Emergency Cash Will Avert Some SF Court Closures, Layoffs

Lawyers See Crisis in S.F. Civil Court Closures

Petra PasternakContactAll Articles

The Recorder

July 19, 2011

BASF’s Kelly Dermody is pulling together a group to study ways to reverse the budget-driven decision that took many by surprise.

SAN FRANCISCO COURT CLOSINGS AND ITS RECOMMENDATION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO DIVORCE LITIGATION

SAN FRANCISCO COURT CLOSINGS AND ITS RECOMMENDATION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO DIVORCE LITIGATION

Recently the San Francisco Superior Court announced that by the end of September 2011, there will be severe cut backs in courtrooms and judges and custody mediators available for civil litigation and divorces.  The staff lay-offs and court room closures in San Francisco are expected to have a devastating impact on the ability of families to separate, settle their family and custody matters, and obtain even a simple divorce.  Uncontested divorces may take up to a year and a half to be completed – instead of the minimum of six months and a day now allowed by state law.   TheSan Francisco Family Law Court formally announced its recommendation in support of ADR (“Alternative Dispute Resolution”)approaches, including Mediation and Collaborative Law.   As one of the earliest and most experienced practitioners ofSF Family Law Mediation,Collaborative Lawandother ADR specialties, we could not agree more and are here with more experience and options to   serve the SF community

The severe cuts in service are already creating havoc with access to the courts and the ability of San Franciscans to obtain vital services. Long lines are forming at court clerk offices.  Local and national newspapers including TheSan Francisco Chronicle,The S.F. Examiner, andThe New York Timesare featuring stories about this crisis and the impact on our citizens who are seeking resolutions of their family conflicts and justice.

While this news is likely to hurt many San Francisco couples and families, there are some excellent alternatives to the public court system presently available that provide fair and faster resolutions for families than what the courts will be able to provide.  Anyone in a position to help families who need to separate or divorce or resolve parenting disputes should become versed in the various “Alternative Dispute Resolutions.”  Even the San Francisco Superior Court is advising all couples who file divorces to explore these alternatives to the traditional judicial system. Couples can find professionals who will facilitate their peaceful separation, parenting plans, and division of assets without having to resort to lengthy waits for judges and courtrooms.

Business registration search:  Collaborative Law:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C2891905	08/03/2006	SUSPENDED	CENTRAL VALLEY COLLABORATIVE LAW AFFILIATES, INC.	GERALD M TOMASSION
C3241857	02/01/2010	ACTIVE	KERN COLLABORATIVE FAMILY LAW SOLUTIONS	STEPHEN C KLINK
C2507710	03/21/2003	ACTIVE	LOS ANGELES COLLABORATIVE FAMILY LAW ASSOCIATION (LACFLA)	FREDERICK J. GLASSMAN
C3384440	06/09/2011	ACTIVE	THE LAW COLLABORATIVE LOS ANGELES, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION	RONALD SUPANCIC

search results for charitable trusts registry, same two words:  “Collaborative Law”  Guess they are for-profits, for sure.

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type 1

However, “Collaborative Law” in california is quite busy;  See “Collaborative Practice California” (.com)

We are a statewide organization of collaborative practice groups.We will help you to:

• Find collaborative practice professionals in your local area.
• Learn about collaborative practice.
• Discover other dispute resolution alternatives that will keep you out of court.

Our member groups include collaborative lawyers, mental health practitioners, financial specialists, and other professionals. The collaborative process is being used in divorce and family law, domestic partnerships, same sex marriages, employment law, probate law, construction and real property law, malpractice, and other civil law areas.

Our purpose is to:

• Increase public awareness of the benefits of collaborative practice.
• Help to draft local, statewide, and national legislation to facilitate the use of the collaborative practice.
• Share information, education, and training opportunities with like-minded collaborative professionals.
• Maintain the high standards of collaborative practice throughout the state.

We invite you to learn more about California collaborative practice, and to search for a local group to find appropriate professionals to meet your needs.

One of the trainings is by AFCC, one of the originals, Joan B. Kelly of the Northern California Mediation Center, where we can learn — of course — more about parent coordination, one of the primary functions of which, I gather, is to STOP PARENTAL ALIENATION (as defined by the same entitities):

Upcoming Trainings at the Northern California Mediation Center

http://www.ncmc-mediate.org Parenting Coordination (Special Master) Training: Child Alienation and Relocation: Challenges for Children and Parents, with Joan B. Kelly, Ph.D. MCLE (6 hours), September 16, 2011, 9 am – 4:30 pm $225 (Early Registration: $175 if by 8/5/2011; $200 if by 8/19/2011) here are the businesses registered as “Collaborative Practice” in my state: Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process C2887391 06/26/2006 ACTIVE COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE CALIFORNIA DAVID A. FINK C3289178 03/15/2010 ACTIVE COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE OF SAN MATEO COUNTY TIMOTHY D MARTIN C3157118 07/31/2008 ACTIVE NAPA COUNTY COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE GROUP COLLEEN CLARK C2544482 07/08/2003 ACTIVE SACRAMENTO COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE GROUP HAL BARTHOLOMEW As we see they all date to this millennium, and none have been suspended or dissolved, yet, unlike the other fields of practice from the same group. Of these, two have self-identifed as nonprofits and registered with the state, so presumably the ones formed in 2003 and 2008 decided not to go with the nonprofit status.  I would not be so presumptuous as to assume that these 4 are the only ones organized and doing business in California; but they are who shows up. Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE CALIFORNIA EX562971 Charity Exempt – Active SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE OF SAN MATEO COUNTY CT0160739 Charity Exempt – Active SAN MATEO CA Charity Registration Charity 1 Click on Collaborative Practice California; it has not obtained and EIN in the approximately 5 years of operation, filed returns with the state to confirm it exists as a charity, and there is no IRS showing either.   The street address here (=/= registered agent) shows a single-person firm, sfchildandfamilylaw.com  who reports a background from Texas:  A BA in psychologist followed by working as a Child Protective Service Investigator in Dallas, after which law school in the University of California system, Bay Area.   I am wondering what part of her practice is for-profit, and what part nonprofit (unregistered) in the same suite. It is a Law and Mediation Office: Before attending law school, I served as an investigator for Child Protective Services in Dallas, Texas and counseled numerous children in a variety of settings from pre-school to juvenile detention facilities. I graduated Magna Cum Laude with a B.A. in Psychology from the University of North Texas in Denton, where I focused on child development and abuse. All of these experiences combined with my own involvement in the child welfare system have led me to create my own firm where I intend to make the most of my skills, background, and knowledge of the law to assist families and children in need. I hope to not only provide superior legal representation, but also a responsive, personable, humane environment for my clients. Resources include Kids’ Turn and Rally Family Visitation Services, which I was yakkin’ about a few posts ago (the post which ended comparing the Supervised Visitation Network with AFCC personnel). Resources Child and Family Support Services CASA – Court Appointed Special Advocates Child and Family WebGuide Child Welfare League of America Children’s Council of San Francisco Family Service Agency of San Francisco Jewish Family and Children’s Services – Parents Place Kid’s Turn Legal Services for Children National Adoption Center National Center for Adoption Law and Policy Parenthood.com Resource List Parents Leadership Institute Rally Family Visitation Services  (broken link) The National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies UC San Francisco – Department of Psychiatry Children’s Center Domestic Violence Resources Manalive “June 15, 2010 – Men Creating Peace (MCP) obtains 501(c)(3).” Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type MEN CREATING PEACE, INC. Charity Not Registered PLEASANTON CA Charity Registration Charity 1 Companies at the address given above, for “Men Creating Peace” (Pleasanton, CA) Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process C3199584 04/30/2009 ACTIVE MEN CREATING PEACE, INC. GORDON DEVON GASTER JR The “Men Creating Peace” website has url “Manaliveinternational.org” and a profile on Gordon Devon Gaster Jr. as a nonprofit group leader working with “manalive” in SF since 1997.   My point being, out of all the domestic violence resources around, why is this particular attorney referring to a men’s group (not SF-based) and another “consortium” only? (at the bottom of the page):360 GRAND AVENUE • SUITE 76 • OAKLAND, CA 94607 | TEL : 510-730-0184 | FAX : 510-217-7061  CLASSES: LANEY COLLEGE • 900 FALLON STREET • ROOM E201A • OAKLAND, CA 94607 COPYRIGHT© 2010 MEN CREATING PEACE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED • CONTACT WEBMASTER This address, for “http://www.manaliveinternational.org/” also correlates to the Alameda County Probation Department.  They are probably contracting with batterers intervention groups.  The class address is on the same street, 3 blocks away from the Alameda County Courthouse.  360 Grand Avenue is a UPS store, i.e., the “Suite” is a PO Box.   This group is the 11th of a list of 11 (below) approved for Batterers Intervention courses as of May, 2011 [PDF] ALAMEDA COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT acgov.org/probation/…/DVCertifiedProviderListMay2011updated.pdf File Format:PDF/Adobe Acrobat –Quick View Oakland, CA 94607. 360 Grand Ave. Ste. #76. Oakland, CA 94610 devon@ mencreatingpeace.org. Devon Gaster. Tel: (415) 6134499. Main: (510) 7300184 …

