This topic is important and interesting enough that I keep splitting posts.  Right now, there are three.  Each may have different focus on the detail, but will have overlap.

The inspiration was again seeing a 2012 report on a committee of (basically but not only, justices) from California, called the “Strategic Evaluation Committee” which in response to complaint that the top ruling body of the courts (California Judicial Council)’s “Administrative Office of the Courts” (AOC for short) was completely out of control.  Probably a good assessment.

List of the committee right here — you can see one person who is NOT from the Legislative or Judicial or Executive (enforcement) branches of state government — but somehow is on the committee to evaluate the courts.  I noticed this immediately, followed up, and learned more (which is coming, another post).  The group this person sits on has a known supportive connection to the AFCC.  From their website, above:

Briefly, the National Center for the State Courts  as early as the 1980s became the “Secretariat” for the private nonprofit association which tends, or at least tries, to attempt to literally run the family and conciliation courts. Some people (I’m one) report SOME on the AFCC (most reform groups ignore it and just trade rhetoric), but only a fool would think they don’t have some backing.  The NCSC does not acknowledge on its site, while it acknowledges many other groups, that it has had any connection to the AFCC.

[In quickly looking up “Deukmejian” I find there is a courthouse named after him scheduled to have just opened, in Long Beach California.   LBJP (Long Beach Judicial Partners) describes who was involved in the project, and another link, from the Administrative Office of the Courts gives a factsheet on the “Governor George Deukmejian Courthouse” (Long Beach being right near the City of Los Angeles, and on the Bay/think “Port of Los Angeles” and you got it.)   [[WOW — reading about the new courthouse and “PBI” (Performance Based Infrastructure” reminds me of the private ownership of public facilities, and then who gets billed for the leasing?)

!!!

AECOM offices (see logo), Global enough for you?   [this brings up the issue of “Who Owns and Operates the Courthouses? in which lives and livelihoods are adjusted and re-allocated?]

Marv Bryer ALSO brought this up in the late 1990s.  (see johnnypumphandle.com, that old site with so many different leads — he talked about the issue of how many “public benefit corporations” is it possible to squeeze into one address, and ways in which we often just do not know who owns the real estate in which justice is dispensed — when they are private corporations.

Wow…. more information (note, the URL ends in a “*.com” so it’s not a gov’t site).

Long Beach Judicial Partners LLC (LBJP) will continue to operate, and maintain the 545,000 square-foot state-of the art courthouse in Long Beach. The project has been delivered under a unique public/private partnership agreement, which has a total development cost of approximately $490 million and a design-build cost of $343 million.

The five-story building houses 31 courtrooms, as well as court administration offices, Los Angeles County lease space, and retail leasable space. The building includes below-grade secure inmate transfer facilities, detention facilities, and separate secure parking areas for judges. A five-level great room atrium enclosed on two ends by a cable-supported glass wall system serves as the single entry point for the public and provide access to a secured central courtyard. Clad in deeply-articulated curtain wall and elements of stone, the project spans two city blocks in downtown Long Beach and replaces the functionally- obsolete court-house building one block away. In addition to the new building, the project team also renovated and expanded an existing 399,000 square-foot parking structure.

This court building is the first social infrastructure project in the United States procured under the principles of Performance-Based Infrastructure (PBI) contracting [[see factsheets]. Under the PBI agreement, the Judicial Council of California (JCC) owns the building, and the Superior Court of Los Angeles County occupies approximately 80% of the space.

Then, does the Superior Court of Los Angeles County pay rent to the Judicial Council of California? If so, how’s THAT work in re: conflicts of interest, when the County gets sued, if it does?

The JCC pays LBJP an annual, performance-based service fee for 35 years. The PBI delivery method leveraged the private sector’s access to financing, technological expertise, and management efficiency to quickly provide a high-quality facility serving the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

This project was started for bidding in 2009, I thought.  LBJP, LLC, was formed in 2009:

515 S FLOWER STREET 8TH FLOOR, Los Angeles 97001

See “Aecom Services, Inc.” dba Aecom Design” (same address and floor):

AECOM Services, Inc., doing business as AECOM Design, operates as a design, management, and technical services company in the United States, China, and the United Arab Emirates. Its services include engineering, architecture, consulting, engineering, integrated facility management, interior design and planning, master planning, security, and sustainability, as well as system solutions and information technology/telecommunications. The company offers client staff augmentation and staff extension, system integration, quality control, and financing strategy services; technology services for intricate and critical infrastructure facilities and systems; and program, project, and construction management services for building projects, including new construction, expansion, renovation, and modernization projects. It serves aerospace/industrial, corporate, defense, department of energy, telecommunication, education, federal, hospitality, nuclear, leisure, and transportation markets; and ports, airports, public and commercial facilities, justice facilities, sporting venues, and government facilities. AECOM Services, Inc. was formerly known as DMJM H&N, Inc. The company was founded in 2000 and is based in Los Angeles, California with additional offices in New Mexico, Virginia, Illinois, Colorado, Texas, Michigan, California, Florida, New York, Arizona, Washington, and Utah, as well as in Abu Dhabi, the United Arab Emirates; and Shanghai, China. AECOM Services, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of AECOM Technology Corporation.

(*see also Chubb Group of Insurance Companies 555 S. Flower Street, Third Floor Los Angeles, CA  90071 Tel: (213) 612-0880 Fax: (213) 612-5731

Because I cannot find either LBJP or Aecom on “Public Traded Companies” search in California, they do indeed look to be privately controlled (major scope of activity, international) Incs and the LLC.

