiatry — the school of logotherapy. The incredible attempts to dehumanize man at the concentration camps of Auschwitz and Dachau led Frankl to commence the humanization of psychiatry through logotherapy. Frankl is a professional who possesses the rare ability to write in a layman’s language.

It is quite understandable why books about the meaning of life may be important to those who have experienced or are experiencing abuse at the hand of captors or others whose role and function (in the relationship) is to establish the teacher/child or master/slave, or, to extend this a little further, “subject/object” relationship with what is a person (not merely a “social being” or a “decision-making organism”) with hopes, desires, needs, and purposes (including individuality) in life.

Again in context, I have been looking at a fast-moving, fast-incorporating? nonprofit which has a lot of claims on its website, and how the same personnel are involved in peddling parenting programs based on (a particular worldview), for profit, through “Active Parenting(tm)” Publishing.  In its essence, we are talking a trademarked product.

Back to:

COOPERATIVE PARENTING INSTITUTE shown to be  “a/k/a Family Solutions Counseling,LLC”

I put out the “APB” for who IS the institute.   I am no expert yet in researching corporations.     One reply gave an appellate reversal, whose footnote identified exactly which corporation is the one running trainings in Chicago, Georgia and Pennsylvania (where one professional has a relationship with the county family court), and from there, an interesting point to make — again — about those of us expecting family law courts, or mandated reporters, to somehow protect our children, or compensate the bereft families when they failed to report and a child eventually died.

(Georgia Court of Appeal)

McGARRAH v. POSIG

No. A06A1205.

— July 28, 2006

Michael J. Gorby, James W. Standard, Jr., Gorby, Reeves & Peters, P.C., Atlanta, for Appellants.Laura Wilson Speed-Dalton, Ian R. Rapaport, Chambers, Aholt & Rickard, LLP, Atlanta, for Appellee.Thomas J. Mew IV, Robert B. Remar, Rogers & Hardin, amici curiae.

Appellants Nancy A. McGarrah, a licensed psychologist, and her practice, Cliff Valley Psychologists, P.A., defendants below, bring this interlocutory appeal from the State Court of DeKalb County’s denial of their motion for summary judgment.   For the reasons that follow, we reverse.

This case stems from psychological therapy and treatment provided by McGarrah 1 to K.P.G., the minor child of appellee Michelle Posig.   Posig sued McGarrah 2 as mother and guardian of K.P.G., alleging that McGarrah breached a professional standard of care by her failure to detect and report sexual abuse of K.P.G.   Under OCGA § 19-7-5, licensed psychologists must report suspected child abuse,3 including sexual abuse,4 to the appropriate authorities; 5  knowing and wilful failure so to report is a criminal offense, a misdemeanor.6

Construing the evidence and all inferences therefrom in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, as we must on review of the grant or denial of a motion for summary judgment,7 the record shows that, following a contentious divorce and custody battle, Posig and her ex-husband, David Gore, K.P.G.’s father, sought “postdivorce parent coordinating” from Susan Boyan, a licensed marriage and family therapist.8 ** During these parent counseling sessions, Posig alleged that Gore had sexually abused K.P.G. since she was an infant.   Although Boyan found no evidence of abuse and made no report under OCGA § 19-7-5, she took the allegations seriously and referred the then five-year-old K.P.G. to McGarrah for evaluation “in order to explore abuse issues.”

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-court-of-appeals/1397399.html

Cases such as the one at bar can certainly present distressing allegations of abuse, and this Court is sympathetic to the plight of abused children such as Terrell Peterson.   Nonetheless, any change in the law in these matters lies in the realm of the legislature.   As this Court has stated on an earlier occasion, “[t]he ramifications of creating a tort liability must be weighed against the consequences of resultant potential over-reporting.   This is a legislative task which either has been fulfilled by the choice for criminal law liability instead, or has yet to be done if and when the legislature determines to undertake it.” 25

Appellee Posig has failed to state a cause of action recognized under current Georgia law, and therefore the trial court erred in denying appellant McGarrah’s motion for summary judgment.

Judgment reversed.

FOOTNOTES

1.  Appellant Cliff Valley Psychologists, P.A., was named as a defendant in the complaint on the theory of respondeat superior, agency or apparent agency.

2.  Also named as defendants were Susan Boyan and Family Solutions, LLC, a/k/a Cooperative Parenting Institute.   The trial court below granted summary judgment on behalf of these defendants, and they are not before this Court on this appeal.

8.  Dr. Boyan did not see or treat K.P.G. professionally, but only her mother and father.

Note:  Under whose advice or which constraints did they seek “postdivorce parenting” — a court order?  Consider under what circumstances BOTH a divorcing mother and father might be ordered into treatment by the same practitioner!

Family Solutions, LLC is now run by a Kathleen Shack at a certain address shared by lots more in similar fields and per the State of Georgia SOS started as an entity in 2007;

Business Name History

NameName TypeFAMILY SOLUTIONS COUNSELING, LLCCurrent Name


Limited Liability Company – Domestic – Information Control No.:07020302Status:Active/Noncompliance  Entity Creation Date:3/7/2007  Jurisdiction:GAPrincipal Office Address:3534 Old Milton Pkwy
Alpharetta GA 30005
Last Annual Registration Filed Date:5/13/2010Last Annual Registration Filed:2010

Selected businesses at this address:   (3534 Old Milton Parkway, Apharetta, GA  30005)

1 review

1 review

Googling “last name /Officer” in Georgia, I find Kathleen Shack also CFO on this one:
Business Name History


Name Name Type
GEORGIA ASSOCIATION FOR MARRIAGE & FAMILY THERAPY, INC. Current Name

Non-Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: J518599
Status: Active/Compliance
Entity Creation Date: 7/6/1973
Jurisdiction: GA
Principal Office Address: 3108 PIEDMONT RD NE STE 224
ATLANTA GA 30305-2547
Last Annual Registration Filed Date: 3/23/2011
Last Annual Registration Filed: 2011
This organization started in 1973, is a division of national group, and as we can see has maintained steady corporate status.  The national group is AAMFT:
Well, apparently in 2006, This Cooperative P.I. was an a.k.a. of Family Solutions Counseling, LLC.  The Family Counseling Solutions, LLC we see here in Georgia was, however, formed in 2007 and shows a different (but AFCC affiliated) leadership (and address).
Here is a group which cites CPI as its certification (among many others, also AFCC-related, clearly:  Collaborative Law, etc.)  “Dr. Kathy”‘s education has been all about families from the start, and it appears to have happened mostly within the state of Georgia.  Here’s a sampler:
 “SEB Health, Inc.   “Social, Emotional and Behavioral Health”

EDUCATION

  • Ph.D. Child and Family Development, concentration in Marriage and Family Therapy, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
  • M.S. Child and Family Development. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
  • B.A. Psychology & Spanish (Double Major), Florida State University. Graduated Cum Laude and with Honors

PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS

  • American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists (AAMFT)
  • Georgia Association of Marriage and Family Therapists (GAMFT)
  • American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC)
  • International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP)  ***
  • Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia (CLIG) ***  (2004 formation)
  • Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) ***
*** fields & terminology courtesy AFCC professionals and developed as market niches in their conferences and publications.
Note:  SEB, HEALTH, INC. was formed in 2005, and Dr. Scott is its only principal officers (in fact, all 3) listed.  The Collaborative law Institute of Georgia was formed in 2004.





SEB HEALTH, INC. 0573173 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 10/27/2005

Records Returned 1 of 1 total 1

“COLLABORATIVE LAW” national search of 990-finder database shows groups in:   MI, MN, CA, GA, IL & TEXAS:

As of 2005, only these states (at least had submitted 990s, or were formed):

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN

Collaborative Law Institute MN 2005 $24,308 990O 17 41-1703520
Collaborative Law Institute of MI 2005 $16,527.46 990EZ 15 20-0903609
Collaborative Law Institute of Illinois IL 2005 $25,386 990EO 6 02-0645845
Collaborative Law Institute of Texas Inc. TX 2005 $146,683 990 17 75-2843154

The texas one (2005 return) shows a $3,000 grant from “IACP” in California, i.e.,the International Group is helping state groups expand.  The purpose of this group is to publicize, surprisingly, “Collaborative Law.”   $58K was received (2004) in “membership fees’ and $52,458K expenses was spent on classes.  There are 14 key officers/trustees, none being paid for anything, however, they will be reaping rewards when courthouses eventually close through budget deficits (and people tired of losing their shirts anywhere near the whole institution), then these professionals have positioned themselves to receive the exodus into, well, their waiting arms.  So forming nonprofits to catch this is definitely a good business, although what the public benefit justifying nonprofit status is, I fail to see.  Because they want to promote a profession, they don’t need to pay taxes, although most of their clients will, and after paying taxes, pay them???

 By 2006, 2007 (year I searched the same terms on) MI has dropped off:

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN

Collaborative Law Institute MN 2006 $29,651 990EO 5 41-1703520
Collaborative Law Institute of Illinois IL 2006 $41,670 990EO 12 02-0645845
Collaborative Law Institute of Texas Inc. TX 2006 $202,917 990 19 75-2843154

In 2008 Georgia Joins MN, IL & TX:

ORGANIZATION NAME

STATE

YEAR

TOTAL ASSETS

FORM

PAGES

EIN

Collaborative Law Institute MN 2006 $29,651 990EO 5 41-1703520
Collaborative Law Institute of Illinois IL 2006 $41,670 990EO 12 02-0645845
Collaborative Law Institute of Texas Inc. TX 2006 $202,917 990 19 75-2843154

Notice, per SOS Georgia, the Georgia institute was formed in 2004 (and filed consistent corporation registries):






COLLABORATIVE LAW INSTITUTE OF GEORGIA, INC. 0402031 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 1/8/2004
Records Returned 1 of 1 total 1
Current Name: COLLABORATIVE LAW INSTITUTE OF GEORGIA, INC.
Image  Date Document

Open the ImageOpen the Image

1/13/2004 New Filing
3/30/2004 Annual Registration
4/1/2005 Annual Registration
4/7/2005 Annual Registration
4/7/2006 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

4/2/2007 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

2/26/2008 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

3/27/2009 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

3/31/2009 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

3/2/2010 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

3/29/2011 Annual Registration

Are they not required to also file somewhere as a nonprofit, including any tax returns? If these are the certifying institutes, what does that say about the certification, in general?  In practicing law!! and certifying people in preparation/anticipation of them setting up (LEGAL) collaborative law practices?

This collaborative law institute lists only one principal — Robert D. Bordett.  I looked him up:

iacp,collaborative law,collaborative practice,collaborative divorce,international academy of collaborative professionals

Robert D. Bordett, CFP, CDFA

Bob is Senior Vice President of Consolidated Planning Corporation, is a Certified Financial Planner, Certified Divorce Financial Analyst and a registered mediator with the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution. Committed to positive outcomes for divorcing families, Bob has spent more than a 22 years providing financial expertise in collaborative practice and mediated divorce proceedings. Bob is the past president of The Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia, and currently serves on the board of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP) and served as a members of the IACP Advisory Council on Collaborative Practice and Training. In addition he is past president of the Georgia Society of the Institute of Certified Financial Planners, served as a National Committee member for the Institute of Certified Financial Planners, and is a founding member of the Family Mediation Association of Georgia. Additionally, Bob is a current member of the Association for Conflict Resolution, National Association of Tax Practitioners, Financial Planning Association, and Association of Family Court and Community Professionals. Bob has spoken to various groups including the Quantum Institute, Family Mediation Association of Georgia, Georgia Trail Lawyers, Women’s Resource Center, Atlanta, Divorce Mediators, State Bar of Georgia Mid Year Conference, Academy of Matrimonial Attorneys Georgia Chapter the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals annual forum and the AFCC annual conference. He has written numerous articles on financial planning that have been published by The Atlanta Journal Constitution, Journal of Financial Planning, Georgia Family Mediation News, Fidelity 401K magazine and has appeared on CNN Sunday News.
Address: 400 Colony Square, Suite 525
Atlanta GA 30361 USA
Phone: 888-U2AGREE
Fax:
Email: bob@u2agree.com
Website: http://www.u2agree.com

The bulk of the references are training in collaborative lawyering, which is a self-perpetuating set of nonprofits definining a new field of practice.  Of course they are going to support and certify and allow others (who paid into the system) to cite each other as parts of one’s resumes:

Collaborative Divorce Training – MN. Peggy Thompson, Pauline Tesler, Nancy Ross, Stu Webb – 2000 Collaborative Divorce Team Training – AZ. George Richardson, Peggy Thompson, Mark Hill, Nancy Ross, Vicki Carpel Miller IACP Annual Forums;2001;2002;2003;2004;2005;2006;2007
Collaborative Training Offered
Interdisciplinary Collaborative Law Training for Attorneys, Mental Health Professionals, Financial Consultants and Mediators: 2007: Pasadena, Ca; Chicago, Illinois, Atlanta, GA. and Advanced Interdisciplianary Collaborative Training; Columbia, Md and Atlanta, Ga: 2006: Chicago, Illinois; Rochester, New York; Miami, Florida; 2005: Albuquerque, New Mexico; Omaha, Nebraska; Spartanburg, South Carolina; Louisville, Kentucky; Jacksonville, Florida; Chicago, Illinois; 2004: Ann Arbor, Michigan; Chicago, Illinois (Basic & Advanced); Charleston, South Carolina (2 Trainings); Dallas, Texas; Atlanta, Georgia Advanced Training 2006; Atlanta, Georgia (5 Trainings); 2006:Atlanta, Georgia Advanced Training 2005; Atlanta, Georgia (4 Trainings); 2005:Atlanta, Georgia (6 Trainings); 2004:Atlanta, Georgia (4 Trainings); 2003: Atlanta, Georgia (4 Trainings); 2002: Atlanta, Georgia (4 Trainings), 2001: Atlanta, Georgia (4 Trainings); 2000: Atlanta, Georgia (2 Trainings).

here is he is, underneath a woman heavily involved in collaborative law, family law (as a Guardian ad litem) and in “Contested Custody” situations.  I don’t mean to minimize what it takes to be a financial planner (at least this involves some real numbers-crunching and analysis) but when it comes to mediation, ad infinitum, I’ve had enough, personally:

Robert D. Bordett is Senior Vice President ofConsolidated Planning Corporation.  He is a Certified Financial Planner, Certified Divorce Financial Analyst, and a registered mediator and arbitrator with the Georgia Office of Dispute Resolution. He is committed to positive outcomes for divorcing families.

Bob has spent more than 25 years providing financial expertise in collaborative practice and mediated divorce proceedings.  He is past president of The Collaborative  Law Institute of Georgia,

{{NOT too hard if you started the organization!}}

past board member of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP) and a member of the IACP Advisory Council on Collaborative Practice and Training.  In addition, he is past president of the Georgia Society of the Institute of Certified Financial Planners, served as a National Committee member for the Institute of Certified Financial Planners, and is a founding member of the Family Mediation Association of Georgia.  In addition, Bob is a current member of the Association for Conflict Resolution, National Association of Tax Practitioners, Financial Planning Association, and Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.  He has written numerous articles on financial planning and Collaborative Practice that have been published in the Atlanta Journal Constitution,Journal of Financial PlanningGeorgia Family Mediation NewsFidelity 401K magazine and has appeared on CNN Sunday News.

(the person listed alongside):

Our Guests
Amy Waggoner

Amy K. Waggoner is a collaborative family law attorney.  Her focus is working together with clients in transition to find creative solutions that promote the best interests of the family and the children. In addition to the collaborative practice of family law, Amy serves as a Guardian ad Litem to protect the interests of children who are involved in contested custody matters and regularly volunteers her time in helping children and families through the Atlanta Volunteer Lawyers Foundation.

Amy is a founding member of the Atlanta Collaborative Divorce Alliance, and a member of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, the Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia, the Family Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association, the State Bar of Georgia, and the State Bar of Tennessee.

She regularly lectures on collaborative and family law issues, particularly those involving implementing creative, non-adversarial solutions to legal issues.

http://www.familybusinessradio.com/?p=111

For skeptics who don’t (yet) believe that these groups are primarily subsists of the (earliest) AFCC, here’sa site VWtapes.com showing AFCC conference and “related” ones.  CP-CAL is obviously “Collaborative Practice California”

CP-CAL

Related Conferences

  • AFCC   Association of Family & Conciliation Courts California Chapter Conferences
  • IACP   International Association of Collaborative Professionals Conferences
  • ACPI   Association of Collaborative Professionals Ireland Conferences

Collaborative Practice California Conferences (CP-CAL)

CDs, MP3s, and DVDs from the 2011 Celebration VI: Collaboration Without Borders Expanding Our Horizons, sixth annual statewide conference presented by the Collaborative Practise California (CP-CAL).

Collaborative Practice California (CP-CAL) Conference Image

CDs, MP3s, and DVDs from the 2009 Celebration IV: Catching the Collaborative Wave fourth annual state-wide conference presented by the Collaborative Practise California (CP-CAL).

Collaborative Practice California (CP-CAL) Conference Image

CDs, MP3s, and DVDs from the 2008 Celebration III: Beyond the Basics: Building on our core strengths–third annual state-wide conference presented by the Collaborative Practise California (CP-CAL).
CDs, MP3s, and DVDs from the 2007 Celebration II: Communicating the Collaborative Message Second Annual Statewide Conference presented jointly by the Collaborative Practice California (CP-CAL) and the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (
CDs, MP3s, and DVDs from the 2006 Annual Statewide Conference presented jointly by the Collaborative Practice California (CP-CAL) and the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP).

This way they can learn who are the leaders in the area, keep their language unified (as opposed to, say, going with the language the commoners know, like the law) and rehearse how to view the flawed parents of the world, the high-conflict divorces, and to socialize them (probably Adlerian-style) or (alternately) coerce under duress of losing children to the other partner — into compliance and becoming good social beings, which all truly healthy human beings are….  I guess that rules out Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, etc., Martin Luther, Martin Luther King, Jr., and basically any other leaders who left indelible and positive marks on the world.   For example, Galileo comes to mind, you name it — people who didn’t “go with the flow” actually can make the world a slightly better place — though not always in their own lifetimes.

(these are from SEB Health, Inc. in GA)

LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS

  • Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist in Georgia.
  • Certified Child Custody Evaluator, Professional Association of Custody Evaluators (PACE)
  • Clinically Certified Domestic Violence Counselor, 2/12/01. F16880, ACCFC
  • Clinically Certified Forensic Counselor, 2/12/01. F16879, NAFC
  • Certified Instructor, Prime For Life (Prevention Research Institute) –DOT approved A&D program.
  • Ericksonian Hypnosis, 11/12/04, completed intensive program under Bill O’Hanlon, MS
  • Collaborative Law.
  • Certified Parenting Coordinator – Certification from the Cooperative Parenting Institute.
NAFC (that’s a new one on me!):   The term was coined by one person to designate “competent” counselors, focusing on group treatment for criminal populations to reduce recidivism:
The NAFC was established in 1994 to establish post graduate standards and professional responsibility in the very specialized area of criminal justice counseling and evaluation. The development of standards of practice, clinical guidelines, and the establishment of a valid certification program are efforts NAFC and ACCFC have made to enhance delivery of safe and effective treatment of offenders in both civil and criminal cases, improve communication, between the clinician and the justice system as well as for the protection of the public. NAFC is a non-profit corporation.
Later, Dr. Francis Deisler had another, better idea, and started USOA, modeled after Alcoholics Anonymous:

HOW DID USOA START?

USOA was founded by Dr. Francis J. Deisler, a Psychologist and Clinical Social Worker who specializes in treating offenders and ex-offenders. In March 2005, Dr. Deisler spoke to a group of inmates and their family members graduating from a violence prevention program at a North Carolina medium security prison. After his talk, Dr. Deisler had the opportunity to speak with the inmates and family members individually who expressed the difficulties they were facing as ex-offenders and the lack of social support in their continued recovery. Dr. Deisler was always aware of the lack of a continuum of care for offenders leaving institutions in the US and  wanted a program specifically designed for the offenders special needs.

Dr. Deisler carried this information back to his staff at his counseling center who then started a program patterned after the successful Alcoholics Anonymous program. The program was offered to ex-offenders in the counseling program as an adjunct to their treatment program and their aftercare. From that first program, other USOA groups have been developed in counseling centers in other cities and states focusing on the treatment and counseling of offenders in other states.

http://www.forensictraininginstitute.org/?Online_Certification_Courses:Certification_Courses_Offered:Certified_Sex_Offender_Treatment_Specialist
(etc.  In other words, NAFC got approved to provide training)….
This entity (for-profit) was formed in 1995, per Indiana Secreary of State search:
Entity Name Type Entity Type City / State
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FORENSIC COUNSELORS Assumed Non-Profit Domestic Corporation FORT WAYNE, IN
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FORENSIC COUNSELORS, INC. Legal For-Profit Domestic Corporation FORT WAYNE, IN

The bottom one has been administratively dissolved:  It was around for a whopping 4 years:

Current InformationEntity Legal Name:
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FORENSIC COUNSELORS, INC.

Entity Address:
800 South Calhoun Street, FORT WAYNE, IN 46802

General Entity Information:
Control Number1995120733 
StatusAdmin Dissolved 
Entity TypeFor-Profit Domestic Corporation 

Entity Creation Date12/4/1995 
Entity Date to Expire:
Entity Inactive Date8/26/1999 

 and the related nonprofit extended 1990 -1998, also “aka” “Sunrise Homes” (?)  Assuming it’s the same group:


Name Searched On:
NATIONAL ASSOC FORENSIC (Assumed)

Current Information

Entity Legal Name:
SUNRISE HOMES, INC.

Entity Address:
C/O Robert S. Bechert, 800 S. Calhoun St., FORT WAYNE, IN 4680

General Entity Information:

Control Number1990080119 
StatusAdmin Dissolved 
Entity TypeNon-Profit Domestic Corporation 

Entity Creation Date7/30/1990 
Entity Date to Expire
Entity Inactive Date5/18/1998 

Other Names for this Entity:

Date Name (Type)
7/30/1990 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FORENSIC COUNSELORS  (Assumed) / Allen County )

Registered Agent(name, address, city state , zip):

Robert S. Bechert
800 S.Calhoun St.
FORT WAYNE , IN  46802

Principals(name, address, citystate, zip – when provided)

Francis J. Deisler
President
2924 S. Calhoun St.
FT. WAYNE , IN  46807

Donald Lytle
Secretary
2924 S. Calhoun St.
FT. WAYNE , IN  46807

Transactions:

Date Filed Effective Date Type
07/30/1990 07/30/1990 Articles of Incorporation
01/23/1992 01/23/1992 Articles of Amendment
08/03/1995 08/03/1995 Certificate of Assumed Business Name
08/04/1995 08/04/1995 Miscellaneous
05/18/1998 05/18/1998 Administrative Dissolution 

Corporate Reports:
Years Paid
1991    1992    1993    1994    1995

Additional Services Available: 

This Business Entity is not eligible to receive a Certificate of Existence/Authorization. 

ANYHOW, this organization? certified the principal at SEB HEalth, inc.
That’s frightening — Dr. Kathryn Scott-Young is also  a DV counselor ???
Notice, Christian and practicing hypnosis as well.  I just don’t get it!   (search “hypnosis” on blog, I mentioned this when the recent toddler murdered in California had a grandmother, a Christian counselor soliciting local pastors for work (the grandfather, who blamed the murder-suicide his son committed on the courts, and apparently was at the same time taking referrals? from Sacramento courts as a psychologist…..) ….
well, friends, I haven’t yet found where “Cooperative Parenting Institute” a/k/a Family Counseling Solutions, LLC” in association with Boyan or Termini actually exist.  Of course I’ve been easy on Pennsylvania recently.
Search
By Business Name
By Business Entity ID
Verify
Verify Certification
Online Orders
Register for Online
Orders
Order Good Standing
Order Certified Documents
Order Business List
My Images
Search for Images
Search Type: Starting With Search Criteria: Cooperative Parenting
Search Date: 9/21/2011 Search Time: 20:41

No Records were found for the search criteria ‘Cooperative Parenting’ on 9/21/2011 8:41:15 PM

Ms. Termini is listed in PA at the “PCM” (Pennsylvania Council of Mediators”):
73) Ann Marie Termini, Eds, MS, LPC

Organization:

Cooperative Parenting Institute

Website:

http://www.cooperativeparenting.com

Email:

Email This Mediator
EFTI.org (a fathers- type of group, I’ve mentioned them here before) cites in Georgia, Susan Boyan as a reference:
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce

Susan Boyan

X X X X X (available on-line)

Atlanta, Georgia 30329

Telephone: (4

Email: smboyan@cooperativeparenting.com

and in Pennsylvania, Ms. Termini:
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce

Ann Marie Termini

301 West Grove Street

Clark Summit, PA 18411

Telephone: (570) 586-5669

Email: amtermini@cooperativeparenting.com

Court of Injustice — Blair County
DaddyJustice — Lancaster County
EqualCustody.com

Telephone: (412) 829-2278

Fathers’ and Children’s Equality, Inc. (FACE) — Every child deserves 2 parents. Bucks and Montgomery Counties, Lehigh Valley, and Philadelphia chapters.

Hotline (610)-688-4748

Heads Held High — Families helping families.
Judicial Clean Sweep
Lancaster Non-Custodial Parents (LYNCUP)

Horror stories from Lancaster-York counties

Don Hank, Director

319 Brook Lane

Wrightsville PA 17368

Telephone: (717) 252-9835

Lesbian Domestic Violence — Support group in Reading, Pennsylvania.
Men’s Custody and Shelter Network (MCSN) — Assists with physical, mental, and counseling needs for men falsely accused in custody disputes. Attempts to obtain temporary housing for men taken from homes and children with restraining orders.
SOURCE:  http://www.ejfi.org/Help/Help-2.htm

This site is supported and maintained by the Equal Justice Foundation.

Last modified 8/18/11

WELL, that’s enough for today.   Admittedly not the most organized post, but hopefully some more food for thought.

Trim the Budget? OK, Trim Embezzlement and Fraud FIRST, especially in Nonprofits and Government

with one comment

Some people (particularly my regular Parisian fan club? visitor from Paris) may wonder why I raise such a big stink about such small nonprofits, at time, that don’t file, don’t incorporate, and replicate like rabbits.  And particularly ones that have as part of their nonprofit purpose marketing a licensed very much FOR-profit item (usually a curriculum and training to certify people in affiliate marketing to captive audiences, like parents ordered into court-referred, court-mandated classes or counseling, or people in prison).

Well that’s basically because I notice patterns, I’ve dealt with some nonprofit that don’t put out what they publicize (and are funded for) and I can multiply.

I also think that if the US General Accounting Office (GAO) agrees with me, which it does, I might be onto something (although they’ve been pointing it out for longer).  I posted this before; there are more where it came from:

GAO, Reports & Testimonies, By Agency (HHS/ACF is our area):

(Note: This first one, August 2011, relates to safety of children in child care facilities, and is not addressing financial matters)

Child Care: Overview of Relevant Employment Laws and Cases of Sex Offenders at Child Care Facilities

GAO-11-757 August 19, 2011

Why GAO Did This Study

Very little is known about sexual abuse among children that are regularly cared for by more than 1.3 million child care providers every week in the United States. In this context, GAO was asked to (1) provide an overview of federal and state laws related to the employment of sex offenders at child care facilities and (2) examine cases where individuals who were convicted of serious sexual offenses were subsequently employed or present at child care facilities.

What GAO Found

Federal laws regulate the employment of sex offenders at federal child care facilities. For example, federally operated facilities are required to conduct criminal-history checks on employees, as are facilities receiving grants from the Department of Health and Human Services’ Head Start program. At the state level, laws vary widely. For example, all 50 states require criminal-history checks for owners and employees of licensed child care facilities, but many state laws exempt facilities from licensing if they do not exceed certain thresholds, such as a minimum number of children. Penalties for violating licensing requirements can range from a $5 administrative fine to imprisonment for a term of years.

The cases GAO examined show examples of individuals convicted of serious sexual offenses who gained access to child care facilities as maintenance workers, spouses or friends of providers, a cafeteria worker, and a cook. At least seven of these cases involve offenders who previously targeted children, and in three of the cases, the offenders used their access to children at the facilities to offend again. Among the cases, GAO found instances of providers who (1) knowingly hired offenders and (2) did not perform preemployment criminal-history checks. GAO also found examples of facilities operating without licenses, and facilities that employed offenders while receiving federal funds. The following four cases illustrate the nature of the situations GAO identified.

(cases from Missouri, Kentucky, Washington, D.C. & New York featured)

Highlights Page (PDF)   Full Report (PDF, 32 pages)   Accessible Text

I find this interesting because our current administration has continued to really push Head Start, Early Head Start, Zero to Five and almost anything that would get those kids away from their Mamas (and Papas) at an early age.  Look at the budgets!

Here’s one on Child Support (Enforcement):

Child Support Enforcement: Departures from Long-term Trends in Sources of Collections and Caseloads Reflect Recent Economic Conditions
GAO-11-196, Jan 14, 2011
Summary (HTML)   Highlights Page (PDF)   Full Report (PDF, 41 pages)   Accessible Text

The CSE program is run by states and overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). States receive federal performance incentive payments and a federal match on both state CSE funds and, except for fiscal year 2008, on the incentive payments, which must be reinvested into the program. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) eliminated this incentive match beginning in 2008, but the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA]  temporarily reinstated it for 2 years. **

. . .

 Preliminary HHS data show that total CSE expenditures grew by 2.6 percent in fiscal year 2008 as many states increased their own funding to maintain CSE operations when the federal incentive match was eliminated. Some state officials attributed this increase in part to state lawmakers’ broad support for the program. ***  In contrast to fiscal year 2008, a different picture emerged in fiscal year 2009, when the incentive match was temporarily restored but total CSE expenditures fell slightly by 1.8 percent, which HHS officials told GAO was due to state budget constraints.

Most states nationwide have not implemented “family first” policy options since DRA. Several state CSE officials GAO interviewed said they support “family first” policies in principle, but funding constraints prevented implementing these options, because giving more child support collections to families means states retain less as reimbursement for public assistance costs.

So, when you hear OCSE, HHS, or anyone else crowing about getting more money to the families than before, i.e., “pass through” or “Family First” just remember, the states agree in THEORY, but not in practice; maintaining their operations is more important than children having enough to eat.  I realize operations have to be maintained, but over the years, we have found that the child support system has dedicated itself to expanding programs and scope, i.e., creating “emotional support” by noncustodial parents, and other not-sufficiently-audited purposes and programs.

By the way, KIDS TURN of SF & San Diego comes under this category — as they are direct beneficiaries of pushing the access/visitation theme through the courts plus TANF reform of 1996.

(**ARRA — speaking of which, see the next report I’ve linked to here:)

ARRA Contract & Grant Recipients Misdeeds, and resulting Debts

Testimony

Before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate

RECOVERY ACT

Thousands of Recovery Act Contract and Grant Recipients Owe Hundreds of Millions in Federal Taxes

Statement of Gregory D. Kutz, Director Forensic Audits and Investigative Service

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 2:30 p.m. EDT

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Also finding some real “anomalies” is the office responsible for auditing HHS — the source of all TANF (welfare), Child Support Enforcement, Medicaid, Head Start & Early Head Start, Abstinence, Marriage, Fatherhood, and Access/Visitation funding.  For starters; this office also manages Foster Care, ie., Titles IV-A, IV-D, IV-E, for starters.    Here’s just a little sampler (running to the millions) from last April:

BROWSING:

REPORTS:  “US Office of Inspector General, Health & Human Services, Office of Audit Services/ ACF reports 

04-06-2011
Review of Title IV-E Foster Care Costs Claimed on Behalf of Delinquent Children in Los Angeles County, California

Executive Summary

We estimated that for fiscal years 2005 and 2006, the California Department of Social Services (the State agency) claimed unallowable Title IV-E costs totaling $5.7 million (Federal share) on behalf of delinquent Los Angeles County children, consisting of $2.2 million in maintenance payments and $3.5 million in associated administrative costs. Title IV-E of the Social Security Act authorizes Federal funds for States to provide foster care for children under an approved State plan. For children who meet foster care eligibility requirements, Federal funds are available to States for maintenance payments, administrative costs, and training costs.

Of the 100 monthly maintenance payments in our sample, 80 payments were allowable, 18 payments were unallowable, and 2 payments could not be evaluated because the case files had been sealed under a court order. The 18 unallowable payments consisted of 13 payments and associated administrative costs for children who were not eligible for services and 5 payments for eligible children that included costs for unallowable services or for services that were not provided.

We recommended that the State agency (1) refund to the Federal Government $5.7 million for unallowable costs, consisting of $2.2 million in maintenance payments and $3.5 million in associated administrative costs, and (2) ensure compliance with Federal requirements by periodically selecting a sample of foster care case files for delinquent children to determine whether the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services made correct eligibility determinations and maintained sufficient documentation to support eligibility determinations and claimed payments only for eligible children, allowable services, and services provided. The State agency did not concur with our first recommendation or the amount of the recommended refund.

“delinquent L.A. County Children” in Foster care (??).  Note — this was from April 2011, and they reported on a whopping 100 cases from 6 years ago.  Of those 100, approximately 1 and 4 were inappropriate payments, and they want their money back.