As for “Man Alive International,” I don’t know who they are:  any relationship (see start date), this one definitely Christian focus….

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1909549	08/01/1997	ACTIVE	MAN ALIVE MINISTRIES, INC.	MYLES J GENTZKOW

NOPE — different entity…..

But here are the other “Manalive” groups — so where does “Men of Peace” being a separate nonprofit, fit in?

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
MANALIVE VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS	040420	Charity	Current	SAN FRANCISCO	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
MANALIVE-SACRAMENTO, INC.		Charity	Not Registered	ROSEVILLE	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

(if you look up the “Manalive Violence Prevention Programs,” they have been filing regularly, apparently until April, 2010, when the OAG issued them an “incomplete report” status because they failed to enclose the $50 check for the program).  Their income apparently comes from government contracts and fees to run these classes:  2000 filing shows $341K in contracts with Sheriff’s Dept. etc.

This began in 1980 around gender issues as “Center for Research and Education in Human Process,” changed name in 1995 to “Manalive Education and Research Institute,” and again in 1999, as above.  An interesting “Miscellaneous” document (bottom of Charity’s detail) shows they began working with MAWS (Marin Abused Women’s Services), believe in feminist theory that men’s violence towards women is patriarchy-based and run peer-based educational groups, “each one reach one” to help undo that philosophy.  “Good luck” when you run into the religious ones….

Street address locates it in The Castro: (Wikipedia)

The Castro District, commonly referenced as The Castro, is a neighborhood in Eureka Valley in San Francisco, California. The Castro is one of America’s first and best-known gay neighborhoods, and it is currently its largest. Having transformed from a working-class neighborhood through the 1960s and 1970s, the Castro remains a symbol and source of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) activism and events.

Manalive Sacramento actually does have an EIN#, and (searched street address), has an interesting registered agent:

Organization Name: Manalive-sacramento Inc

Function, Activity: Spouse Abuse Prevention

Assets: $10,372

Income: $114,615

Contact Info:

Mark Throckmorton
1115 Parkview Dr
Roseville, CA 95661

Mark Throckmorton

Rev. Mark Throckmorton received his Masters of Divinity from San Francisco Theological Seminary in 2001, and has served two congregations as interim pastor. Before recently moving to Sparrow Hawk Village, he served as Executive Director of Manalive-Sacramento, Inc., facilitating a domestic violence prevention program for men in Northern California. In addition to Moore and Gillette, Mark’s workshop will draw on his studies of archetypes with Robert Bly. His teaching also uses unpublished work by John Donovan, Mark’s colleague in a highly effective recidivism reduction program in the Sacramento County jails. 

   

“Great.”  A Robert Bly afficionado, probably the last thing needed in preventing violence against women….”  That paragraph from SanctaSophia comes from a seminary established in 1977 (“Sophia” representing “wisdom”)

Sancta Sophia Seminary offers a distinctive approach to transformation.

Envisioning a life of hope, love and service, each student prepares to be a modern Light Worker through professional preparation. Sancta Sophia, established in 1977 by Carol E. Parrish, is located in the spiritual setting of Sparrow Hawk Village in the foothills of the Ozarks outside Tahlequah, Oklahoma. Guests are always welcome to the Seminary, which is open to all who seek personal growth, various certifications, or ordination. Our ordinations are endorsed by theInternational Council of Community Churches, in cooperation with Churches Uniting in Christ

And for “Robert Bly,” this article (old — 1992) under “New Age Patriarchs” expresses it well.

Feminism helped mould the ‘new man’. But the latest brand of new
man has little truck with feminism. Erica Simmons investigates.

Behold the newest of the new men. You might have seen him on television, adorned with a mask of body paint, dancing around a campfire, entering a sweatlodge, shouting out his grief and anger from some pleasant location in the North American countryside.

Under the tutelage of Minnesota poet Robert Bly and guided by his bestselling book Iron John, thousands of American men are gathering to forge a new masculine identity.

The tools for this reappraisal include poetry, mythology, fairy tales, mask-making, drumming and sweatlodges – the traditional native Indian version of the sauna. Believers call the movement ‘mythopoetic’; the historically minded observe that it borrows heavily from Jungian psychology.

Bly has diagnosed the psychic wounds of contemporary American men. They are afflicted with inexpressible feelings of grief and are emotionally repressed and socially isolated from one another. They are nice guys who are adept at meeting the needs of women and submerging their own. They have abandoned the old macho version of manhood, but lack a suitable new model of masculinity. They are what Bly calls ‘soft men’.

Just exactly who I’d want coordinating and organizing batterers’ intervention groups; get in touch with your “wild side.”

Apparently “manalive” is a hot topic, however, “men of peace,” if it is (in fact) “manalive” — who aren’t continuing under the same name as of 2010, but “men of peace” started in 2010 —

Under “Men of Peace” (website) is this news:

June 5, 2010 – Men Creating Peace partners with Progressive Transition(s).

360 Grand Ave. Suite #312
Oakland, CA 94610
510.273.9573

. . .  In Other words, it has a PO Box at the same UPS store as Men of Peace? (or, is upstairs in the same building…only it’s a one-story building right next to a tatoo parlor in downtown Oakland.

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
PROGRESSIVE TRANSITION(S), INC.		Charity	Not Registered	BERKELEY	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C3150168	06/02/2008	ACTIVE	PROGRESSIVE TRANSITION(S), INC.	NORMA R WARD

Founders appear to be social workers.  Registration address is a modest home in south Berkeley street.  Partners:

Our Partners

Based in Oakland, California, Progressive Transition(s) partners with a variety of non-profit and community based organizations, including:

• A Safe Place
• Alameda County Domestic Violence Collaborative
• Alameda County Family Justice Center
• Family Violence Law Center
• Men Creating Peace
• Walden House, Inc.

Interesting.   A nonprofit formed in 2008 lists as its partner a nonprofit formed in 2010 (and vice versa), neither charitable registration yet current. although Men of Peace is doing (in my opinion) a good imitation of simply being “Manalive” reincarnated with a new name, and: the Alameda County Family Justice Center (California Bill SB-557 still pending, and probably will pass, FYI), itself a nonprofit formed in 2006, profiled by me under “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys” (and also researched by and Indy writer, “Steve White.”   For nice pictures of some of the bigwigs involved, go here: and more, here

San Jose Mercury news article of Sep. 2005 shows them in operation, with the current street address, and finally in 2007, they got around to incorporating with the Secretary of State, although among the originators were District Attorneys and County Supervisors….

Inside the Family Justice Center in Oakland a victim can find law enforcement officers, prosecutors, probation officers and civil attorneys as well as therapists, chaplains and job referrals — all under one roof.