On a hunch, I went to see whether “AECOM” was listed in the Bentley 500 that I keep squawking about on this blog (and in other forums). Bentley provides software infrastructure support to major projects, one reason they probably know alot about who owns what assets.  I was floored when I saw their list.  … Sure enough, AECOM is involved with them (using some of their software) and got an  award (from Bentley).  I just want readers to see the scope of the projects involved here.  They have about 45,000 employees worldwide, are involved in rebuilding the World Trade Center (as in, NYC, rising from the ashes), and:

AECOM is a leader in all of the key markets that it serves. AECOM provides a blend of global reach, local knowledge, innovation and technical excellence in delivering solutions that create, enhance and sustain the world’s built, natural and social environments. A Fortune 500 company, AECOM serves clients in approximately 125 countries and had revenue of $7.7 billion during the 12 months ended June 30, 2011. More information on AECOM and its services can be found atwww.aecom.com.

Essentially it is collaborating across time and space, utilizing high-quality and secure software (provided here by Bentley, Inc.) to complete projects in a cost-effective and timely manner:

“AECOM saves $850,000 using ProjectWise for Work Sharing and Engineering“

25 October 2012

Selects Online Deployment for $416 Million Texas State Highway Project

EXTON, Pa., U.S.A. – Bentley Systems, Incorporated, the leading company dedicated to providing comprehensive software solutions for sustaining infrastructure, today announced that AECOM Technology Corporation, a global provider of professional technical and management support services for government and commercial clients, has selected Bentley’s ProjectWise for the cloud-based engineering content management of its Texas State Highway (SH) 161 Phase 4 project. The ProjectWise system of collaboration servers and services provides industry-proven work sharing, content reuse, and dynamic review capabilities that are essential to leveraging information modeling throughintegrated projects for high-performing, intelligent infrastructure. The $416 million design/build project completes a 6.5-mile link in the loop around Dallas-Fort Worth, managed by the North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA). AECOM was challenged to complete the major design elements within 15 months. With the project office in Grand Prairie, Texas, and team members distributed across 22 locations in seven U.S. states, AECOM implemented ProjectWise Online to provide project team members, regardless of their location, with a single, secure environment to create high-quality design documents. ProjectWise enabled AECOM to increase quality, create documents that were 95 percent compliant with its client’s CAD standards, and reduce risk, saving NTTA $850,000 in costs associated with information, workspaces, and standards management as well as quality-control review.

However Long Beach Judicial Partners, LLC (which operates the courthouse now) is sited as underneath a different corporation (while sharing a street address with AECOM).

Did you notice that tiny “A Meridiam Infrastructure Project Company” under the logo for “LBJP, LLC” above? So who is “Meridiam” and what does it mean to be one of their “infrastruct project companies?”  Meridiam:

http://www.meridiam.com/en

History:  Meridiam started as a French/USA (venture?) in 2005, with support from AECOM Technology Corp* and Credit Agricole:

[*note that exact name is not among the four California Corps listed above.  AECOM Technology Corp =/= “AECOM Technical Services, Inc.” the closest similar name listed under California Business Entities Search, is..]

A PIONEER LONG-TERM INVESTOR IN PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
Meridiam was established in France and the United States by Thierry Déau, formerly Chief Executive of Egis Projects (a subsidiary of France’s Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations, specialized in developing, financing and managing infrastructure projects), with operational and financial support from AECOM Technology Corp. [operational presumably] and the Crédit Agricole Group [financial, presumably]
Set up to achieve convergence between the needs of public authorities and the interests of institutional investors, Meridiam finances public infrastructure while aiming to create a secure investment framework for long-term savings.

In 1994, John M. Dionisio formerly of Frederick R. Harris had a 39 yr old engineer (in re: bid-rigging for a Port Authority Project) literally commit suicide in his home setting it afire, and forcing Dionisios’ wife and young son to flee. Apparently the engineer also killed his long-term (9 yrs) mistress (body never found).  I wasn’t sure IF this is the same “John Dionisio,” but his “Forbes.com”  bio makes the connection clear enough:  Frederick R. Harris & Co., Inc.  became later DMJM & Harris, which became, later a subsidiary of Aecom Technology.

Did you notice who is not apparently from a part, or formerly from a literal part (civil servant as identified) of California government?  There is only ONE person, and that is significant indeed. More later.  Were members of the public at large actually on the committee?   Were people who’d been through the courts?  I guess this was an in-house op, except for that one person I mentioned, VOCW.

And that May 2012 Report (about 300pp) is laid out for US to see, how their own AOC developed, and how the ‘CFCC’ (except below, or see p. 81) developed underneath it to the largest sector of the AOC.  A timeline is in the introduction, and related legislation setting the scene.

I don’t know where else this was so neatly laid out.  All parents in California should read it, and then all parents dealing with custody cases in California AND other states (as much of what’s done here becomes a Model for elsewhere — or came here as an intentional Model for elsewhere.  The concept behind “Model” practices is that you already have the “mold” and so its easier to reproduce, without -reinventing the wheel).

It’s an organizational and administrative concept (more on that later).  If practices from other states are rubber-stamped, hand-stamped, and mass-stamped onto a certain state — then why bother with, say, having legislators that listen to their own constituents, I mean why keep pretending?  Is the “tell us your concerns” factor just there for show?

So, out of my three (so far) posts on the topic:

This first one was taken from underneath “Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption through Common Law Discovery.”  While I”m interested in that (i.e., no more slush funds) — I’m more interested in getting (us) out of the “name that, repeat that, hammer that in” mode into the SEEING and PERCEIVING mode of how these things developed.

Read the rest of this entry »