The Samaans,

I also note that in the recent (Sacramento, CA area) where the two-year old daughter of a woman employed, working as an attorney under Attorney General Kamala Harris, was murdered on a child-abduction following court-ordered visitation; she could not save her own daughters’ life, and the father’s father (father couldn’t speak because he killed himself also), a Dr. Marak Samaan — had been terminated from a California University for criminal activity (pled down to misdemeanor) surrounding IMPROPER BILLING, THREE HABITUAL PRACTICES, in his PRIVATE PSYCHOLOGICAL PRACTICE.  While such criminal activity apparently lost him a tenured professorship, and (as of 2010) was about to have him lose his license to practice in the field of behavioral health, it apparently wasn’t sufficient to stop him from working for the courts as a psychologist!    This man blamed the family court system for his son having shot the kid and himself to death.  We are indeed in dark days, but I have got to believe that financial accountability and compliance with simple, basic regulations for nonprofits is a great barometer of individuals, nonprofits, or systems

Here’s one from OHIO, Hamilton County:

01-24-2011
Review of Ohio Department of Job and Family Services Claims for Costs Reported by the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services

Executive Summary

Our review found $59 million (Federal share) in unallowable Administration for Children and Families (ACF) costs identified in the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services’ (State agency) report for services provided by child welfare organizations from July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2004. We conducted this audit at the request of ACF after the State agency identified a total of $216 million in unallowable costs reported by the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services (County agency). The County agency inappropriately allocated the child welfare organizations’ costs through indirect cost pools. The State agency inappropriately claimed the costs because it relied on the County agency’s reported program costs and did not ensure that the County agency allocated the costs in accordance with the cost allocation plan and other Federal requirements.

BACKGROUND

INTRODUCTION

Within the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) provides funding to State, territorial, local, and tribal organizations for programs relating to children and families. State, county, city, and tribal governments and private local agencies provide services to eligible children and families.

Ohio’s Administration of Programs for Children and Families

In Ohio, the Department of Job and Family Services (State agency) administers ACF programs and other Federal and State programs related to health care, cash assistance, food assistance, childcare, child support enforcement and administration, foster care, and employment and training assistance. County agencies coordinate and provide these services to eligible children and families and report costs to the State agency. The State agency then claims these costs for Federal reimbursement.

On May 1, 2008, the State agency issued a report entitled Hamilton County Limited Review (State agency’s report) related to costs reported by the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services (County agency). The State agency’s report found that the County agency did not properly account for Federal, State, and local funds and recommended that the State recover $216 million. However, the State agency’s report did not clearly identify what portion of the costs recommended for recovery pertained to ACF programs. Therefore, ACF requested that we conduct this audit.

County Agency Child Welfare Service Costs

During our audit period, the County agency charged costs to the State agency for services provided by certain child welfare organizations:

• Under the auspices of the Multi-County System Agency, a consortium of county governmental entities, the County agency contracted for consecutive periods with Beech Acres and then with Hamilton Choices, LLC (collectively, BA/HC), to provide treatment and care for high-risk foster care children.

The County agency contracted with Magellan Behavioral Health (Magellan) to coordinate and administer the delivery of child welfare and mental health services to children and families.

Hillcrest Training School and Youth Center (Hillcrest), a county-operated, accredited community correctional/treatment center and training school for youth offenders, provided rehabilitative services to adjudicated youths (non-foster-care children) who were placed there by the Hamilton County Juvenile Court.1

What I’m pointing out here is that money goes from the Feds (through ACF) to the States, to County Agencies, that then contract out to provide services with various organizations, which may be LLCs, or other incorporated organizations.     There are many layers of transfer of money, and so many levels at which reconciliations and checks should happen, but apparently don’t.

Or here’s one from 2009 about grants that should be closed out, but weren’t:

02-05-2009
Review of Administration for Children and Families Grant Closeout Procedures

Executive Summary

We found that the 9,877 Administration for Children and Families (ACF) grants identified by the HHS Division of Payment Management (DPM) as eligible for closeout as of September 30, 2006, which had unexpended balances totaling more than $472 million, remained open in the payment system for several reasons. DPM is responsible for closing grants after receiving instructions from ACF or the HHS Division of Financial Operations. ACF is responsible for initiating closeout of grants. As a general rule, grants must be closed within 180 days after the end of the grant period (the cutoff date). However, the grants remained open after the cutoff dates because of staffing shortages; differences among the grant award, expenditure, and drawdown amounts in the payment system; or a lack of grant closeout procedures. Also, ACF and the Division of Financial Operations lacked follow-up procedures to determine whether DPM had actually closed grants for which closeout was initiated.

We recommended that ACF use the information in this report to ensure that grants are closed in a timely manner and to eliminate the backlog of grants eligible for closeout. In comments on our draft report, ACF described actions that it had taken or planned to take to implement our recommendation

And here’s one of my “favorite” topics:

02-09-2009
Review of Undistributable Child Support Collections in Tennessee From October 1, 1998, Through December 31, 2007

Executive Summary

We found that from October 1998 through December 2007, Tennessee did not recognize and report as program income $8.7 million ($5.8 million Federal share) in undistributable child support collections that met the State’s definition of abandoned property. In addition, the State reported incorrect amounts for undistributed collections. Within the Administration for Children and Families, the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) oversees the Child Support Enforcement program. OCSE requires States to offset program costs by recognizing and reporting income from undistributable child support collections. Undistributable collections result when States receive child support payments but cannot identify or locate the custodial parents or return the funds to the noncustodial parents.

We recommended that the State report as program income undistributable child support collections totaling $8.7 million ($5.8 million Federal share), ensure future compliance with State laws regarding abandoned property, and correct reporting errors on the next quarterly Federal filing. The State said that it would implement our recommendations.

if you look at this, the detail adds: (sorry about the double-character resulting from copying from a ‘pdf’ file).

From October 1, 1998, through December 31, 2007, the State agency recognized and reported $907,012 in program income from undistributable child support collectiions.. However, the State agency did not recognize and report as program income $8,739,762 ($5,768,243 Federal share) in undistributable child support collections that met the Statte’s’sdeeffiinniittiioonnooffaabbaannddoonneeddpprrooppeerrtty.. In addition, the State agency reported incorrect amounts for undistributed collections on its quarterrlly report of collections (Form OCSE-34A) for December 31,2007.

TThe State agency did not recognize and report program income for undistributable child support collections primarily because it had not developed and implemented adequate policies and procedures to comply with State and Federal requirements for treatment of undistributable collections. TheSttatteagenccyy’s’sqquuaarrteterrlylyrreeppoorrttwaassnnoottaacccuurraatteebbeeccaauusseetthheeaaggeennccyyhaadnott (1) adjusted its recordkeeping and support documentation to account for ACF’s recent modifications to the Form OCSE-34A or (2) properly accounted for child support payments collected on behalf of children in the Statte’s’sFoosstteerrCaarreepprroogrraam..

Yes, Foster Care assignment is another way (along with prolonged custody litigation, often inappropriate) to bring federal monies to the states to support children in the system.

This type of “millions unaccounted for” sometimes relates to accounting procedures (or lack thereof), misunderstandings on how to allocate this, or that, or disagreements between States and Feds.  However, notice that the HHS reports were habitually “Limited Scope Review” and that there were no real teeth behind any results — just “recommendations.”  Moreover, the HHS tends to say the States are really responsible, it just oversees (though not yearly, not nationwide and not consistently.  It’s too BIG to oversee everything, anyhow!)  The states tend to kind of blame the changing federal policies.  What very FEW of the discussions even brought up — UNDISTRIBUTABLE CHILD SUPPORT means that child support didn’t reach those children, while it was sitting around earning interest for the states.  Also underplayed, how “unresolved cases” is an excuse not to distribute, hence ENCOURAGING high-conflict litigation profits the states and counties (whilc stealing from the children it’s supposed to help, and hurting both parent’s work lives as they have to incorporate constant litigation into their job schedules, if possible).

THEN — there are other kinds of simply direct embezzlement and fraud coming up at the bottom level — nonprofits that get some of these contracts — as people in charge or their books, or in some cases, the senior executive of the place — just flat-out lie, steal, and get away with it, robbing taxpayers in ever more creative ways.

As a result of some recent (TV, Newspaper) news about embezzlement situations, I found this site:

http://fraudtalk.blogspot.com/

This one was on TV, because of who got hit with the issue:

Former Democratic Operative & Campaign Treasurer Charged With Bank Fraud In Potential Multi-Million Dollar Embezzlement

Kinde L. Durkee, 58, of Burbank, California, was arrested last week and charged with federal bank fraud in connection with an alleged embezzlement of possibilly millions of dollars from a number of campaigns, including that of Senator Dianne Feinstein(D-CA).  According to Feinstein, her campaign coffers have been “wiped out,” to the tune of millions of dollars.  Durkee’s political consulting firm, Durkee & Associates has run afoul of campaign finance laws in the past.  In the current criminal case, Durkee reportedly had control over 400 bank accounts and appeared to be embezzling cash for personal use — and then shuffling funds around different accounts to cover her trail, according to a federal complaint.  Media reports state that The Los Angeles County Democratic Party says they lost $200,000, RepresentativeSusan Davis (D-San Diego) alleges losses of more than $250,000 and Representative Loretta Sanchez(D-Garden Grove) says Durkee “emptied her campaign fund.”  The FBI complaint against Durkee alleges that she embezzled more than $677,000 from the Solario for Assembly 2010 campaign and spent the money covering bounced employee payroll checks, paying for her mother’s care at an assisted living facility, and paying Costco and Virgin Air bills.Read the story herehereherehere and here.

On the site “fraudtalk” (or near it, anyhow, I found this) is an article I recommend reading — ALL of us:

Non-Profits At Risk For Fraud & Embezzlement With Some Practical Recommendations To Protect Your Organization

By Christopher T. Marquet July 11, 2011

All organizations are subject to fraud, waste and abuse. However, non-profits seem to be especially susceptible to internal fraud and theft. In fact, based upon our analysis of more than 1,000 major embezzlement cases in the US in the past three years as outlined in our annual Marquet Report on Embezzlement, non-profits, ranging from small charities to large non-profit institutions, together with religious organizations, are the third most frequently victimized industry sector (behind financial institutions and government entities, respectively).

While embezzlement occurs daily at all types of organizations, we have tracked a large number of significant misappropriations at non-profits. This is in spite of the fact that many cases involving non-profits go unreported and unprosecuted – which is part of the problem. The damage, while significant, is not only financial. Institutional reputation, donor relations, future growth and fundraising, can all be negatively affected by a major defalcation.

We believe that this risk facing non-profits is the result of both a weak financial control structure and a general high level trust factor within a given non-profits community. Nevertheless, while that trust is generally well founded, there are still going to be wayward birds in every flock. A colleague once told me that in every organization, at any given time, there is always someone who is up to no good.

That’s why controls and checks should be habitual and are so vital!
… many embezzlers’ schemes last for years before they are found out. In fact, they often begin in good economic times, when it is easier to hide their schemes from otherwise more vigilant management….Consider the following 26 major embezzlement cases around the US in the news over just the past six months involving non-profits, totaling more than $10 million in direct losses:

June 2011 – Valerie Tebbetts, 54, formerly of Dorchester, Massachusetts, was indicted on charges alleging she embezzled more than $126,000 from The Living Center, a local HIV/AIDS charity group for which she had served as the executive director. According to prosecutors, over a period of more than 2 years, from September 2008 to November 2010, Tebbetts issued numerous checks to pay for personal expenses, including her rent as well as made numerous cash withdrawals from the charity’s accounts. Tebbetts was indicted on three counts of larceny by embezzlement over $250 and false entries in corporate books. Her case is pending.

NOTICE that the nonprofits have all kinds of emotionally appealing names, helping distressed and impoverished or vulnerable people.  Otherwise, they wouldn’t be nonprofits.  Well, these situations attract wolves, also, not just nice shepherds!

May 2011 – Gayle J. Tatman, 59, of Grove City, Ohio, was sentenced to 2 years in prison for embezzling nearly $213,000 from the Grove City Food Pantry for which she had served as treasurer. According to authorities, Tatman siphoned the funds, amounting to half of the non- profit pantry’s cash, over a period of 7 years, from May 2002 until April 2009. Tatman’s scheme involved forgery of checks and at least four of the organization’s bank accounts, including one that was supposed to have been closed out years ago. Tatman pleaded guilty in a plea agreement in January 2011 to one count of bank fraud.

Stealing from a food pantry — how callous can a person get!??!  But how come no one was checking her work more carefully?

Here’s another (I’m skimming the site):

April 2011 – An unnamed female former bookkeeper for the Washington State Superior Court Judges’ Association is being investigated for embezzling as much as $400,000 from the non- profit group. According to reports, the bookkeeper was fired in April 2010 after an internal investigation revealed the misappropriation. The thefts allegedly spanned “several years.” The matter has been turned over to law enforcement officials for investigation and possible prosecution. Specific details about the case have yet to be released.

If this is your state, follow up, let us know what happened.  Notice, unnamed, “possible” prosecution.  Also note a JUDGES ASSOCIATION is a nonprofit.

Here’s one from Northern California:

March 2011 – Thomas Ray Martin, 47, of Concord, California, was charged with embezzling about $162,000 from the Discovery Counseling Center of the San Ramon Valley, a Bay Area non-profit mental health organization where he had served as director. According to authorities, Martin used a debit card linked to the checking account of the organization to pay for personal expenses and luxury items. His misappropriations allegedly spanned more than three years, from July 2007 until September 2010. The thefts were quantified after an audit was conducted following allegations of Martin’s misconduct and he was terminated last October. Martin has been charged with 4 felony counts of grand theft by embezzlement and has pleaded not guilty. His case is pending.

This case was news recently; he got a local super-attorney, pled no-contest, paid back $100K, and the articles indicate his record may be cleared, it was an “unfortunate mistake” (excuse me, 3 years of “mistakes”) and the reporting emphasized, after all, he’s a “family man” with wife and children.

This angered me (if he were a single mother, or a single man — would there have been a different reporting?) — and I did a little background research.

Turns out the business license is suspended (but thanks to California Secretary of State “Business Entities Search” database shortcomings, we don’t know when); the CHARITABLE REGISTRATION is current — but they almost lost the nonprofit status for failure to file for several years and completely blowing off warning notices from the OAG.   It also turns out that this officer was practically the only paid director, whose salary went from $68K to $87K in a few short years, AND that the nonprofit gets grants or contracts from both the county and the local school district, in a very prosperous area, Danville California (former home of PAS promoter Phil Stahl, Ph.D.).

And that the group profits (about $20K/year) from marketing a curriculum licensed out of Kentucky called “Creating Family Connections.”   Same old idea; get some nonprofits together, get grants, get curriculum that is electronics-based (and easy to reproduce it), get your foot in the door and market it nationwide.  The state of Kentucky courts page also markets the (in)famous “Kids First” which comes from a (front group?) nonprofit individual (or 2) in Pennsylvania.  I’m getting tired of this and will most likely be back to finish telling at least this one story — particularly as the newspaper attempted to put the positive spin on it.

I also wonder at their being so quick to forgive, forget (though they did fire) the guy.  Maybe no one wants further prying, which I will probably provide anyhow.

Oh yes, the Creating Family Connections curriculum (substance abuse prevention) had a fatherhood connection.  I’ll try & follow up on this one:

http://courts.ky.gov/circuitcourt/familycourt/

History of Family Court
Kentucky launched an innovative and ambitious project when Jefferson County began a Family Court pilot program in 1991. It was the first such court in the state to focus solely on the needs of families and children. Family Court introduced a unique solution that would allow one judge to provide continuity by hearing all of a family’s legal problems and issues.

The Family Court model expanded beyond Louisville to suburban and rural areas across the commonwealth. The project’s success prompted efforts to make Family Court a permanent part of the Kentucky Constitution. Kentucky voters gave Family Court a resounding victory in November 2002 when the amendment passed in all 120 counties with more than 75 percent of the vote.

Today Family Court serves 3.2 million citizens in 71 Kentucky counties. Kentucky Family Court is so progressive and successful that it is considered a national model.  (site is co. 2009)

Here’s a sampler of classes being sold on this site — it really caught my attention months ago:

Go to Kentucky.gov home page

  • Search TermsSearchthis siteJudicial Ethics OpinionsSupreme Court of Kentucky Rules and ProceduresKentucky.gov
Kentucky Court of Justice (Banner Imagery) - click to go to homepage. Kentucky Court of Justice (Banner Imagery) - click to go to homepage.

For the “Cooperative Training and Divorce” link, the class is described, and anyone wishing to “start one in your area” is referred to:

Active Parenting USA Headquarters:
1955 Vaughn Rd. NW, Suite 108
Kennesaw, GA 30144-7808

Because I’m just such an inveterate snoop, I know that this one connects with the Parenting Coordination people.






ACTIVE PARENTING PUBLISHERS, INC. J312304 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 6/24/1983
Rec

They are in the “training the trainers” business like many others:

Active Parenting Training Opportunities

(Families obviously being deaf, blind, dumb and clueless without expert help…..)

Active Parenting Publishers, Inc., was founded in 1980 by Dr. Michael H. Popkin, a former child and family therapist and Coordinator of Child and Family Services for Northside Community Mental Health Centers in Atlanta, Georgia.

“Popkin” is a popular name for incorporation in Georgia, which allows people to search on Officer / Registered Agent names.  TOo bad California Doesn’t — maybe that Discovery Center might’ve found a prior embezzling history on Mr. Martin and saved themselves a lot of grief, and money.    Unless people just start embezzling and cooking books when they hit about age 45-55ff, possibly because the prior work grind wasn’t profitable enough for the desired lifestyle?

POPKIN MICHAEL H ACTIVE PARENTING PUBLISHERS, INC.  that’s THIS one, created “1983” not 1980….at least as to registration with the secretary of state of Georgia.
POPKIN RENAE MAHIN, INC.
POPKIN, G M DAR CRAWF PLUMBING, INC.
POPKIN, HARRY G. ATLANTA CENTER FOR COUNSELING AND FAMILY EDUCATION, INC. (formed 1985)
POPKIN, MARK J MARK J. POPKIN, P.C.
POPKIN, MARK J. G. M. POPKIN, P.C.
  MARK J. POPKIN, P.C.
POPKIN, MICHAEL ATLANTA CENTER FOR COUNSELING AND FAMILY EDUCATION, INC.  (ditto)

2nd entity — existed 1985-1992, administratively dissolved:

ATLANTA CENTER FOR COUNSELING AND FAMILY EDUCATION, INC. Current Name

Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: J515615
Status: Automated Administrative dissolution/Revocation
Entity Creation Date: 10/9/1985
Dissolve Date: 1/9/1992
Jurisdiction: GA
Principal Office Address: x x x x x
ATLANTA GA 30342-3001

Registered Agent
Agent Name: GANZ CHARLES D
Office Address: x x x x
ATLANTA GA 30309
Agent County:

Officers
Title: CEO
Name: POPKIN, MICHAEL
Address: x x x x x
ATLANTA GA 30342

APP delivers quality education programs for parents, children and teachers to schools, hospitals, social services organizations, churches and the corporate market. The Active Parenting model is heavily based upon the theories of Alfred Adler and Rudolf Dreikurs (click here for more about Adlerian Psychology as it applies to Active Parenting).

The most popular program is Active Parenting Now, for parents of children ages five to twelve. Active Parenting Publishers is recognized as an innovator in the educational market and is committed to our mission of developing human potential through our programs.

APP operates out of Kennesaw, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta. Our products are distributed throughout the US as well as in Canada, Japan, Korea, Kuwait and Sweden.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS AND CONSULTANTS

Susan Boyan, M.Ed.
Susan Boyan, M.Ed., (Cooperative Parenting and Divorce) is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist. She has worked with children and families since 1971 and has been in private practice since 1984. Mrs. Boyan is a clinical member of the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. She is also a member and research chair for the Georgia Play Therapy Association. Some of her other organizations include: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Association of Fathers and Children, Step Family Association, Association of Christian Counselors, Southeast Psychomotor Society and the National Association for Children of Alcoholics. She consults extensively and presents numerous professional presentations to national, state and local audiences. Mrs. Boyan does expert witness testimony and has written articles on Parental Alienation. She is a former special education teacher and rehabilitation counselor. Mrs. Boyan divorced in 1979. In 1981 she married and has two daughters. She resides in Atlanta, Georgia, with her family.

From Georgia Sec of STate, “Boyan” — both are dissolved, one in 2008, the other reads, 8/27/11 (?)

SUSAN BOYAN BOYAN & BOYAN, INC.
 (same name) NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC.

Odd;  A divorcelawyers site from Gaithersburg MD (Note:  Maryland is original? home of the Children’s Rights Council/CRC) says this “National Parent Coordinators Association” was formed in 1999, and that the concept originated with psychologists from Colorado, and reiterates the concept that the real problem is always parents failure to communicate, which a professional, of course, must solve — and thus take authority over almost every critical area of an adult or child’s life:  Don’t miss reviewing this site and learning where YOUR TAX AND PRIVATE$$ ARE GOING TO BE HEADING NEXT!

 

My records from the Georgia SOS show it was incorporated (“formed”?) in 2002, not 1999.  and has since been dissolved

 

Search Type: Starting With Search Criteria: national parent coordinators
Search Date: 9/17/2011 Search Time: 15:14
Click on the Business Entity Name or Control No to view more information.
Records Found:1
Business Entity Name Control No Type Status Entity
Creation Date





NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC. 0207284 Non-Profit Corporation Admin. Dissolved 2/11/2002

It filed every other year, approximately (I DNK what the GA requirement is to file for corporations, but one might assume yearly?) and then dissolved.  Perhaps there is a different type of coordination to be considered “at risk” here — with the state!

 

Current Name: NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC.
Image  Date Document

Open the ImageOpen the Image

2/11/2002 New Filing
5/8/2003 Annual Registration
2/4/2005 Annual Registration
1/26/2006 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

5/16/2008 Administrative Dissolution

 

 

The goal of a Parent Coordinator is to help parents learn how to communicate more effectively and thus avoid the conflicts which cause them to return to court. When a Parent Coordinator can reduce the need for parents to return to court, the conflict for their children is also reduced.

The concept of parent coordination dates back to the early 1990’s. In 1994, two psychologists from a high conflict study group in Colorado, Carla Garrity and Mitchell A. Baris, published a book about parent coordination called Caught in the Middle: Protecting the Children of High Conflict Divorce. Since then, there have been other studies and publications lending credence to parent coordination.

{{THE ORGANIZATION — TX ORIGIN “CHILDREN IN THE MIDDLE” same theme comes to mind.  }}

As Parent Coordinators have gained success in dealing with high conflict families, more states have begun using them in addition to other services, such as mediation, parenting seminars, custody evaluators and guardians ad litem. The difference Parent Coordinators bring to families in conflict is that they are often appointed long-term to work on problems that reappear after the litigation and other services have ceased. Since Parent Coordinators are often trained mental health therapists, they can understand the underlying emotional and personality issues that contribute to conflicts and can use their training to help deal with these issues.

There is no uniformity among states as to when and how Parent Coordinators are used. In 1999, the National Parent Coordinator Association was formed and is currently seeking to develop standards of practice and ways to encourage collaboration among Parent Coordinators. For more information about the organization, go to www.cooperativeparenting.com.

“cooperativeparenting.com” IS the “Cooperative Parenting Institute” I am challenging someone to provide a home state for:  It IS Termini and Boyan:

Mission Statement

Susan Boyan and Ann Marie Termini are co-founders of the Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI). The CPI is an organization {what KIND — corporation, association, or what?} whose  (organizations are made of people, they are not people or a “who”) mission is to promote the healing and enhancement of family relationships.

The Institute offers a wide range of services and resources to assist families as well as professionals with a successful transition from a one to two home family. The professionals at CPI are dedicated to educating the public, judges, legal and mental health professionals on the effects of divorce and time-sharing arrangements on the development of children.

I have noticed the habit of, when websites define an organization, the systematic (though not universal) failure to mention whether it is a nonprofit or not, and if so, what state it is legally functioning in.  Some groups do, but when a group self-defines without corporate status, the FIRST step an onlooker, or person interested in evaluating it should verify is whether or not it exists LEGALLY as a business if it is actually doing any business.  If this can’t be looked up independently, one can contact the group and ask (and I’d cc that to the charitable trusts registry (if appropriate) AND secretary of state to wherever IT operates from, if not also the IRS) “are you a corporation, an LLC, an association and if you are a nonprofit, please send your EIN#.  As you are above-board and honest, I’m sure you won’t have a problem with this, right?  By next week, please. or email within 48 hours….

More from this site: (actually links to the Georgia site).

Susan Boyan L.M.F.T. is the co-founder and director of both Family Solutions Counseling Center(1) and the Cooperative Parenting Institute in Atlanta, Georgia. Practicing since 1982, Susan provides psychotherapy through Family Solutions and functions primarily as a child specialist, divorce coach, mediator and a parenting coordinator through the Cooperative Parenting Institute

(1) Search, just now :

http://corp.sos.state.ga.us/corp/soskb/SearchResults.asp?FormName=CorpNameSearch&Words=All&OnlyActive=ON&SearchStr=family+solutions+counseling+center&SearchType=Search

No Records were found for the search criteria ‘Family Solutions Counseling Center’ on 9/17/2011 2:47:50 PM

There are, however, 28 organizations with the words “family solutions” in them — just none by this name.  Perhaps the website claiming co-foundership should get the actual verbatim name  in place: I’m not going through all the founding documents on these to find which one Ms. Boyan started, but is no longer a registered agent or officer of.

Search Type: All words Search Criteria: family solutions
Search Date: 9/17/2011 Search Time: 14:52
Click on the Business Entity Name or Control No to view more information.
Records Found:28
Business Entity Name Control No Type Status Entity
Creation Date





ADVANCED FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC 08087028 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 11/19/2008
AMERICAN FAMILY HOME SOLUTIONS, LLC 10036163 Limited Liability Company Active/Noncompliance 5/17/2010
ATLANTIC FAMILY SOLUTIONS L.L.C. 09068013 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/28/2009
BESTWAY HOMECARE AND FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC 10055018 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 8/2/2010
CHILD AND FAMILY COUNSELING SOLUTIONS, LLC 0681702 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/14/2006
CITYSIDE FAMILY SOLUTIONS, INC. 11047243 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Owes Current Year AR 6/20/2011
COMPLETE MULTI-FAMILY SOLUTIONS, INC. 10080716 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 11/18/2010
CORPORATEFAMILY SOLUTIONS LLC 08070688 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/10/2008
FAMILY CARE SOLUTIONS HEALTH SERVICES TRAINING INSTITUTE, INCORPORATED 10066985 Professional Corporation Active/Compliance 9/23/2010
FAMILY CARE SOLUTIONS, INC. 06100235 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Noncompliance 11/14/2006
FAMILY CENTER FOR LIFESTYLE SOLUTIONS, INC. 0582944 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 12/9/2005
FAMILY CONCERNS & SOLUTIONS INC. 10071014 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 10/11/2010
FAMILY SOLUTIONS AND CONSULTATION SERVICES, LLC 0441284 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 7/7/2004
FAMILY SOLUTIONS COUNSELING, LLC 07020302 Limited Liability Company Active/Noncompliance 3/7/2007
FAMILY SOLUTIONS FOR ALTERNATIVE PASSIONATE CARE,LLC. (LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ) 10070303 Limited Liability Company Active/Noncompliance 10/7/2010
FAMILY TLC SOLUTIONS, LLC 10084570 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 12/7/2010
GEORGIA FAMILY CRISIS SOLUTIONS, INC. 0461102 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 10/12/2004
GEORGIA FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC. 07065373 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 7/13/2007
KMCA FAMILY & FUN SOLUTIONS, L.L.C. 11066287 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/1/2011
LATIN AMERICA FAMILY SOLUTIONS OF GEORGIA INCORPORATED 11011875 Profit Corporation Active/Noncompliance 2/14/2011
MOM’S FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC 11041125 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 5/17/2011
MULTI FAMILY FLOORING SOLUTIONS, LLC 10069936 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 10/6/2010
MULTIFAMILY SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 11044818 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 6/9/2011
MULTIFAMILY TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC. 0614132 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 2/27/2006
N’SPIRED BY ACHIEVEMENT FAMILY SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC. 08038877 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 3/31/2008
PIERCE FAMILY SOLUTIONS L.L.C 11003310 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 1/15/2011
POSITIVE SOLUTIONS FAMILY ENRICHMENT SERVICES, INC 0644115 Profit Corporation Active/Noncompliance 6/19/2006
PRN NURSING AND ALTERNATIVE LIVING FAMILY CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC 11005241 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 1/23/2011
Records Returned 1 of 28 total 28

Note:  The website showing “Cooperative Parenting Institute” of Georgia, with Ms. Boyan, lists a street address of 1936A North Druid Hills Rd, Atlanta.  Searching that address one finds (among other things) “Atlanta Psychotherapy Guild” and on a site copyrighted 2006, then “updated 2010”, alphabetical list of membership, the name Boyan does not appear; odd, if she is doing business at the same address, or taking mail for a business there.   It reads:

The Atlanta Psychotherapy Guild is an association of licensed psychotherapists of all disciplines including counselors, marriage and family therapists, psychiatric nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers.

http://www.psychotherapyguild.com/about.html

(2) Search, just now:

: http://corp.sos.state.ga.us/corp/soskb/SearchResults.asp?FormName=CorpNameSearch&Words=All&OnlyActive=ON&SearchStr=Cooperative+Parenting+Institute&SearchType=Search

No Records were found for the search criteria ‘Cooperative Parenting Institute’ on 9/17/2011 2:50:24 PM 

I will apologize in public on this blog if I am shown adequate corporation, nonprofit and it’d be nice also to see the professional qualifications too (at this point) for these two women, however, I would at that time note that a more straightforward approach might have been to stick with approximately ONE corporation, nonprofit EIN# if it’s nonprofit and state this on the site.  CRC does this..   However, I won’t expect too much of anyone wrapped up with the likes of the AFCC< given their corporation history, multi-state, and multi-metamorphoses as well.  It’s a family trait.

 

Back to the Maryland YourDivorceLawyers.com site:

Currently, approximately one-third of the states use Parent Coordinators. There are only four states with Parent Coordinator statutes: Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma and Oregon. Some states have used existing statutes which allow for “mediators” or “special masters” as a basis to appoint Parent Coordinators: Arizona, California, District of Columbia, Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts and New Mexico. Other states appoint Parent Coordinators absent statutory authority: Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas and Vermont.

NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC. Current Name

Non-Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: 0207284
Status: Admin. Dissolved
Entity Creation Date: 2/11/2002
Dissolve Date: 5/16/2008
Jurisdiction: GA

and (there are several, listed alphabetically):

Ann Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S.
Anne Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S. LPCAnn Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S., (Cooperative Parenting and Divorce) is a Licensed Professional Counselor. She has worked with children and families since 1979. Respected in her field, she has conducted seminars on the national, state, and local levels. She has experience developing programs that meet the specific needs of professionals working with children and their families. Mrs. Termini has also published material in professional journals focusing on the therapeutic needs of children. She is a former officer for the San Antonio Association for Marriage and Family Therapy and coordinator for special education services. She has been awarded Clinical Membership in the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Among her many professional activities, Mrs. Termini is a consultant for a family court in Pennsylvania and maintains a private practice. She resides in Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania, with her husband and two daughters.

They also run trainings for Cooperative Parenting, see my “APB” at the end of yesterday’s post.

read this material on the Kentucky Family Court website under “Cooperative Parenting”  Listen to the language.  I’m posting the link so as to show that the URL is indeed a “*.gov” site:   http://courts.ky.gov/stateprograms/divorceeducation/CPD.htm

The overall emphasis of Cooperative Parenting is to be able to offer children of divorce or unmarried couples a home environment free from being caught in the middle of their parents’ hostility and conflict. The goals of the Cooperative Parenting and Divorce “Group Format” are to:

  • Assist parents in shifting their role from former spouses to co-parents
  • Educate parents regarding the impact of parental conflict on their child’s development
  • Help parents identify their contribution to conflict while increasing impulse control
  • Teach parents anger management, communication, and conflict-resolution skills
  • Educate parents about children’s issues in divorce

Family relationships do not disappear when a marriage ends in separation or divorceFor the sake of their children, divorcing parents or unmarried parents should continue to communicate with each other in all matters of child rearing and wellbeing.**  A child’s adjustment to divorce is determined in part by how well divorcing parents share the joint responsibility of raising their children in a cooperative atmosphere.  Unrelenting parental conflict is the single most common cause of poor adjustment in children following a divorce. ***

This paragraph and statements are so broad, vague, and so do NOT apply to real life situations, real family court practices (which includes creating a “sole custody zero contact” custody order for parents who may disagree with the above philosophy for very good reasons — for example, one parent is abusing the children physically, sexually, or has threatened to kill or abduct them, BOTH of which situations continue to happen in the family law process — it’s so ridiculous a statement if taken as fact (and it is STATED as unequivocal fact, without qualification) — as to constitute a religious belief, and a ridiculous one, at that.