The creation of such a centralized refuge is significant, victims and those who work with them say, because those trying to leave an abusive situation often are discouraged from doing so when they find they must shuffle between agencies scattered around town.

That problem has been especially acute in Alameda County, where victims have had to navigate 25 different agencies to do things such as file a police report, obtain a restraining order and seek medical care and counseling, said Nancy O’Malley, an Alameda County prosecutor, during a ceremony Wednesday. . .

Alameda County competed nationally to win $1.3 million of $20 million in federal grant money authorized by President Bush to combat domestic violence. The center is one of only 15 in the nation and one of only two in the state.{@ 2005; now there are more!)  The other California site, in San Diego, has been credited with helping to reduce the number of domestic violence-related deaths in that city.

by whom — its originators?

In July, Attorney General Bill Lockyer announced that a two-year study had found that California’s domestic violence laws weren’t being enforced despite more than 186,000 abuse calls and 169 related killings in the state in 2004. On Wednesday, Lockyer told the crowd that the center was the type of solution needed.

Wow.  Any victim (particularly one with children) could’ve told them that, also see homicides.   Supposedly this center is the solution, however it does nothing to address the state of the family law system, apparently, which where the unenforced domestic violence laws go underground to get buried under a deluge of talk about high-conflict relationships and parental alienation, etc.

FINALLY, in 2007, it gets around to incorporation:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C2996837	05/10/2007	ACTIVE	ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER, INCORPORATED	HAROLD O BOSCOVICH

and somewhat later, if then, filing for nonprofit status:

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER, INCORPORATED	CT0163526	Charity	Current	OAKLAND	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

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: ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER, INCORPORATED FEIN: Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2996837

Registration Number: CT0163526 Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration Issue Date: 8/6/2010 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/2011 Registration Status: Current Date This Status: 9/29/2010 Date of Last Renewal:

Address Information

Address Line 1: 470-27TH ST Phone: Address Line 2: Address Line 3: Address Line 4: OAKLAND CA 94612

Annual Renewal Information

Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-07 Fiscal End: 31-DEC-07 Total Assets: $0.00 Gross Annual Revenue: $0.00 RRF Received: 16-AUG-10 Returned Date: 990 Attached: N Status: Accepted

Finally (3 years later), the OAG’s office wrote them (interesting, considering Bill Lockyer involvement from the start, and his wife being their first CEO),

(DATE:  May 27, 2010)

NOTICE TO REGISTER

We have received information indicating that this organization may be subject to the registration and reporting requirements of the Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act (Government Code sections 12580, et seq.).

Pursuant to section 12585 and 12586 of the Act, every charitable corporation incorporated or doing business in California, unincorporated association and trustee holding assets for charitable purposes or doing business in the State of California is required to register and file annual reports with the Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts, within thirty (30) days of receiving assets (which includes cash or other forms of property). Some entities, such as educational institutions, religious corporations and hospitals, are exempt from registration and reporting under section 12583.

The articles of incorporation and change of address to 27th street as of 8/31/2006  (stamped rec’d May, 2007 — two years after its doors opened right in central Oakland ) bear Nancy O’Malley’s signature (but no date), Harold O Boscovich signature page — unsigned (He’s the corporate registered agent still),

Note:  on that weekend, another woman disappeared in the neighboring county, Nina Reiser, on a court-ordered visitation exchange.  This was high-profile trial and a wrongful death suit filed by her mother and children in this same county.  SFGate chronicled the trial and yet somehow “domestic violence” in certain circles bears no relationship to the family law system at all.

Hans Reiser Trial: July 7, 2008

Henry K. Lee has been liveblogging the Hans Reiser murder trial. See all his Chronicle articles on the case here and all his blog entries here.

Nina Reiser’s body has been found. A handcuffed Hans Reiser, accompanied by his attorney, William Du Bois, led Oakland police, prosecutor Paul Hora and DA’s Inspector Bruce Brock to her remains at about 4 p.m. today, Du Bois confirmed.

Her body was found buried off a hiking trail near the 8200 block of Skyline Boulevard near Redwood Regional Park, authorities said. The body hasn’t been officially identified, but the defense says the body is that of Nina Reiser.

Wednesday’s sentencing may be delayed in light of today’s discovery. Sources say Reiser agreed to lead police to the body in exchange for a second-degree murder conviction — instead of the jury’s finding of first-degree — and a sentence of 15 years to life, in lieu of 25 years to life.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/localnews/category?cat=1428#ixzz1X1YODJdP

REISER himself definitely connected things to the family law system:

Hans Reiser Trial: April 29, 2008

Henry K. Lee is liveblogging the Hans Reiser murder trial. See all his Chronicle articles on the case here and all his blog entries here.

Hans Reiser was brought into the courtroom at 11:22 a.m. today wearing a red jail jumpsuit, not the suit he wore during his trial. The sentencing date was set for Wednesday, July 9. He faces 25 years to life in prison after being convicted Monday of first-degree murder for the premeditated killing of his wife, Nina, in September 2006.

One of the jurors in the six-month-long trial, Vince Dunn, 61, or Juror No. 7, is speaking out about the case. . . .

In an interview with your scribe this morning, Dunn said Reiser never showed any sympathy for Nina and that his premeditation was clear in part because he suddenly stopped using his Visa card in August 2006 and increasingly tried to contact Alameda County Supervisor Gail Steele in the days before the murder to rally her help in changing the family court system. For the full story, click here.

(04-29) 12:24 PDT Oakland — Hans Reiser’s arrogance and his lack of compassion for his estranged wife helped persuade jurors to convict the computer programmer of first-degree murder, a member of the Oakland jury said Tuesday.

In an interview with The Chronicle, Vince Dunn, 61, said that while Reiser had been going through a bitter divorce with his wife, Nina Reiser, “He never showed any kind of sympathy for the fact that she was the mother of his kids.”

. . . Dunn declined to discuss the opinions of other jurors, but he said the group was convinced that Nina Reiser’s murder was the result of deliberation because Reiser stopped using his Visa card in August 2006 and used cash instead, and repeatedly called county Supervisor Gail Steele in the days before he killed his wife.   Reiser believed Steele could help change the family court system that had awarded Nina Reiser custody of their young son and daughter, the supervisor testified during the trial.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/29/BAKU10DLNG.DTL#ixzz1X1ZnPN6k

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/localnews/category?cat=1428&o=10#ixzz1X1YzWpqJ

However (after groundbreaking right around the time this woman disappeared on a court-ordered visitation, same county) it is explained that this nonprofit was formed ONLY to get the government grants that individual agencies couldn’t, although it is ENTIRELY paid for (as to staff) by the County of Alameda:

Re: Alameda county Family Justice center cr File # cr0r63s26

Dear Ms. Gonzales,

This is in response to your letter of August 6th (copy attached).

<> The Alameda County Justice Center (ACFJC) has operated as a government agency since its inception. The C.ounty of Alameda,bistrict auorneyis office obtained a federal grant to establish the Center. It is located in a county-owned and maintained building, housing governmental and non-profit agencies working in collaboration to provide services to victims and families who have experienced family violence. It has [been operating] and still operates under the administration of the District Attorney’s office and funded under the budget of the county of Alameda. It has no assets, all utilized assets belong to the County of Alameda.

<> With the ever-shrinking county-budget and the need to ensure the continued operation of the A-cfJC and expandiervices, a decision was made to incorporate as a non-profit and thereby maximize the potential for obtaining grants and receiving donations normally not available to government agencies. An application_for Recognition of Exemption (InS Form 1023 copy attached) has

been submitted to IRS and we are awaiting their decision.

<> Registration Renewal Fee Forms (RRF-l) are attache dfor 12/31107,l2/3I/0g,

and I2/31l09′ There is no annual gross revenue for these periods, as all funding is provided within the budget of the county of Alameda.

