Perez v. Tilton et al

Filing 250

ORDER APPROVING SPACE COORDINATION AGREEMENT. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 10/7/08. (jjo, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2008)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 v. MATTHEW CATE, et al., Defendants. / 1 CARLOS PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, No. C 05-5241 JSW (N.D. Cal.) v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Defendants. / MARCIANO PLATA, et al., Plaintiffs, No. C 01-1351 TEH (N.D. Cal.) v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Defendants. / RALPH COLEMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-90-0520 LKK JFM P (E.D. Cal.) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AND THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 JOHN ARMSTRONG, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Defendants. / ORDER APPROVING SPACE COORDINATION AGREEMENT No. C 94-2307 CW (N.D. Cal.) The Receiver in Plata, the Special Master in Coleman, and the Court Representatives in Perez and Armstrong have presented to the judges in the above-captioned cases an agreement that they have reached during the coordination meetings that they have held to date. The agreement, which is attached to this order, was presented to the undersigned for review and approval. By order filed September 5, 2008, the parties in the above-captioned cases were granted until September 26, 2008, to show cause why the attached agreement should not be adopted as an order of the court. On September 26, 2008, defendants filed a response to the order to show cause. Therein, defendants state that they support the proposed agreement, except insofar as the creation of a single unit to manage office space planning "is a step toward creating a new and distinct health agency" with jurisdiction over California prisoners that, according to defendants, the Receiver has stated his intention to create. Defendants' Response to Order to Show Cause, filed September 26, 2008, at 2. Defendants' objection to the creation of a new state agency is noted. Nothing in the agreement before the court requires further consideration of that objection at this time. ///// ///// ///// ///// 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the attached space coordination agreement is adopted as an order of these courts. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 10/07/08 LAWRENCE K. KARLTON SENIOR JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DATED: 10/07/08 THELTON E. HENDERSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DATED: 10/07/08 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DATED: 10/07/08 CLAUDIA WILKEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Space Coordination Agreement Space planning is defined as the leasing and management of physical office space including, but not limited to, space design, tenant improvements, and procurement of furniture (both conventional and modular), required office equipment, and the voice and data structure to operate an office. The Office of the Receiver (responsible for medical care remedial infrastructure) needs to work in coordination with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the Division of Correctional Health Care Services (DCHCS) (responsible for the mental health, dental, and the Americans with Disabilities Act remedial infrastructure) to achieve the respective missions, visions, and goals of the Plata, Coleman, Perez, and Armstrong class actions. Based on previously approved coordination agreements, the Receiver is responsible for Information Technology, Telemedicine, Construction including New Healthcare Facility Construction and Upgrade Construction, Chief Executive Officer Pilot Program, CIM-GACH, Contracts, Credentialing, Hiring, and Pharmacy. A coordinated office space agreement would ensure that the space related infrastructure required will be available to support these agreements. Currently, office space planning is managed separately by the Receiver and DCHCS. It would be more practical and efficient for this process to be managed and handled by a single unit. The Court representatives in Plata, Coleman, Perez, and Armstrong propose that the Receiver's Plata Support Division Business Operations Unit assume responsibility, in coordination with DCHCS and subject to the oversight of the Court representatives in Plata, Coleman, Perez, and Armstrong, for all noninstitutional office space statewide for the medical, mental health, and dental programs. Placing this responsibility under a single unit will ensure that the planning, acquisition, and management of necessary space would support both the Receiver's objectives and the requirements of the mental health and dental programs in a cost efficient manner. 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?