***If this is indeed a court of law, than adjusting children is NOT its business.  Of course, by now we should know clearly that though these courts do have laws, deal with laws (and they even have rules and procedures), in driving essence (besides the financial) they are courts of “psychology & counseling,” whether or not it’s called for.  The statement that anything (let alone the AFCC themesong, it’s one constant claim decade after decade, that anything “high-conflict” is bad  . . . . and we live in a country that participates in wars!) is a single cause of “poor adjustment” (adjustment to WHAT?  Being abused, robbed of their child support, having their lives in constant turmoil to satisfy the Federal/State child support enforcement check book balances?)

(sorry about that, but I did notice that Kentucky indeed has gone overboard in promoting parent education and every other kind of education — but when one looks closely, they are typically marketing for some out of state for-profit organization with an AFCC connection and some sort of government grants & contracts, usually, also)

Speaking of which — notice that this Marquette International said that nonprofits were NOT the main source of embezzlement and fraud problems — financial institutions and governments exceeded them in that aspect!

Meanwhile, please do stop by and read more from the Marquette International 2011 copyright description of how nonprofits can avoid this situation.  What I am more interested in ,however, is how citizens can detect (there are signals) when this behavior is habitual, and stop having taxes they pay for social services — or because not paying them could result in a jail term — which are then funneled to programs that steal, or with employees in them who steal.  Perhaps it’s time we re-examine the policy of creating a multi-tiered hierarchy through the US Income Tax, and allowing anyone with an idea and a penchant for forming a corporation (nonprofit of course) to have privileges in their particular desire to reform the world (or certain parts of it) into their own personal images — and not doing it from a level playing field.

This then creates classes of people who do this, and a H U G E superstructure to enable, pay for, support, track, — and fail to adequately supervise, the whole mess.

Consider from Marquette International, Ltd. (British?)

Our research into this topic reveals that the most common types of embezzlement involve the following types of schemes, in order of frequency:

 Forging checks payable to cash, oneself and/or to personal vendors  Pocketing cash receipts meant for deposit into institutional accounts  Issuing extra paychecks and/or bonus checks through payroll to oneself  Submitting fraudulent expense reports for reimbursement  Submitting fraudulent invoices from phony or legitimate vendors  Abusing institutional credit card accounts for personal use  Electronic transfers of institutional funds to personal accounts and/or vendors  Pilfering institutional equipment and/or inventory

Clearly the most common risk to non-profits primarily involve fraudulent or forged check writing schemes as the cases above demonstrate.

. . .  and:

Bank reconciliations should be made by a different person than those that handle cash receipts and cash disbursements.

Know who your institution’s vendors are. As we can see from the above examples, embezzlers often create phony vendors and submit fraudulent invoices for payment.

Examine payroll records regularly. Some embezzlers issue themselves extra paychecks and bonuses through the payroll system, as we have also seen

As a general citizen, we can’t always see payroll records (UNLESS it’s a public entity or paid from one, then we can see payment records through comptroller’s sites, or request, do an FOIA letter) — but we can be on the lookout for “phony vendors” and corporations.  Although it’s not illegal to simply fail — or change one’s mind – – in a business, that happens — a constant rotation of business names by certain individuals, following name themes set by associations they belong to, and a high percentage of these continuing to lose their licenses for failures to file, or never bother to register AT ALL for a nonprofit status, while claiming it — is indication of a racket, and potential racketeering, i.e., RICO.

No wonder there is an ongoing economic crisis.  If we have given up the concept of (or desire, or even hope of) actually tracking what happens to our own wages after they  leave our own pockets and run off to the IRS, then we have lost sight of whose country we are living in.  The HHS and GAO cannot do it all; and what they DO get around to, does not have teeth anyhow.  It’s more concerned with retrieving federal funds (after all, those are federal agencies).

 

 

 

 


An Abundance of Profitable-to-Practitioners Family Law Terms, collated…

leave a comment »

Preparatory to writing up an informal post:

Court Litigants Toolkit:  Secretary of States Business Entity Search, Charitable Registry Search, Comptrollers, Assessors &amp; Nationwide Clues to “Whassup” in your area.

(Disclaimer:  I’m an amateur and this is not practicing law; it’s practicing Lookups, or more specifically, “Look-ats.”)

I’m more of a traffic signal person when there have been accidents on the road, which I think we have to acknowledge in the family law system, there are.  At least from the perspective of the families who lost members they are; from the perspective of “the system” they were justifiable attribution, I guess — because there has hardly been a major redirection since the whole train started, in the mid 1900s.

If you want professional advice, get a professional:  one for each problem you have, i.e., lawyer, a private or retired judge (who’s likely also now a:)  a mediator, or a reputable psychologist, if that’s not an oxymoron.  By then you should also need a financial expert.   Someone has anticipated your needs, because all 3 (excluding the judges) in one place in your local collaborative law group, and be assured when it comes to YOUR best interests, they will function as independent and self-regulating individuals because that’s what professionals in any field do (right?).

Take my advice at your own risk; I’m doing this for my impression of a civic duty, and in retaliation for having been scammed in the family law system for years because I trusted the local professionals to tell me the relevant truths for our family moreso than for their continued operations, which wasn’t thinking like a businessperson, obviously.

COMMON TERMS:  COLLABORATIVE LAW:

  1. IACP: Collaborative law,collaborative practice,collaborative divorce.

    www.collaborativepractice.com/ – Cached

    The International Academy of Collaborative Professionals provides a collaborative law alternative to the typical divorce experience. Locate a collaborative 

  2. Collaborative Practice Groups Around the World

    www.collaborativepractice.com/_t.asp?M=7&T=PracticeGroups – Cached

    iacp,collaborative law,collaborative practice,collaborative divorce 

  3. Collaborative practice – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborative_practice – Cached

    Overview and History. Collaborative Family Law (also called Collaborative Practice, Collaborative Divorce, and Collaborative Law) was originally a family law 

  4. Collaborative Practice California

Collaborative Practice is a new way to resolve conflicts in a respectful and mutually agreed upon process. Rather than turning the decision-making power over to 

Or, “ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:

  1. Alternative dispute resolution – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_dispute_resolution – Cached

    Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) (also known as external dispute resolution in some countries, such as Australia) includes dispute resolution processes and 

  2. RSI – Resolution Systems Institute (formerly CAADRS)

    Sep 8, 2011 – The premier provider of resources and services in court alternative dispute resolution, Resolution Systems Institute maintains an online Court 

    You’ve visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 7/7/11
  3. Alternative Dispute Resolution Law – Guide to Alternative Dispute 

    Guide to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Arbitrators and mediators have an important role in resolving disputes.

  4. AAA – Arbitration, Mediation and other forms of Alternative Dispute 

    www.adr.org/ – Cached

    Find all the ADR information you need at aaauonline.org ». aaauonline.  More. Muscular Arbitration Conference Dispute Resolution Conference, Dallas, Texas 

  5. Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR“) processes are alternative methods of helping people resolve legal problems before going to court. ADR involves an 

Jan 8, 2010 – The NYS Unified Court System is committed to promoting the appropriate use of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution 

OR, PARENTING COORDINATION


  1. Parenting Coordination Central – The Premier Resource on 

    www.parentingcoordinationcentral.com/ – Cached

    The Premier Resource on Parenting Coordination. What is parenting coordination? how did it begin? how is it different from other services ordered by the court?

    You’ve visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 8/21/11

  2. Cooperative Parenting Institute | Home

    http://www.cooperativeparenting.com/ – Cached

    Parenting Coordination Training. Click Here to register for the first and only comprehensiveparenting coordination training program! 

    You’ve visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 8/21/11
  3. Cooperative Parenting Institute | Parenting Coordination Training

    http://www.cooperativeparenting.com/pctraining.html – Cached

    The Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI) is an internationally recognized 

  4. PARENTING COORDINATION: a bad idea

    http://www.thelizlibrary.org/parentingcoordination/parentingcoordinatio – Cached

    parenting coordinatorparenting coordination, domestic violence, risk assessment, child custody research and studies, child custody evaluations, joint custody.

  5. Matthew Sullivan, PhD (Clinical Psychologist): Parent Coordination 

    http://www.californiaparentingcoordinator.com/ – Cached

    He is a pioneer in the field of Parenting Coordination, which he helped develop in Santa Clara County more than 15 years ago, and has led the development of 

  6. [PDF]

    Guidelines for Parenting Coordination Developed by The AFCC 

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    The Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (“Guidelines”) are the product of the  standards of practice for parenting coordination for North America and named 

  7. Parenting coordinator – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenting_coordinator – Cached

    Parenting coordinator (PC) is a relatively new practice that is used, in some US states, to manage on-going issues in child custody and visitation cases by 

  8. Parenting coordination basics

    Most jurisdictions have no laws or regulations that outline a parent coordinator’s role, so their use and ethical obligations often vary, say experts. Even the names 

or, PROBLEM-SOLVING COURTS:

  1. ProblemSolving Justice | Center for Court Innovation

    www.courtinnovation.org/topic/problemsolving-justice – Cached

    Thousands of problemsolving courts are testing new approaches to difficult cases where social, human and legal problems intersect. In recent years, many in 

  2. ProblemSolving Courts

    Problemsolving court strategies include extended probation, frequent appearances before a judge, frequent meetings with probation officers, staggered 

  3. Problem  – Office of Justice Programs – U.S. Department of Justice

    Problemsolving courts began in the 1990s to accommodate offenders with Problemsolving courts seek to promote outcomes that will benefit not only the 

  4. Problem Solving Courts

    http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/problem_solving/ – Cached

    Welcome to the ProblemSolving Courts website. With the third largest population in the nation, the New York State Unified Court System serves the needs of 

  5. [PDF]

    Challenges and Solutions to Implementing Problem Solving Courts 

    http://www.sji.gov/PDF/Problem_Solving_Courts-BJA3-31-08.pdf

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    ecent years have seen the exponential growth of “problem solving courts,” also  concept of problem solving courts also has expanded to address societal 

  6. Problem Solving Courts – Home

    Problem solving courts represent a shift in the way the justice system traditionally handles offenders with issues involving substance abuse, mental health or 

  7. Indiana Problem Solving Courts

    This page contains information pertaining to the drug courts of Indiana.

  8. In ProblemSolving Court – New York Times

    Apr 26, 2005 – New York is creating new courts where judges are cheerleaders and social workers as much as jurists.

  9. NCSC: Research: ProblemSolving Courts Resource Center

    Dec 7, 2007 – tracked the growth of problemsolving courts; studied the theoretical foundation on which problemsolving courts are based; provided technical 


    ProblemSolving Courts Task Force Page

    Sep 29, 2009 – NACDL’s Task Force on Problem Solving Courts  To fully understand the ramifications of Problem Solving Courts, the Task Force conducted 7 


And of course, the UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS in which problems are solved:

  1. Family Courts – Court Programs

    http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/familycourts.shtml – Cached

    Unified Family Court is a fully integrated, comprehensive approach to handling all cases involving children and families, while at the same time resolving family 

  2. [PDF]

    Unified Family Court Brochure – Florida State Courts

    http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/bin/ufcbrochure.pdf

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    UnifiedFamily Court . . . Families don’t think of their problems in terms 

  3. Unified Family Court

    http://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/familycourt/ufc.aspx – Cached

    Sep 1, 2011 – Search Terms: Family Court. Family Court Department of the King County Superior Court. You’re in: Family Court » Unified Family Court. Share 

  4. [PDF]

    An Evaluation of Unified Family Court Pilot Sites in Washington State

    www.courts.wa.gov/newsinfo/content/pdf/UFCFinalReport.pdf

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
    In brief, the evaluation found several benefits from Unified Family Court Unified Family Court is an important tool in improving Washington’s response to 

  5. Unified Family Court

    sfsuperiorcourt.org/index.aspx?page=195 – Cached

    Jun 3, 2011 – Unified Family Court. larger font size; smaller font size; font size; text only; text. Patrick J. Mahoney, Supervising Judge 400 McAllister Street 

  6. Unified Family Court – Clerk & Comptroller, Palm Beach County

    Unified Family Court information from the Clerk & Comptroller, Palm Beach County.

  7. Thurston County Family & Juvenile Court

    Unified Family Court Project to Better Serve Families and Children. Thurston County was the first county in Washington State to co-locate all family and 

  8. The Unified Family Court – National Center for Preventive Law

    It is my view that by thinking about and sharpening these concepts, then applying them to aunified family court system, we will help save lives, reduce injury, and 

  9. University of Baltimore School of Law » Unified Family Courts

    law.ubalt.edu › … › CFCC and Unified Family Courts – Cached

    The Unified Family Courts, part of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts website.

  10. [PDF]

    Unified Family Court Evaluation Literature Review

    www.courts.ca.gov/documents/ufclitreview.pdf

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    by A Hirst – 2002 – Related articles
    A. General Goals of Unified or Coordinated Family Court Programs .  B. Indicators/measurements used in other unified family court program evaluations that 

  11. News for unified family courts


FAMILY JUSTICE CENTERS:

 All these concepts keep the court business booming.  Accordingly, like churches in San Leandro, California — they can hardly be expected to operate in all different kinds of, old, buildings within a geographic area, which brings us to the topic of the real estate boom in courthouse construction and/or leasing.  Who’s paying for it?  While the USPO is laying off workers, and potentially (recent news), the Department of Defense, also, needs to cut $500 billion from its budget, which could send unemployment up by a full percentage point?

COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION FUNDS:

Now that the state has already taken over the distribution of child support, or rather, the states have, it’s time for California (largest court system around) to take over the courthouse buildings also:

Fees Fund Courthouse Construction Program

By Paul Shigley on 5 January 2009 – 11:31am

Although gigantic state budget deficits are threatening to stall thousands of public works projects in California, one major effort appears to remain on track: Courthouse construction. The $5 billion program for replacing, rehabilitating or expanding 41 courthouses has its own funding source in the form of civil filing fees and criminal penalties.

Four projects – new courthouses in Los Angeles County, Chico, Red Bluff and Woodland – have been approved and authorized, and eight others have been approved by the state Judicial Council and await final Department of Finance authorization.

“California’s courthouses are in a spiraling state of crisis,” the state Judicial Council reported last year. “Many buildings which house California courts are in a critical state of disrepair and antiquated design. Inadequate security has created dangerous conditions that place children, jurors, witnesses, litigants, visitors and court employees at risk.”

Legislation approved last year (SB 1407, Perata) authorized the issuance of $5 billion in lease-revenue bonds to be retired by new civil and criminal fees. The legislation increased numerous civil filing fees by $20 to $25, raised fees for motor vehicle license, registration or mechanical violations by $15, boosted traffic violator school fees $25, and imposed an assessment of $30 on each felony or misdemeanor conviction, and $35 on each infraction, including traffic offenses.

Like Jack Welch (see “courthousenews.com”) was saying, in filing a class action on this supreme conflict of interest:  “CONVICTIONS = COURTHOUSES.”

The construction program is a follow-up to the ongoing transfer of court facilities from counties to the state government. State lawmakers authorized the transfer in 2002, and court officials have been inspecting, reviewing and ranking the facilities for repair or replacement ever since, said Philip Carrizosa, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the Courts.

“The counties are more than glad to get this off their budgets. As the counties had gotten more strapped financially, they had pretty much stopped taking care of the courthouses,” Carrizosa said.

Although the state has taken possession of many of the 451 court facilities, it continues to negotiate with counties over some seismically questionable buildings. Essentially, the state is requiring the counties to accept liability should a future earthquake damage these facilities, Carrizosa explained. The state’s negotiating position has eased, as several years ago it insisted counties bring facilities up to seismic safety standards before the state would accept the properties.

Remember that decades ago, the term was “CONCILIATION.”

“CONCILIATION got the courts JURISDICTION” and from then it was a matter of chutes and ladders game, basically:

Cindy Ross (California) summarized this beautifully many years ago, referring to the Washington DC-area “NAFCJ.net,” on how this works:

2/19/2003, Newsmakingnews:

Enacting Conciliation Court Law gives the family court jurisdiction over domestic violence cases, in violation of appropriate family codes and “child’s best interests” laws. For example, in California, while Family Code §3044 establishes a presumption that sole or joint custody for a parent convicted of domestic violence is not in the best interests of children,  Conciliation Court codes are used not only to assist abusive men get custody, but to help them avoid criminal prosecution. [16] Because blame is shifted to mothers by concealing evidence of paternal crimes against women and children, in the Conciliation Court, victims of abuse (not perpetrators) get convicted in accordance with PAS “threat therapy”. [17]

PAS court-ordered threats include jail terms for mothers and institutionalization of children to convince them that the abuse never occurred, but their mothers are crazy. [18] PAS threats have been linked to the death of at least one child. When forced to “choose” between visiting his violent father in a positive frame of mind, or having his mother jailed for his refusal, Nathan Grieco chose suicide instead. [19]

The Conciliation Court uses PAS methodology to give abusive men the legal upper hand. However, “shared parenting” has become the rallying cry of the fathers’ rights movement, primarily because joint custody also means no child support obligations. When AFCC affiliates assist fathers get custody and get out of paying child support, they instigate frivolous litigation for their own financial gain. They take kickbacks and other improper payments to rig the outcomes of the cases.

Judicial slush funds, such as the “hearts and flowers” fund exposed in Los Angeles Superior Court, are established using fees charged for child custody “training” seminars. [20] Because Conciliation Court codes specify how funding is dispersed to the court itself, huge sums of money are diverted out of federal and state block grants by AFCC affiliates, in the guise of “amicable settlement of domestic and family controversies”. [15] (See Codes 1800-1852).

The National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) was founded in 1994, to “lead a society-wide movement to confront the problem of father absence”, i.e., to embed the fathers’ rights agenda into government policies and programs. [21] In 1995, former President Clinton issued executive orders that directed federal agencies to review and “modify” all family programs and initiatives serving primarily mothers and children, to include fathers and “strengthen their involvement” with children. [22]

President George W. Bush, has appointed NFI founding officials to high level positions in the present Administration; Wade Horn is Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services and Don Eberly is in the White House Office of  Faith Based Initiatives. Under the control of these and other fathers’ rights allies — especially former OCSE Commissioner David Gray Ross (a frequent presenter for CRC) — the federal Department of Health and Human Services Office of Child Support Enforcement has been turned into a men’s custody agency. While publicly touted as “responsible fatherhood programs” official federal documents say the purpose of their programs is to provide noncustodial fathers with free attorneys to litigate for custody. [4]

AFCC affiliated experts who have established federal “model custody” programs using PAS methodology, include Joan Kelly, a founding official of CRC, and Judith Wallerstein of the Center for the Family in Transition. Richard Gardner originally based his PAS theory on Wallerstein’s and Kelly’s research. [23]

Joan Kelly sets up family court services programs and trains judges and “special masters” (mediators with quasi-judicial authority), using Access to Visitation grant funding. She is also connected — primarily through CRC — to Michael Lamb, of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Kelly and Lamb promote materials developed by Richard Gardner (and other pedophiliac experts), in conferences and seminars regarding “parenting time” and “alienation”. [8]

Judith Wallerstein, is an advisor to NFI. According to CA NOW’s “Family Court Report 2002”, in 1986, Wallerstein provided testimony — along with David Levy of CRC — to the House committee on Children, Youth and Families. regarding the “problems of single female parent families”. [24]

Members of Wallerstein’s Center for the Family in Transition and Kelly’s  Northern CA Mediation Center, have “reformulated” PAS as “alienated children”, possibly to distance themselves from Richard Gardner. However, in addition to being connected to some of the most egregious local (Marin County, CA) PAS cases, as the “Northern CA Task Force on the Alienated Child”, their group promotes PAS custody switching methods and “threat therapy” at AFCC conferences around the country and the world. [25]

Wallerstein, Horn, Eberly and others connected to NFI, CRC and AFCC have expanded the Conciliation Court agenda to include not only divorce prevention, but marriage promotion. By merging conciliation court and fathers’ rights agendas with a “faith based” marriage “movement”, they call for even more federal programs promoting “two-parent” families, through “marriage initiatives” funded by TANF/Welfare grants. [26]

In the guise of reducing poverty and promoting child welfare, women are forced to stay married and mothers are punished for seeking divorces. In the guise of amicable custody resolution, federal programs enforce the systematic abuse of women and children. The pretense is that government programs produce responsible fathers and healthy families. The reality is that federally funded misogyny and pedophile protection programs are lining the pockets of corrupted court officials and appointees.

For further information, visit the website of the National Alliance for  Family Court Justice at http://nafcj.org/#_Favorite_Links”>nafcj.org/.

There are other factors, of course, but I don’t believe you could get a much more concise summary almost anywhere.  For a summary of the costs of this program, see FY 2012 budget, HHS/ACF/OCSE (etc.)

These truths haven’t basically changed, and because the people reporting them didn’t have multiple new terms to market, like the latest thing on the scene (BootCamp for New Dads, “neofathering” or “Parents Inside Out” cognitive restructuring programs, etc. . . . . ) it was primarily ignored, including by desperate mothers who listened instead to anyone who would report on their trauma.  The thing to report on, however, is what’s causing that trauma.  Which is systems — not personalities!  (except perhaps for those who designed it to start with, for which if you can grasp “Narcissism” that’s the basic concept.   Already at the top of the society in many ways (Wade Horn, HHS, etc.) why not fix or adjust it a little more?  Status quo is boring, right?)

Now I’m going to start another post, possibly more helpful.

By the way, anyone who can locate the PARENTING COORDINATION CENTRAL’s most current state of incorporation (if any) and whether it’s “nonprofit” — consider this an APB.  I haven’t found it in the states they appear to be doing business in:  Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Illinois (Chicago).  Perhaps there’s a registered tradename I’m missing somewhere, but last I looked the Parent Coordination Institute (or whatever it was called) with Ms. Termini and Ms/Mrs. Boyan, got shut down as a corporation.

 

Parenting Coordination Central

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.parentingcoordinationcentral.com/

Parenting Coordination Central is an all inclusive site offering valuable up-to-date information to parents and professionals on parenting coordination.  It is a central location designed for professionals to share their experiences and expertise.  The goal is to increase awareness and provide educational material on the process of parenting coordination. 

More than one million children each year are affected by divorce and family separation. Half of these children will be raised in families where parents remain in conflict. Many of these parents engage in ongoing litigation over their children for years.** Children raised in an atmosphere of unrelenting conflict are four to five times as likely to grow-up with serious emotional and behavioral difficulties. Not only are high-conflict cases damaging to innocent children, they require an inordinate amount of court time and mental health services.** Consequently, high-conflict divorces pose grave concerns for mental health and legal professionals. In order to minimize the adverse effects of divorce on children and families, many parents are encour-aged or court ordered to work with a parenting coordinator.

 

**Notice the professional is unable to distinguish whether one side in the litigation is consistently filing actions; they are lumped together, although in ANY court proceeding, someone filed a complaint (or an OSC) and someone has to respond to it.  Also note:  the concept that a biological parent might actually be acting in the best interest of the child is not even considered.  The concept that court orders or penal codes have been violated, and another parent wishes to address this is also “off the table.”  The class divide here is basically “Bad parents / Good professionals,” and something around the level of elementary school paradigm, adapted for an adult culture.    That’s clear displacement of blame through vagueness.

**’require an inordinate amount of court time and mental health services.”  — this ongoing conflict justifies the need for mental health services, and contributes to the crisis at times requiring them.   By switching custody to an unsafe parent, of course there is going to be more litigation!

Parenting Coordination is a non-confidential, child centered process for conflicted divorced and divorcing parents. It is a form of dispute resolution for parents in which mediation would be inappropriate or ineffective due to high levels of conflict. “

I did a 4-part series on who is pushing parenting coordination (i.e., AFCC professionals), and published parts of its handbook, which is hostile to mothers and a roadmap to how to “justify” getting kids away from the moms.   Calling it child-centered is a misnomer — it’s professional-centered.  Calling it NON-CONFIDENTIAl is true, and that’s another drawback, and reduction of appropriate due process for these life-changing situations.

 

But the best indicator I have is for how few years people can keep their own corporations legally registered.  These people are charging for their trainings.  So what state are they registered in, and if as a nonprofit, where are the last several 990s?  I’d like to see if the income has been reported honestly.

 

ALSO NOTE:  The pairing of a nonprofit with a for-profit in government networking circles (plus being an advanced degree psychologist or judge) is GRRReat for income.  Also good for the profession — form multiple nonprofits, similar but identical (make sure to have SLIGHTLY different personnel on the boards of the directors, to keep people like myself on their toes) and cite them as if they were independent professionals who suddently decided do to do business with you on the basis of merits of the program, lending it more credibility.

For example:  Ohio Network of Practitioners for Fathers and Families, Center for Families and Children, and  “Community Endeavors Foundation” (formerly, at least for part of its history, Killpack Foundation”) basically consisting of some college classmates who had some brilliant ideas and at least some of who also had some government (Fatherhood Commission of Ohio) connections.

(those names are approximate, see the post for more detailed accuracy on ONPFF, CFC and etc.)

By the time we have tracked down corporations for one of these, there will be more.  However, I hope to gain some momentum on the fields of practice enabled by the access/visitation funding, including “Compromise of Arrears” after raising it too high, or setting it too low, to start with.  The whole OCSE seriously needs some light to be shined on its operations.  Perhaps I will contact California Protective Parents Association, as shining the light on problems is their “thing,” after which I think the appeal to the higher nature of whatever (crooks) have been in the neighborhood will be abashed and reform themselves under the clear light of a judgmental public, and someone else will fix the problem.  Like, for example, “Center for Judicial Excellence” with all its wonderful contacts (the OVW?, Dr. Phil, Oprah, California legislator Mark Leno, etc.)

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 16, 2011 at 9:01 am

Right to Work (states) and “Creating Jobs:” HR 2587: Talk about asking the wrong questions!

with 2 comments

 

I don’t sleep much, or well, most of the time.  This morning I woke to a televised discussion of House Bill H.R. 2587, which made (portions I heard) zero progress between “Union Protects American Workers”  and “Unions Are Destroying American Workforce and companies will outsource to overseas.  I saw three women, total, speak — one from Connecticut (anti-HR 2587), one from Tennessee (the cosponsor of HR 2587) and one from the U.S. Virgin Islands, who, referring to her pastor, said “have compassion” (presumably anti-HR 2587).

 

Here’s a map of “RIGHT TO WORK STATES” for a visual from a partisan site — notice the distribution of the colors:

 

http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

 

 

 

 

 

(Note:  My putting this first doesn’t indicate favoring it; i just figure some readers may not know what the term means.  I’ve been involved with other things, and didn’t!)

 

 

Sorry, but I couldn’t help noticing the ones adamant against interfering with the business tended to be from southern states which earlier, protested interfering with slavery to the point of seceding from the U.S.   Mostly west, a solid vertical stripo from TEXAS -OK_KS_NE_SD_ND (Michael Hayes of Texas OAG could drive straight north, turn right at the border to Minnesota for the National Fatherhood Summit, and not hit a unionized state before MN).  Colorado & NM are unionized, and we unionized states also have the west coast covered, plus Alaska and Hawaii.  There you have it (and the northeast).

 

AFL-CIO on “RIGHT TO WORK FOR LESS:”

AFL-CIO Logo

 

Right to work laws lower wages for everyone. The average worker in a right to work state makes about $5,333 a year less than workers in other states ($35,500 compared with $30,167).[1] Weekly wages are $72 greater in free-bargaining states than in right to work states ($621 versus $549).[2] Working families in states without right to work laws have higher wages and benefit from healthier tax bases that improve their quality of life.

Federal law already protects workers who don’t want to join a union to get or keep their jobs. Supporters claim right to work laws protect employees from being forced to join unions. Don’t be fooled—federal law already does this, as well as protecting nonmembers from paying for union activities that violate their religious or political beliefs. This individual freedom argument is a sham.

 

And here’s a (pro-“Right to Work”) SF Examiner EDITORIAL from last May,  summarizing.  I figure there are other parents who, like me, have been in family court survival mode for so many years, they perhaps missed this one:

 

By: Examiner Editorial | 05/18/11 9:00 PM

“Danaher’s closing,” said Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., lamenting the loss of a plant that had employed 330 people in his state. “Now those jobs are going to Arkansas and to Texas.”

It was April 2005. Neal was taking the opportunity during a House committee hearing on competition with China to complain instead about how Massachusetts was losing jobs to states with less-hostile business climates.

The Ways and Means Committee chairman in 2005, California Republican Bill Thomas, mildly rebuked Neal’s deviation from the topic, saying Massachusetts had shot itself in the foot with high taxes and compulsory union membership.

(the key word, there, being “republican” in connection with Ways and Means Committee….)

“At some point perhaps the good citizens of Massachusetts will pick up the drift,” Thomas said.

Businesses often consider government interference when they make decisions about where to locate. One instance of such interference is the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, which established a regimen of special treatment for labor during an era when nearly one in three employees were union members.

Today, unions have lost relevance for more than 93 percent of American workers in the private sector, but this law remains with us, harming the ability of American businesses to compete. To see its results, we need only look south and west, to the success of our nation’s 22 right-to-work states.

Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 allows states to pass right-to-work laws, which bar union membership from being used as a condition of employment. In practice, these laws make unions significantly less powerful and less disruptive than did the original NLRA rules, and with tremendously positive economic results for everybody concerned.

A recent study by the staff of Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., pointed to some revealing data. Between 1993 and 2009, right-to-work states created jobs twice as quickly as states where forced unionism is permitted, and they enjoyed 10 percent faster growth in personal income (FOR WHOM??). Right-to-work states account for only 40 percent of the U.S. population, but they hosted 60 percent of the nation’s new businesses from 1993 to 2009.

Such data contrasts mightily with facts such as this: Unions spent $400 million to elect President Barack Obama and Democrats in 2008 largely because of promises to use the federal government to restore labor to its former strength. The centerpiece of that effort was card check, which would have abolished secret ballots in workplace-representation elections if it hadn’t failed in Congress.

So now the Obama campaign to rescue dying unions is focused on the National Labor Relations Board. The NLRB, controlled by Obama appointees, has filed a complaint against Boeing for expanding its manufacturing operations into DeMint’s right-to-work state. Obama is only trying to help his union campaign donors — as usual — but this effort is bound to backfire.

Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2011/05/right-work-states-doing-good-country#ixzz1Y4Lfsqwk

 

 

PRO-HR 2587:

The “Unions are Bad” POV from “www.biglaborbailout.com”

Congress to Vote on Landmark Job Protection Bill

Today, the House of Representatives will vote on legislation that could end the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) assault on right-to-work states. H.R. 2587, the Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act, would prevent the NLRB from ordering a business to close or transfer work. Every Member of Congress interested in workforce fairness needs to support this legislation!

Rep. Tim Scott of South Carolina introduced H.R. 2587 in response to the NLRB filing a complaint against Boeing for locating an assembly factory in right-to-work South Carolina. If the NLRB’s complaint is successful, Boeing would be forced to shut down its South Carolina plant and relocate work to its unionized facility in Washington State. That move would cost 1,000 much-needed jobs in South Carolina.

This unprecedented action by the NLRB is a threat not only to Boeing’s workers in South Carolina, but to every right-to-work state in America. The precedent it would set would encourage government interference in private business and discourage businesses from expanding and hiring in right-to-work states. It would stifle job creation at a time when the unemployment numbers are some of the worst our country has seen in the past century.

ANTI-HR 2587:

House Republicans Put Boeing Over Workers’ Rights in Bill to Cripple NLRB

by Mike Hall, Jul 21, 2011

Republicans on the Education and Workforce Committee today rammed through a bill (H.R. 2587) that would cripple the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) ability to protect workers from management retaliation for exercising their rights. The bill was passed on a 23-16 party-line vote.

The Republican bill, which ranking minority member Rep. George Miller (D) dubbed the “Eviscerate Workers’ Rights and Ship Jobs Overseas Bill,” is aimed the NLRB’s recent decision to file a complaint against the Boeing Co. The NLRB charges that Boeing moved production away from its Washington State facility in retaliation for the workers exercising their right to strike, and that’s against the law.

Says Miller:

The legislation is nothing more than a rush to protect one special interest to the detriment of all American workers. This bill presents American workers with a choice: You can have your rights or you can have your job. But you can’t have both.

Interesting.  Because it was clearly demonstrated to me as a woman, and a law-abiding one, and a mother — that I could have ongoing contact with my clients / employers OR I could know where my children were and maintain some contact with them — but not both, because certain people in power decided that feminism and fatherlessness was a credible social threat and responsible for poverty, abuse, etc.   And it was expedient that one — actually lots of “ones” cumulatively — real individual, real lives and real work stability — be sacrificed for the (ethereal and theoretical) common “good.”

In short, if I believed I had some legal rights or equal standing on almost any category of vital life issues, I was welcome to continue this fight into my retirement.  Or, I could submit, after years of income loss and repeated violations of existing family court orders (which I eventually found out meant nothing, basically) and give up, without children, start again as an aging female worker outside of the former profession and without significant social contacts in it.

Approximately six years ago I realized that this “jobs model” didn’t apply to parents in the family law system with a custody dispute; primarily anyone leaving violence or who had TANF involved.  Why?   Because of patterns set in the 1990s, further enabled by faith-based initiatives, primarily aimed at keeping women in their place and a man in every child’s life, even after many times, those men ended up killing the women and/or the children.

What also was driving the men, many times, was the same awareness of how extortionist and unfair the child support system was to them, overall, and/or insulting their intelligence by forcing them to submit to classes about parenting, children, or “conflict” which any young person who’s gotten up to 5th grade in life usually already knows and has witnessed, unless they have succeeded in hiding, dodging, and laying down flat in many social situations, or become superb negotiators already.