This nonprofit didn’t, however, explain this until the OAG sent them ANOTHER letter reminding them of the requirements:

August 6, 2010 CT FILE NUMBER:

(From address) 1300 I Street P. O. Box 903447 Sacramento, CA 94203-4470 Telephone: (916) 445-2021 Ext. 4 Fax: (916) 444-3651 E-Mail Address: Registration@doj.ca.gov

CT0163526

RE: CONFIRMATION OF REGISTRATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S REGISTRY OF CHARITABLE TRUSTS

The captioned entity is now registered with the Registry of Charitable Trusts and has been assigned the registration (“CT”) number set forth above.

In order to complete the Registry file, please submit the following, together with a copy of this letter:

1. The date, month and year the entity first received property (assets).

2. A copy of the Application for Recognition of Exemption (IRS Form 1023) and a copy of the Internal Revenue Service determination letter.

3. Registration Renewal Fee (RRF-1) Reports, together with required renewal fee, for fiscal year(s) ending:

12/31/07, 12/31/08, and 12/31/09. 4. IRS Form 990, 990-PF, or 990-EZ reports for fiscal years ending: 12/31/07, 12/31/08, and 12/31/09.

The RRF-1

Minor note:  The salary of the CEO of this entity was originally set to be $65,000, but raised to $90,000, after which Bill Lockyer’s wife was chosen.  Among the responsibilities of taking $90,000/year (plus benefits no doubt) from the citizens of this county (by being on its payroll), why should we not her to know how to file for a registered charity without generating more correspondence from the Office of the Attorney General? And not need to be reminded:

All forms and instructions are available on our website at http://ag.ca.gov/charities . Directors of nonprofit corporations are required to adhere to the provisions of the California Nonprofit

Corporation Law (Corporations Code section 5000, et seq.).

Trustees for charitable purposes are required to adhere to the provisions of California Probate Code (commencing with section 15000).

Bill Lockyer (Wikipedia):

William Westwood “Bill” Lockyer (born May 8, 1941) is an American politician. He is the current 32nd State Treasurer ofCalifornia, elected in 2006 and re-elected in 2010. He has also served as California Attorney General and President Pro Tempore of the California State Senate. Having held elective office since 1973, Lockyer has arguably had more varied executive and legislative experience than any other current official of the State Government.^[1] Lockyer is unable to run for a third term in 2014 due to term limits.

As treasurer, he should know about these things.  As attorney general, also, obviously.  So should his wife:

Personal life

Lockyer has been married since April 2003 to attorney Nadia Maria Davis, an Orange County native of Hispanic, Native American and European descent. He has been married twice before, has an adult daughter who is an attorney for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and a son born in 2003.

Nadia Lockyer has been a public interest law attorney since 1997. She currently {to article; not now} works as Executive Director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center. In January 2010, she was appointed to the California Community Colleges Board of Governors by Governor Schwarzenegger. She was elected to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in the November 2010 election.^[4]

WE should be relieved to know that one other (of the multiple) family justice centers now operating in Califor nia, which have before the legislature a bill to make them the standard — has actually bothered to register as a charity.  Or has it? (note, this would be the fund-raiser for the actual justice center, presumably)

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER SONOMA COUNTY FOUNDATION		Charity	Not Registered	SANTA ROSA	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

The address of this one turns out to be the Sonoma County Courts, and there is a “Sonoma County Alliance,” incorporated in 1975  (Take Back Our Streets-style)

The Sonoma County Courts
600 Administration Dr.
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
Phone: 707-565-2657

Sonoma County Alliance shows current nonprofit status, reporting since the year 2000; its 1975 articles of incorporation include “the right to attempt to influence the actions of government agencies and entities.”

http://ca.opengovernment.org/sessions/20112012/bills/sb-557

Twitter Mentions

No tweets were found for #cabill #sb557.

I mentioned it, obviously…

Some discussion on the internet — NOT MUCH, although it’s “only” going to repeal part of the penal code, replace it with other text, and among the key issues are.  Some discussion here:

KEY ISSUES 
          SHOULD LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITIES BE AUTHORIZED IN STATE LAW TO
          ESTABLISH "FAMILY JUSTICE CENTERS," WITH ENUMERATED PURPOSES,

and …

DEFINITIONS, STAFF MEMBERS, CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS, AND RELATED
          SPECIFICATIONS? 

          SHOULD THE NATIONAL FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER ALLIANCE BE AUTHORIZED TO
          MAINTAIN AGGREGATE, NON-IDENTIFYING DATA ON CLIENTS OF THE FAMILY
          JUSTICE CENTERS AUTHORIZED BY THIS BILL,SUBJECT TO AUTHORIZATION FROM INDIVIDUAL VICTIMS?**

{{**likely to be traumatized... and apt to sign away rights in exchange for promise of help...Note, individual victims
includes child victims of trafficking, from what I understand.}}
                                       PURPOSE

          The purposes of this bill are to 1) authorize local government
          entities to establish a  multiagency, multidisciplinary family
          justice center to provide services to victims of domestic
          violence, sexual assault, human trafficking and elder abuse, as
          specified; and 2) authorize the National Family Justice Center Alliance {{i.e., the one in San Diego}} to maintain, and 
a family justice center to provide,
          nonidentifying, aggregate data on victims receiving services from family justice centers and the outcomes from the services provided, and to report findings and outcomes to the Legislature annually, as specified.

They are asking for special recognition and privileges in front of the legislature, having gotten some major grants funding,

and this after failing to incorporate on time, report their nonprofit status on time, and when called on this, completely

like other nonprofits are supposed to.

SB 557 defines family justice centers for the first
               time in California law.  Family justice centers have been identified as a "best practice" by the U.S. Department of Justice.

NOTE:  there’s a history to the head of OVW and prior family law involvement, as to who’s getting these grants…

Susan Carbon — appointed by President Obama in 2009, clearly has a very Family Law background, including collaborating

with AFCC on some projects, being a family law judge in New Hampshire, involvement in the Greenbook INitiative, which has heavy

HHS (translation:  marriage/fatherhood components) involvement, and which basically does not address batterers getting custody.

President Obama, despite this OVW and Office of Women & Girls, has taken fatherhood granting up several notches from where it was already,

and despite our national debt.    The statement that the “DOJ” identifies it as a best practice doesn’t mean it IS a best practice.  Has there been

any grassroots movement — from victims — for a convenient one-stop shop, and glowing reports — from victims — of these centers?

NOTE: I am not going to follow this trail further for purposes of this post.

And lastly, this SFCHILDANDFAMILYLAW.com site lists for resources:

San Francisco Domestic Violence Consortium

The San Francisco Domestic Violence Consortium (aka SFDVC and/or DVC) founded in 1982, is a network of seventeen domestic violence service agencies that come together with the goal of providing high quality, coordinated and comprehensive services to San Francisco’s victims of domestic abuse. The services of the individual agencies include emergency shelter, transitional housing, crisis lines, counseling, prevention programs, education and legal assistance. Services are available in the many different languages of San Francisco’s diverse populations. One of the main activities of the SFDVC is networking. SFDVC agencies share information, learn about issues that impact their work and coordinate their services and activities with a particular focus on public funding, specifically coordinating grant proposals and conducting advocacy/lobbying of government departments as to the importance of funding domestic violence services

The SFDVC is a nonprofit organization and a project of the Tides Center. The SFDVC is led by its co-chairs and committees. The SFDVC recognizes that San Francisco is a diverse city and domestic violence is a problem in all communities regardless of ethnicity, race, class, physical ability, religion, age, immigration and economic status, sexual orientation and gender identity. Therefore, the SFDVC reaches out to all communities in order to insure a broad representation in its membership. To provide accessible services for all individuals and communities, the SFDVC strives to eliminate social, institutional, language and physical barriers to its agencies’ services.

How odd that this consortium has as one of its members the Family Violence Prevention Fund (which I’ve written so much about) and which takes fatherhood funding, with according fatherhood emphasis — yet has allied with a group that says it’s feminist.  WHatever ….

