SAN FRANCISCO (CN) - California's Judicial Council on Friday changed its policy on information requests, in response to growing interest from judges in the judiciary's financial affairs .
The council will now play a larger part in dealing with requests pertaining to council policy, and staff for the Administrative Office of the Courts must defer to council members on how to respond.
The battle over information plays out as part of a larger confrontation between a powerful court bureaucracy and trial court judges critical of the policy and spending choices made by that bureaucracy.
"It wasn't until we were realizing the hundreds of hours that were being expended in answering the types of requests that we were seeing, that were, honestly, some people have a lot of time on their hands," said Judge Mary Ann O'Malley.
Skeptical of the new policy, Judge David Lampe called it "an example of unwarranted bureaucratic complexity."
Retired Judge Charles Horan from Los Angeles, who fought a lengthy information battle with the court bureaucracy earlier this year said rules on information requests were being subverted to withhold information.
He said he would have to wait and see on Friday's policy changes.
"Any system is only as effective as the good faith of the people running it," said Horan. "That's what it will boil down to."
The language adopted by the council on Friday consists of guidelines on how the administrative office staff should apply the council's Rule of Court 10.500 titled "Open Access to Public Information."
The preamble to that rule states, "The intent is to clarify and expand the public's right of access to judicial administrative records and must be broadly construed to further the public's right of access."
The guidelines put in place Friday will send requests for information under Rule 10.500 along different paths, primarily based on who is asking.
If a question comes from the governor or a legislator, it will go to the court lobbyists.
If a question comes from the press and has to do with policy-making, such as why the director of the court bureaucracy sits on the Judicial Council as a non-voting member, it will by answered by the press liaison.
If such a question comes from a judge, the new guidelines say, "Refer to Director of Court Operations, Special Services Office, who will consult with Chief's appointee(s) to determine whether request is within the regular scope of judicial business. If yes, appropriate staff will be notified and should respond. If no, refer to Chief's appointee."
If question comes from member of the public and concerns policy, such as why is the administrative office employs attorneys in China, and if that questions "appears to present a legitimate issue or be appropriate for response," the guidelines say, "refer to direct of Court Operations, Special Services Office, who will consult with Chief's appointees(s) to determine whether to respond."
"Otherwise," the guideline continues, "a response is not necessary."
Most of the requests for information over the last year came from the Alliance of California Judges, a reform group that has pushed for greater oversight of the bureaucratic agency. Judge Lampe of Kern County is a director of the Alliance and retired Judge Horan is a member.