Read on some….  and this is a SF Bay Area California Legislator talking:

The bill will  l take away the NLRB’s authority to remedy unlawful conduct like Boeing is alleged to have engaged in. H.R. 2587 would apply to cases currently being considered, including the legal action against Boeing.

In a letter to the committee, AFL-CIO Government Affairs Director Bill Samuel says the bill would “cripple workers’ rights, hobble the NLRB, make it easier for companies to ship jobs overseas and create a new race to the bottom for American workers.”

H.R. 2587 will take away the NLRB’s authority to restore workers to their jobs when companies simply eliminate work in order to eliminate workers who are pro-union or when companies eliminate work in order to avoid their legal obligation to bargain.

[The bill] will have dire unintended consequences as well. It will make it easier to ship jobs overseas because it legalizes the most despicable form of outsourcing—the illegal kind—by keeping the NLRB from being able to stop it. The bill will remove one of the only tools preventing work from leaving the U.S.

Miller says the freedom to organize and collectively bargain is “meaningless if there is no effective remedy when they are violated.

Welcome to MY world.  Born, raised, working in the USA until unenforceable restraining order, unenforceable child support order, and unenforceable custody order booted me out of the workforce, and removed the incentive for the father of my children too.  These were not, actually “unenforceable” but so many incentives to use “discretion” according to the whimsy of the latest theory (fatherhood, abstinence education, you name it) (federal incentives to the states) (Prolonging custody disputes for the sake of accumulating interest on the “undistributable arrears”) and other nonsense — but common practice — made the concept of actually building ANYTHING and expecting to maintain it in the workforce became a moot point.

Here’s the bill summary:

H.R. 2587: Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act

(aka “Outsourcer’s Bill of Rights.”)

The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress. GovTrack did not write and has no control over these summaries.

7/25/2011–Reported to House amended. Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act – Amends the National Labor Relations Act to deny the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) any power to: (1) order an employer (or seek an order against an employer) to restore or reinstate any work, product, production line, or equipment; (2) rescind any relocation, transfer, subcontracting, outsourcing, or other change regarding the location, entity, or employer who shall be engaged in production or other business operations; or (3) require any employer to make an initial or additional investment at a particular plant, facility, or location. Applies the amendment made by this Act to any complaint for which a final adjudication by the NLRB has not been made by the date of enactment.

Here’s the NLRB:  It is an agency of the U.S. Government.   I just read through an interesting case (March, 2011 hearing before an Administrative Law Judge) in which a  group called Human Services Projects Inc. d/b/a/ Teen Triumph, was reprimanded and forced to give back pay to a worker fired in retaliation for protesting its practices, (engaging in protected behavior).  Of note (para. 30) the nonprofit (presumably) went to San Joaquin Superior Court and got a restraining order on the individual worker, Jake Wallace — and he was not given notice of the hearing.  Available here:

32-CA-025262 JD(SF)-15-11 Human Services Projects, Inc.d/b/a Teen Triumph
View

Their business was group homes for sex offenders & youths, and they got $50,000 of federal help, it says:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1821256 05/15/1992 ACTIVE HUMAN SERVICES PROJECTS, INC. MARTI H. FREDERICKS
C0821069 07/15/1977 DISSOLVED HUMAN SERVICES PROJECTS, INCORPORATED BRYAN MORSE

 

 

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
HUMAN SERVICES PROJECTS, INC. 085852 Charity Current STOCKTON CA Charity Registration Charity
HUMAN SERVICES PROJECTS, INCORPORATED Charity Not Registered STOCKTON CA Charity Registration Charity
1

 

(a quick lookup of street address of the bottom “not registered” one shows it’s the same person as incorporator on the founding documents of the Top, legitimate one.)

Another quick skim of their listed assets/income show that, despite this hard economy, this particular groups’ revenues are ONLY increasing steadily.  Here’s its business:

(B) The specific purposes for which this corporation is organized is to provide for the development, evaluation and implementation of humans services programs including, but not limited to clinical and residential treatment programs to serve children, adults and/or juveniles with emotional, or developmental problems, economically disadvantaged and minorities.

THREE: The name and address in the State of california of this corporation’s initial agent for service of process is: David F. Scatena

3188 Sea Gull Lane Stockton, CA. 95219

Note:  It came before the NLRB because of mistreatment of its employees and retaliation against one of them for complaining

It has nothing on file since 2008, either RRF (charitable registration) or IRS form.  In the 2008 RRF, it notes which governmental agencies are supporting its operations:  Note:  The Fredericks (Mr. & Mrs.) were the people the NRLB complaint was about, and who told the employees if they didn’t like working there, they could quit…

STATEMENT 1

FORM RRF·1, PART B, LINE 1 FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS

1. SEE “KEY EMPLOYEE” DEALINGS STATEMENT ATTACHED.

2. THE ORGANIZATION WAS OBLIGATED TO MARTI FREDERICKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR) AND J CRAIG FREDERICKS (CFO) FOR A CONTINUING AMOUNT REPRESENTING A PORTION OF THE PURCHASE PRICE (ORIGINAL AND CONTINGENT AMOUNTS) OF CORPORATION STOCK PURCHASED FROM THEM IN 2002. THE BALANCE DUE THE FREDERICKS’ AT YEAR END WAS $22,150.

(???) . . . . .

3. THE TAXPAYER WAS OBLIGATED TO MARTI AND J CRAIG FREDERICKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CFO, RESPECTIVELY) FOR THREE (3) WORKING CAPITAL LOANS MADE DURING 2008. THE FIRST WAS FOR $30,000 AS WAS PAID BY YEAR END. THE SECOND WAS FOR $40,000 AND WAS PAID BY YEAR END. THE THIRD WAS FOR $30,000, OF WHICH $10,000 WAS PAID BY YEAR END, LEAVING A YEAR END BALANCE OF $20,000.

STATEMENT 2

FORM RRF·1, PART B, LINE 6 GOVERNMENT AGENCY THAT PROVIDED FUNDING

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THROUGH NUMEROUS COUNTY JUVENILE PROBATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: SAN JOAQUIN, SACRAMENTO, STANISLAUS, CONTRA COSTA, ALAMEDA, AND SOLANO. NO PRIMARY MAILING ADDRESS, CONTACT PERSON, NOR TELEPHONE NUMBER IS USED

Most significant activities (per 2008 IRS, Part 1):  Sounds a little maudlin:

Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities: _”To develop and operate programs to assist youths and adults in the enrichment and enjoyment of their lives, to rekindle their hopes and dreams; to support them in celebrating life; to work in the community to create a better, safer and healthier environment for this.

Program Service Accomplishment 1:  Actually was operated at a $16,000 profit, (Expenses $2.454,123 ; Revenue $2.470,708)

  50 adolescent males were treated in a 24-hour residential program for sexually abusive youth with co-occurring behavioral and mental health problems.

(Perhaps the employee low wages contributed to the profit)  COST per male, for one year, thus about $122,706.15 per individual).  Mr. & Mrs. Fredericks (presumably), ED & CFO, are earning collectively about $187 plus? about $100K in other columns for 40 hour week each (approaching a judges’ salary, eh?).  “Reportable income from related organizations.

The organization also operates as a “representative payee” for 500 Social Security Beneficiaries and keeps their assets in a common account audited by the SSA, managing their affairs, etc.

I find it VERY interesting that the Director, “Marjorie Harris (1st husband?) Fredericks” was originally a Marriage and Family Therapist, running this entity had been contracting since 1980 (under this corporation) with a San Joaquin Mental Health,** but evidently saw that it’s be expedient to get some real estate background.   In 1990 she got into a real estate program(a 9-month program somehow? resulting in a “Masters of Science”) and then aimed for HOUSING for the low-income and elderly.    She reincorporated this Human Services Project in 1992, and in general showed a real aptitude at getting those contracts and dealing with severely compromised populations, and housing them.

**(the NRLB record mentioned that Ms. Fredericks was able to get an UNNOTICED restraining order on one of her employees from the local court; interesting).

The website shows only 1,763 visitors — that’s fewer than I get in a month.  Maybe not too many people are checking up on it.

Who we help:

 The Mental Health Services Act was passed in 2004 and provides new money for many different and and new mental health services and supports. The population to be helped under the MHSA is defined as adults and older adults who have been diagnosed with or who may have serious and persistent mental illness, and children and youth who have been diagnosed with or who may have serious emotional disorders, and their families. The MHSA is specifically targeted to reach consumers (and potential consumers) who are unserved, underserved and/or inappropriately served under current mental health support programs.
———————————————————————————————–

This CEO is one smart cookie.  First, she goes into psychology and gets up to a Masters level (see AFCC, see the 9 highest paying jobs with least hours of work article recently posted), and then figures out to go into real estate as well.  Knowing already how to get contracts, moves with ease in and out of “for profit” situation and ends up in “Nonprofit” with a plenty high salary; between she and her husband, well over $200K as employees of their own corporation, and somehow the corporation still owes them about $22,000 for stock (?)

Another service they offer is managing government disbursements for compromised people.  Starting to remind me of Viola STtroud (Genia Shockome case) and friends:  “ACTION PAYEE SERVICES” from the same group.

Our Mission

To establish caring, honest relationships with persons who need assistance managing their finances while empowering them to be successful by providing them aid in fulfilling their financial obligations and responsibilities.

This program is offered to adults who are unable to manage their finances without assistance; and to children, who Social Security determines require the protection offered by a payee relationship.  The payee program provides a vital service to consumers, by helping them gain greater stability without the stress of struggling with their finances.  Emphasis is placed on assuring that all consumer recipients have appropriate housing and availability of weekly funds for purchase of food and the personal items required for daily living.  Expenses paid for the children serves must all be individually approved by Social Security to ensure the proper use and application of funds to the benefit of the child.

(suggest — read the NLRB audit.  )

Ah well…..

Obviously I am going to be interested in companies in this field.  Did they incorporate here?  (from the list of 197 “Human Services Projects Inc.” companies.  NOTE;  California site  (it seems) does not allow you do to an “Exact Search” so if the company you want has a common name, you are S.O.L. and have to guesstimate on which page it might show up, as there are also only allowed 10 search results per page, unlike MANY other public-access databases in this world, including the California Attorney General’s Charitable Registry Search.

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1022232 03/26/1981 DISSOLVED HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES BARBARA LANE
C1506443 12/29/1988 DISSOLVED HUMAN RESOURCE TRAINING SERVICES, INC. DAVID M JORDAN
C2744252 04/25/2005 SUSPENDED HUMAN RESOURCES CONSULTING SERVICES INC. SPIEGEL & UTRERA, P.A., WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS SPIEGEL & UTRERA, P.C.
C2844199 10/03/2006 FORFEITED HUMAN RESOURCES CONSULTING SERVICES, INC WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS HR BUSINESS STAFFING BLANCA ROMERO
C1739018 02/10/1994 ACTIVE HUMAN RESOURCES CONTRACT SERVICES, INC. COMSTOCK & SHARPE, INC.
C3272760 01/19/2010 ACTIVE HUMAN RESOURCES SERVICES, INC. JAMES C OZELLO
C1879287 12/10/1993 SUSPENDED HUMAN RESOURCES SUPPORT SERVICES INCORPORATED JAY GREENHOW
C1691229 08/15/1991 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES ACADEMY, INC. NOVEL E. STOKES
C2146636 09/09/1999 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES ALLIANCE OF LOS ANGELES JOHN RUSSELL
C1585136 04/17/1987 FORFEITED HUMAN SERVICES AND CONCERNS, II MICHAEL DAVID FOX

 

Forfeited, Suspended Dissolved . . . . . 2 out of 10 active.  Next page has only 1 out of 10 active:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C0867470 06/14/1978 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES AND MANPOWER TRAINING
C0729827 01/23/1975 ACTIVE HUMAN SERVICES ASSOCIATION SUSANNE SUNBERG
C0734379 04/14/1975 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES ASSOCIATION OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY BARBARA MARGERUM
C0547827 06/20/1968 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES BUREAU, INCORPORATED
C1258115 10/01/1984 DISSOLVED HUMAN SERVICES CENTER, A PSYCHOLOGICAL CORPORATION ARLO THOMAS, PHD
C0777114 08/25/1976 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES COLLABORATIVE
C0843200 04/10/1978 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES CONSORTIUM CAMERON THOMPSON
C1137205 03/18/1983 DISSOLVED HUMAN SERVICES CONSULTING, INC. DOLORES A CUTLER
C1009649 11/20/1980 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES CONTINUUM OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, INC. JOHN BROWN
C0892163 07/20/1978 SUSPENDED HUMAN SERVICES COORDINATING COUNCIL OF SAN MATEO COUNTY CORPORATION
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 

I’m going to propose that man of these are organizations which were hoping to operate primarily from government-based grants.

NLRB Logo

(sorry about that diversion into a specific NLRB case in my state).

 

 

ALTERNATE QUESTIONS TO ASK:

HOW COME WHEN THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE AROUND GOT WEALTHY BY ACQUIRING ASSETS, INVESTING IN STOCKS (NOT ALL US, I’M SURE), BY INHERITANCE, AND BY LEARNING HOW TO EXPLOIT THE US TAX LAWS TO THEIR ADVANTAGE — ARE THESE SAME PEOPLE TALKING ONLY — AND ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY, WHEN IT COMES TO THE NATIONAL PRESS — ABOUT “JOBS”?

We have created a high, deep and wide society where mobility is restricted the more institutionalized the educational system is into forcing certain classes into “jobs” whiel failing to mention the classes that are from youth (and many times by not having to attend the local public school, where this ain’t taught) how to run businesses, acquire assets, leverage holdings, buy & sell, to learn things about compound interest, investments, and to develop a superior set of skills and — more important even — attitudes.

While the so-called “lower” (that’s in wealth, not necessarily character, but the treatment implies, it IS “Character”) get taught how to submit to authority or else (or be medicated), get sorted and labeled in the k-12 system, graded, spat out or promoted according to very arbitrary standards (many times) and not really informed just how much of a union-based system contributes to who gets elected from state to state.

 

 

FY 2012 HHS BUDGET:

The HHS budget (this, from the white house) gets $79 billion.   A lot of this goes into character formation — and I’ve been showing some of the “characters” of the organizations so intent on teaching this.  For one, they don’t file taxes right, stay incorporated, register as charities when they are claiming to be some, and they pretty much repeat the same general concepts to each other in conferences which are sometimes paid for by the public.

In the courts, the business of the courts is getting externalized into nonprofits which are initiated and formed by people often times staffing the courts.

Even a single man convicted of a traffic ticket (some of the highest-cost, most-aggressive enforcement areas around) figured out that his conviction was to help build courthouses (see yesterday’s post).   We know that the child support cases to bring monies to the county and that BOTh the HHS/OIG/OAS and the larger scope GAO have already stated clearly that — you guys don’t know where the money is.  That grantees and contractors of federal (I believe it was ARRA, but might have been DRA) grants — are possibly in violation of tax codes to tune of $350 BILLION for grant amounts of $275 BILLION, and several of the ones audited were known to be involved in criminal activities, etc.

FROM THE WHITE HOUSE SITE:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/health.pdf

HHS is asking $79 billion for the 2012 budget.  $17 BILLION of this went to ACF (Administration for Children and Families) in 2010, and $16 bil. estimated for 2010.  First of all, no one is really overseeing where this goes.  Second of all, at least as to OCSE, they are going to exceed the estimate.   Third of all, although it seems that Dads and Moms BOTH hate the OCSE, I do believe the evidence shows that since about 1994, it has been re-tooled to become a “let’s promote responsible fatherhood” organization — which funds aren’t tracked properly but we know they ARE diverted from what might otherwise actually reach children in order to test and evaluate specific theories about what inspires a man to pay, or not pay, child support.

Then more reports are written assuming that he’s not paying because he can’t. All kinds of theories can be proposed and tested BY LAW because the Secretary of Health and Human Services (per 45 CFR 303.109, as I recall) has the authority to require states getting access visitation grants to assist this office (HEad of HHS) with projects as it sees fit.

And what projects they are!

From the same source, the summary claims this budget:

Supports Responsible Fatherhood. The Budget encourages fathers to take responsibility for their children by changing policies so that more of fathers’ child support reaches their children while continuing a commitment to vigorous enforcement. The Budget increases support for States to pass through child support payments to families, rather than retaining those payments, and encourages States to provide access and visitation services that can improve a father’s relationship with his family. The Budget targets additional State incentives based on performance, which continues an emphasis on program outcomes and efficiency.

This is baloney.  First of all “encouraging” anyone to do anything doesn’t require them to.  Period.  FOr example, the Feds encouraged the states to actually pass through more money to the families, called “family first” but the States complained that this would screw up their budget and resisted.

One summary of the situation reads thus:

90% of the parents paying child support are fathers.   Using child support enforcement programs as a vehicle, these extortion-based programs force fathers to choose between criminal penalties (for nonpayment) and inciting “high conflict” family court litigation to create a “need” for their own publically funded services.  These IRresponsible programs cash in on “incentives” (TITLE IV-D ones, I’ve blogged this, meaning the $2 Federal to $1 State incentives with a complicated basis of determining it) by placing children in UNSTABLE homes, then starving the entire family onto some sort of public assistance.

The (unlawful) programs are supposed to be administrative, but they use quasi-judicial powers to CREATE, amend, and enforce court orders without judicial authorization.  The agency does not provide due process, nor does it have to show you your file!

Judges “have to” look the other way {{I’m still thinking about whether I agree with that one}} because if they object, they will lose their HHS funding, and at the same time the judge has to accept responsibility for the agency’s badly managed or even crooked interference when litigants are hurt.

I believe this person (unidentified but I don’t think I’ll be sued for copyright on it!) is showing us that JUDGES do not always know what the CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY is up to in specific cases.   Litigants are told visitation is SEPARATE from child support, but the sheer existence of these access and visitation programs (which custodial parents — trust me — are NOT even told exist) is to tie them both together.  The Federal Government (OCSE, HHS officials or former ones, including Wade Horn, Ron Haskins, and so forth) officially believes that if men are reconnected with their children this will produce a character change resulting in more child support payments.

Never mind that these men, at times, know that private groups getting government contracts to chase them down and garnish their wages are caught sometimes in fraud, overbilling, double-billing or even fabricating child support (or medicaid) cases — and STILL get yet more contracts with the government:  Maximus, SupportKids, etc.

That said, I personally find no excuse for judges sitting on the boards of, for example, Kids’ Turn, or all over the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, privately conferring about how to best treat the family court litigants they or their colleagues have helped destroy previously and who are actually showing anger or distress / protest about that treatment — and then make up new professions (to be organized into similar-titled nonprofits, i.e., “COLLABORATIVE LAW”) after the last round (Parent Education) got out’ed or is about to be (by others like myself reporting on it).

This has been going on long enough that second generations of children eliminated from contact with their mothers due to “fatherhood” programs in the courts and around child support — are showing up broke, homeless, or trying to retain custody of their own kids.  Although he has BARELY acknowledged this, even attorney general Eric Holder has acknowledged this in a statement at a conference put in on part by (fatherhood-supported) Family Violence Prevention Fund and (as I recall) either the NCADV, or the NCJFCJ (National COuncil of Juvenile & Family Court Judges), or all three of them.

As referenced here:  (NOTE:  I do not appreciate the language or tenor of this blog, though there is plenty cause to be angry.  I also do not associate with its author because of this and other matters. Nevertheless, here you are:  U.S. Attorney General Actually Admits, and provides the link)

From http://ncmbts.blogspot.com/2011/02/eric-holder-why-are-mothers-who-are.html

It look like (fatherhood.gov) Holder Knows Abusers get Custody of their Children, HE SUPPORTS IT! And Finances it. WTF?

AG Eric Holder

Eric Holder Knows about Batterers Getting Custody and HE SUPPORTS it with Fatherhood.gov.

Last year 2010 he plays a mentor to Fathers in Prison getting out and being ‘dad’. See Fathers Day 2010 where Obama gave 500 Million dollars MORE to the Fatherhood Initiatives.

See Video here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRJBkoq1DXs

Obama steps up fatherhood advocacy with new mentoring initiative:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/06/21/AR2010062100006.html

Original Domestic Violence speech of Holder here:http://www.justice.gov/ag/speeches/2009/ag-speech-090602.html

 

(The blogger then goes on to say “Fuck that Shit!”(in bold print) and suggests a march on Washington.  Rather than an internet or in-person trip to the local county assessor’s office, or secretary of state to find out who is doing business where.  Did I mention the comptroller’s office?)

HERE’s the setting (note:  Year, 2009):

 

Attorney General Eric Holder via Video to the National Summit on the Intersection of Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment
~ Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Remarks as prepared for delivery.

Good morning and welcome to the National Summit on the Intersection of Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment. I want to thank you for attending this very important conference. Domestic violence, in particular children exposed to domestic violence, is an issue that I have worked on for much of my career in public service.

As a judge at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia I saw first hand the suffering and long-term trauma experienced by children exposed to violence. As the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, I created the first Domestic Violence Unit in the office’s history. As Deputy Attorney General during the President Clinton Administration, I helped to launch the U.S. Department of Justice’s Children Exposed to Violence Initiative, as well as the Safe Start Initiative. And now, as Attorney General, I am committed to reinvigorating our work on this very important issue.

The Office on Violence Against Women, in partnership with the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Family Violence Prevention Fund has planned this meeting to continue a conversation that began almost a decade ago, at the first National Summit held here in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. That meeting brought together domestic violence advocates, child abuse workers and judges to address the critical need for coordinated services to family members victimized by both domestic violence and child abuse.

This summit brings together a broader cross-discipline of professionals who do not commonly work together: domestic violence and child advocates, judges and other court personnel, attorneys, child welfare workers, guardian ad litem, mental health workers, researchers, and policy makers. While you may not always work in concert on this issue, you share a vision for safe and healthy families. 

Gee, almost everyone was represented there except openly acknowledge fatherhood practitioners (although groups that endorse and take funding from fatherhood movements were most definitely present), and actual mothers who lost custody courtesy “parental alienation theory” or someone who spouted it while switching custody to the batterer and knowing that their courthouse, at least, would be getting some funding from a county-based intervention program of some sort.

As you are gathered here in this beautiful location, I hope that you will forge new alliances and a collective leadership that will help identify solutions that will have a lasting impact on the lives of mothers and children traumatized by family violence. I ask that you consider ways the Department of Justice can renew and strengthen its efforts to address this problem. We want to draw upon lessons gleaned from your work in communities throughout the country. We also want to know what has been left undone.

Some of the topics that you will address may be more challenging than others. I hope you will especially discuss the most difficult issues I know many of you confront in your work:

  • Why are mothers who are the victims of domestic violence losing custody of their children to the courts and to the child protection system? 
  • Why are children of color over-represented in the child protection system? 
  • Do children need a relationship with their fathers even when their fathers have been abusive to them and their mothers in the past? If so, what does that relationship look like?
Did it occur to anyone present to ask such a mother how it happened?  As to children of color over-represented in CPS system, not to mention, men of color over-represented in the prison system, not to mention both women and men of color overrepresented in the ranks of the unemployed and poor, in Congress, and many other places, I propose two possible answers (which some to mind), #1 greed and #2 racism, institutionalized.

I ask that you explore all of these things while always remembering that the needs of children who are exposed to violence are inextricably linked to the needs of mothers who are the victims of domestic violence.

How heartfelt.   I think Attorney General Holder is a remarkable man, and I don’t hold anything against him.  However fatherhood is now entrenched in the system, and here his with no doubt equal eloquence, addressing some fatherhood practitioners:

I’ll link to it from our Ohio Organization based on the ??MIA National (NPNFF) organization I’ve been mentioning:

http://www.opnff.net/white_house_fatherhood.asp

White House Conversations on Fatherhood

 This national conversation began on Father’s Day weekend with an event hosted by President Obama at the White House. The Conversation will reach communities across the country in the coming months through a series of Town Hall meetings.  The outcome of the Conversation on Fatherhood will be to inform federal policies supporting the development of strong fathers and healthy families.

Town Hall meetings will explore ways in which fathers, community organizations and the government can come together to encourage responsible fatherhood and strong communities, reconnect youth who have fallen away, and strengthen our nation’s families.

If you missed watching President Obama’s Town Hall media event on Friday, June 19, 2009, on “Fatherhood and Personal Responsibility”, I suggest you make every effort to review it!  It is the kick-off to a series of similar town hall meetings that will be held in various parts of the country in the near future.

 

and  (note:  same year as the National Summit, above).

Atlanta, Georgia, December 15, 2009: The third in the series of White House Conversations on Fatherhood was held in Atlanta Georgia and co-hosted by the Department of Justice and the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships – click here to read coverage of the Fatherhood Forum on the President’s Advisory Council blog.  Attorney General Eric Holder spoke at the event, stressing the intersection between fatherhood and criminal justice issues: the importance of working with incarcerated and reentry fathers as well as their children and families.  Click here to read AG Holder’s speech.

Let’s listen to part of it:

 

Let’s be clear — a father’s role in the life of a child is irreplaceable. I know this not just from the studies and the research that I’ve read and that I will share with you later, but from my own experiences parenting two teenage daughters and a 12-year-old son. And believe me, when I’m not up late thinking about how I can help to keep our nation safe, I’m up late thinking about how I can help my kids. It is both my commitment to public safety and my concern for my own children — and for all the other children throughout this country — that brings me here tonight.

I’m honored to be joined here this evening by fellow dads and leaders focused on fatherhood. In the course of our discussions, I hope we will be open and honest enough to ask ourselves tough questions — father to father, parent to parent — about what our communities and the federal government can do to strengthen our families and support those fathers who are trying to do the right thing . . .

 

and — this is a larger segment, browse and at least catch the drift:

 You simply cannot be a real man if you don’t do all that you can to care for those who have the greatest right to depend on you. We cannot leave this awesome responsibility to the women in our lives and in our communities who too often labor alone, taking care of our sons and daughters. This must end.

I don’t pretend that this is easy, especially for fathers who have been incarcerated. So I come here with great respect for those of you who have made some mistakes, but have chosen to appear here tonight because you know that someone else is counting on you.

People sometimes make bad choices. As a result, they end up in prison or jail. But we can’t permit incarceration of a parent to punish an entire family.

More than 1.5 million American children have fathers in prison. More than half of these children are African American. And we know that children of incarcerated parents suffer from: the physical and emotional separation; the stigma associated with having a parent detained; the loss of financial support; and the disruption caused by introducing new caregivers into a child’s life, no matter how well meaning those caregivers may be. As a result, children of incarcerated parents often struggle with anxiety, depression, learning problems, and aggression, undermining their own chances of future success. We know that in many cases maintaining relationships with their parents during incarceration can improve the lives of children, and yet too often our policies have failed to support these relationships.

Actually, there are multiple programs specifically designed, and federally supported, to connect incarcerated Dads with their kids AND to modify their child support downward AND help them craft requests to modify custody to give them MORE time with children.  Maybe it’s not enough — but these DO exist and can be/are funded no doubt under the “Access and Visitation” funding, set to increase radically in FY 2012, it seems.

Even when fathers are released from prison and return to their families, we have failed to properly support family reunification. We don’t adequately address such pressing issues as the role that these fathers will play in their children’s lives. And yet, if we care about what happens to these children, their families, and their communities – if we care about public safety – we have to help these men play a central role in their children’s lives.

Research reveals that incarcerated men who maintain strong family ties while behind bars are more successful when they are released. They have an easier time finding jobs and staying off drugs. In fact, a recent study done for the Department of Health and Human Services found that people who were married or in committed relationships were half as likely to use drugs or commit new crimes after they were released from incarceration.

 

What happened to the comments at that other National Summit, the question:

Do children need a relationship with their fathers even when their fathers have been abusive to them and their mothers in the past? If so, what does that relationship look like?

I think the FIRST question should be answered before elaborating upon the 2nd question.  however that first question — if he were honest — already HAD been answered, and years earlier, by the fatherhood movement through HHS/ACF/OCSE to start with.

From (green font, above), the 2009 speech by AG Holder to the fathers in Atlanta, 2009, I deduce the same message that I’ve gotten right along:  It’s OK to USE contact with children in an attempt to try to reform fathers, i.e., Innocent Children as Character-Correction Bait.  Because if we don’t use those children to reform the fathers, those angry and unrepentant fathers might go bothering others, not related to them, and THAT, we can’t have.  But for invisible, unreported, child molestation and other crimes against children, well, let’s just not talk about that in the same breath as “fatherhood activity promotion.”  Sure ….

 

HERE (going on, same speech) he is going to talk about some fatherhood programs to reconnect men with their families post-incarceration.  Were these brought up at the other conference, on intersection of domestic violence and child maltreatment, asking why mothers were losing the custody to batterers?  Of course not.  Would that have been politically expedient??

I’m happy to note that in Tennessee, the city of Memphis has hired a family liaison who works with formerly incarcerated people to help them reconnect with family members when they return to town. In South Dakota, the Department of Corrections has launched a Fatherhood and Families Program to address the challenges faced by incarcerated fathers and to promote healthy relationships.

So, how’s that one going?  Who paid for it?  Were some of these fathers in arrears in child support, or engaged in a custody battle, or did this program help them START such a battle?

And in Oregon, Marion County is deploying an evidence-based parenting curriculum called “Parenting Inside Out,” and a family reunification curriculum called “Restoring Relationships.” These are just three examples of how we’re shifting resources to support family reunification for formerly incarcerated people and their families.

I “couldn’t” resist.  (I’d run across this phrase before).  It’s a FOR-profit registered trademark of (to be found out), another high-profit low-overhead curriculum to be marketed to captive — literally — audiences to help them:

 

 

 

Curriculum

Parenting Inside Out (PIO) is an evidence-based, cognitive-behavioral parent management skills training program created {BY??? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _} for incarcerated parents through a six-year collaboration of scientists, policy makers, practitioners, and instructional designers. Both the information in the program and the way that information is presented were informed by knowledge derived from research and practice.

At the core of Parenting Inside Out is the Parent Management Training (PMT) curriculum, which appears on the “best practice” lists of: the American Psychological Assoc., the US Department of Health & Human Services, and the Office of Victims of Crime, the US Department of Justice. PMT includes communication, problem solving, monitoring, positive reinforcement and non-violent discipline techniques. Researchers built upon the PMT curriculum to make it effective within the context and restrictions of parents and families involved in the justice system. {{they had another market application and adapted to it…}} In addition to the scientists, practitioners and curriculum designers who contributed to the PIO program, inmates and their families were extensively interviewed to ensure the program addressed the real needs and issues they experience.

(Looking up “Parent Management Training, I find a Yalechild psychologist, Alan E. Kazdin, Psychologist.  I TOLD us the best line of work with an advanced degree is psychologist, right?  (Or Wall Street 24/7 did))

Parent Management Training for Oppositional, Aggressive and Antisocial Behavior in Children and Adolescents

About the author

Alan E. Kazdin, PhD, is Director and Chairman of the Child Study Center and John M. Musser Professor of Psychology at Yale University School of Medicine. He also directs The Child Conduct Clinic at Yale University , an outpatient treatment service for children and their families. His research focuses primarily on aggressive and antisocial behavior in children and adolescents and the influences that contribute to child dysfunction and therapeutic change. He has published more than 550 articles and chapters and written or edited more than 35 books on child and adolescent behavioral disorders, treatment, and methodology and research design.

Wonder if he eats lunch, or ever collaborates with the Pruetts, Kyle or Dr. Marsha Kline (of AFCC note?)  (Child Psychiatry center at Yale).

Description

Among the evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents, parent management training (PMT) is without peer. No other treatment for children has been as thoroughly tested and as widely applied as has PMT. In Parent Management Training, Dr. Alan Kazdin brings together the conceptual and empirical bases of this treatment, as applied to children and adolescents with oppositional, aggressive, and antisocial behavior.

And, I was wrong to mention OFI — it’s OSLC (Oregon Social Learning Center).  Close enough for jazz…  That’s their logo:

Utopia Airways

(from their site, where I’ve been before):

A number of preventive interventions have also been developed at OSLC. The prevention studies involve intervention with a variety of populations. Most include a focus on testing the effect of parent management training with specific populations, such as with recently divorced mothers, with step families, with the siblings of at risk youth, with incarcerated fathers and mothers, with mothers and fathers involved in community corrections, with at risk girls involved in the child welfare system, and with youth at risk for substance use. A universal school-based prevention program, Linking the Interests of Families and Teachers, was designed to promote healthy behavior at home, in the classroom, and on the playground (etc.)

 

(see below) as “slaves” were the profits of previous generations, and stocks (etc.) are of wealthy families/individuals today, the access to populations on which to test “interventions” is a source of PRODUCING ONGOING PUBLICATIONS AND STUDIES for psychologists and psychiatrists.  In a nutshell, it’s WHAT THEY DO.  They then can develop and market curriculum (making a name in the process) through government networks and also supported by them — particularly if it’s anything about better controlling an unruly and possibly violent population.  I”m starting to get angry at the scope and prevalence of this.