THE TIDES CENTER:   (as of 2010) appears, unlike many others, to be actually filing, including when it conducts a raffle to raise money.  It incorporated in 1994? with 3 people, and commandeers assets of $77 million, plus revenue of $68 million.  It is SF-based.    If you are a nonprofit operating in this state, you should register.  if you are a commercial fundraiser doing a raffle, that has to be registered (once per year), also. Something like this:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2007 Raffle Expired SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Registration Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2006 Raffle Expired SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Registration Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2005 Raffle Expired SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Registration Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2007-04 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2005-1 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2006-2 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-2005-3 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110 Raffle Registered SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Registration Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-08-5 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 094566 Charity Current SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity THE TIDES CENTER 4110-08-6 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-08-7 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-08-8 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-10-1 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle THE TIDES CENTER 4110-10-2 Raffle Complete SAN FRANCISCO CA Raffle Report Raffle 1

the tax-exempt goal:  “Activities: To .promote and support emerging social change_ and educational ~programs._

I.e., to change the world.  Very active overseas, and registered as a nonprofit in 38 out of 50 of the USA.

Because that’s enough for this post, I”m going to point again to one “Collaborative Practice” organization (nonprofit, formed 2010 as we

pointed out), and business address at which the young (?) attorney above from Texas posts her resources (including Kids’ Turn):

Entity Name:	COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE CALIFORNIA
Entity Number:	C2887391
Date Filed:	06/26/2006
Status:	ACTIVE
Jurisdiction:	CALIFORNIA
Entity Address:	291 GEARY STREET, SUITE 600
Entity City, State, Zip:	SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102-1811
Agent for Service of Process:	DAVID A. FINK
Agent Address:	291 GEARY STREET, SUITE 600
Agent City, State, Zip:	SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102

 

At this site (a little birdie told me…..)

(CRIIS.com  “Access to Public Records for County Government”)

One can access SOME California county’s records, in SOME sort of database,

And (years, 1995 – 1999 search), I notice a lot of activity:

		Date	Document		Doc Type	E/R	Name
	Show Detail	07/29/1999	G627668-00		SUBSTITUTION TRUSTEE	R	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	05/22/1996	F978078-00		RECONVEYANCE	E	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	05/03/1996	F967391-00		DEED	R	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	03/06/1996	F939501-00		DEED	E	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	03/01/1996	F937875-00		RELEASE JUDGMENT	R	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	03/01/1996	F937874-00		RELEASE JUDGMENT	R	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	03/01/1996	F937873-00		RELEASE JUDGMENT	R	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	12/13/1995	F895936-00		ASSIGNMENT OF DEED OF TRUST	E	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	08/28/1995	F838511-00		DEED OF TRUST	E	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	08/28/1995	F838511-01		ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS	E	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	07/20/1995	F817773-00		SUBSTITUTION TRUSTEE	R	FINK DAVID A
	Show Detail	01/24/1995	F747931-00		SUBSTITUTION TRUSTEE	R	FINK DAVID A

 

Many of these (per “show detail” link) appear to have business dealings with the Thorn family (i.e., Kids’ Turn, 1242 Market Street Limited, SF, etc.)

whether Schapiro-Thorn, Suzie Thorn, or another (presumably) relation.  For example,

(hard to paste to this format), the second item above has American Securities reconveying something to both Mr. Fink and Joe W. Thorn, Jr.

who (with Sr. & Suzie) are Kids’ Turn Donors:

1. Kids’ Turn » Donors . .

Joe Thorn, Jr.
Joe W. Thorn, Sr.
Suzie S. Thorn, Esq.

and some property (APN 2608-062) transferred between them on 03/06/1996, from Joe Jr. to Mr. Fink

From 1996-2006 (searching by APN tag) this is one active piece of property, shifting around between several different families, and banks, and living trusts.

Might be worth a look (I’m curious what street address, i.e., is it a commercial building):

Possibly (judging by who was at the top of the transfer list) not that I know if it’s current:

 33 Park Hill Avenue
San Francisco-Castro/Upper Market, CA 94117
Owner: Todd D Stein (Living Trust)

Joe Thorn (I DNK whether Sr. or Jr.) is on staff at Schapiro-Thorn, and Managing partner for the LLC  owning the property,

“1242 Market Street Limited”

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
198501800044	01/18/1985	ACTIVE	1242 MARKET STREET, LTD.	SUZIE S. THORN

Sometimes all 3 will be in a transaction — this one appears to be some real estate in the care of a trust:

Or another, dating back to 1990.  Point being, that real estate recorded deeds (often involving family trusts) are relevant to keep track of, and retired judges,

active judges, family lawyers, etc. can definitely be landlords or involved in real estate transfer, as well as administering estates which may include property.

I am not prepared to struggle with the (copy & paste function) today on this, however, in tracking finances, one has to look at real estate and administration

of trusts.  For example, if one attorney is representing wife, the other husband, and both are together attorneys administering property, or own it together,

we should know this.   See bottom of this post on another corporation which has a lien with the courts….

((David A. Fink) Attorney Description on the firm’s page)

Admitted:1987, California, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California and U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Law School:Golden Gate University, J.D.

Member:Collaborative Practice California (Executive Board Member, 2006—); Bar Association of San Francisco (Chair, Executive Committee, Family Law Section, 1995); State Bar of California (Member, Sections on: Family Law; International Law; Chair, 1999-2000, Member 1996-2007, Executive Committee, Family Law Section; Co-Chair, Council of State Bar Sections, 2002-2003); American Bar Association (Member, Family Law Section); International Bar Association; Association of Certified Family Law Specialists; Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

Biography:Named: Northern California Super Lawyer, Law and Politics, San Francisco Magazine Top 10, 2006 and Top 100, 2005—; One of the Bay Area’s Top Family Law Attorneys, The Recorder, November 2003. Recipient: Distinguished Service Award, Family Law Section, State Bar of California, 2007; Eureka Award, Collaborative Practice California, 2007.** Judge Pro Tem, San Francisco Superior Court, 1992—. Fellow: American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers[[AAML”]] (California Chapter President, 2008); American Bar Foundation.

Born: San Francisco, California, September 13, 1960

 

Of the two formed in 2010 (notice how far back the formations go), I looked up the top row, Mark Fotohabadi, who turns out to be a Pepperdine  / Straus Institute graduate; I believe I blogged this already — but a search shows that the ADR community is organized and ready to refer each other’s business just fine:

New members of ADR hub.com are asked, and Mr. Fotohabadi answered:

What is your profession and title?    Principal

What is your ADR experience? (trainings and education

MDR Graduate of the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine University School of Law.

What are you hoping to get from ADRhub.com

Collaborate with other like minded professionals and practitioners.

Another logo (on the site) ADR hub.com is “Created and supported by the Werner Institute” it says…

The “Werner Institute” is, predictably, also based at a university, this time “Creighton University School of Law”:

Taking the field of conflict resolution to a higher level

The Werner Institute was established in 2005 thanks to a generous gift from the C.L. Werner family, creating the most richly endowed program of its kind in the country. The mission of the Werner Institute is to be a leader in advancing the field of conflict resolution to a new quantum level with a focus on developing the next generation of practitioners and scholars who are responsive to the real, and often unacknowledged, needs of those in conflict. With an interdisciplinary foundation and a focus on collaboration and open inquiry, the Institute supports the mission of Creighton University and builds a bridge between the field of conflict resolution and the issues faced by people in an increasingly complex world.

I’d be interested to see how the “real and often unacknowledged needs” that these graduates will be able to identify will, in practice, trump identified criminal activity by one or more of the partners in “conflict” with each other primarily because of that criminal activity.

Like Pepperdine, Creighton (in Omaha, NE)  has a religious origin:     Catholic/Jesuit.  This can get interesting when the topic is divorce…..

The Mission and Identity of Creighton University

Creighton is a Jesuit university, rooted in the Catholic tradition. At Creighton we live this mission and are guided by our identity. Because we are Catholic, we approach education with a passion for learning and a zeal for making a difference in our world. In the Catholic intellectual tradition, we celebrate our diversity, we learn through dialogue, and we pursue the truth in all its forms. As a Jesuit university we are continually bringing the richness of a 450 year old educational tradition to bear on the most contemporary issues of our world. Our Jesuit vision commits us to form women and men of competence, conscience and compassion who have learned from reflecting upon their experiences of being for and with others. We do this in service of a faith that does justice.