The concept of continually experimenting and demonstrating on already distressed (or OPpressed) populations, for fame and profit, is offensive, to me at least.  In this sense, by continue to force people back onto welfare, or back into the courts, there is an UNENDING source of lower-caste (supposedly) or Needing Our Expert Help people available to anyone who can scramble or collaborate to the top of the pack when it comes to curricula.  It of course helps to have a Ph.D. and get some grants under your belts.   Just as traffic violation convictions help build courthouses, people getting incarcerated serve any number of purposes and industries, including the social scientists and those wishing to study their “minds” and try to get inside them.  The less ethical among these also (when in individual situations have too often gotten inside some of those (Minors’) pants as well, sometimes getting caught, sometimes not– but usually enabled by the incessant thirst to be able to manipulate human behavior into something politically acceptable and correct.  Such as into LOW-CONFLICT with ABUSIVE AUTHORITY.

 

Parent Management Training-Oregon Model (PMTO)

Parent Management Training-Oregon Model (PMTO) is a behavior intervention program designed by Dr. Gerald Patterson and colleagues at the Oregon Social Learning Center (OSLC). OSLC is a world renowned research center in the area of antisocial behavior in children. The behavior interventions used in PMTO are based on over 30 years of research on families with children and adolescents who have serious conduct problems. Patterson and his colleagues have identified five core parenting skills that have the most impact on improving serious behavior problems in children. PMTO is a family intervention designed to help parents use the following five core parenting skills:

 

Is it going to tell me, easily, which CORPORATION? is marketing this, and if it’s a nonprofit?  No.  But look at the telltale marks (cf.  BootCamp for New Dads): Does it bear (its authors) any relationship to the AFCC-affiliate (generic term, that’s my sarcasm) “OFI” (Oregon Family Institute)?

 

Purchasing Parenting Inside-Out

The Parenting Inside Out program consists of two parts: Coach/Coach Supervisor Training and the Curriculum usage and materials license.

Training classes are three days long. Regular training classes are scheduled in Portland, Oregon. Custom classes can be arranged for your organization at your location. 

For further information and price quotes, please contactmindy@childrensjusticealliance.org or call 503-977-6399.

My “TESS” (US patent search database) shows that the holder of the trademark “parenting inside out” is this Children’s Justice Alliance, an Oregon nonprofit.  It was filed for in 2008 and in use since 2009 (i.e., Eric Holder mentioning it in 2009 also). [“USPTO.gov”]    So now I look up that nonprofit at Oregon Secretary of state:

Record No Entity Type Entity Status Registry Number Name Status Name Assoc Search
   1 DNP ACT 174099-96 CUR   CHILDREN’S JUSTICE ALLIANCE

http://www.childrensjusticealliance.org/

The Children’s Justice Alliance was formed in 2004 by Claudia Black, Ben DeHaan, Sharon Darcy, and Mark Eddy, PhD. to take a programmatic and systemic approach to improving outcomes for children whose parents are involved in the criminal justice system.

(written after looking up this group, and then seeing “pathfinders of Oregon.”  SHARON DARCY is on the board of Pathfinders of Oregon) as of 2010).  Google Maps shows them also at the same address>  7800 Sw. Barbour, Portland

The primary impetus for creating the Children’s Justice Alliance was to give parents and families the tools they need to break the preventable cycle of intergenerational criminality.

Many donors, many other nonprofits organized to provide or distribute this curriculum.

In addition to the Oregon Department of Corrections and the Oregon Department of Human Services, other partners include: community justice, law enforcement, the courts, K-12 education, higher education, early childhood providers, mentoring programs, mental health agencies, researchers, CASA and Girl Scouts Beyond Bars.

 

 

 

PATHFINDERS of OREGON  / Center for Family Success:

Record No Entity Type Entity Status Registry Number Name Status Name Assoc Search
   1 ABN INA 128755-97 CUR   OREGON PATHFINDER
   2 DNP ACT 358132-86 CUR   PATHFINDERS OF OREGON

 

From this description I learn that Pathfinders of Oregon (itself a 501(c)3 delivering cognitive behavioral therapy (yada, yada) partnered with “Children’s Justice Alliance” in 2003.  However, prior to 2003, “Children’s Justice Alliance” didn’t exist — so it was formed as a nonprofit to market (etc. etc.).

Pathfinders, a 501 (c) (3) social service agency, was founded in 1993 to operate cognitive-restructuring programs for the Oregon Department of Corrections. Since that time its mission has broadened to include prevention and intervention strategies that are aimed at keeping at-risk clients from entering the criminal justice system. Pathfinders expanded its services to provide parenting-skills training and to operate an alternative-incarceration program in the prisons, as well as cognitive and parenting programs for some Oregon counties. In 1999, Pathfinders began to operate an alternative school for pregnant and/or parenting teens with funding from Portland Public Schools (PPS). In 2008, with additional funding from PPS, Pathfinders opened another school in East Multnomah County.

In 2003, Pathfinders formed a partnership with the Children’s Justice Alliance (CJA) to serve as the official service delivery arm of its programs. Through CJA, Pathfinders provides services to clients who are involved with the Oregon Department of Human Services; it has also provided family based services funded by the United Way and other governments and agencies, such as the City of Portland and the Department of Labor. It is with CJA that Pathfinders operates two Centers for Family Success, where clients can obtain training as well as wrap-around services, helping them stabilize their families and avoid involvement in the criminal justice system. Pathfinders has a long history of meeting (or exceeding) contractual obligations in all of its programs.

Since 1993 Pathfinders has provided training for more than 27,500 inmates, including 3,000 female inmates. Classes have been provided in every state prison in Oregon. Pathfinders has provided parenting training to over 1,000 clients of the Department of Human Services who have involvement with the criminal justice system.

what is a “Client of the Department of Human Services” also involved in the criminal justice system?

Here, we see that Pathfinders had access to the Criminal Justice System, and somehow, the people starting CJA had access to the HHS system clients. I suspect that if we looked further, the incorporators of CJA probably were social workers or in some manner DHHS (Oregon) employed…..  But in fact, the actions they are involved in include, central, marketing a curriculum aimed at behavioral modification, basically.

 

This alliance, around since 9/23/2003, has had changes of address, of registered agent, and its current address is shared with the “Children’s Trust Fund

Children’s Trust Fund of Oregon 

Your donation will fund programs through the Children’s Trust Fund to help prevent child abuse, neglect, and to strengthen families.

Children’s Trust Fund of Oregon
1410 SW Morrison Street, Suite 501
Portland OR 97205

Record No Entity Type Entity Status Registry Number Name Status Name Assoc Search
   1 FNP ACT 247301-86 PRE   CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND  (later became National Drug & Safety organization — this is WDC based)
   2 ABN ACT 028015-95 CUR   CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND OF OREGON  {{STARTED 2001}}
   3 DNP ACT 317425-88 CUR   CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND OF OREGON FOUNDATION Search

 

The Children’s Trust Fund is supposed to stop child abuse:

CTFO logo - link to Home page

History

In the mid 1980s, at the urging of child welfare advocates and professionals, Congress passed noteworthy legislation to respond to the growing increase of child abuse and neglect incidents. In response, the Oregon legislature enacted the Children’s Trust Fund of Oregon (CTFO) in 1985. This groundbreaking agency was mandated to prevent the generational cycle of child abuse and neglect to innocent children in Oregon. Over the past 25 years, this now independent non-profit foundation has served our state in the following ways:

  • fostered leadership to promote and strengthen local networks interested in child abuse prevention
  • distributed over $9 million donated funds to effective local programs serving thousands of Oregon families
  • monitored program delivery through quality outcome studies
  • advocated for legislation and public policy to protect our children, enhance family functioning, and support prevention activities statewide

Organizational Structure

In 1999 the Oregon legislature statutorily privatized the CTFO. Following a two-year transitional process, on July 1, 2001 the CTFO became a new, non-profit legal entity, the CTFO Foundation. The activities of the agency are directed by a 25-member volunteer Board of Trustees, 20% to be appointed by the Governor. Staff members are hired by the Board to conduct the activities of the agency. All CTFO’s administrative expenses are paid by public funds as part of the state’s commitment to fostering prevention activities in Oregon. Therefore, 100% of all donated funds go directly to support the local programs’ commitment to prevention.

So whoever is best, most experienced, most connected, and/or fastest at developing “prevention programs” is most likely to get on the top of that faucet.  It appears (judging by when the Parenting Inside Out and Children’s Justice Alliance were formed, that someone figured out how to get their curriculum to the head of the class, and to “every state prison in Oregon.”   Downloadable PATENTED curriculum, license for training, train the trainers — it’s the name of the game, baby!  Do this nonprofit and get your distribution network to be courtesy the state incarceration (and/or TANF?) population and you’re “IN like FLINT.”

 

 

ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER CONTINUES TALKING TO FATHERS IN (as I recall) ATLANTA, Dec. 2009)

 

Similarly, the Department of Health and Human Services awarded 13 grants to encourage responsible fatherhood and to help strengthen family ties among men returning from incarceration. Those programs are undergoing a national evaluation, and the results of that evaluation will help us ensure that we are implementing data-driven, evidence-based programs that work to keep families together and communities safer.

In the meantime, we’re learning some important lessons. We’re seeing encouraging results from parenting programs in prison. Men who participate in these programs are more positive about their role as fathers, and they have more frequent contact with their children.** Relationship intervention programs have also shown promise in improving communication between formerly incarcerated parents and their children.

**Access Visitation, that’s the purpose…..

 

What I’m saying is that we are seeing a lot of MOTHERless children in society these days.  In this I’d include both situations such as my own or similar (became noncustodial after leaving an abusive relationship, children shifted to the abusive parent in an apparent attempt to keep the litigation going when it otherwise might have settled itself) — and parents (male/female both) who are unavailable emotionally simply because they are extorted into this battle, to the supposed “consternation” (but in truth, profit and a lot of it) of the related court professionals.

 

. . . .

Today, I was very bothered by the HR 2587 discussions, and the failure of any of the (largely male) House of Representatives speaking to actually put out identifiable link to anything besides claims — one claim, the counter claim, another claim, the counter-claim.  Meanwhile, there’s a whole lot of child support sitting around in agency coffers being UNCLAIMED because no one is talking about that; we are essentially as a nation trafficking in anything “children” to draw some funding down, as well as literally it seems in many cases.

 

MOREOVER who is to determine whether, for poor people, that J O B S are the answer (when those talking about it live off their own assets, AND sometimes jobs, including for Congress) — when another definition (which I didn’t get to today) is that to hold a J>O>B entails a whole set of relationships which, bottom line, get right back down to the tax code and to who is ABOVE BOARD and has wages EASY to be garnished, and who (on the contrary) is operating and owning/selling businesses (or, profiting from the rise AND/OR fall of those businesses in the form of stock, options, short-selling, futures, etc. and terms not taught K-12 and in a lot of liberal arts colleges (as required courses) either.

INCOME – EXPENSES – TAXABLE INCOME (see “Human Project Services, Inc.”) = you own a business.

INCOME – TAXES – EXPENSES OUT OF WHAT”S LEFT = you work for someone who owns a business.

INVESTMENTS IN BUSINESS — what’s that?  (for most of America, including Middle Class America.  Just leave it up to the experts).

 

Talk about “jobs might be outsourced” in my book just about compare to someone associated with the SF COurt system saying, ominously, “divorces MIGHT take more than a few months!”   (talk about detached from reality — anyone know how long a typical divorce that comes through the court takes, at all?)

 

I found this group — and publication today.  You might find it interesting reading:

 

INSIGHTCCED.org — CLOSING THE RACIAL WEALTH GAP

At least these people are talking about WEALTH vs. JOBS!

Closing the Racial Wealth Gap Initiative

Who We Are:

The Insight Center’s Closing the Racial Wealth Gap Initiative is a national effort to address the wealth gap that leaves the average American family of color with only 16 cents for every dollar owned by the average white family. To close this gap in the next generation, we have brought together over 150 scholars, advocates, and practitioners of color to inform the national economic debate with diverse perspectives and provide policy solutions to create a more inclusive and equitable future for all Americans.

Why This Matters:

Unleashing the potential that exists in all our communities to generate economic growth is essential to ensure a globally competitive economy, but it depends on our nation’s commitment to eliminating inequities and providing opportunities for all families to build their wealth (assets minus debts). Without wealth, families and communities cannot become and remain economically secure. Public policies have and continue to play a major role in creating and sustaining the racial wealth gap, and they must play a role in closing it.

 

Our Attorney General (representing pretty much Administration policy):  Without Fathers connected with their children, our communities are not safe (or economically secure) even if those Dads have been in prison (by extension, possibly for assaulting their wives or children, in part, or other dangerous activities.  By contrast with how women get in prison (also on the last 3 blogs, I believe), which has been shown to be substance abuse — often related to prior serious physical abuse, incl. prior to age 18, i.e., rape, molestation, trafficking.  Look at the post before Corrections Corporation of America; in other words THEIR road down often begins with abuse, followed by an eagerness to incarcerate over drug-related nonviolent offences, and privatization of the prison industry, etc.

 

WEALTH FOLLOWS TAX ADVANTAGE:  TAX ADVANTAGE HELPS PRESERVE WEALTH:

Now from this publication (theirs):

Historical Roots of the Racial Wealth Gap

The long-standing American belief is that anyone can make it to the top by just working hard and tugging mightily on those proverbial boot-straps. From the pioneers to the financiers, American heroes are acclaimed as self-made men, succeeding on pure grit, gumption, and ingenuity.

From this logic it then follows that if certain people have not achieved financial success, they must not be hard-working. Poor people, particularly people of color, are described as lazy, wanting something for nothing, unwilling to learn English, incapable of saving, uninterested in education, and so on. In short, the common wisdom is that both wealth and poverty are the result of personal behaviors.

 

While it may sometimes seem that individuals laid each building block of wealth with their own effort alone, in fact, the invisible hand of government has helped families of European descent erect their asset structures during every period of U.S. history.

a. Public Policy and Wealth Building in U.S. History

The founders of this American democratic experiment rejected the idea that a person’s future should be decided by the accident of their birth. Instead, they believed that the opportunity to rise economically and socially should be available to everyone willing to work hard and serve the common good. During the Revolutionary War, the brilliant leadership of many ordinary men cemented the belief that all are capable of greatness. The promise of opportunity has drawn immigrants from all over the world, many of them arriving with nothing but their dreams, their drive, and their capacities.

But how can people move beyond a subsistence living toward being able to create new value for their families and for society? Farmers coming from Europe needed land to till, youth with inventive minds needed education, workers needed wages high enough for saving, and entrepreneurs needed access to capital to start businesses.

Throughout U.S. history, federal and state governments have provided “wealth starter kits” for some to turn their work into worth. For example, governments have given gifts of land, free public education, government- backed mortgages and farm loans, a social safety net, and business subsidies to white families, sometimes exclusively and usually disproportionately.

(AS YET, WOMEN NOT MENTIONED….))

These government investments jump-started our economy more than once, an economy that has leapt forward with dynamism and innovative power, turning the U.S. into a global economic powerhouse in a short span of time.

and, post WWII

Take the post-World War II GI Bill as an example. In the largest federal public benefits program in our history—$50 billion in today’s dollars and 15% of the national budget—7 million mostly working class, overwhelmingly white young men who might otherwise not have had the opportunity for post-high school education received college and vocational training paid for by Uncle Sam. Millions also got low-interest government-backed mortgages that made it possible for them to buy their first homes. These programs unleashed tremendous intellectual, professional and entrepreneurial talent and created a large, stable, educated and home-owning middle class with a stake in American success. The GI Bill returned seven dollars to the nation for every dollar invested, and helped lead to an era of unprecedented and widely shared prosperity.11

But due to discrimination in college admissions and in the housing markets, soldiers of color who fought just as valiantly and sacrificed just as deeply as whites were far less able to use the benefits. They, and the nation, could have made even greater advances if there had been equal access to the programs to which all veterans were entitled.

I’m sure this is true.  I am just wondering why no mention made of 1913 — personal income tax, and 1933, etc. developments!

b. Obstacles to Asset Building in Four Communities of Color12

Throughout U.S. history, beginning with the founding documents of our nation, deliberate government policies transferred wealth from nonwhites to whites and blocked people of color from asset ownership. But the specific mechanisms have varied for each group of color. A brief review of American history reveals a consistent pattern of race-based policies that created the deep racial wealth gap that divides our population today.

 

as is this:

 

African Americans: Black labor, white wealth

While both European and Africans were both initially indentured servants, the status of Africans was fixed by law; they alone were placed into permanent servitude. When indentured servants finished their terms of work, many received plots of land, their “wealth starter kits.” As enslaved people, African Americans not only were denied the right to earn a wage—it is estimated that if they had earned wages there would be four trillion dollars in the Black community today—they could not turn their own work into wealth. In fact, they were tangible assets, listed as such in the financial ledgers of their owners. The South was the richest region of the country up to the Civil War, and most of that wealth was held in the form of slaves. Like stocks and bonds today, possessing enslaved people brought greater return than their initial cost, both through the products their labor created, and through their production of more units of wealth—enslaved children. The slave system became the basis of the entire U.S. economy. Enslaved people created wealth for plantation owners in the South, slave traders, bankers, and insurance companies in the North, and the cotton they produced fed the burgeoning garment industries. If hard work alone were the basis of wealth, then African Americans today would be the wealthiest people in the United States.

 

THE CONVERSATIONS WE NEED TO HAVE TODAY, AS WELL AS THIS ONE, IS TO ACKNOWLEDGE HOW THE SAME SYSTEMS OF CONTROL OF OPPORTUNITIES  — in good part through the accumulations & centralization of government enabled by IRS collections — CONTINUE TO EXPLOIT CERTAIN POPULATIONS, BOTH OF COLOR (PRIMARILY) but INCREASINGLY OTHERS — AS TANGIBLE ASSETS OF THE “HUMAN RESOURCES PROJECTS” OF THIS WORLD — the HHS / ACF / OCSE / “FATHERHOOD” and . . .and… (sorry ladies…)  “DOMESTIC ABUSE PREVENTION” projects  and . . . .and the “THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE / PSYCHOLOGY-BASED LAW programs — almost ALWAYS started from Top-Down (if you look into the organizations) . . .

are still a factor of our economy not yet having addressed that it began in slave labor. The forms of slavery have simply changed.

 

f. Business Ownership

The rate of business ownership for people of color is only about half that of whites; 14% of white families but only 7% of families of color owned equity in a business in 2007.74 And for those who do have business assets, the median value is only $60,000 for people of color, compared with $112,500 for whites.75 Asian businesses are the most successful of minority businesses, because they often are in the import/export trade and have access to the global marketplace, suggesting that this is a successful strategy for increasing wealth in other immigrant communities with international ties.

 

Business start-ups are financed most often by bank loans only for white men; women and people of color are more likely to use credit cards, as seen in Figure 11. Credit card interest rates are usually higher than loans from banks, putting the borrower at greater risk of failure.

 

And yet some more (I am skimming this lengthy document).  I believe, though it is more laborious, it is possible to stop thinking in terms of the slave-master relationship of jobs only to the investment/sales/business language that actually leads to something approaching acquiring of assets, which really should be EVERYONE’s goal, for their own families and communities, and so time would become available to participate politically and better track what politicians have been, in fact, doing while one was at work!

Reasons for the Business Ownership Gap

The wealthiest individuals in communities of color have traditionally been business owners; but the limits of their business success have largely been defined by the boundaries of their own communities. While there were Black-owned businesses before the Civil War with mainly white patrons, after the war, the development of a segregated society ended that.80

During a century of segregation, African-American businesses did not have access to the white market. The Chinese were run out of mining claims; their business opportunities were limited to jobs that no white man would consider: laundry and cooking. They started these businesses that were traditionally women’s work in the mostly male mining towns in the mid-1850’s, and it became a small niche market that continued throughout the 20th century. Japanese were explicitly prohibited from owning corporations in the early 20th century.

Because of their limited capacity to raise capital and the smaller size of their market, and because they were discriminated against in government procurement processes, minority businesses have not created the levels of wealth of white-owned businesses up to today, with a few individual exceptions. The profile of minority-owned businesses is different from that of whites. Besides the high proportion of micro-businesses, businesses often are family affairs or formed by a network of friends; co-operative ventures are more common. They tend to be deeply embedded in their communities.

While providing services, job creation and wealth creation in these markets are strengths, small family businesses and cooperatives usually don’t expand to allow greater wealth creation. One reason is the lack of access to the amount of start-up capital that would support larger businesses. Discrimination by financial institutions in the provision of business loans is what needs to be addressed so that businesses of all sizes and in all locations can be established by people of color. Research shows that African-Americans are less likely to receive business loans than white people and those who do receive substantially smaller loans than whites.81 This is true even when African American and white entrepreneurs have the same level of education, equity capital, credit rating, business size, industry, and previous business experience.82 Successful entrepreneurship also requires business and market-based knowledge specific to the rules of the nation, state, and local community; such knowledge may be gotten through social networks in white communities, but may sometimes be lacking in minority and especially immigrant communities. * * * Reliable information and social networks are also necessary to gain access to capital. As for other types of loans, credit-scoring methods can be a barrier, and networking opportunities with potential funders may be limited.

 

* * * I will likely differ from these authors in one aspect.  I believe the public school system exists primarily AS a caste-sorter, and to slow down economic mobility. I have worked in urban and suburban communities (in the schools) and lived in them; the marked difference is that the suburban parents, often able to exist on one-income, a high one, have a parent free to run around and supplement the college-bound-curriculum with afterschool and enrichment activities — or to contribute to, fundraise for, or get involved as a parent in those schools.  I know this in part (also as a single mother) because I profited by working for some of those organizations and individuals that knew, unsupplemented public school wasn’t going to make it for their kids.

The public schools, and their textbooks (particularly trendsetters California and Texas) are among the most censored books around, including self-censored.  Meanwhile, library funds and arts, “enrichment” etc. activities are often on the chopping block because the kids aren’t learning to read and do math properly.

These schools are ESSENTIAL to perpetuating the slave-based economy (whether within the US or outside it) because without this heavily subsidized indoctrination organization, also highly political (i.e. NEA and NTA contributing to political campaigns, usually Democrats) , people might have time to discover some of the networks that might leak out some financial smarts, or jargon — and act on them.   Then where would Corrections Corporation of America, and its stock, be?

 

I wonder — I really wonder — how many Congressmen, and the few women, actually got to Congress by working normal jobs.  I also wonder how many of their school-aged children attend public schools, overall?   I suspect, very few.   Until we are as a nation willing to put more women in Congress, at least 30%, (I do not include Michelle Bachmann in the recommended number, although a little too late for that, obviously!)  …   This idiotic perception that it takes a MAN and only a nurturing etc. MAN to raise a REAL child (President Obama excepted?), therefore EVERYONE should support any program which says (whether or not it does) it support “fatherhood” (whatever that really is, whatever stereotype….) . . . . . .

We’re probably going down for the count financially.  We will have society organized in the hierarchy, and those at the top will be clueless as to those whose lives they direct actually have to live, or what their needs are.  They could not get to Congress without a little hero worship, so the temptation to provide new “solutions” all the time, never ceases.  And so the codependent relationships continue. . . . .. .

 

I actually have this crazy idea that if the attorneys and judges (add “mental health practitioners”) can be so smart as to “outsource” justice to nonprofits they themselves run, and then complain about clogged courts — that we, the people, could “OUTSOURCE” them by simply solving our problems without their help.  Problems such as marriage, divorce, domestic violence, property transfer and who knows what others?

And stop asking crooks for help to reform things they are profiting from, starting with the child support system.

 

I sign this as a mother who went from abuse  to prosperity as a single mother, to family law system (overnight), back into poverty with my children’s education consistently downgraded, a factor that REALLY irritated and stressed me even further, and rapidly devolving into dependency again — and overnight removal of y kids by my ex, in violation of a standing court order, and with the family court not even blinking its eyes, just “stamping the rubber” of the court-connected crony (mediator, in this case), and even for a season BACK on the system.

And I know women who went homeless from the same process.

 

Too many people have bought into this system.  The two institutions that I see MOST working in concert with each other are financial institutions:The IRS and the OCSE.  They even have their information gaps, too.  The enablers are the family court gatekeepers.

 

This article I have been quoting does admit (though I will come to a different conclusion from them about it, I think):

 

The tax code is the nation’s wealth budget. Taxes are an investment we all make in each other’s, and our nation’s, future: the shape of that future can be seen in our tax code. Within the tax code is embedded our nation’s wealth DNA, determining who is helped to expand their net worth, and who pays what share of the nation’s expenses.

 

True.  And my readings of the various GAO and HHS/OIG/OAS reports, state-level incorporations, and state-level nonprofit registrations, and a good many articles of incorporation plus IRS tax returns available (for nonprofits) — tells me that this investment has been serious mis-appropriated and not even stewarded well.  NO ONE KNOWS WHERE IT GOES!  AND THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE ADMITTING THIS TO EACH OTHER! 

Moreover there is also a technology gap when it comes to internet access to informationa bout there it goes; it is VERY timeconsuming for a person without assets to invest in, for example, a services like “FEDMINE” or “MapVisual” (whatever site it was trying to charge me $600 for more relationship maps the other day) — are disadvantaged.  MORE of our time will be used to find LESS available — and not necessarily accurate (read all the disclaimers) information, or complete information — about WTF happened to that fund, or those $$ collected.

Reason for the Gap in Tax Advantages

Throughout U.S. history, taxes have been used as a mechanism of wealth redistribution from people of color to whites. In the mid-1800’s when people flocked to California during the gold rush, special taxes were levied on Chinese miners and laundries, inhibiting their capacity to build wealth.

(Note:  The US began before the 1800s.  Note2:  Compulsory public education, nationwide, really took off in the late 1800s, and was in good part (at least eventually) modeled on a military state, Prussia.  Another motive for getting it passed was fear of the immigrant Catholics by traditional protestant groups.   Samuel Blumenfeld, John Taylor Gatto…..)

Taxes paid by Chinese accounted for 25% of California’s taxes between 1850 and 1870, but the Chinese, unable to become citizens, did not receive any tax funded services.Poll taxes only on African Americans prevented them from voting for nearly 100 years.

And when African American males got the vote, no women of any color could vote, that took longer.  Should’ve been mentioned here.  Why?  In part, because empowering a formerly slave population — or, rather, HALF of it — indicated a desire to hold onto a substitute slave population.

 

In some Southern states constitutional limits were placed on property taxes in order to keep Black schools underfunded and the population undereducated; the Alabama law still exists.102 While Latino and other immigrants pay taxes, they are not eligible for tax-funded benefits. For example, the high-school valedictorian children of undocumented workers have been barred from going to public universities at the in-state tuition rate in the state where they reside.

Ironically, just as Native American tribes are finding ways to develop business enterprises such as casinos on their reservations, new tax policies are being passed by states to require them to share their resources, even though tribal governments are legally sovereign and tax-exempt.

Current tax policies are redistributive—from the poor to the wealthy. Those with lower tax liability, or no liability due to low incomes, subsidize the breaks given to those who can afford to pass down large estates to their children, to invest in stocks, and save for retirement and their children’s college educations.

(apparently authors approve of the estate tax.  I don’t know enough about this to take a stand).

Laying the Foundation for Equitable Economic Growth (on page 31)

a. Asset Development Over the Life Span

A comprehensive approach to asset accumulation must recognize that wealth building should unfold over the course of a person’s life.

Saving, not spending

Today, children are bombarded, even in school settings, with advertisements that promote consumption, and there is no financial education that teaches them how to use money wisely. In fact, sometimes spending is described as patriotic.

OF COURSE — GUESS WHO PROFITS from turning America’s children (most, not all of them) into — if not prison fodder — now-oriented, over-consuming, materialistic, and gang-forming individuals (white-collar or other kinds of gangs)?    We are paying interest on debt, the name of the game is international corporations and international banking.  Is this still “news?”   WIthout the overconsumption, the global “economy” will melt.

Suggested reading:  Susan George, on “Maldevelopment” model, IMF, etc.

@@@Susan George is a well-known Franco-American political and social scientistactivist and writer on global social justiceThird World poverty, underdevelopment and debt. She is a fellow and president of the board of the Transnational Institute in Amsterdam. She is a fierce critic of the present policies of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (IBRD) and what she calls their ‘maldevelopment model’. She similarly criticizes the structural reform policies of the Washington Consensus on Third World development. She is of U.S. birth but now resides in France, and has dual citizenship since 1994.@@@

In 1974 she attended the World Food Conference in Rome, Italy where she felt that corporate agribusiness representatives dominated the proceedings.[1]

In 1976 her first book was published: How the Other Half Dies: The Real Reasons for World Hunger.[4]

(a review of a 1980s book, “A Fate Worse Than Debt” gives a background of this person, and is a book I’ve read which explains the costs of transforming another nations’ economy into a “debt-servicing” (exporting products) economy — which then the more “developed” companies must be trained to consume their products.   It talks about the IMF and more.  I can’t summarize it here, but it helped explain to me the INSANE drive to turn people into consumers of products and services they just don’t need, and who, exactly, that profits.)

In 2004 she half-heartedly supported the candidacy of U.S. senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, for president. While she had canvassed for Kerry in Pennsylvania, she wrote for OpenDemocracy.org (November 3, 2004), “we all thought [Kerry] had a very good chance, even though everyone admitted it was hard to get really enthusiastic about him…. The man isn’t the most charismatic ever to walk the earth. But at least he’s not a proto-fascist or a go-it-aloner, and that’s what we seem–apart from a last-minute miracle–to be stuck with now. With four years clear ahead of him and no re-election to worry about, I fear Bush and the ghastly neo- con/neo-liberals around him will now go on the rampage. They can continue with impunity their attacks on the Constitution and on hard-won freedoms; while profound economic inequalities and religious obscurantism spread throughout the country.”

Back to my friends commenting on how students are pushed to consume, not save:  There’s a reason why:  that reason is the global economy, from which the wealthy are taught to profit, whether or not anyone else does.  It has also to do with debt service, the Federal Reserve, the INCOME tax (enabling centralization and redistribution of wealth, as you have so well noted) — and also enabling these antiquated but purposeful (and their purpose is dumbing down and establishing a captive audience prone to consumption, bullying, and illiteracy) so-called public schools.

 

But saving is a habit that can begin early in life to encourage future orientation. After World War II for example, children were taught to save by being able to bring money to school a little at a time to buy U.S. Savings Bonds—saving was encouraged as a patriotic act. Even small amounts, deposited regularly, can through the magic of compound interest yield many times more than what is put in initially. Money deposited in transactional accounts such as checking, savings or money market accounts represent a source of readily available funds, while savings put into investments such as stocks, bonds, retirement and college savings accounts are longer-term investments intended to appreciate over time.

 

And in California,three Los Angeles judges attempt to shut down the entire state’s homeschooling population — in this millennium, a practice which actually gives children (and their parents) time to become more involved in their communities, and often to start and maintain businesses (ONE way to learn to save), or more time to develop skills and talents that a school day modeled on the work day (8 to 5, 8 to 3, etc.) doesn’t enable.

Or ways to fail to acquire some of the worse social habits (sexting, raping others, bullying, forming gangs, etc.) that kids are prone to develop when herded together and boxed up, regulated, and taught over and over again that they really can’t be trusted, but the best thing is emotional dependence upon whoever is at the front of the classroom which, FYI — will be constantly changed as they get older….

 

People produce more, and better, when they are not treated like, or regarded as, cattle.  Alas, the tax system as it exists encourages and enables a whole thickening layer of professionals who believe, perhaps innocently, perhaps sincerely — but wrongly! — that this is their function and calling in life.

 

Meanwhile:

http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2009/09/economy-signs-of-impending-meltdown-are.html

 

 

(i went looking for the image, and otherwise don’t know this blog — but it’s talking, 2009.  I’m going to end — one has to stop somewhere! with his quote of a GAO man, as I was recently quoting the GAO telling (whoever it told) that “since 1992” they’ve been talking about how one needs to require that federal grant and contracting recipients ought to, er, pay taxes and file right themselves, i.e. follow some rules.  Also, that no one knows how much money is owned when even a single entity doesn’t file.  They identified 17,000 out of 80,000 (actually looked at, which is not the whole, I”m sure) who didn’t even register a number with the government contracting database, as they are required to!  They also estimated that the taxes and penalties owed EXCEEDED the DRA (or ARRA) funds distributed, about $350 B (not M, “B”) to $275.  At least from what the GAO could speculate based on its information.

 

So, here we are:

finally, the former head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Mr. David Walker, has been sounding the alarm for some time about the implications of US Government deficits for the ordinary man and woman in the street. In an interview in the Wall Street Journal, he waxed eloquent on the dangers of the current situation. An extract:

Mr. Walker, a 57-year-old accountant, didn’t set out to be a fiscal truth-teller. He rose to be a partner and global managing director of Arthur Anderson, before being named assistant secretary of labor for pensions and benefits during the Reagan administration. Under the first President Bush, he served as a trustee for Social Security and Medicare, an experience that convinced him both programs are looming train wrecks that could bankrupt the country. In 1998 he was appointed by President Bill Clinton to head the GAO, where he spent the next decade issuing reports trying to stem waste, fraud and abuse in government.

Despite many successes, he was able to make only limited progress in reforming Washington’s tangled bookkeeping. When he arrived he was told the Pentagon was nearly a decade away from having a clean audit, or clear evidence that its financial statements were accurate. When he left in 2008, he was told the Pentagon was still a decade away from that goal. “If the federal government was a private corporation, its stock would plummet and shareholders would bring in new management and directors,” he said as he retired from the GAO.

Although he found the work fulfilling, Mr. Walker said he decided to leave last year with a third of his 15-year term left because “there are practical limits on what one can—and cannot—do in that job.”

. . .

“We have four deficits: a budget deficit, a savings deficit, a value-of-the-dollar deficit and a leadership deficit,” he tells one group. “We are treating the symptoms of those deficits, but not the disease.

 

AND:

Our $56 trillion in unfunded [US Government] obligations amount to $483,000 per household. That’s 10 times the median household income—so it’s as if everyone had a second or third mortgage on a house equal to 10 times their income but no house they can lay claim to.” As for this year’s likely deficit of $1.8 trillion, Mr. Walker suggests its size be conveyed thusly: “A deficit that large is $3.4 million a minute, $200 million an hour, $5 billion a day,” he says. That does indeed put things into perspective.

Despite an occasional detour into support for government intervention, Mr. Walker remains the Jeffersonian he grew up as in his native Virginia. “I view the Constitution with deep respect,” he told me. “My ancestors and those of my wife fought and died in the Revolution, and I care a lot about returning us to the principles of the Founding Fathers.”

He notes that today the role of the federal government has grown such that last year less than 40% of it related to the key roles the Founders envisioned for it: defense, foreign policy, the courts and other basic functions. “What happened to the Founders’ intent that all roles not expressly reserved to the federal government belong to the states, and ultimately the people?” he asks. “I’m pleased the recent town halls show people are waking up and realizing it’s time to pay attention to first principles.”

Again, there’s more at the link. The paragraph in bold print is my emphasis. The whole interview with Mr. Walker is recommended reading.

Folks, if you aren’t paying attention to these authorities; if you aren’t actively looking at your financial situation, right now, and deciding what you’re going to do to ride out the storm that’s bearing down on us (and believe me, we ain’t seen nothin’ yet, as far as financial storms go!), thenyou’re about to be swimming for your financial life – without a lifebelt.

It’s coming, friends, and it’s going to get much worse before it gets better. Be prepared.

Peter

Posted by Peter at 9/11/2009 10:24:00 PM
Here (see top of post) is an article relating the RIGHT TO WORK and teacher’s union situations.  Date:  August 18, 2011 and it’s talking about performance vis a vis spending, California (Union) to Texas (right to work):

Commentary: Right-to-work states, not union, create needed jobs

By Mark Fantozzi

For the Cupertino Courier

Posted: 08/18/2011 08:03:26 PM PDT
Updated: 08/18/2011 08:03:26 PM PDT

Despite a $6 billion windfall in tax revenue, the unions representing government employees and teachers are clamoring to raise taxes. Instead of allocating the money from this windfall for education and safety, the Legislature spent it on programs such as requiring hotels to provide fitted sheets on their beds (I am not kidding). By the way, this bill was supported by the hotel workers union. This way, the Democrats blow the money on nonsense and claim they still need to raise taxes.

Just to show you how bad things really are, San Jose City Councilman Pete Constant is being sued by the city’s employee union because he refuses to hire an administrative assistant that he says he doesn’t need. He wants to save the taxpayers’ money, where the union wants to spend it for no other reason than to support a union position.

To go even farther, the teachers union is urging Gov. Jerry Brown to extend taxes that are due to expire at the end of the year, without a vote of the people. David Sanchez, the union’s president, says he is afraid that voters will reject the taxes if they’re put on the ballot after they expire in June. As usual, they threaten further cuts in school spending if taxes are not raised. But the reality is that despite recent cuts, education spending and the student-teacher ratio are about the same as they were in 2004.

From 1970 to 2005, school spending per pupil–adjusted for inflation–doubled, while achievement


scores were flat. Over roughly that same time period, public school employment doubled per student, according to a study by researchers at the University of Washington. Comparing Texas and California, both have very similar demographics, yet Texas outperforms California on all four national tests across the demographic groups, despite spending less money per pupil.Between 2004 and 2007, the state (Calif?) increased K-12 and community college funding to $56 billion from $47 billion. Even as student enrollment declined, schools added 4,000 teaching, 2,100 administrative and 5,200 student support jobs. Meanwhile, school districts that experienced a boom in property tax revenue increased teacher benefits and salaries. Those of you who voted for Measure C should feel a bit suckered right about now.

(The rest of the article is a good read also, showing how a failing school district tried to outwit parents that tried to turn a school into a charter; the tricks of the trade.  It then related this to Gov. Brown’s quick replacement of the state Board of Education on taking office….)
ED.gov describes the US Dept of Education in glowing terms, from 1867 to present but, kind of like HHS when it comes to who’s really responsible for:  child support enforcement, or the family law courts, etc.  — it’s not really their responsibility, it’s the states.  HOWEVER, there is a history of increasing federal control… and expansion.   Interesting read:
The Federal Role in Education

OVERVIEW

Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United States. It is States and communities, as well as public and private organizations of all kinds, that establish schools and colleges, develop curricula, and determine requirements for enrollment and graduation. The structure of education finance in America reflects this predominant State and local role. Of an estimated $1.13 trillion being spent nationwide on education at all levels for school year 2010-2011, a substantial majority will come from State, local, and private sources. This is especially true at the elementary and secondary level, where about 89.2 percent of the funds will come from non-Federal sources.

That means the Federal contribution to elementary and secondary education is about 10.8 percent, which includes funds not only from the Department of Education (ED) but also from other Federal agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services’ Head Start program and the Department of Agriculture’s School Lunch program.

The Federal Role in Education

 

Section I. Summary of the 2012 Budget

During his first two years in office, President Obama has combined unprecedented support for America’s students and schools during tough economic times with extraordinary leadership in promoting transformational reforms at all levels of our education system. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) delivered nearly $100 billion to States and school districts to help address budget shortfalls and meet the needs of schools and students in the midst of the most severe economic recession since the Great Depression. This funding helped save or create an estimated 400,000 jobs, including 325,000 education jobs. The Education Jobs Fund, passed in late summer of 2010, is helping cash-strapped States and districts keep tens of thousands of teachers in the classroom during the 2010-2011 school year.

At the same time, President Obama recognized the need to not just recover from yesterday’s economic recession, but to take bold action to ensure America’s success in tomorrow’s global economic competition. This is why the President used $4 billion in Recovery Act funds to create the Race to the Top program, an initiative he has described as “the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation.” Race to the Top helped support more than 40 States in raising their standards for teaching and learning, and has brought together State and local leaders—Democratic and Republican—to work collaboratively to implement their best ideas for improving their schools.

Obama was elected in great part by Teacher’s Unions, and every time he gets on TV, or Arne Duncan does, talking about “our children” and “our Schools” I wonder what happened to the other paradigms and types of schools that actually still DO exist — miraculously — and are often outperforming the public schools — because they are following different models!
If I am reading “FOLLOWTHEMONEY.org” right here (I filtered to find “industry” influence, choosing the Education Industry, and with in it, Public school teachers, adminstrators, here’s the charts and breakdowns of these industries contributions to:  POliticians (by party) and Ballot measures.
Notice the year 2008, when our current President was elected:
Industry Influence Graph
ANYTHING stand out to you about this chart?  The tall line is Ballot Measures, 2008 (by $$ contributions of Education Industry to)
By charts, below here:

TABLE 1: Government Agencies/Education/Other Contributions to All Candidates and Committees
Year Total Donations to Democrats Donations to Republicans Donations to 3rd Parties or Nonpartisan Donations to Ballot Measures % to Dems % to Repubs
2000 $43,030,573 $23,234,988 $18,864,586 $930,999 $0 54.00% 43.84%
2001 $4,040,809 $2,008,023 $1,875,486 $157,301 $0 49.69% 46.41%
2002 $104,491,756 $39,312,126 $30,266,001 $2,244,486 $32,669,143 37.62% 28.96%
2003 $12,892,585 $6,229,338 $2,995,942 $192,999 $3,474,306 48.32% 23.24%
2004 $138,123,305 $21,858,519 $16,584,879 $965,028 $98,714,879 15.83% 12.01%
2005 $5,199,753 $1,284,171 $954,532 $81,013 $2,880,037 24.70% 18.36%
2006 $85,987,590 $37,251,640 $26,800,365 $1,555,730 $20,379,855 43.32% 31.17%
2007 $5,727,593 $1,990,972 $1,829,239 $357,874 $1,549,508 34.76% 31.94%
2008 $242,917,042 $28,232,169 $18,316,324 $1,317,255 $195,051,293 11.62% 7.54%
2009 $6,415,047 $1,253,826 $1,777,655 $457,111 $2,926,455 19.55% 27.71%
2010 $119,035,646 $50,021,793 $44,349,152 $2,491,182 $22,173,519 42.02% 37.26%
2011 $732,921 $278,576 $444,378 $200 $9,767 38.01% 60.63%
Of the “$195, 051,293” contributed to “Ballot Measures” in 2008, it appears that $180, 887,710 was in my state of California:


Year Total Donations to Democrats Donations to Republicans Donations to 3rd Parties or Nonpartisan Donations to Ballot Measures % to Dems % to Repubs
2003 $1,799,113 $0 $0 $0 $1,799,113 0.00% 0.00%
2004 $75,922,964 $0 $0 $0 $75,922,964 0.00% 0.00%
2005 $1,857,331 $0 $0 $0 $1,857,331 0.00% 0.00%
2006 $12,331,231 $0 $0 $0 $12,331,231 0.00% 0.00%
2008 $180,887,710 $0 $0 $0 $180,887,710 0.00% 0.00%
2009 $266,100 $0 $0 $0 $266,100 0.00% 0.00%
2010 $17,584,809 $0 $0 $0 $17,584,809 0.00% 0.00%

Well time to post this baby…..

 

 

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 15, 2011 at 6:15 pm

How Traffic Tickets Help City Budgets, and Build New Courthouses….during a Budget Crisis

leave a comment »

 

Recommended Reading

I just had someone post a post-length comment to my May 28th, 2011  “What’s Money Got To Do With It?” post.

It talks about judges’ requirements to file their Form 700 (Statement on conflicts of interest), the “high-conflict” relationship between Presiding Judge Katherine Feinstein & the Administrative Offices of the Courts,  and many (many!) other issues.  It is recommended reading; besides commentary specifically on the SF Courts circus (“we’re going to fire everyone!  Courthouses will be shut down!  Divorces will take more than a few months (Say WHAT??)”   “No we’re not — the AOC is going to rescue us with a few million, no strings attached.”  “Wait a minute, there ARE strings attached?  We object! !!”  (and other infighting between the trial courts, the AOC and the Judicial Council) — you will probably learn something about what can get a judge disqualified, including falsifying expense reports.  Although I tend to think that anyone filed for such a “minor” matter probably offended someone in power on another level as well.

We are not, really, amused about the family squabbles (very high-conflict) and cross-accusations between the San Francisco Superior Courts, the California Administrative Office of the Courts (that’s ALL California Courts, but it happens to have an SF address), and the California Judicial Council, (that’s for ALL California Judicial matters) of which the AOC appears to be a subset, and a subset of that is the AFCC-professionals-led ‘CFCC” which of course is all about the welfare of families and children….

I’d like to point us to “Courthousenews.com

Courthouse News ServiceCourthouse News Service

Courthouse News Service is a nationwide news service for lawyers and the news media. Based in Pasadena, California, Courthouse News focuses on civil litigation, from the date of filing through the appellate level. Unlike other Internet-based publishers that simply aggregate information prepared by other content providers, Courthouse News publishes its own original news content prepared by its staff of reporters and editors based across the country.

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C1909963 08/25/1997 ACTIVE COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE WILLIAM GIRDNER
It’s also registered in Nevada as a foreign (out of state) corporation:  in Rhode Island as a News Wire Service focusing on civil litigation,
trademarkia” says this trademark (name of company) is actually “dead” circa 1997 (formation, I gather)  However it’s also registered in Arizona as

e: COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE, INC (FN)
and probably a few more places.   Anyhow, it’s definitely interesting.  And from this we get (along with the latest scoop on the SF Courthouses scandal) an interesting class action, article July 29, 2011 (i.e., recently).
A man tired of getting screwed in traffic court figured out that criminal convictions, by statute, contribute to COURTHOUSE BUILDINGS through a “Courthouse Construction Fund.”   This to me sounds similar to the concept of “extended custody litigation = county /state gets to hold onto collected child support, collect INTEREST on it, get more federal incentives (Title IV-D) in fact, get gold stars from the HHS for, between them, earning money on our distress.  As this money comes to the county level, it is in the county’s best interests to actually fail to collect child support well, and exacerbate family law cases, not to mention get various grants to come to the courts to facilitate dealing with all the flawed, angry, and sometimes confused, parents coming through its doors, which are clogging the dockets.  Clogged dockets then justify more buildings, money, and programs — which brings up the question:
WHO owns the buildings? (usually a corporation.  Who is on the board of those corporations?)  Who is leasing the buildings (answer:  the public).  Who is on the boards of the nonprofits that get the grants to come to the courts that are held in those buildings?  Well, that varies from place to place, but I have a general idea of where some of these individuals conference together to figure out what to call the next round of  “Family Solutions” for their problem-solving Unified Whatnot Courts.
For example, in San Francisco, there is a Pre-Trial Diversion program.    “PTD” is described (for US attorneys) here:  Pre-Trial Diversion is a national practice, and there’s an agency to discuss it:

The National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) would like to thank the United States Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance for its funding of this document and continued support of pretrial diversion programs.

Anyhow, here’s San Francisco’s Pre-Trial Diversion Project, Inc.

Pretrial Diversion

The San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project (SFPDP) provides first-time misdemeanor offenders with court-proceeding alternatives and services such as anger management, parenting, domestic violence, and substance abuse counseling and education.

For more information, contact us at info@pretrial.com

 

I.e., where a victim of DV may wish the matter to be treated as criminal (particularly where injury is involved, or serious threats to life & limb after serious injury), the court’s interest might just be to divert it into counseling instead.  CLogged dockets, you know.  Notice, to find out about it, the address is a *.com, not a *.gov.  It’s an “INC” meaning it’s a corporation.  OK, here I go:
San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project, Inc.
567 Seventh Street, San Francisco, CA 94103
Telephone: (415) 626-4995 
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C0763761 02/11/1976 ACTIVE SAN FRANCISCO PRETRIAL DIVERSION PROJECT, INC. WILLIAM S LEONG
The first thing I notice is that it’s been around for a long time, and that its registered agent sounds real familiar, as does the process.  A 2008 monograph (with DOJ support, via a grant) describes the concept, and comments that this hasn’t been studied/surveyed, summarized, etc. since 1982!

Background

Over the past few years, criminal justice practitioners have rethought their approaches to crime prevention, adjudication, and punishment.

As they were not publishing this and telling the rest of us so much, are we to be telepathic and understand that the criminal laws are no longer to be taken as such?

Growing corrections populations, larger court dockets, and the rising number of former prisoners returning to American communities have forced localities to be as smart about using criminal justice resources as they are tough on those who commit crimes. In the last decade, America’s criminal justice systems have become laboratories for innovative programs and collaborative problem-solving approaches. A body of developing research suggests that these approaches can reduce crime, promote better victim services, and enhance public trust in the justice system.

Interestingly, many of these problem-solving approaches are based on the well-established concept of pretrial diversion—community-based alternatives for nonviolent defendants to better address the underlying social and psychological reasons for their criminal behavior. Specialty courts, community-based sanctions for quality-of-life crimes, and services and training for former prisoners all have at their core the idea of using methods outside of traditional case processing and sentencing to provide meaningful interventions and sanctions for criminal behavior and to help reduce future criminality.

Pretrial diversion programs have operated successfully at the federal, state, and local levels for decades providing close supervision and needed services to thousands of defendants each year.

This particular corporation is a nonprofit:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
SAN FRANCISCO PRETRIAL DIVERSION PROJECT, INC. 020881 Charity Current SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity
1
it has quite a decent budget:

iscal Begin: 01-JUL-08
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-09
Total Assets: $466,382.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $3,959,457.00
RRF Received: 03-MAY-10
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-09
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-10
Total Assets: $396,321.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $3,527,864.00
RRF Received: 17-FEB-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
It’s purpose (incorporating documents) show a contract with the city to provide alternative to the criminal courts, at the discretion of the Municipal Court.  Some letters may have not described well, and the doc’t is available on-line.

Statement describing progress and accomplishments during the year in carrying out exempt (charitable) purposes.

San Francisco Pretrial Diversion·Project, Inc. was formed in February, 1976 to undertake financial and accounting responsi- bilities for operation of a court diversion project in San Francisco. The corporation signed a contract with the City and County of San Francisco undertaking this responsibility and now receives LEAA funds through the City to be disbursed for operation of the Project. The Project itself commenced operations in April, 1976, when it began to receive the’first referrals of misdemeanor defendants from the Municipal Court. These defendants are interviewed from a program of education, training, counseling or other activities .. The Diversion Project reports back to the Court with a recommendation for or against diversion three weeks after the referral. If the Court decides to divert the defendant, criminal proceedings are suspended for a period of 90 days to one year. If the diverted d~fendunt completes the program assigned satisfactorily and conforms to the other conditions of diversion, the charges against him are dismissed. At present the Project is receiving approximately 150 misdemeanor oefendants each month for evaluation and recommendation. Approximately 100 defendants are being diverted by the Municipal Court each month. The Project currently has a caseload of approximately 500 persons,

Wow.  Sounds like fatherhood programs too — the individual is over the barrel for something (probably child support payment) and then is diverted to another program.  From the Website: In reading websites, we are basically reading the folklore of an organization.  Here’s this one’s:

Who We Are

 
The SFPDP building entrance.

 

 

The San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project (SFPDP) organization was established in 1976 through the joint efforts of a group of socially conscious citizens, the San Francisco Bar Association and the Judges of the Municipal Courts.

Their experience had shown that most individuals charged with a misdemeanor offense did not benefit perceptibly by jail time. They were convinced that both the goals of crime prevention and rehabilitation would be better served by an alternative program of education, rehabilitation and community service work. SFPDP was formed to provide “first time” misdemeanor offenders of non violent charges an opportunity to have their case dismissed by completing a program.

Continuing our tradition and philosophy of “Dignity and Respect, Compassion and Accountability,” SFPDP added more programs designed to address various needs of the Courts, the Clients and the Community.

 

 

 

Interesting concept.  The SF Bar Association, some Municipal Court Judges, and “socially conscious citizens” decided there was a better alternative to the justice system, and so simply went about making one.  What a grass roots effort:

re:  Socially conscious citizens:  There are just 4 people listed as incorporators on the founding documents. We’re going to look at who:

Irving Reichert, Jr., Frank E. Farella, Robert G. Sproul, Jr.. and for 4 months? only Thomas H. Gee (same address as Reichert).

One was Mr. Reichert, who as we see above was Exec. Dir. of the SF Bar association at the time, i.e., an attorney.

 

(1) IRVING REICHERT, JR.

One of the original signers (and the registered agent) was Irving Reichert, Jr., (d. 1997)  who apparently got some of the ideas for this from the British system, after a Ford Foundation study/travel grant 1972ff..

Irving Reichert Jr., renowned Bay Area attorney and dedicated legal reformer, died of a heart attack Saturday at his home in Palo Alto at the age of 76.

Mr. Reichert had a long and varied legal career. After graduating from the University of California at Berkeley and Harvard Law School, he was a law clerk to former state Court of Appeal Justice Raymond Peters before joining the San Francisco district attorney’s office, where he was an assistant district attorney from 1951 to 1958.

. . .

In 1972, he received a Ford Foundation Travel Study grant, which took him to England for a year to study the British criminal justice system.

He returned to the Bay Area in 1973 and served as a consultant to the American Justice Institute and the Santa Clara County Criminal Justice Pilot Program.    From 1975 until 1985, Mr. Reichert served as the executive director of the San Francisco Bar Association, concentrating on expanding its role in providing legal services for the poor and enlarging its involvement in the criminal justice system.

In 1987, he came out of retirement — neglecting “my promising career in lawn bowling” — to take charge of the Own Recognizance Bail Project, a program that he had been instrumental in founding several years earlier.

 

 (2)  FRANK E. FARELLA

Partner in Farella, Brown & Martel, LLP.   He does mergers and acquisitions with an interest in the beverage / wine industry in particular.

FRANK E. FARELLA, PARTNER

Frank E. Farella, a founding partner of Farella Braun + Martel, maintains a diverse practice in corporate, financial and international transactions.  The firm knows quite a bit about formation of trusts, nonprofits, family estates, etc. and publishes on these and other topics.

Frank E. Farella Mr. Farella owns and operates his family’s vineyard and winery in the Napa Valley, Farella-Park Vineyard and is a member of the Napa Valley Vintners Association.

Mr. Farella served as President of the Bar Association of San Francisco in 1978.  He chaired a California State Bar Committee and authored the California legislation requiring attorneys to arbitrate fee disputes.  He has been listed in Best Lawyers in America for Corporate Law for almost three decades.

 

(3) Robert G. Sproul, Jr.

JusT FOR THE RECORD, ROBERT, JR.’s father was president of UCBerkeley, which explains why there’s a “sproul plaza” named after him.  He died one year before formation of this organization, SF pretrial diversion project.  There is a “robert G. Sproul, Jr. Award” which I see relates to pro bono, civil rights, diversity, etc.

 

 

I can’t find much about this person except who received awards named after him, at this time. There is an oral history about his father (in 2 volumes) at UCB

(4) Thomas H. Gee

Born in Canton, China, was a SF attorney and Library commissioner (Secretary of this organization) and died in March 1999.  “A native of Canton, China, Mr. Gee came to the United States in 1929. He was a 1941 graduate of San Jose State College. He served as a sergeant in the Army Air Corps, and was assigned to the U.S. Military Intelligence Language School. He was a 1954 graduate of Lincoln University Law School and a longtime administrative law judge for the state of Nevada in Las Vegas.   

He served as president of the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association in 1948 and in 1991. In the 1970s, he was a founder and administrator of Northeast Medical Services, a Chinatown health organization. He also served on the boards of two other prominent Chinatown social service organizations, On Lok Senior Health Services and Self Help for the Elderly.

(IF I have the right Thomas H. Gee).

Corporationwiki mentions him as president of a ” Commercial and Industrial Development of San Francisco Chinatown, Inc”

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C0663011 08/17/1972 SUSPENDED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OF SAN FRANCISCO CHINATOWN, INC. SAMUEL NG

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OF SAN FRANCISCO CHINATOWN, INC. EX513099 Charity Exempt – Active SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity
1

Interesting how this one can still be active — look at the details!

Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.
Registrant Information
Full Name: COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OF SAN FRANCISCO CHINATOWN, INC. FEIN:
Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 0663011
Registration Number: EX513099
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/1991
Registration Status: Exempt – Active Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: 754 COMMERCIAL ST. Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: SAN FRANCISCO CA 94108
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
No Related Documents
Prerequisite Information

(do you see an EIN# there?  I don’t either….)  There is a Chinatown CDC still active, a compilation (April 1977) from other organizations:

On April 1, 1977, five grassroots organizations came together and created the nonprofit community development organization theChinatown Resource Center (CRC).  The newly formed CRC comprised of organizations that advocated for affordable housing, tenant rights, open space, transportation and revitalization issues –y it

So, obviously these people that started SFPD in 1976 were socially conscious, socially active individuals (it also being the 1970s!) of very influential backgrounds (Sproul, Reichert, Farella, all of them) at least at that time, movers and shakers. So they figured out that it was time to change the criminal justice system in SF by diverting cases; incorporated and did so.  So maybe I should give the Family Justice Center folk a break — after all, everyone is doing this, right?  Being employed by the public in the legal, law enforcement, district attorney, or family law (etc.) professions — and simply, while there, CHANGING them, because some had a brainstorm that doing so would be a good idea.  They just forgot to run it by the public — who was paying — and the poor  — who would be most affected by it.

ANYHOW, the 2009 IRS shows about $4 million of gross receipts ($605K from program service income) of which $3.6 million was spent on services (not described in much detail), $102K for Mr. Leong (salary); there are no contractors, there are thousands in “professional fees” and there is a “management committee” which is composed of (I’m going to list them):

Judge Herbert Donaldson

Judge Kay Tsenin Judge Teri Jackson Judge Loretta Giorgi

Commissioner Ron Albers

District Attorney Kamala Harris represented by Greg Barge

Public Defender Jeff Adachi represented by Kwixuan Maloof

Patrick Boyd, Chief Adult Probation Officer

OK, if I am not mistaken, all these judges are paid by the state (not counting any undisclosed fringe benefits).  The commissioner, district attorney and probably public defender and probation officers are probably paid by City & County of SF.  Moreover, the SFPD is also paid by contract with the City.   Lord knows if there are also private donations — but how is this not a conflict of interest?

There is also a “mentor court” since 1996….based on (it says) a model from (across the bay) Oakland Court

Another way someone can be induced to participate in an SFPD-style alternative is to get a PARKING or TRAFFIC TICKET.  That’s not too hard to do in overcrowded San Francisco!    Going into community service after being dinged (or hit) with a ticket, is kind of interesting when one thinks about who set up and paid for this to start with — Bar Association, Judges, and paid for by the City.  So, ostensibly, but assigning enough traffic tickets, some real community service might get done.

Project 20 
The Project 20 Fine Alternatives program is for people who cannot afford to pay their parking tickets or traffic violations. People are assigned community service hours in lieu of paying.

Project 20 serves the City and County of San Francisco. All clients must have a referral from either of these departments to participate in Project 20. Out-of-county cases require a referral from the California League of Alternative Service Prorgrams.

For Parking Tickets: Clients are referred from the Department of Parking and Traffic. DPT is located at 11 South Van Ness Ave., (415) 701-3000.

For Traffic Violations: Clients are referred from the Traffic Division at the Hall of Justice, 850 Bryant Street, Room 101.

I wonder what kind of “bang for the buck” a traffic ticket translated into free cleanup etc. services for the city would be:

Q: HOW MANY HOURS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE HOURS MUST I PERFORM?
A: The number of hours is determined by the amount of the fine assessed and the type of fine incurred. Parking and traffic fines are assessed at different rates.  For parking fines, community service is performed at the rate of $6 per hour, for example: $120 parking fines would require 20 hours of community service.  For traffic fines, community service is performed at a rate of $10 per hour.  Please note that Project 20 does not set these rates.

. . .

Q: IS THERE A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS ALLOWED FOR Project 20 WORK? 
A: Yes, there is a limit of 10 citations total (or $250.00) per vehicle per calendar year, (January 1 through December 31). Beyond this, a citizen can still sign up for Project 20 but will be required to pay 50% of the contract fine amount, and the remainder can be worked off in community service hours.

Q: CAN I DO MY Project 20 WORK ANYWHERE?
A: No, since the citations were issued in San Francisco, the community service must be completed in San Francisco. We encourage clients to participate with the NEW citY! DPW community service project because it’s the quickest way to complete the program while helping to beautify San Francisco’s neighborhoods.

Q: IS THERE A SIGN-UP FEE?
A: YES! Project 20 charges a nominal program administration fee which is based on the amount of assigned community service hours.

Q: WHY MUST I PAY A PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION FEE TO DO Project 20?
A: Project 20 operates solely on program administration fees collected. This program receives no city, state or federal funds and its existence relies entirely on the nominal fees paid by its clients.

So, if someone gets fines totalling $250 / year, San Francisco can get approximately one week (6 X 40 hours) of work from the individual if it was a parking ticket.   
Or, depending one’s category of need, you might get this kind of help, or I saw acupuncture also listed.
SELF-AWARENESS/ DRAMA THERAPY STRESS MGMT/DRUMMING
Introduces clients to strategies for curtailing obsessive thinking, anxiety, depression and hostility. During these weekly groups, participants learn to utilize relaxation techniques and conflict resolution using drama therapy, non-verbal drumming, and meditation techniques.

I have a few problems with judges, district attorneys, probation officers, and a court commissioner, encouraged by prominent attorneys, to take into their hands whether or whether not to divert what would be a criminal case, perhaps a domestic violence case with no criminal past, into “diversionary” activities designed to reform the individual.  That this reform will help — and because the prisons are overcrowded — is a theory.  I have a problem in particular with this one, from San Francisco:  I’ve excerpted a few paragraphs, and to the right, you’ll see I actuallys tarted a page investigating this case from 2005.  At least, in 2005, that’s when they found the woman’s body in the trunk of a car.  McAlpin is the man (the aggressor), and Melnitchenko is the woman (the victim):

– On Dec. 23, 2001, McAlpin went to Melnitchenko’s place of work in San Francisco, forced his way in and threw Melnitchenko against a wine crate, prosecutors say. Charges were filed, but McAlpin went free pending the outcome of the case.

— In March 2002, McAlpin went to Melnitchenko’s home in San Francisco, put his hand over her mouth, pinched her nose and held her so hard that her mouth bled, according to prosecutors. He held her hostage for two hours, at one point ripping the phone out of her hand, prosecutors say. He was arrested and jailed briefly.

— In July 2002, McAlpin, who was free again despite the two pending cases, allegedly broke in to Melnitchenko’s home. “He said, ‘If you don’t come back to me within a week, I’m going to kill you, bitch,’ ” Cogan said. He fled when San Francisco police arrived, leading officers on a pursuit to the East Bay, prosecutors say. He later turned himself in.

— On Oct. 31, 2003, McAlpin admitted to stalking, assaulting and threatening Melnitchenko in charges stemming from the three cases.

— In December 2003, Cogan sought a six-year prison term, but McAlpin was allowed to plead guilty, over prosecutors’ objections, to retired Judge Herbert Donaldson, who sentenced him to time served and probation. “We felt his acts were so significant to warrant state prison, even without a prior criminal history. I brought in Anastasia, her mom and sister to testify,” Cogan said. The judge, she said, granted probation “over our strong objection.” Donaldson also ordered McAlpin to undergo counseling and spend 52 weeks in a domestic violence program.

— On Aug. 1, 2004, McAlpin allegedly tried to kidnap Melnitchenko as a co-worker escorted her to her car after work. McAlpin allegedly slapped her and carried her down the street, saying: “You’re dead, bitch!” Melnitchenko escaped when a passer-by sprayed McAlpin with Mace. Melnitchenko suffered scratches to her face, prosecutors said.

— In October 2004, Melnitchenko failed to show up at the preliminary hearing in the case and could not be reached, despite what prosecutors described as “numerous attempts.” Upton said Melnitchenko was doubtless scared of her attacker and justifiably afraid of testifying. “If the system had sent a message it could protect her, she would have moved forward.”

— On Dec. 1, 2004, the case was resolved with a guilty plea and a sentence of one year in jail.

– In the spring of 2005, McAlpin was freed under a judge’s order that he attend domestic violence classes and come to court each month. He had progress reports in April, May, June and August, but failed to show twice, including this month. A judge issued a bench warrant for him on Oct. 13.

I forgot to identify the article — here is the title and credits:

Slaying suspect’s violent past / 8 felony convictions, but he’d never been sentenced to prison

October 25, 2005|By Jaxon Van Derbeken, Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writers

Scott McAlpin stalked, harassed and threatened his former girlfriend for three years, once even carrying her down the street in an attempted kidnapping until someone maced him, authorities say.

They had no children together, and I don’t recall, but believe had never lived together.  Apparently this young man felt that an immigrant had no right to say No!

On Monday, the 24-year-old El Sobrante man was accused of murdering his ex-girlfriend, Anastasia Melnitchenko, 21, of San Francisco, and stuffing her body in the trunk of his Honda Civic.

The retired judge who gave this man opportunity to kill his ex-girlfriend, sentenced him to time served and probation, was also socially conscious, compassionate, understanding progressive, and presided over a “behavioural court.”  The photo is from his obituary (2008, of cancer):

Judge Herbert Donaldson dies: ‘A born jurist

December 10, 2008|By Michael Taylor, Chronicle Staff Writer

  • Superior Court Judge Herbert Donaldson presides over behavior court at the Hall of Justice. Judy Mauve, who has a court file many inches thick, is now out of jail and in a treatment program - which is where the judge, DA and public defender agree she should have been all along. The problem is that too many people like her - with major mental illnesses - are in jail. She's spent more than a year behind bars and has more than 50 arrests for everything from arson, drug possession to prostitution. Diagnosed as bipolar and severely depressed, she now appears every other week before a judge who presides over an unusual new program - behaviorial health court. Event on 8/7/03 in San Francisco. MICHAEL MALONEY / The Chronicle
    Superior Court Judge Herbert Donaldson presides over behavior court at the Hall of Justice. Judy Mauve, who has a court file many inches thick, is now out of jail and in a treatment program – which is where the judge, DA and public defender agree she should have been all along. The problem is that too many people like her – with major mental illnesses – are in jail. She’s spent more than a year behind bars and has more than 50 arrests for everything from arson, drug possession to prostitution. Diagnosed as bipolar and severely depressed, she now appears every other week before a judge who presides over an unusual new program – behaviorial health court. Event on 8/7/03 in San Francisco. MICHAEL MALONEY / The Chronicle
    Credit: Michael Maloney

Herbert Donaldson, a retired Superior Court judge who was widely known in San Francisco for his role in gay organizations long before it was either acceptable or fashionable, and for his tenure as one of the city’s more compassionate and community-oriented jurists, died Friday at his home in San Francisco, surrounded by his friends and his three cats. …

During the 1960s, he was chief attorney for the central office of the San Francisco Neighborhood Legal Assistance Foundation,** which provided legal services for the poor. Four years after his 1999 retirement from the bench, he served a three-year term as the first judge of the newly created Behavioral Health Court, a special branch of the San Francisco Superior Court system designed for defendants with mental health problems.