ANYHOW, good luck, Mark Fotohabadi….currently of Beverly Hills, with your practice and business incorporation.  It should do OK, looks like there are some entertainment lawyers and one of the board of directors of Beverly Hills CHamber of Commerce with the same street address, or at least on the same floor (a.k.a. I tend to look up street addresses):
Allan Alexander, Esq.
9595 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Phone: (310) 273-8400

The 4th row of “Alternate Dispute Resolution” companies, also Active, and formed October 2010 (red font), when I looked up the address, turns out to have been a 2011 Executive Committee of the Monterey County Bar Association in Salinas, Mr. John L. Bailey, Esq.

(FROM THE SECTION ON COllaborative Practice / Registered Agent David A. Fink of Nachlis & Fink, and “recorded documents” Criis.com site:)

I pointed out that the parent education nonprofit Kids’ Turn (SF), which has been found with a lien involving the San Francisco Courts, and a history from articles of incorporation of place of business, 1242 Market Street (Schapiro Thorn) San Francisco — and noticed a different “Thorn” also granting the SFTC (the SF Trial Court system) liens as well:

Record

Date

Document

Doc Type

E/R

Name

Show Detail

01/26/2010

I917579-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/26/2010

I917578-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/26/2010

I917577-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/26/2010

I917575-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/28/2000

G728049-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/28/2000

G728048-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/28/2000

G728047-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Show Detail

01/28/2000

G728045-00

NOTICE LIEN

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

Thorn Americas, Inc.  — formerly American arm of a British Firm — was bought out by someone else, and is not incorporated to do business in California.  Go check yourself — but every one of these liens (2000 & 2010) has SFTC involved in the “Show Detail” segment.

Record

GrantoR

Year

Document

Date

Reel

Image

Document Type

APN

GranteE

Name

2010

I917579-00

01/26/2010

K066

1671

NOTICE LIEN

–

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

–

E

SFTC

Record

GrantoR

Year

Document

Date

Reel

Image

Document Type

APN

GranteE

Name

2000

G728045-00

01/28/2000

H562

1074

NOTICE LIEN

–

R

THORN AMERICAS INC

–

E

SFTC

It may be totally unrelated to the attorney family, but apart from being the subject of some civil rights lawsuits, and apparently from Wichita, this group isn’t operating in California under its own name, legally, that I can see:Notice the year:

BUSINESS

Renters Choice to Buy Thorn’s U.S. Unit for $900 Million

June 18, 1998 | From Bloomberg News

Renters Choice Inc. said Wednesday that it will buy British company Thorn’s U.S. rent-to-own business for $900 million in cash, combining the two largest chains of appliance and furniture rental centers that give customers an option to buy. Thorn Americas Inc., the leading U.S. rent-to-own company, with about 1,400 stores under the Rent-A-Center, {{see below}} Remco and U-Can Rent names, had revenue of about $890 million last year.

Earlier article I presume here:

THORN AMERICAS, INC.
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS

The nation’s largest rent-to-own company, Rent-A-Center, conducts its corporate operations in a new 120,000-square-foot facility in northeast Wichita. The company’s sale in 1987 to Thorn EMI, a British company, propelled Rent-A-Center to the number one slot in furniture, electronics and appliance rentals.

Established in 1973 when the first Sight and Sound rental store opened in Kansas City, Missouri, the Rent-A-Center name was adopted in 1980, the same year the company opened their 25th store. At the present time over 300 facilities are in operation.

Flexibility and expansion were the primary goals in designing the new $8 million headquarters, which allows for the expansion to 400 employees at this site.

Conference and training rooms on the first floor include one room with full multi-media capabilities for training and seminars. A large exercise area for employees is located in the partial basement with locker rooms, a padded floor for aerobics and a basketball court that can accommodate three racquetball courts….

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1282901	08/05/1985	FORFEITED	C & H INVESTMENTS, INC., WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS RENT-A-CENTER OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA	** RESIGNED ON 10/30/1992
C1705691	04/16/1992	SURRENDER	RAC USA, INC. WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS RENT-A-CENTER OFSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA	THE PRENTICE-HALL CORPORATION SYSTEM, INC.
C1270453	03/05/1985	FORFEITED	RENT-A-CENTER OF AMERICA, INC.	** RESIGNED ON 10/16/1991
C2491181	12/23/2002	ACTIVE	RENT-A-CENTER WEST, INC.	C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
C1637191	03/16/1989	SURRENDER	RENT-A-CENTER, INC.	THE PRENTICE-HALL CORPORATION SYSTEM, INC.
C1969694	05/23/1996	ACTIVE	RENT-A-CENTER, INC.	C T CORPORATION SYSTEM

RENT-A-CENTER, Inc. shows as”  Incorporated in Delaware (i.e., hard to track), place of business, Plano, Texas, and Registered agent, C T Corporation System is in Los Angeles.

The top 3 (forfeited/surrender/forfeited) all show Kansas in their information; the 3/16/89 “Surrender” shows PLano Texas and Sacramento.  Corporation mill, much?

.

The “Family Connections” in this business appear to me to be the collegial collaborations with the family of the family law attorneys and affiliates, overall.

I do not have a “family” of data researchers (and certainly no copyeditors!) at this point, so am going to call it a day on calling out a few different places to look for information.  Added to the technology restraints is the fact that the best databases are not free to the public, usually.  one thing has become clear — neither CRIIS.com (as informative as it seems) nor the secretary of state’s business database, were really meant for the public to conduct any serious research on them.  Other states have better ones — but to be unable to tell at a glance WHEN a corporation was suspended, dissolved (or etc.) — and not being able to sort on any field — for example, for-profit/ not for profit is not showing on the incorporations, is troubling.   I realize one comes before the other (theoretically), but wouldn’t it be great if the OAG would actually talk to the SOS and share information – and a common identity number?

COLLABORATIVE LAW — Wikipedia article — shows the organization, and if one scrolls straight down to the bottom, it’s clear that this is an AFCC phenomenon and northern california originated (says the article):

History

This approach to conflict resolution was created in 1990 by a Minnesota family lawyer Stuart Webb,^[2] who saw that traditional litigation was not always helpful to parties and their families, and often was damaging.

I love reading group’s own histories of themselves.  A single attorney realized that divorce proceedings were a mess and “not always helpful.”

Since 1990, the Collaborative Law movement has spread rapidly to most of the United States, Europe, Canada and Australia. Per the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (“IACP”),^[3] more than 22,000 lawyers have been trained in Collaborative Law worldwide, with collaborative practitioners in at least 46 states. In some localities, Collaborative Law has become the predominant method for resolving divorce, co-habitation and other family disputes. More than 1,250 lawyers have completed their training in England where collaborative law was launched in 2003.

The growth of the collaborative process in England and Wales has been encouraged by both the judiciary and the family lawyers organisation, Resolution.^[4] In an address to London family lawyers in October 2009, the newly appointed Supreme Court Justice, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore became the first member of the Supreme Court to publicly endorse Collaborative Law and called for its extension to other areas.^[5][6] Previously, in October 2008 the Hon. Mr Justice Coleridge, a High Court Judge of the Family Division, had promised that collaborative agreements would be fast tracked in the High Court of England and Wales.^[7]

[edit]Organizations

The primary global collaborative organisation is the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP), which was founded in the late 1990’s by a group of northern California lawyers, psychotherapists, and financial planners. *  There are numerous practice groups (or PODS) of collaborative practitioners worldwide. An updated list of worldwide practice groups and their individual members can be located on the IACP website, http://www.collaborativepractice.com.

(if this were a cult, or insurgent political group, the word “cells” would apply  However, not to be so obvious, it’s “PODS”  Remind anyone of science fiction, yet?)

The American Bar Association (“ABA”), the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, and the International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (“IAML”)^[8] all have Collaborative Law committees.

IACP is an interdisciplinary organisation whose members include lawyers, mental health professionals and financial specialists*

(*Hard to practice law outside the courts if you don’t know where the money is hidden in a situation, right?)

Did this group of northern California lawyers going international incorporate in northern california?

“ABOUT US” shows its origins in Minnesota:  allegedly with one person.

In the beginning, there was Stu…

The story of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals begins with the founder of the Collaborative movement: Stu Webb, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Stu practiced traditional family law for more than twenty years when, during the late 1980s, he became interested in mediation and alternate dispute resolution.

No doubt this just rained down from the sky or sprung up from his clientele; I’m sure it didn’t have anything to do with who he was associating with, or any professional organization he might have been a member of (I won’t name names here…)

Stu’s challenge was to craft a way to bring the particular talent of lawyers as problem-solvers into a “settlement only” process for family law representation. What Stu envisioned was a model where lawyers could not, under any circumstances, go to court over any issue. Lacking court as a dispute-resolution option, lawyers would have no alternative but to rise to the challenge of solving the problem.

How is the problem of criminal activity by a partner handled?  Continuing to solve the problem, and do not report any child abuse?  If child abuse is found and reported, continue to “settle” while one parent goes somewhere else in an attempt to actually protect a child, and him/herself?

From this insight, Collaborative Law was born. In 1990, Stu announced to his clients and colleagues that he would no longer go to court;

Yes, it was conceived in his mind, in the form of insight, and gave birth, like many of his clients did, physically.  . . .

Collaborative Law catches on…

The Collaborative Law concept quickly spread beyond Minneapolis and arrived in California in 1993, when lawyers from San Mateo County learned of this new process from Minneapolis lawyers presenting the idea for the first time at a national conference. By early 1994, family lawyers in northern California had begun practicing Collaborative Law.

and . . .

…and then there was the American Institute of Collaborative Professionals

As Collaborative Practice in its many forms began to develop in several areas of the San Francisco Bay Area, it became clear that collaborative practitioners should work together in order to promote and improve the process. The concept was to share what they were learning, to explore the processes that worked and those that didn’t, and to share resources.

Pauline Tesler, Peggy Thompson, Nancy Ross, David Green and Karen Russell began to meet monthly in 1997. They were soon joined in 1998 by Gene Seltzer, Jennifer Jackson, Catherine Conner, Linda Seinturier and James Sheehy. Their vision was to form an umbrella networking organization to serve Collaborative Practice in its many forms.

(JENNIFER JACKSON had about a decade earlier started Kid’s Turn.  Now, she is a collaborative & mediation lawyer:

Under Divorce/Marriage Resources are some interesting ones:

centers, and, for a fee, child support calculations for your state.

KIDS TURN Kids’ Turn is renowned throughout the United States as a leader in divorce education for children and parents. The goal of Kids’ Turn programs is to help minimize the negative effects of divorce on children. The programs are educational (not therapy) focusing on skill building and positively affecting each family’s ability to manage the changes created by divorce or separation.

Children’s Rights Council The Children’s Rights Council is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to assisting children of separation and divorce through advocacy and parenting education. Their site offers excellent, up-to-date research: legislative information, links to other sites and resources and a good book catalog. There is a California chapter.

{{YEP, there sure is — right here!

Organization Name	Registration Number	Record Type	Registration Status	City	State	Registration Type	Record Type
CHILDREN’S RIGHTS COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA (THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF CHILDREN’S RIGHTS COUNCIL OF WASHINGTON, D.C.)		Charity	Not Registered	SACRAMENTO	CA	Charity Registration	Charity
1

wonder how long it’s been operating in California . . . .let me look:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C1862355	06/29/1993	DISSOLVED	CHILDREN’S RIGHTS COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA (THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF CHILDREN’S RIGHTS COUNCIL OF WASHINGTON, D.C.)	PATRICIA GEHLEN

WOW — since 1993, and NEVER REGISTERED YET!  Ms. Jackson, please update your website as to both KT and the CRC, please!

1. LaDads Forum – LaDads

   ladads.info/modules/newbb/report.php?forum=2… – Cached

   Patricia Gehlen, Coordinator CRCCalif@aol.com. Phone: 916-635-2590 voice and fax 5.8CRC of California Sacramento Chapter Paul Stroub, President …

1. Resources Around the Country

   http://www.fathersrightsne.org/ResourceList.htm – Cached

   Children’s Rights Council Patricia Gehlen, Coordinator P. O. Box 163801. Sacramento, CA 95816-9081 916-635-2590 voice and fax CRCCalif@aol.com …

UCDavis INTERNSHIP AND CAREER CENTER lists possibility of interning with this group, alphabetical opportunities

16. Catholic Social Service of Sacramento – Immigration Program
17. Children’s Rights Council of California
18. Citizens Commission on Human Rights
19. Coalition of Concerned Legal Professinals

When I click on #17, here, it reads:

Address: 915 L Street, Suite C-282
City: Sacramento State: CA Zip: 958143700

Contact Person: Patricia Gehlen
Contact’s Position: Calif State Coordinator
Phone: 9166352590
Email: crccalif@aol.com
Hours: 24 hours a day, 7 days a week

Descriptions: Promotes healthy development of children of separated parents. Encourages joint custody, shared financial responsibility, liberalized visitation, access to school and medical records, and making the present mediation/counseling system accountable. Discourages the use of the legal system as a tool of revenge. Legislative advocacy, community awareness, newsletter, and discount on resource materials. Monthly information and support meetings, and legal clinics. Keywords: youth

(Address shows up   at a Police Chief’s Association 2011 conference roo?)

California College & University Police Chiefs Association   {{anyone can find this one registered as a nonprofit, comment-me….}}

Attn: CCUPCA Conference 915 L Street C#282 Sacramento, CA 95814

 

Clearly it’s a going concern, and I’d say a valuable one:

The California College and University Police Chiefs Association (CCUPCA), was founded in 1982 to represent and promote the interests of safety and security in the public and private institutions of higher education throughout California.

The non-profit Association is dedicated to promoting and advancing the professional development of higher educational campus safety by acting as a focal point for the exchange of professional ideas and information, and by hosting conferences and training classes.

CCUPCA is committed to strengthening the political voice of higher educational campus safety by working with legislators on issues which affect the safety of the students, faculty, and staff of California’s colleges and universities.

CCUPCA Members

CCUPCA consists of police chiefs from over 75 colleges and universities in California. Our current members are listed below.

Membership Fees for each level of membership:

• Institutional Membership $100.00
• Associate Membership $50.00
• Corporate Membership $200.00

 

Apparently this vibrant organization does not exist as a corporation or a nonprofit in California.  I also looked (checking spelling, using partial words, etc.) in NCCSDataweb and 990 finder.  There are Police associations, but not that I can see with the words “College” or “Universities” in them.  Perhaps someone can illuminate me.

 

ORGANIZATION NAME	STATE	YEAR	TOTAL ASSETS	FORM	PAGES	EIN
California Police Chiefs Association	CA	2010	$633,314	990O	23	23-707255

Fresno Police Chiefs Foundation

CA

2009

$45,726

990EZ

16

41-2029665

L A County Police Chiefs Assc

CA

2005

$24,638

990O

11

81-0555130

San Diego Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Association

CA

2010

$14,452

990EO

5

33-0680289

(990 finder, searching the words “police chiefs” in California comes up with four different organizations / EINs.  The same search on the attorney general’s site shows nothing (results, zero), at the Secretary of STate site seems to show these four, (statewide + 3 cities’ worth) plus some predecessors:

Entity Number	Date Filed	Status	Entity Name	Agent for Service of Process
C0132395	02/02/1929	SUSPENDED	CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS AND SHERRIFFS ASS’N
C0511549	07/01/1966	ACTIVE	CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, INC.	LESLIE JOHNSON MCGILL
C2675740	09/08/2004	SUSPENDED	CALIFORNIA TRIBAL POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, INC.	MICHAEL B MEESE
C2166436	06/14/1999	ACTIVE	LOS ANGELES COUNTY POLICE CHIEF’S ASSOCIATION	ELIZABETH HERNANDEZ
C3166969	10/24/2008	ACTIVE	MANTECA POLICE CHIEF’S FOUNDATION	DAVID BRICKER
C3279969	02/18/2010	ACTIVE	MARIN COUNTY POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION	ERIC STERNBERGER, ESQ.
C1671103	08/20/1990	ACTIVE	NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE, INC.	CORPORATE CREATIONS NETWORK INC.
C1923985	09/01/1995	ACTIVE	SAN DIEGO POLICE CHIEF’S AND SHERIFF’S ASSOCIATION	PAT SPRECCO
C2404755	02/27/2002	ACTIVE	THE FRESNO POLICE CHIEF’S FOUNDATION	DONALD HENRY GROSS

 

 

 

 

 

Back to the attorney Ms. Jackson’s website:

Plus Smart Marriages, obviously something related to CFDA 93.086 (fatherhood/marriage grantee type projects):

Smart Marriages “… all couples disagree about all the same basic issues – money, kids, sex, housework, in-laws and leisure time.The difference between successful and unsuccessful couples is how they handle their differences. Successful couples disagree in a way that makes their relationship stronger. They also have other skills and attitudes which help them build long-term happiness and satisfaction. The good news is that anyone can learn to do it better and smarter. . .”

There is no question that the founders of Kids’ Turn know how to propagate their nonprofits.  FUNNY, HOW WHEN THEY GET TOGETHER, LATER, THERE IS ALWAYS ANOTHER NONPROFIT, MOVEMENT, OR CONCEPT BEING “BORN.”  This would be something like, when couples repeatedly have sex together, showing up surprised that one day, about 9 months later, a baby will be born.  I mean, what that’s what the associations enable — more nonprofit births.  So let’s get honest and say it was intentional — and not some sort of awesome wonderful miraculous (virgin) birth of the latest nonprofit network whose incorporators were lawyers and/or judges with a few social workers in there as well, OK?

While Collaborative Law, here, began with a MN family lawyer, in his mind — it says that “kids’ Turn began in court” (i.e., in the mind of a family law judge, and helped by Jennifer Jackson, here….)  From the KT site:

The idea for Kids’ Turn began in court. While presiding over the family law department of the domestic relations court in the late 80’s, Judge Ina Levin Gyemant noted that while lawyers filed motions and parents sought orders regarding custody, visitation and other disputes, children and their needs were almost completely ignored. Mediation services were mandated for parents in California at the time, but no educational program was available for children, who are often the people most vulnerable and confused during parental separation.

In 1988, Kids’ Turn was created. With the foresight and vision of renowned San Francisco mediator, Jeanne Ames, Family Law Judge, The Hon. Ina Gyemant, psychiatrist, John Sikorski, and attorneys Ann Van Balen and Jennifer Jackson, Kids’ Turn started as a nonprofit agency in order to offer direct educational services to children and their parents who are undergoing separation or divorce. Located in San Francisco, Kids’ Turn now serves six Bay Area counties: Marin, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, San Francisco and Santa Clara.

In the early 90′s, the Kids’ Turn board developed a framework for sharing the curriculum and for licensing affiliates.

Initially called the American Institute of Collaborative Professionals (AICP), the group’s activities included local networking meetings, a newsletter meant to be a voice for the collaborative movement (now known as The Collaborative Review) and an annual networking forum. AICP was incorporated in 1999 as a 501 (c) (3) non-profit corporation.

… and now we are International

In May of 1999, the first annual AICP networking forum was held in Oakland, California. The following year, a meeting was held in Chicago to discuss the state of Collaborative legal practice across the country. The nearly 50 practitioners who attended this meeting agreed that AICP should serve as the umbrella organization for our rapidly-growing movement. At the same time, they recognized that since Collaborative Practice was also developing exponentially across Canada, the organization needed a broader, more inclusive name and mission. Thus the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals was born in late 2000, officially changing its name in 2001.

{{Note:  It’s so disconcerting to continually hear about corporations, which are made by people by deliberately filing with their secretaries of state — as things which are passively “born.”  I guess it’s just that “detachment” thing — we are to believe these things had a life of their own, and were not pushed, really, by profesisonals.  Yes, they’re narrating who did what, but always this “was born” or “founded” or “launched” [i.e. the feminine or the masculine attributions] keep showing up when the announcement is about each bouncing new baby nonprofit or for-profit that shows up — as though this were something new in the world, when in fact that’s primarily what Family Lawyers seem to be in the business of doing — collaborating, associating, publishing, and incorporating.}} ANyhow, here it is, in California showing a Phoenix, Arizona address also:

Entity Name:	THE INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONALS
Entity Number:	C2133860
Date Filed:	02/05/1999
Status:	ACTIVE
Jurisdiction:	CALIFORNIA
Entity Address:	11811 N TATUM BLVD STE 1000
Entity City, State, Zip:	PHOENIX AZ 85028
Agent for Service of Process:	DONNA BECK WEAVER
Agent Address:	520 BROADWAY STE 350
Agent City, State, Zip:	SANTA MONICA CA 90401

The Collaborative Review has been published continuously since May, 1999. The work begun by initial editors Jennifer Jackson and Pauline Tesler has grown into an in-depth, scholarly publication with contributors from around the world. The 2nd annual IACP Networking Forum took place in October 2001, again in Oakland, California with over 100 practitioners gathering from across the United States, Canada and Switzerland. The scope of the annual forum has gradually expanded to include education, inspiration, dialogue, and opportunities for member feedback on important IACP initiatives. In 2009, IACP celebrated its 10th Anniversary Networking and Educational Forum in Minneapolis, Minnesota, with nearly 600 attendees from across the globe.

I think it funny, the fascination with hooking up with the UK and other countries.  Somewhere in our distant United States history, declaration was made of independence from the same country, and institution of a different form of government which would disable tyranny, particularly of religion.  It also resisted the idea of colonizing others through taxes, and (well, etc.).   Here, all these tax-exempt professional organizations — run by people whose professionas are often quite profitable to start with — are readying themselves to catch the fallout from the family courts ,which have been apparently bankrupted by budget cuts – and not years of management by rapidly expanding administrative offices of the courts, changing the cultures of custody, and throwing family divorce business to the local nonprofit, whichever one is closest crony to who assigns the county contracts. .  . .

Each new nonprofit formed is added to the professional’s website as a gold star indicating their vast experience and competence.  While I’m not questioning Ms. Jackson’s, here’s hers:

Jennifer believes that a lawyer must be actively involved in her professional community, and that life is about making a difference. Jennifer is one of the founders of Kids’ Turn, a program for separating families begun in San Francisco which has expanded exponentially in size and in quality of service to children and families. She is one of the founders of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals and served for eight years as co-editor of its journal, The Collaborative Review. She has had leadership roles in her professional organizations at local, state national and international levels, and is a past president of the Northern California chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

I imagine having millionaire donors, grants, court-connections, and founders with international connections would probably help anything expand exponentially.  But of course it did so mostly because it was just such a great idea . . . . . Ask the parents in Lackawanna County, PA (who are being subjected to a Kids Turn lookalike, Kids’ First — through their courts — how they feel about where their money is going, and the coursework.

I know it must be a little over-stimulating to be birthing and conceiving (well, in reverse order) and associating to propagate some more great ideas, primarily along the lines of AFCC & CRC (no parental alienation!) – – but I think it’s time to ask our professionals to take some trips back to the home area and incorporate properly, report their charitable organization with the OAG — not just press releases and such — and file tax returns promptly and properly with the first attempt, too!  I mean, if ALameda County Family Justice Center can’t get it straight, how much really can the lawbreaking individuals that created the clientele they serve (i.e. victims) to?