Jennifer Johnson, a deputy public defender in San Francisco, said Monday that Judge Donaldson “was instrumental in shepherding us through the process of breaking down barriers between agencies that don’t traditionally work together.”

**in 2000, this group, merging with two East Bay groups, became “Bay Area Legal Aid.”  See URL for description..  they handle domestic violence issues — but not as criminal matters; they do not deal with criminal matters, but claim to provide domestic violence protection, and I’m sure, do provide some.

Priority Areas

Practice Areas

  • Domestic Violence Protection: BayLegal helps those needing to escape from dangerous or abusive home situations. Domestic violence survivors are assisted in stopping the violence and creating safe and stable homes for themselves and their families. BayLegal handles all family law matters related to domestic violence, including full legal representation in dissolution proceedings,** including obtaining support orders and protective orders, and also assists immigrant victims of domestic violence and victims of sexual assault.
  • Economic Security:  BayLegal assists low-income Bay Area residents who need help getting or keeping their basic safety-net benefits. BayLegal helps people through direct legal representation, education, outreach, and also provides training to public benefits workers. BayLegal’s economic security work is designed to help families achieve basic economic self-sufficiency.
  • Homelessness Prevention and Expanding Affordable Housing:BayLegal helps low-income Bay Area residents with housing issues. BayLegal staff works to prevent homelessness, preserve and expand affordable housing, and fight illegal evictions.
  • Health Care Access:  BayLegal helps low-income Bay Area residents get the health care services they need. Attorneys assist people with enrolling in and obtaining uninterrupted services from health insurance programs.

Clients Served
In 2008, more than 70,000 people benefited from Baylegal’s services.

Funding
BayLegal is funded by a combination of government and private grants, as well as corporate, law firm and individual donations. We are the only organization in the Bay Area to receive federal funds from the Legal Services Corporation.

This (from their 2000 IRS 990 statement) describes the merger and who “Legal Services Corporation” is:

Bay Area Legal Aid (formerly San Francisco Neighborhood Legal Assistance Foundation) EIN #94-1650231 Details of Name Change

In 1999, the Legal Services Corporation consolidated six Bay Area service areas into one service area. The Boards of five programs obtained a $15,000 grant to consider a merger. A merger consultant worked with six entities: Community Legal Services, Inc. (CLS), Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation (CCLS), San Francisco Neighborhood Legal Assistance Foundation (SFNLAF), {{Judge Donaldson, founder}} Alameda County Bar Association, Legal Aid of the North Bay, Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County. By June of 1999, only CLS, CCLS, and SFNLAF remained in merger discussions and the Boards voted for merger. In November 1999, the designated new Board of Directors hired Ramon Arias to become the Director of the new program named Bay Area Legal Aid. SFNLAF was renamed Bay Area Legal Aid as the surviving corporation. A core of private attorneys from large law firms prepared the major documents and conducted a due diligence review of the program. Local bar associations designated new board members during the week of December 8, 1999, and on January 3, 2000 the new board held its first meeting.

Bay Area Legal Aid (BALA) is a California not-for-profit corporation that began operations on January 1, 2000. The Legal Services Corporation (LSC), a not-for profit corporation established by Congress to administer a national legal assistance program, primarily funds BALA. BALA provides specialized legal assistance in the areas of welfare, domestic violence and fair housing, among others, for very low-income residents of the San Francisco Bay area.

The 5 officers (apparently 4 of them attorneys) are moderately paid, all under $100K.  BALA shows $10.4 million assets and $9.5 revenues, as of 2010.
Legal Services Corporation is itself a 1974 founded, Washington DC-based nonprofit with an usual start:

LSC-funded programs provide a wide range of civil legal assistance to their clients. The most frequent cases involve:

  • Family law: LSC programs assist victims of domestic violence by obtaining protective and restraining orders, help parents obtain and keep custody of their children, help family members obtain guardianship for children without parents, and provide representation and assistance on other family law matters. More than a third of all cases closed by the local programs are family law cases.
  • and….
  • Who are helped by LSC-funded programs?

    Three out of four clients are women — many of whom are struggling to keep their children safe and their families together. Overall, the clients are the most vulnerable among us and are as diverse as our nation, encompassing all races, ethnic groups and ages, including the working poor, veterans, homeowners and renters facing foreclosure or evictions, families with children, farmers, people with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, the elderly and victims of natural disasters.

AND — get this:   “Board of Directors Profiles

LSC is headed by an 11-member Board of Directors appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. By law, the Board is bipartisan: no more than six members may be of the same political party.
I’m looking at the board members, and so far, all of them were appointed by our fatherhood loving President Obama in 2009, including CHarles N.W. Keckler, with this background, including Harvard undergraduate and experience in Chicago:

Charles N.W. KecklerFrom 2007-2009, Prof. Keckler was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Senior Advisor at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families where he worked on regulatory matters and oversaw networks of federal grantees providing billions of dollars of services to disadvantaged populations. In this role, he testified before Congress and led the United States diplomatic delegation to the Organization of American States Conference on Social Development.

Prior to his work with HHS, Prof. Keckler taught civil procedure and comparative law for two years at George Mason University School of Law. He began his academic career as a lecturer at Northwestern Law School. He previously practiced as an appellate and trial litigator with Mayer Brown in Chicago….

I’m beginning to understand why, in the years of my family law (in this Bay area, though not SF) I was completely unable to get ANY help from Bay Area Legal Aid.
ANYHOW, this retired Judge Herbert Donaldson, sentenced, incredibly, McAlpin to “time served” after which he went out and murdered his girlfriend, as he’d promised her he would.   Somewhere in there, the domestic violence intervention program nonprofit also got itself a warm body, probably good for the next round of grant applications at the time, although I imagine the negative press was a bit of a drawback this time.
Note:  this is not the only murder to follow a diversionary sentence to Batterers Intervention (or anger management) classes.
Now we are ready to look at this COURTHOUSE NEWS recent NEWS: and I have a little more research to do on this Courthouse Construction Fund:

     SACRAMENTO (CN) – A federal class action claims California’s Administrative Office of the Courts and the state Supreme Court are “using the Administrative Office of the Courts as a collection agency to build new courthouses for themselves,” by adding fees for a “Courthouse Construction Fund” to traffic tickets and other fines.
     Lead plaintiff Jessee Welch Jr. calls this “self dealing” by the defendant agencies, which have an unbearable conflict of interest that can be expressed by a simple equation: “Convictions = Courthouse, No Convictions = No Courthouse.”
     The budget disaster suffered by California’s Administrative Office of the Courts has been extensively reported by Courthouse News. Welch says that “the sole source of money for the courthouses is the ‘Courthouse Construction Fund.'”
     “The entire funding scheme implemented by statute and being embraced fully by the court is an assessment that has as its sole condition precedent the conviction of people,” Jessee Welch says. “If there is no conviction, there is no assessment. Without assessments there can be no courthouses. The court wants courthouses. Therefore, the court must convict.”
     He adds: “There is a dollar for dollar, conviction for conviction, direct benefit bestowed upon the Court. The very court that will make the rules, interpret the laws, determine credibility, and exercise almost unfettered discretion in every criminal case. All state appeals, up to and including the Supreme Court of California, have the same issue of ethics and conflict of interest and are therefore incompetent to hear this case.”
     Welch says he got a speeding ticket in June 2009, which he fought unsuccessfully.
     He claims that he was “denied evidence, ordered to return to court numerous times, denied numerous dismissal motions, and subject to unethical conduct by both the prosecutor and the traffic commissioner. Welch, finally exhausted by the burdens placed upon him and under the advice of counsel, plead[ed] to the offense and filed a timely appeal.” But he lost that too, so he paid the fine and the cost of his insurance increased.
     Welch claims no California court should hear his case, as they all have the same conflict of interest.
     “If (any) person is found to have violated any law, i.e. found guilty or admits, then the Administrative Office of the Courts shall impose an assessment. The sole purpose of that assessment is to build new courthouses for the benefit of the very court that heard the case. In fact, the fund the assessment must be deposited to is named ‘Courthouse Construction Fund.'”
     Welch says the courts violated his right to due process: “the California court hearing Welch’s case never informed him that the California court was going to construct new courthouses and the sole source of money for the courthouses is the ‘Courthouse Construction Fund.’ Welch was not told that to contribute to the ‘Courthouse Construction Fund’ Welch must first be found liable for any offense.”
     He claims to represent all people whose cases were heard by California’s criminal courts.

Well, THAT’s interesting!
HEre’s a sample article, same timeframe:  “Group Wants to Cut Courthouse Fund
A California court budget group recommended a $60 million cut to the courthouse construction fund last Friday, possibly affecting the proposed $58 million Santa Clarita courthouse.

The $60 million cut was recommended by the Trial Court Budget Working Group to help pay daily court costs for the Judicial Branch of California, said Philip Carrizosa, spokesman for the Judicial Council of California Courts’ Administrative Office of the Courts.

“We don’t know yet how this will affect individual courthouse projects, such as the one planned for Santa Clarita,” Carrizosa said. “But our plans are to continue with negotiations with Los Angeles County to secure a site for that courthouse.”

This cut comes after the state borrowed $310 million from the courthouse construction fund and took $350 million from the judicial branch’s general budget to help balance the state budget.

The state has not said when it will give the $310 million back to the courthouse-construction fund, Carrizosa said.

According to Carrizosa, members of the Court Facilities Working Group will decide how to proceed with court construction in light of the recent cuts.

The California Legislature approved the courthouse-construction fund in 2008. Court-user fees were supposed to generate $5 billion over 5 years for the fund, but the fund has less than $100 million in it now, Carrizosa said.

Currently, 41 courthouses are waiting to be built or updated by the courthouse construction fund. Sixteen of those projects are projected to cost over $100 million each.

A little more info from January 11 (official stuff) and I’ll be back on this one!

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 14, 2011 at 3:11 pm

(Speaking of CCA profits): Franklin County, OH Judge allows sale of 5 prisons; there are 3 out of state bidders

with one comment

Speaking of Correction Corporations of America, and

Remember, I blogged once on “The Business of Detention” which appears to be an excellent investigative project:

Business Of Detention Home

and Corrections Corporation of America

and political lobbying, which did produce profits:

To complete the seamless connections between CCA and its federal funders, the company has hired former government officials to head key programs.

CCA’s Senior Vice President Mike Quinlan is credited with obtaining its credibility among federal clients after coming to the company with a 22-year career in public sector corrections and serving as Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons from 1987 to 1992.

“The collective corrections experience of CCA’s operations and management team, much of it gained during distinguished careers in federal or state corrections systems, is one of the most impressive in the country,” said Quinlan on the company’s website.

In 2004, after nearly 25 years with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Kim Porter joined CCA as Senior Director of Federal Customer Relations. Porter’s primary responsibility is to manage CCA’s relationship with ICE. Anthony Odom came on board to manage CCA’s relations with USMS after he retired in 2004 from a 32-year career with the agency.

CCA’s general counsel, Gustavus Puryear IV, could give the revolving door another turn. Puryear made headlines this year when President Bush nominated him for a federal judge seat in the Middle District of Tennessee, where CCA is headquartered. Puryear has worked as a speech writer for Vice President Dick Cheney. He testified during a Senate hearing that he would recuse himself from cases involving the company.

Among the politicians strongly connected with CCA is Tennessee’s Lamar Alexander.  This listing service of the top 10, top 50 (etc.) richest Congressmen & women, shows him at #24.  A browse through this list shows clearly that among these wealthy, next to ZERO of them got that way through jobs.   They have real estate, they have stocks, and some of the younger members seem to have holdings (or run business) involved in Technology, which seems smart as it is EVERYwhere.  Others married Rockefeller relatives, etc. Topping the list is Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts in 2010.  This talks about their losses.  Despite those losses, they are Congresspeople, often with spouses (and assets in the name of those spouses) beneficiaries of family trusts and “blind trusts.”  They vote on things such as how society will look for people who have none of these options, including where incarcerated family members may be dwelling, and who is handling how to get profits from THAT company.

This is from 2009

24. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)
$12.13(that’s million)

The Tennessee Senator remains financially steady, reporting a slight 2 percent dip in his minimum net worth in 2008.

Alexander reported the sale of at least $1.5 million in stock of Bright Horizons Family Solutions, a national workplace child care services provider. The sale included stock Alexander previously valued at $500,000 to $1 million, as well as stocks held by his wife previously valued at “over $1 million.”

The Senator continues to own $5 million to $25 million of stock in Processed Foods Corp., a Knoxville-based company where he served on the board prior to his election to the Senate in 2002. His wife also owns “over $1 million” in company stock.

The Alexanders also list numerous real estate holdings, including commercial buildings and undeveloped properties, such as a Nantucket, Mass., plot that Alexander values at $1 million to $5 million, which his wife also lists as an asset valued at “over $1 million.”

By Contrast, the 57-year old Sen. Mark Harmon, a freshman legislator, ranked #5 in 2009.  Just for information:

5. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)
$72.37 million

The Virginia Senator lands on the highest rung among the 11 freshman lawmakers who joined the 50 wealthiest Members of Congress.

Warner made his fortune as a co-founder of Nextel telecommunications company and via an investment in Columbia Capital.

Among his assets, Warner is the beneficiary of the MRW Trust, which initially served as a blind trust after his election to the Virginia governor’s office in 2001 until 2006. The fund includes a money market account valued at $5 million to $25 million, as well as numerous city and state bonds.

Nonetheless, Warner reported nearly $19 million less in personal wealth than he did in his previous financial disclosure form filed as a candidate ahead of the 2008 elections.

Warner reported $9 million less in U.S. Treasury notes than he did as a candidate. He also reduced the value of two investment funds, Pointer LP and Signature Financial Management, both of which dropped from the $5 million to $25 million category to the $1 million to $5 million column.

In addition, Warner reports holdings in three investment partnerships worth $5 million to $25 million each.

Co-founded Nextel.  Investment.  Set up as a beneficiary of a blind trust (the trust spins of interest or other income, obviously).  That it has city and state bonds means the city and state owe the trust money at interest; that’s what (as I understand the term) BONDS are.    Also Treasury notes, and investment partnerships.  He’s a Harvard grad, no military duty …..After losing $19 million, he still ranks at #5.  He’s married with three children.

Now remember those women in the Chowchilla (or wherever) prison system, as reported in 2000, that may not have $5.00 and if they need more than 5 sanitary napkins (did anyone say tampons?) per month, may have to sell themselves for sex to get some more.  THis may be tricky when rape (not actually paying with bartered goods for services) is already clearly a problem in prisons.  And many women who got to prison had experienced abuse before getting there, possibly related to their drug habits, not that it’s an excuse.

(Sorry, I can’t resist).   “Roll Call” this August 15 (by Amanda Becker) shows the Bachmanns (as in Michelle Bachmann) with about $2.8 million:

Republican presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann has assets worth up to $2.8 million, the largest of which are the building housing her husband’s psychotherapy clinic and a family farm, according to disclosure forms she filed late Friday.

Anyone ever think about tracking the real estate in which family law business is transacted?  I know I have…..

What if women’s prison was in Ohio?  So here’s Corrections Corporation of America, that invested lobbying and  has former prison board employees on its board:

Well, here they are again.

Ohio to Proceed With Sale of Five Prisons

After Judge Denies Delay Request

By Mark Niquette – Aug 31, 2011 1:32 PM PT
(THIS IS THE ENTIRE ARTICLE< FYI):

Ohio will proceed with its plan to sell five prisons after a county judge denied a request today for a temporary restraining order to stop the sale.

The Rehabilitation and Correction Department scheduled a news conference for tomorrow in Columbus to announce the contract awards, the department said in a release.

“We believe our process is sound,” Carlo LoParo, a spokesman for the department, said by telephone from Columbus.

ProgressOhio, a Columbus nonprofit group that describes itself as a “progressive voice for Ohio citizens,” filed a lawsuit to block the sale on grounds it violated the state constitution.

Judge Patrick E. Sheeran of Franklin County Common Pleas Court declined to issue a restraining order and set a hearing for Sept. 13 in Columbus to consider legal arguments.

“Neither the selection of bidders nor the awarding of a contract will constitute irreparable harm for purposes of this motion,” Sheeran wrote in his 16-page opinion.

Ohio wants to sell five prisons, including one that’s closed and two that are privately operated, to raise an estimated $200 million to help balance its budget.

Three companies submitted bids in June to buy and operate the facilities, according to the correction department. They are: Nashville-based Corrections Corp. of America Inc., Geo Group Inc. (GEO) of Boca RatonFlorida, and Management and Training Corp. of Centerville,Utah.

The state offered three combinations of prisons for sale and might award packages to different bidders, the agency has said. The department plans to sign contracts by Sept. 1 for companies to assume operation of the prisons by Jan. 1.

ProgressOhio and other opponents of the sale say the state won’t get a fair value or realize the projected savings of $6.6 million annually. Ohio’s alternative is closing prisons and sending thousands of inmates out of state, Gary C. Mohr, director of the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, has said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Mark Niquette in Columbus, Ohio atmniquette@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Tannenbaum at mtannen@bloomberg.net

So the companies running the Ohio prisons would be run by groups from either TN, FL, or UTAH.
For starters ,the state could start looking into its Fatherhood Commissioners, Practitioners, Trainers, Promoters, and so forth.  Make em file and if they have employees, have them report the income.
Franklin County is building a new courthouse, too.  Wonder who the contractors are, who owns the real estate.
The Franklin County Court of Common Pleas – General Division, in conjunction with the Franklin County Board of Commissioners, is in the process of building a new courthouse.The new Franklin County Courthouse, scheduled for completion in 2010, physically symbolizes both the literal and figurative concepts of Transparency of Justice through the inclusion of vast areas of glass across the building’s facade.Much more than symbolic, the glass is an integral component in the building’s energy conservation systems, making this the firstLEED certified courthouse in the State of Ohio

Franklin County, like most counties, is paying somewhere for fatherhood classes, turning hot young males into nurturing dads and helping to heal the wound:
(OPNFF and BOot Camp For New Dads is in here.  Translate — some tax-exempt, unreported? $3,000 grant from Community Endeavors Foundation, maybe, followed by collective sponsorships in public circles to teach dads how to nurture — and of course there’s no overhead anywhere, and all this funding is properly accounted for and reported.  Yeah: This is just a section from the site:   http://www.cul.org/father.aspx
Scope of Services
Provide a classroom curriculum that develops the attitudes and skills needed for responsible fatherhood and helping men discover and cultivate their nurturing potential. Assistance with issues regarding child support, visitation, and family law matters, ultimately advocating for policy change/implementation that make these very areas more father friendly.Partners
Columbus Urban League’s (CUL) – African-American Male Initiatives (A.A.M.I.)
Columbus Urban League’s Head Start
Ohio Commission on Fatherhood (OFC)
Franklin County Child Support Enforcement Agency (FCSEA)
Ohio Practitioners Network of Fathers & Families (OPNFF)
Nationwide Children’s Hospital (Family & Volunteer Services)Target Audience
Class Curriculum – ‘Nurturing Father’
African-American fathers between the ages of 16-35 referred by CUL Head Start, Franklin County Child Enforcement Agency & Juvenile Court System. There will be a dual class format (One AM – One PM) on 3 month cycles. Each class will consist of 12-15 fathers giving us the ability to serve 100 fathers per calendar yea

Have you “GOT” this yet?  The local child support agency shepherds (refers) business to the fatherhood class providers.  Shepherds or extorts, depending on one’s point of view.
Public Awareness / Advocacy Agenda

The Ohio Practitioners’ Network for Fathers and Family is a Statewide Network of fatherhood practitioners and stakeholders. The Network was founded in February of 2004 by a small group of diverse and passionate individuals from both the public and private sector.

PUBLIC SECTOR = access to monies.  FOUNDED IN 2004, INCORPORATED IN 2007, and I cannot tell if it has properly registered as a nonprofit anywhere, yet.   

Mission Statement

The mission of OPNFF is to enhance the outcomes of children, families and communities by providing training, support and strength to the professionalism of fatherhood practitioners.

Examples of Policy Agenda:

 Update legislation to give unmarried fathers rights when paternity is established,
   thus not allowing mothers rights to be superior. Fathers should not be considered
   below mothers on any scale.

 Mandate cooperative parenting programs. Divide and conquer does not work.

 Fathers should have the same access to benefits and assistance programs as
   mothers.

 One Stop Shops to deal with Custody/Paternity/Support issues efficiently.

 Fathers should be first considered in situations where children are taken out of the
   home, as now, paternal grandparents and foster homes are the choice.
From the FATHERHOOD COMMISSION PAGE, obviously this section of the Midwest is hurting for fatherhood programs:
Ohio Commission on Fatherhood Funded Programs

Funded Fatherhood Programs
The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood awards grants to exemplary fatherhood programs throughout the state of Ohio each biennium. The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood recently completed another round of fatherhood grants for 2010-2011. The Commission awarded grants to nine fatherhood programs located through out the state of Ohio in the amount of $1.5 million.  More>>
Fatherhood Regions
Fatherhood regions mirrors Ohio Department of Development regions. This map will reflect fatherhood programs, activities, fatherhood initiatives and resources within each region. More>>
Ohio County Fatherhood Initiative
On January 18th, the Ohio Commission on Fatherhood launched the Ohio County Fatherhood Initiative.   Eleven counties (including Franklin County) have been selected to participate in this pilot project.  The Ohio County Fatherhood Initiative is a six-month process during which county leaders identify specific needs in their county and develop a fatherhood action plan.  If your county would like to participate in a future training, submit the on-line form to be added to the waiting list.   More>>

(in the detail here, I notice:  “Who will provide the training?

The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood will provide technical assistance and contracted with the National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) to provide free training to all counties. ”

This is why cronyism (The Wade Horns & Don Eberlies of this world) needs to be stopped where it first starts.  Shame on the DV agencies for failing to report properly on this movement, to this date! !!!    !!! (why?  because they get a piece of the pie, too!)

What they are training is how to drum up more business for the same old network — set up fancy or at least assisted websites claiming one thing or another, then reference these in personal resumes, and get expenses-deductible conference access.   It must be so rewarding!

Training participants could have either/or business or faith-based entity.  Great.   Find a patriarchal church and train them how to get on the gravy train and elevate fathers, who are so oppressed by feminists!

Who can participate in the training

Each county must identify their County Leadership Team who agrees to take part in the training and must consist of:

    1. County Commissioner or State Representative
    2. Family or Domestic Relations Judge
    3. Director of Child Support
    4. Director of Child Welfare
    5. Leader of a local faith-based entity or business

Elected officials, judges and directors can assign a designee to represent them in the training but are asked to review and provide input into the planning process.

Custodial Mothers will be completely uninformed that this leadership team has assembled, and is taking aim at THEM and their children.  They may be invited to participate, but I doubt they’ll truly understand the depth, breadth, history, and height (piled higher and deeper) of who is behind their “classes.”

And an interactive county map of ohio, too!  Cool!  Do we have one for those five prisons, too?

OPNFF is also advertising the (now past) 2011 Minnesota Fatherhood Summit that I blogged on early in 2011, i.e.., Texas Attorney General OFI (Office of Family INitiatives) had its man on the scene, Michael Hayes.  I believe he’s also on the supervised visitation network??  (DNR for sure).

ON one of their resource pages, here’s our friend Rep. Danny K. Davis (as in, crowning Unification Church leader Sun Myung Moon and promoting more fatherhood funding, typically).

DANNY K. DAVIS (IL-07) Presents: COMMISSION ON PATERNAL INVOLVEMENT IN PREGNANCY
TO ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS AT CAPITOL HILL BRIEFING

Representative Danny K. Davis and the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies Health Policy Institute—the nation’s leading research and public policy institution and the only one whose work focuses primarily on issues of particular concern to African Americans and other people of color—released and discussed of new policy, research and practice recommendations in a report from the Commission on Paternal Involvement in Pregnancy Outcomes on Thursday May 20th.  Click here to download the press release.

Assembled in 2009, the Commission on Paternal Involvement in Pregnancy Outcomes (CPIPO) is an interdisciplinary working group of scholars from the social sciences and public health community whose goal is to raise public awareness of the need for paternal involvement in pregnancy and family health.  CPIPO’s recommendations are intended to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in pregnancy outcomes by offering best and promising practices to address policy barriers and increase the involvement of men and expectant fathers in maternal and child health research and clinical practice.    

   

OPNFF is taking donations on-line:

OPNFF is now accepting online donations! 

Donate

I am looking to see if its website self-identifies as a nonprofit.  It doesn’t, at least not visibly on the home page.  OR on the “About Us” page either.
It’s corporate status (again, dating to 2007 NOT 2004) states it’s a nonprofit.  I see no EIN and would like to.  Clearly someone is funding it:  They are soliciting funds, right?  (see above).

From the “ABOUT US” page describing the formation of this entity:

As a result, a Network Planning Council was formed and the first meeting was held in Columbus on August 8th, 2003. At this time all background information was reviewed in order to develop a strategic planning process. Monthly meetings were facilitated by consultant John Smith of NPNFF (National Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families).  The Council continued to meet monthly in Columbus and developed an organizational frame work. A mission statement was crafted along with a vision, principles, goals and action steps.  In April of 2004, the Planning Council completed its work and the first Board of Directors of OPNFF was elected.

Right there it should say, they incorporated, or became a nonprofit.  It doesn’t, because they didn’t.  They had a “board of directors” but where was the corporate entity?  Or are they an “association” (but filed as a corporation) or what the heck do they consider themselves, business-wise, and tax-wise?

Instead of telling some timeline and pertinent truths about THEMSELVES, they simply go into their agenda next…..

OPNFF seeks to advance a fatherhood and family agenda in partnership with public agencies, grass roots faith and community based organizations, and local and state government entities.

I don’t do facebook, but apparently theirs claims nonprofit status:
  1. Ohio Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families (OPNFF 

    http://www.facebook.com/…/OhioPractitionersNetwork-for-Fathers-and- – Cached

    Ohio Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families (OPNFF) – OPNFF is recognized as the one-stop organization  NonProfit Organization · Cleveland, Ohio 

In looking up this group (while I’m on it) this Fatherhood.hhs.gov source, obviously not current, lists Vicky Turetsky at CLASP (now she’s head of the OCSE) and also this interesting positioning of the organization I’ve reported on quite a bit in this blog:  CPR with Jessica Pearson (also co-founder of AFCC, I believe, and in recent (this summer) posts, I showed some corporate status printouts to give pretty good justification of that assumption, when one embodiment of AFCC (en route to its present corporate status) showed a street address in Denver identical to where CPR then was doing its business, which I proved on the post.  This is your woman:

SOURCE:   http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/involv-non-res00/res-org.htm

TITLE OF PAGE:    Involving Non-Resident Fathers In Children’s Learning ~ Resources on Fathers and Families

The first group listed under “Research Organizations” (possibly alphabetical) – – this apparently in the year 2000:

Research Organizations

The Bendheim – Thoman Center for Research on Child Wellbeing
Phone: 609-258-5894
http://opr.princeton.edu/crcw
Sara McLanahan, Center Director

CRCW is located at Princeton University. The Center is concerned with a broad range of children’s issues, including education, healthcare, and income sufficiency, and supports basic research as well as evaluations of particular policies and programs. The Center has recently undertaken a major new project, the Fragile Family and Child Well-being Study, to learn more about nonmarital childbearing and its effect on family relationships and child development.

Recent work on fathers and families

  • Fragile Families Research Brief: “Dispelling Myths about Unmarried Fathers,” June 2000.
  • Testimony of Sara McLanahan before the Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Ways and Means, U. S. House of Representatives April 27, 1999.
  • Fragile Family City Reports: Austin, Texas and Oakland, California.
AND:

Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Phone: 202-328-5140
www.clasp.org
Vicki Turetsky, Senior Staff Attorney

Through education, policy research, and advocacy, the Center for Law and Social Policy seeks to improve the economic security of low-income families with children and secure access by low-income persons to the civil justice system.

Recent work on fathers and families

  • “What If All the Money Came Home?”
  • “Realistic Child Support Policies for Low-Income Fathers.”
  • “Pursuing Child Support for Victims of Domestic Violence.” In Battered Women, Children, and Welfare Reform: The Ties That Bind.
  • “Testimony of Vicki Turetsky before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the House Committee on Ways and Means (October 5, 1999).”
  • “Models for Safe Child Support Enforcement.”
  • “TANF Funds: A New Resource for Youth Programs.”
AND:

Center for Policy Research
Phone: 303-837-1555
Jessica Pearson, Director

The Center for Policy Research works with public and private sector service providers to plan, develop, and test projects that improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the justice system and human service agencies.

Recent work on fathers and families

  • “OCSE Responsible Fatherhood Programs: Early Implementation Lessons (with Policy Studies, Inc.)
  • “Evaluation of the Parent Opportunity Project.”  {{http://NAFCJ.net flags this program as one compromising custody cases, as I recall}}
  • Programs to Increase Fathers’ Access to Their Children.” In Fathers under Fire: The Revolution in Child Support Enforcement.
  • “Parenting Alone to Multiple Caregivers: Child Care and Parenting Arrangements in Black and White Families.” Family Relations 47(4). 343-53.
scroll down and you have a MAJOR federal contractor, MDRC (I’ve blogged them also) — one of those ARRA nonreporting ones?  Probably not, but what about subgrantees?  Subcontractors under MDRC?  Either way, they’re in on the research:

Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation  (revenues around $80 million, 67% of this federal?  I DNR — can refresh info at their site)
Phone: 212-532-3200
www.mdrc.org
Virginia Knox, Senior Research Associate

The Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation conducts primary research and designs and implements demonstration projects on a variety of issues related to helping families obtain economic independence, including teen pregnancy and fatherhood issues.

Recent work on fathers and families

  • “Promoting Participation: How to Increase Involvement in Welfare-to-Work Activities.”
  • “Fathers’ Fair Share: Helping Poor Men Manage Child Support and Fatherhood, A Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation Study.’
  • “Building Opportunities, Enforcing Obligations: Implementation and Interim Impacts of Parents’ Fair Share.”
Under the category “PRACTICE” we find the cleveland group:

Center for Families and ChildrenScope–LocalPhone: 216-451-2359In Cleveland, Ohio,  the Fathers and Families Program of CFC, together with its Council of Fathers, provides peer support, community activities and programs to help equip fathers with the tools necessary to strengthen themselves, their families and their communities and help families as they make the transition from welfare to work. The Center has produced a monograph, Fathers Count, A Manual for Developing Fatherhood Programs, to help other communities learn from their experiences in developing a fatherhood program.

(aka monkey see, monkey do.  This group learned from other groups and is doing similar things in similar manners, it seems….)
and:
Father Resource Program, Wishard Health Services
Scope—Local Phone: 317-630-2486
Wallace McLaughlin, DirectorThe primary goals of the Father Resource Program are to develop the capacity of young fathers to become responsible and involved parents, wage-earners, and providers of child support, and to assist fathers in developing the skills and behaviors necessary to cooperate in the care of their children, regardless of the character of the relationship with the mother.LGH comment:This description fails to even mention that it’s in INDIANA (prime fatherhood state, see “Evan Bayh” (Jr.)  and that in Indiana, CRC (that’s Children’s Rights COuncil) has a link on the child services page, not to mention Fathers and Families, a direct link on the child support page.  Don’t quote me on that– just go take a look.  It’s unbelievable that in this day and time, it could be still assumed that mothers do not pay custody and are not noncustodial parents, in good part through some of these programs’ earlier groundwork and networking!

scroll down some more, and here is this group that at least in Indiana got its corporate status revoked, and we see no IRS filings since 2007:

National Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families
Scope—National
Phone: 800-34-NPNFF or 202-737-6680
www.npnff.org
Preston Garrison, Executive Director

The National Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families is a national, individual-membership organization whose mission is to build the profession of practitioners working to advance the involvement of fathers in the lives of their children.

(see yesterday’s post).

Policy and Advocacy

Center on Fathers, Families and Public Policy
Scope—National
Phone: 608-257-3148
www.cffpp.org
David Pate, Director

Through the provision of technical assistance, policy research, and public education, the Center on Fathers, Families and Public Policy works to place child welfare at the center of public attention. The center’s recent projects include the Legal Assistance Project for states that are Partners for Fragile Families sites, the Common Ground Project with the National Women’s Law Center, and a colloquium series on “Negotiating Child Support.”


Children’s Rights Council
Scope—National
Phone: 202-547-6227
www.vix.com/crc
David Levy, President

The Children’s Rights Council (CRC) is a national non-profit organization based in Washington, DC that works to assure children meaningful and continuing contact with both their parents and extended family regardless of the parents’ marital status. CRC has chapters in most of the United States.

Remind me some day to find out how many other boards Mr. Levy (along with Ron Haskins and similar personnel) are currently on.

I found another funder of the Cleveland-based CFC (Center for Families and CHildren) which also mentions the Ohio group:

http://www.oneillfdn.org/_dpl/fatherhood_programs

Fatherhood

Fatherhood Programs

The Foundation’s first fatherhood-focused grant was made in 1995 to the “Fathers & Families Together” (FAFT) project at the Center for Families and Children in Cleveland.

The program, which in its first year reached out to 60 men in Cleveland’s Glenville community, offered family life and community building activities; crisis intervention; mediation; and job counseling, readiness and placement. A follow-up group, the Council of Fathers, made up of Fatherhood program graduates, also received Foundation support.

Of the 385 men who participated from 1996 through 1999, 65% graduated from the program and over one-third obtained or maintained jobs. Since then, FAFT has served over 1,000 fathers and continues to strengthen father-child bonds as it helps men work toward self-sufficiency, the most important factor for successful fatherhood.

Translation:  about 33 men per year, or 6 per month participated (HOW much was the cost?)

Of these 385, 65% managed to complete whatever program that (someone else) paid for.   Of those 65% LESS THAN HALF got or maintained jobs.  FAFT does not claim to have helped men actually obtain self-sufficiency, only to have served 1,000 (in what timespan?) and work towards it.  By enrolling them in programs that aim them towards self-sufficiency (as propped up by foundations, not that I think it’s a bad goal) — they also then qualify for more grants, foundational help, or whatever.  It’s a win/win deal for both foundation and grants or help recipients, regardless of how well individual clients actually do.

A school that had a lower than 50% graduation rate would NOT be marked successful (I hope) in the US Public Education System.  As a parent, not to mention a former teacher, if I am involved in anything, I do not want it to have a lower than 50% success rate.  But such is life in the nonprofit world of donations and programs.

In 1999 the Foundation began offering support to the fatherhood program at Services United for Mothers and Adolescents (SUMA), now housed at the Talbert House in Cincinnati. The SUMA Fatherhood Project now also includes a partnership with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation to provide legal services for fathers who have recently completed prison sentences.

. . .

The Foundation also supports the InsideOut Dad™ program for incarcerated fathers. Developed by the National Fatherhood Initiative®, it “teaches inmates to connect with their children on the inside and prepares them for a lasting relationship with their family when they get out.” This innovative program is utilized in five correctional facilities in northeast Ohio that return many inmate fathers to Cuyahoga County after their release. The InsideOut Dad curriculum has already been adopted as a state-wide standardized curriculum for inmate fathers in Indiana, Iowa and Washington State.

IT’S A DANGED “CAPTIVE AUDIENCE” MARKETING AFFILIATE SYSTEM!  Maybe this is why the prominent social thinkers behind NFI to start with were actually smart businessmen.  Maybe that’s why — even through their about $5,000,000 in outright HHS grants are disguised by multiple misspellings in the grant titles and principal investigators on TAGGS.hhs.gov database (my post yesterday) — they don’t need ongoing federal support — because they have program service revenues, train the trainer status, and copyrighted curriculum which I am SURE will not incorporate any anti-feminist, right-wing, or ultra-conservative religious values, right?

The Children of Incarcerated Parents Program, operated by the Cleveland Catholic Diocese, has also benefited from O’Neill Foundation support.

That should go over real well for men of other faiths, or atheists/agnostics.  It would go over particularly well, one might speculate, with those of the Muslim faith incarcerated for nonpayment of child support and/or wife abuse…..

APPARENTLY THE FIVE FACILITIES A FRANKLIN COUNTY JUDGE IS ABOUT TO, OR HAS SOLD, TO THE BEST BIDDER, TO PRIVATE PRISON CORPORATIONS IN UTAH, FLORIDA, OR TENNESSEE.  GOOD LUCK TO THOSE YOUNG AND OLDER MEN.
They go on to mention OHIO NPFF positively and even number them (the web page contains no date reference, though):

The success of these fatherhood programs has had a noticeable influence on public policy; today the importance of strong, supportive fathers in families is well recognized. One evidence of this is the creation of the Ohio Practitioners’ Network for Fathers and Families. This organization, which comprises 500 social services professionals, recently released its Public Policy Agenda. It outlines key issues affecting the lives of fathers and families in Ohio, and recommends particular emphasis on: Child Support, {{always a high priority in any fatherhood program; it’s in part where the diversion of funds comes from!}} Job Training and Employment; Welfare Reform/TANF; {{see last bracketed comment; these are related}}; Fathers, Families and Professional Support; and Incarceration and Reentry.

In all the Foundation has issued about $4.8 million in Fatherhood-related grants, helping approximately 2,000 men and their families

Note as they say above, “helping” didn’t mean at least in one program, even a 50% success rate in finding or obtaining a job — the purpose of diverting TANF funds to fatherhood programs to start with (along with “emotional support” of children).  !!

VISUALLY:    $4,800,000 / 2,000  = $4,800/2 = $2,400 / 1 man “serviced”

At that rate, why don’t they just pay the child support arrears directly to the noncustodial parent (Oh I forgot — the SDU gets it, after which they get to hold it to accrue interest which they won’t report, and may — or may not — forward it to the children.  Alternately, they could perhaps find housing, a room to let, for $600 month somewhere, and pay 7 months conditional on seeking work activities or other appropriate stuff, so the man has a base of operation to look for work.
If the OPFNFF actually exists as a distinct entity and has 500 members, I find it strange it has very little income ??
This foundation was formed in 1987, with the help of some very successful Catholic businessmen, Hungarian and German origins and is local to Cleveland in origins also:

Under William’s stewardship, and that of his brothers (and later his son and nephews), Leaseway Transportation grew to become a billion dollar a year enterprise, with operations throughout the United States and in foreign countries as well.

Throughout his life, William was noted for his philanthropy. He died in 1983.

Dorothy’s life was spent raising her children and nurturing her grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Devoted to her family, she will long be remembered as a constant source of wisdom, courage and good humor to family and friends alike.

In 1987, Dorothy and her eldest son, William J. O’Neill Jr., established The William J. and Dorothy K. O’Neill Foundation, a private, family foundation organized to render support “exclusively for charitable, religious, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, either directly or by contributions, to organizations which qualify as exempt organizations under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.”

Why is it that so many of the FOUNDATIONS which stem from personally successful corporate BUSINESS MEN (and women) and financially smart enough to put things into a family trust — are so intent that the people they wish to help get JOBS — rather than some of their business savvy, or any mentoring into how to start and steward a business.  I imagine THAT would help develop a sense of self-sufficiency!    So tax laws have changed — teach that!  Don’t teach “how to find your nurturing side” when nurturing sides are not what wealth in this country comes from (the opposite, in fact).
Makes you think — possibly it’s the innate sense of the successful to do homage to fellow-businessmen, and make sure there’s plenty of competition for jobs in those businesses they (or others) own.
Here’s this one as they TRUTHFULLy reported, it was founded in 1987:
Ohio Secretary of State's Office
Ohio Secretary of State's Office
704914 CORPORATION FOR NON-PROFIT 07/10/1987 07/15/2016 Active PEPPER PIKE CUYAHOGA OHIO
500769 CORPORATION FOR NON-PROFIT 07/05/1977 Dead CLEVELAND CUYAHOGA OHIO
1 – 2
Agent / Registrant Information
LEAH S. GARY, PRESIDENT AND CEO
THE WILLIAM J. AND DOROTHY K. O’NEILL FOUNDATION 30195 CHAGRIN BLVD., #106
CLEVELAND,OH 44124
Effective Date: 07/15/2011
Contact Status: Active
Incorporator Information
SHELDON M SAGER
Filings
Filing Type Date of Filing Document Number/Image
DOMESTIC ARTICLES/NON-PROFIT 07/10/1987 G198_0989
LETTER/RENEWAL NOTICE MAILED 03/23/1992 000000391181
CERTIFICATE OF CONTINUED EXISTENCE 06/19/1992 H376_0523
LETTER/RENEWAL NOTICE MAILED 03/03/1997 000000391182
CERTIFICATE OF CONTINUED EXISTENCE 03/21/1997 5806_0351
LETTER/RENEWAL NOTICE MAILED 11/21/2001 200132564922
CERTIFICATE OF CONTINUED EXISTENCE 12/06/2001 200134003042
LETTER/RENEWAL NOTICE MAILED 08/07/2006 200621955252
CERTIFICATE OF CONTINUED EXISTENCE 09/15/2006 200625802106
LETTER/RENEWAL NOTICE MAILED 05/16/2011 201113683790
CERTIFICATE OF CONTINUED EXISTENCE 07/15/2011 201119900965
They got letter of renewal notice mailed — but do you notice them going out of business for failing to file?
THe articles of incorporation (read them if you’re unfamiliar with foundations, family trusts) include purpose (a) — to receive or maintain real or personal property, and (c) — to distribute income so as not to become subject to income tax.
I also not that the Son (“Jr.”) in OH wa sin charge, and that apparently his mother Dorothy K at this time was living in Delray  Beach, Florida
Looking for them on national databases — I imagine these are all related to each other by family:
Most Recent Tax Period EIN Name State Rule Date IRS Sub- section Total Revenue Total Assets 990 Image
2009  346545084 Oneill Brothers Foundation OH 1955 03-pf 371,354 4,854,310 990
2009  311679171 The William E and Juliana P Oneill Family Foundation Oneill William E Ttee OH 2001 03-pf 82,498 267,757 990
2009  311530980 Oneill Foundation OH 1998 03-pf 54,866 906,488 990
2009  341910008 The Patrick J Oneill Family Foundation Vanik Thomas C Ttee OH 2000 03-pf -5,203 152,612 990
2009  341560893 William J & Dorothy K Oneill Foundation Inc OH 1987 03-pf -3,599,798 65,244,811 990

I do not have to go flying all over the place to find out if they have an EIN# — they obviously do.
(I’m not going to check in local registry as a charity in OH, probably they are smart enough to do that if required).
I just browsed the 2009 tax return.  They have around $68 million assets, and about $1 million income in dividends and securities.  They report their balance sheet (holdings), salaries — only the top 3 officers get paid:  President, about $158K, and the other two (EVP & Grants manager) under $70K.  The management firm is paid $488K.
They gave the National Fatherhood Initiative a $15,000 grant (somewhat larger than the other 501(c)3’s listed, as well as $1,000 here and $3,000 there.
Perhaps another way to save those five prisons from being sold off — teach others by mentoring —  communicate business skills, not just geting grants skills.
I have seen young children (rich and poor) learn incredible things no one expected they could, simply because we (colleagues and I) did.  This has been proven time after time (for example, look up JUMP ” Junior Undiscovered Math Prodigies” out of Canada.   Don’t let them internalize the 7 lesson schoolteacher, but show how it’s wrong by conveying at least ONE skill in-depth.
Like accounting.  Or stewarding SOMETHING.  Stop patronizing people.
That said, feed a man, you’ve fed a man.  Feed a woman, you’ve fed a family.  Teach HER those skills and shut down the offensive OCSE which doles out blessings to some, encourages religious gender (apartheid, though nothing like Islamic gender apartheid that I just put a link up to)   and withholds them from other, backed up by the IRS, which turns its eye on and off some just as capriciously.  Teach them the tax history of this country honestly.  Put good books and info in front of people and stop propping up outdated textbook industries that are hostage to how the big guys in California and Texas do, and self-censor to match.
Stop elevating the Psychology and Training industries (along with the curriculum peddlers) which the 24/7 wall street site I quoted (today’s first post) says leads to the least work for a little advanced training (second step — judges!) by promoting “fatherhood” which is a rhetoric.
It’s being promoted just find within Catholicism, that’s not going anywhere soon, as well as in plenty of other religions.
There has to be a better way than the outsourcing AND concealing (by networks so diverse, it takes a Sherlock to figure out who paid off whom!) AND turning a blind eye in one’s grant recipients (or subgrantees) to tax-dodging agencies who fail to stay incorporated properly.
NEXT UP:  “Coordinated Parenting Institute” (or whoever the Susan Boyan/Anne Termini team is these days) and Lancaster County, PA court system.
I have yet to find out where they exist, although any of us can find out where they are running the expensive trainings in how to become a parenting coordinator and separate those children from their mothers due to her lack of trust in the parent coordinator, and for a good reason, too!
Want to hear another one, in re: wealth transfer through the courts?  This just out (or at least I just found it):
It beats even the Let’s Make Kids’ Turn the STatewide Standard effort of about 2002 (which I blogged earlier):
PUBLIC GUARDIAN TO EXPAND POWERS TO SEIZE ASSETS (Calif. AB 1288)

AB 1288, which is now in front of the California Legislature, would expand the time frame in which the Public Guardian’s office could take control of an elder’s assets, prior to filing for conservatorship over that individual.

Now hold on a minute. Does this bill actually state that the Public Guardian can come in and take over assets without a guardianship being in place? How in the world can that be allowed?

Well, the law authorizing this is already on the books, as Probate Code 2900, which allows the PG to seize assets based on “intent” to file for guardianship.

UUnbelievable.

AB 1288 would just give the Public Guardian a bit more time to hit the bank. As written into law, PC 2900 allows the PG’s office fifteen days to mosey over to the savings and loan and take all of Grandma’s hard earned cash, based on “intent” and without an official determination of incapacity by any court of law.

Wow. That’s starting to sound a bit like family law, which can switch custody (in practice does) without giving a reason why.  The law says they should, but I’ve seen it often enough (and experienced) to know how few clear remedies once a judge does this.  

AB 1288 would give the PG an extra chunk of time to do exactly the same thing and would include the option to kick out family or friends living with the proposed conservatee.

And, most tellingly, without even telling Grandma. The only notice that needs to be given to the prospective ward is if the assets are in a Trust. Sans that document , the PG can simply drive up to the bank, grab Granny’s dinero and take off like a bandit, and Granny isn’t even entitled to be told what hit her.

Parallel in the family law system — deals cut / on compromise of arrears, or the involvement of federal grants monies — around the child support system.  The custodial parent is NOT notified many times of major restructurings affecting what her (or his) kids get to eat, or, case in point, NOT.    There are certain forms which have, on the face of the form, “Notice not required.” and are handled, it appears administratively — outside the courtroom.  That’s what we get for letting AOC get so large.

But I need my future guest blogger (who I bet is reading this post) to outline that a little better.

According to Assemblyman Rich Gordon’s office (Gordon is the author of 1288), this is only to protect the elder’s assets from “injury or loss.” In an email on August 4, Gordon aide Margot Grant wrote:

“AB 1288 would provide that if the public guardian or public conservator determines that the requirements for appointment of a guardian or conservator of the estate are satisfied, and the public guardian or public conservator intends to apply for appointment as the public guardian or public conservator only if the real or personal property held in the trust is subject to loss, injury, waste, or misappropriation.

Case in point, suppose the public guardian lived, say, in Los Angeles County.  This is like asking the foxes if the chickens are at risk, and if so, feel free to take over the henhouse, and eat the weak ones.

Attorney General Bill Lockyer (found at “no-probate.com”) warns people about living trust mills scam:  I can’t say anything about this (how about the “I’m related to Bill Lockyer and want to head up one of the family justice center franchises?” and suddenly the pay goes up by $25K/year).

Caregivers can be a nightmare:

Seattle ‘caregiver’ raided 93-year-old’s life savings, prosecutors claim

(April, 2011) Alleged victim’s son: His father “was no longer the man he had known his whole life”
By LEVI PULKKINEN, SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF
She was hired to care for the 93-year-old’s dying wife.
Instead, King County prosecutors contend, the 52-year-old Seattle woman inserted herself into every facet of his life, separated him from his children, then raided his life savings to the tune of $300,000.
Filing theft charges earlier this month, prosecutors claim Samantha Pierce bilked her elderly ward by winning his trust in the months after his wife’s death.
 
After a miser’s life, the self-made millionaire’s finances and health began to erode under Pierce’s care, Seattle Police Detective Elizabeth Litalien said in charging documents.
 
Still, the detective said, he thwarted attempts by his family to oust Pierce while she wrote more than $125,000 in checks to her children, obtained the title to a luxury SUV owned by the man and was preparing to buy a $2 million home on Lake Washington — sight unseen — with his money.
 
“Prior to his wife’s death, Pierce manipulated (him) into believing that she was the only one that would care for him and for his well being,” Litalien told the court. “She attempted, and often succeeded, in isolating him from a family that loved and cared about him.
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Seattle-caregiver-split-93-year-old-from-1349181.php#ixzz1Xs9CegBt
 
That was not a probate example, but we get the picture of vulnerability in old age and the attraction of real estate. In fact family and probate law are often hand in hand.  More from the Phelan site:
 

We can only asssume that the folks in Sacramento are living in a bubble and haven’t gotten the skinny from Southern California yet. According to an aide in a Riverside County Supervisor’s office, who spoke under conditions of anonymity, “The Public Guardian’s office has been looting estates for years. That is old news.”

AB 1288 will be coming up for a vote shortly. It is only a matter of time before the hazy shroud of “intent” is lifted and the free- for- all begins, in earnest. I can foresee the day when turning sixty five will occasion an official “launch” party, as the birthday senior will make a run for the border . Getting out of dodge before one officially enters one’s “golden years” may turn into a race for the safety and security of a country which does not regard its elders as cash cows.

Mexico is looking better all the time….

(she writes)…

Very interesting…..
(in part…..)
This bill, sponsored by the Counties of San Mateo and Santa 
Clara, would authorize a public guardian or conservator to 
restrain access to a proposed ward’s or conservatee’s real or 
personal property for up to 30 days and also restrain access to 
the proposed ward’s or conservatee’s trust assets. CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

1. Existing law provides that if the public guardian or 
public conservator determines that the requirements for 
appointment of a guardian or conservator of the estate are 
satisfied and the public guardian or public conservator 
intends to apply for appointment, the public guardian or 
public conservator may take possession or control of real or 
personal property of a person domiciled in the county that is 
subject to loss, injury, waste, or misappropriation, and may 
deny use of, access to, or prohibit residency in, the real or 
personal property, by anyone who does not have a written 
rental agreement or other legal right to the use of, or access 
to, the property. (Prob. Code Sec. 2900(a).)

Obviously out of state or out of county relatives, or even 1 mile away relatives, are not likely to be on the rental agreements.  Perhaps they should consider changing this!

Existing law authorizes a public guardian or public
conservator, in reliance upon a peace officer’s declaration of 
pending elder or dependent adult financial abuse, to take
immediate possession or control of the property of the elder
person and issue a 2901 Certification. (Prob. Code Sec.
2952(c)(1).)

Of course law enforcement is completely independent from the family/probate law by lack of association of collaboration.  See Family Justice Center (which conveniently co-locates them together to better serve victims of domestic violence, child abuse, child trafficking etc.) What are the chances this might tempt the peace officer (who are humans, not ethical deities) to make declarations in anticipation of a little cut of the action?This bill would provide that if the public guardian or public 
conservator determines that the requirements for appointment
of a guardian or conservator of the estate are satisfied and
the public guardian or public conservator intends to apply for
appointment as the guardian or conservator of a person
domiciled in the county, the public guardian or public

All of this is pretty much up to what’s going on in the public guardian’s and peace officer’s heads.  I think that’s a little too subjective for comfort, although I could see the desire to protect looting by relatives.

“Unfortunately, the
ÝPublic Guardian/Conservator] is legally prohibited from 
filing a TRO ÝTemporary Restraining Order] because they lack 
the standing to do so. A court will not allow the ÝPublic
Guardian/Conservator] to take any action on behalf of the
elder until a conservatorship is in place. Like a TRO, AB
1288 provides a means to maintain the status quo until the
matter can be adjudicated.
What some people continue to just not “get” is that there is a vital purpose behind insisting that someone actually have standing to take a legal action; jurisdiction is about the first thing to be handled in the pleading.  This is saying, let’s suspend that, after all we know public guardians are the good guys, right?
Sure, uniformly.
This site (alerting us to AB 1288) has also reported on the dual docketing system discovered by Joseph Zernik (intersecting with Richard Fine), in Computerized of Con-puterized and on a troubling topic called “Probate Murder” which, actually, can happen through medical neglect or overdose, or dosing with contraindicated medications.  It’s not that hard to kill off a frail, isolated, and dependent elder, after all, they are going to die eventually, right?
I can’t speak for everything on the blog (which I haven’t read all of), but to me, this is another issue to watch.  NOTE:  in taking a couple into the family court, if there are elderly parents on either (or better yet, both) sides, these assets may surface eventually as the parents start funding their kids court cases.  This is how Marv Byer found out about the things he did in the late 1990s, in Los Angeles County (See my “Shady shaky foundations of family law” post, on links to the right0.
The McNeill Foundation, it appears, did the right thing:  Along with business sucess, they knew how to protect their earnings.
Something to bequeathe to the next generations, along with how to make those earnings in a drastically changed tax environment and with major expansions of federal spending, plus integrating faith communities onto the grants streams (Bush, 2001), and what not.
If you want to learn a society, watch what it does to the lower classes (education, imprisonment, work -lifestyles sold to it) and watch HOW the upper classes (NOT the middle classes) do this.  Step back and just look at it.
The arrival of the internet enables two-way traffic, both abusive and enterprising.  As I have been narrating, it also facilitates the creation of what I call “nonprofit front groups.”  Consider yourself warned, in between hating the Tea Party, or the Progressives, that there are other ways to view the picture.
By the way, I started clicking on some of the spinoff websites supported by the nonextant “NPFF.org” domain:
So far, the first one,
http://supportingoursons.org/
whose FIRST link is “Donate Money”
Supporting Our Sons
http://supportingoursons.org/aboutus/aboutus.cfm
Copyright © 2001-2003 Supporting Our Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.
Supporting Our Sons, Inc.
555 Bryant Street #527  (= a UPS store….)
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Call toll free1-866-Our Sons (1-866-687-7667)
E-mail us at: Members@supportingoursons.orgOK, this should be showing in California then:

rganization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
SUPPORTING OUR SONS, INC. 117640 Charity Current PALO ALTO CA Charity Registration Charity
1
(they appear to have petered out as of 2008, after about 3 years (2002,3,4) of some good revenues — and not one single RRF filing shows up.  The revenues were over $100K for those years.  They should’ve sent in the forms.  Being small, maybe no one bothered to get on their case….)
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2322789 12/12/2000 SUSPENDED SUPPORTING OUR SONS, INC. LISEN STROMBERG
similar names:

 

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2075425 05/24/1999 SUSPENDED SAVING OUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS JOHN SANFORD, JR.
C3383724 03/21/2011 ACTIVE SAVING OUR SONS FOUNDATION KENNETH B BRIDGES

 

Websites Related To Npnff.org

nformation and resources about parenting in the Napa Valley. Offers events, meetings and school readiness.
Sounds good enough (but don’t be tricked int

 

Related Sites 

 

KidsPeace (Popularity: ): KidsPeace gives kids peace through mental health treatment programs, crisis intervention and public education. KidsPeace is a private, not-for-profit organization.
Children’s Rights Council (Popularity: ): National non-profit organization that works to assure children meaningful and continuing contact with both their parents and extended family, regardless …
New Parents Network (Popularity: ): A non-profit organization providing weekly multi-lingual parenting tips, PSA’s for radio, TV, newspapers, and kiosk software reaching low-income families in …
Every Person Influences Children (Popularity: ): Provides help to parents, teachers, and members of the community raise children to become responsible adults.
Kids First! (Popularity: ): The Coalition for Quality Children’s Media – a national not-for-profit organization that is a voluntary collaboration between the media industry, …
Supporting Our Sons (Popularity: ): National, nonprofit membership organization dedicated to the development of the whole boy. Provides organization profile as well as information on …
New Jersey Parents’ Caucus (Popularity: ): A resource site. Discusses issues, lists events, includes a newsletter in English, Spanish, and Chinese, and has family support job …
Family First (Popularity: ): Non-profit organization provides various articles and other information on marriage, parenting and fatherhood.
o clicking on the website too often!)
this one is a going concern:  just write out the name of the state and you have the current website:

New Jersey Parents’ Caucus

275 Rt. 10 East Ste.220-414, Succasunna, NJ 07876


On January 24th, 2000, New Jersey’s Governor announced the new Children’s System of Care Initiative. Over the past few years, the Initiative was renamed The Partnership For Children, and finally the Division of Child Behavioral Health Services. We are proud to introduce New Jersey’s first three family support organizations under the Governor’s Partnership For Children: the Family Support Organization of Burlington County, Family-Based Services Association of NJ located in Monmouth County, Family Support Organization of Union County, Family Support Organization of Mercer County, Family Support Organization of Bergen County, Family Support Organization of Cape May/Atlantic Counties, and the Family Support Organization of Hudson County. Middlesex and Morris/Sussex counties are the next two geographic areas included in the 2003-2004 family support organization development. The remaining counties will follow suit as the funding will allow. As of 2006, all of the counties in the state of New Jersey have funded family support organizations.

Over the past few years, the New Jersey Parents’ Caucus has worked in partnership with SAMHSA –The Center For Mental Health Services (CMHS)Eli Lilly CorporationUnited Advocates for Children of CaliforniaPage Hill FoundationBen & Jerry’s FoundationBristol Meyers Squibb,OJJDP-Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention,Janssen PharmaceuticaNovartis,Trinitas RegionalMedical CenterGlaxo Smith Kline and a host of other organizations throughout the country to provide community education, training, advocacy, support, and information resources and referrals to parents, caregivers and professionals throughout the state of New Jersey.

Thats an awful lot of pharmaceuticals.  Seems to me Bristol Meyers had some connection to (Maximus), I DNR.


This one exists.  When asked “What Is It” the answer what it does is given.  It’s a fatherhood group, marketing programs, florida-based. It has a board of directors:
Family First logo
There are a “kazillion” family firsts in Florida, but I got lucky and clicked on the one with same street address, first:
Family First is a registered trademark owned by:

FLORIDA FAMILY COUNCIL, INC.
5211 W. LAUREL STREET, SUITE 102
TAMPA FL 33607
in connection with:  ”

TELEVISION/RADIO ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES, GENERALADVICE CONCERNING MARRIAGE, PARENTING, FAMILY LIFE HEALTH, FAMILY RELATED ISSUES
first used in FL 1998, they filed to co-opt the name in 2004.
It’s a nonprofit formed in 1991 and unbelievably, seems to be filing at least its annual reports.

Document Number N41555
FEI/EIN Number 593043408
Date Filed 01/08/1991
State FL
Status ACTIVE
Most Recent Tax Period EIN Name State Rule Date IRS Sub- section Total Revenue Total Assets 990 Image
2009  593043408 Florida Family Council Inc FL 1991 03 2,883,791 897,181 990
$2.8 million, approx, grants, $115 program service revenue.  Already I don’t like them, talk about a vague nonprofit purpose “strengthen marriage/ family, promote fatherhood” (purpose #2)  PDF to the 2009 990 here
As to the nonprofit registration IN florida:
Non-profits corporations that solicit funds (charitable organizations) are also required to register with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The Department publishes the “Gift Givers Guide” listing these charitable organizations. The guide is available online at http://www.800helpfla.com/giftgiversguide/
Back to the Division of Consumer Services' Homepage
They have to register here, too:
Florida Family Council, Inc., Tampa, FL Print
Also Soliciting as
Family First
Registration Number :CH1697 Expiration Date :11/30/2011
Revenue Source         : 08 – IRS 990 w/ Sch.A (12/31/2009)
Total Revenue : $2,883,791.00 Program Services Expenses : $2,137,353.00   88%
Total Expenses : $2,436,941.00 Administrative Expenses : $113,392.00   5%
Surplus/Deficit : $446,850.00 Fund-Raising Expenses : $186,196.00   8%
Statement Of Purpose
THE MISSION OF FAMILY FIRST IS TO STRENGTHEN THE FAMILY BY ESTABLISHING FAMILY AS A TOP PRIORITY IN PEOPLE’S LIVES AND BY PROMOTING PRINCIPLES OF BUILDING MARRIAGES AND RAISING CHILDREN.
Florida Family Policy Council, Inc., Orlando, FL Print
Registration Number :CH21143 Expiration Date :10/3/2011
Revenue Source         : DCS Statement of Support/Revenue (12/31/2009)
Total Revenue : $324,968.00 Program Services Expenses : $169,073.00   46%
Total Expenses : $366,963.00 Administrative Expenses : $90,666.00   25%
Surplus/Deficit : -$41,995.00 Fund-Raising Expenses : $107,224.00   29%
Statement Of Purpose
EDUCATION, AND INFORMATION, ADMINISTRATION, FUNDRAISING
The president is a high-priced + expenses motivational speaker, exactly who’s attracted to marketing marriage business:

MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKERS / MARK MERRILL

Mark is the host of the Family Minute with Mark Merrill, a national daily radio program that reaches 2,400,000 people each week. The broadcast is heard on mainstream stations in 32 states, as well as Canada, XM and SIRIUS Satellite Radio and American Forces Network. He has appeared on numerous ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC network affiliates and network radio programs including NPR, CBS Radio and the Canadian Broadcasting Network. His comments and writings have appeared in many publications including USA Today, the Washington Times and Sports Illustrated.
As an energetic advocate for the family, Mark speaks at conferences and events for companies such as Chick-fil-A, JPMorganChase, and Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines. He also speaks at major events hosted by NFL teams, and at special engagements for dignitaries like First Lady Laura Bush and Governor Jeb Bush.

(CHICK-FIL-A is a fatherhood supporter).

Before founding Family First in 1991, Mark practiced law in Florida for seven years. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree as a Phi Beta Kappa in 1981 and his Juris Doctor degree from the University of Florida.

Charity navigator shows his 2009 salary as $199K and 8.19% expenses:
Name Title Compensation % of Expenses
Mark W. Merrill President $199,810 8.19%
Doubt his legal practice could beat that, or why would he have switched, here?
This is a NONprofit, but the behavior it’s engaged in is called marketing things on websites that end *.com.
Here’s a spoon.  Gag me with it.  Let groups like this start paying taxes and stop soliciting donations to promote their products under the umbrella of nonprofits with $2.8 million revenues and $200K officers…
An “all pro Mom” writes:
Post Susan Smith — All-Pro Mom
Anyone else questioning the propriety of Tony Dungy calling himself an “All-Pro Dad”? Your kid commits suicide, maybe you’re not Ward Cleaver.
  • Tony Dungy, President Clinton, James Dungy
  • Tony Dungy, left, included his son James in team activities, including this photo op with President Clinton in 2000.
  • (2005, his son, 18, commits suicide)
    he Dungys have four other children: daughters Tiara and Jade, and sons Eric and Jordan. James, their second-oldest child, was taking extension classes at the University of South Florida, the sheriff’s office said.

    James Dungy spent his senior year at North Central High School in Indianapolis and graduated this year. C.E. Quandt, the school’s principal, said Dungy was a personable student who never flaunted his father’s position.

Former NFL coach Tony Dungy has fumbled hisinvitation to serve on President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, according to CBN’s David Brody. A White House source tells Brody that Dungy couldn’t make two of the four faith council meetings.

“Because of the time commitment needed I have respectfully declined,” Dungy said in a statement to Brody.

The news should cheer the folks over at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, whotsked-tsked the president for the appointment in a March 31 statement:

“Dungy, former coach of the Indianapolis Colts football team, has well-known ties with intolerant Religious Right groups. In 2007, for example, he spoke at a fund-raising dinner for the Indiana Family Institute, a James Dobson-affiliated group that opposes gay rights, reproductive rights and separation of church and state.”

Dungy will work with the president instead on responsible fatherhood initiatives.

and:
Dungy is an evangelical Christian and at one point in his coaching career considered leaving football for the prison ministry.[4] Throughout his career, he has remained involved with community service organizations.[32] On March 20, 2007, Dungy aligned himself with a socially conservative organization, the Indiana Family Institute, and openly supported an amendment to the Indiana constitution which would have defined marriage as solely between one man and one woman.[33] Dungy also appeared in a testimonial video on I Am Second, in which he shares his story of his personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Hardly surprising.  I’m not criticizing Tony Dungy, but the practice of nonprofiting one’s way to even more fame and prosperity, marketing like this.  We do not need any more institutionalized Focus on the Family or anything like it.  Many of these people have made family & fatherhood an idol and are sacrificing to it, with other peoples’ lives and finances.    Have the relationship with Jesus Christ however you want to, but remember  the First Amendment is in the Bill of Rights FIRST for a reason, and the people who helped give you that freedom of worship were deists anyhow, for the most part, for all their shortsuits and blindspots — the design of this thing was good called the Constitution which President Bush helped alter significantly through executive orders — and is worth remembering at least, since we aren’t practicing it any more.
 
 New Parents Network (active website with an Entrance display you have to click past):

Our History

Ms. Karen Storek founded New Parents Network in 1988 out of her often frustrating experience stumbling across vital parenting information on a hit-or-miss basis. She realized that thousands of agencies had been specifically created to help parents and children, and that their information needed to be brought together, all in one easy-to-access, free location, using technology in creative ways to reach anyone, even those without computer and Internet access.

Over the years, New Parents Network’s dynamic library of parenting information has grown and the means of distribution has evolved:

©1988-2010 New Parents Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved – P.O. Box 64237 Tucson, AZ 85728-4237 – Tel: 1-520-461-6806 –
(NOTE:  I go FIRST to the “About us” page and look for a geographic location, then to that state to see how it incorporated, especially if it’s self-described as a nonprofit.  While I understand this seems like generic parenting stuff, I”m still going to go.
Arizona Corporation Commission (also see “coordinatedlegal.com” link I posted)

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 13, 2011 at 5:10 pm

%d bloggers like this: