By Joseph Atteridge, The Pacific Institute

Nearly 70% of employees say they feel disengaged from their company’s mission, according to recent surveys by the Gallup Group.  Why?  Haven’t we spent enough on employee programs and training?  Don’t they understand where we are going?  Why the lack of commitment?  Well, further research indicates a very strong correlation between the degree of an employee’s commitment/engagement and how strongly their personal values match the values espoused by their employer.

Throughout my career, I have read many business books on subjects such as Leadership, Continuous Improvement or Quality programs and Re-engineering. Many of these publications stated that Values were an essential component of Leadership. However, I just took the term for granted and didn’t explore the subject in-depth.  After all, our organization had a set of Values and they appeared on many posters throughout our facilities, so what else could there be?  Everyone certainly knew what they meant, as they were as common in our understanding as motherhood and apple pie.  They were words like Respect, Service, Accountability, Integrity and Excellence.  As far as I was concerned, we were in compliance with the numerous recipe books for organizational success.

Values certainly seemed to be secondary to Vision and maybe even strategy, but I came to learn of the tremendous power they have for an organization that really uses them.  In fact, Values more than anything else, drive the culture of the company.  Indeed, they are the benchmark by which leadership is measured and the glue that keeps the employees deeply connected to the firm.  Yet, like me, most leaders gloss over them and focus on either the Vision or next quarter’s objectives.

You might be thinking that it is obvious that Values play an important role in culture, so what!  Well, let’s take a minute to define culture; it is the shared beliefs that drive the attitude, thinking and behaviors of the group.  Simple enough, right?  But I would like you to really stop and think about what the attitudes and behaviors of your people are.  Do you know?  What impact do you think attitudes and behaviors have on customer service, teamwork, or productivity?  Are those areas where your company needs to improve? What are the beliefs that drive the attitudes, thinking and behaviors on your team?  Better yet, who set the beliefs you and your leadership team or the people that have been there for years?  Beliefs are an outcome of the Values you espouse, but you probably haven’t really defined what you mean by those Values, and that is a critical step.

In defining Values, often we tend to describe what we mean by the word. However, Values are really only recognized in the behaviors we see others exhibit.  If we see someone behaving in a way that makes us think they are being accountable, we believe they are living in accordance with that Value.  So, it becomes essential that we define the Value in terms of the expected behaviors. Certainly, you and your leadership team could do this, but for the average employee this will look like and sound like a forced march. It’s far better for your employees to define those positive behaviors which represent the Values of your Company. Notice that I wrote that employees should determine the behaviors associated with the Values but not the Values themselves.  That is your job!  You and your leadership team need to decide what the Values are that will be essential to you achieving your Vision.

This approach to Values allows you and your employees to jointly build the attitudes, thinking and behaviors that will get you to your Vision.  It energizes your team and makes them accountable.  It increases their level of engagement to the organization and its goals.  It also forms the basis for a new methodology in performance measurement for your leaders, managers and supervisors.  In other words, this provides the foundation for “walking the talk.”  You will now have very clear and precise descriptions of the behaviors that leaders should model, and you can measure them to provide feedback in the leadership development process.

Values become the driving force of a constructive culture and that means increased accountability, satisfaction and profitability.  So, are you getting Value from your Values?

---

Joe Atteridge is the Managing Partner of The Pacific Institute.  Joe has over 35 years of experience in C-suite leadership positions with global organizations and oversees the company’s strategic growth initiatives and financial operations. Additionally, he spent eight years on active duty as an officer in the U.S. Air Force and has a B.A. from Providence College and an MBA, with honors, from the Thunderbird School of Global Management.

---

About The Pacific Institute:

As a global consultancy, with over four decades of expertise, The Pacific Institute® has worked with over half of the current Fortune 1000 companies, as well as national and international governments, educational institutions, professional athletes and sports teams. Founded in 1971, in Seattle, Washington, The Pacific Institute® uses the latest research coming out of the fields of cognitive psychology, social learning theory, backed by recent neuroscience, to help organizations and individuals ignite fresh thinking and accelerate performance.

Who’s going where? This is a great opportunity to let us know who is promoting and or joining your organization. These are their new positions.

Would you like to let us know who is moving and where? Send an email to Stacy Gray to share in our next issue of OneVoice.

Central Sierra
Adele Hendrickson	Retired (Executive Director)
Julie Prado	Executive Director
Mary Gray	Retired (Child Support Supervisor)
Kern
Alexandra Villalobos	Child Support Officer II
Amanda Holden-Rafferty	Child Support Officer II
Brittnie Belansky	Paralegal
Carissa Guerra	Child Support Officer II
Janeen Rodriguez	Senior Office Services Specialist
Jesse Gutierrez	Child Suppot Officer II
Jordan Moser	Child Support Officer II
Jordan Wells	Office Services Assistant
Joslyn Zepeda	Child Support Officer II
Kantashia Thompson	Child Support Officer II
Karen Padilla	Child Support Officer II
Kiley Jackson	Customer Service Representative
Maria Pantoja Mendez	Child Support Officer II
Mireya Martinez	Child Support Officer II
Nancy Garcia	Child Support Officer II
Noel Lopez	Customer Service Representative
Silvia Vasquez	Customer Service Representative
Tania Salinas	Customer Service Representative
Tracy Palacios	Customer Service Representative
Vijay Siddiah	Paralegal
Los Angeles
Brian Lozada	Child Support Officer III
Harold Diaz	Attorney IV
Joel Santoyo	Senior Network Systems Administrator
Laura Belis	Retired (Head Child Support Officer)
Laurie Groina	Attorney IV
Martiros Sahakian	Head Child Support Officer
Melissa Fox	Attorney III
Phillip Carnahan	Departmental Information Security Officer
R. Monique Saisho	Head Child Support Officer
Sheila Lebowitz	Retired (Attorney III)
Spencer Yu	Accounting Technician II
Steven Schnoebelen	Retired (Head Child Support Officer)
Mendocino
Randy Johnson	Interim Director
Plumas
Diana MacGregor	Retired (CSS III)
San Bernardino
Diana Flores	Child Support Operations Manager
Jackie Laws	Retired (Executive Secretary)
James Hartel	Child Support Operations Manager
Jennifer Shoemaker	Supervising Child Support Officer
Jesse Reyes	Retired (Supervising Child Support Officer)
Jo Cruz	Child Support Operations Manager
Leah Bulf	Retired (Deputy Director)
Leah Torres	Child Support Operations Manager
Lynne Healy	Retired (Supervising Child Support Officer)
Mona Harnish	Retired (Supervising Child Support Officer)
Monique Herrera	Supervising Child Support Officer
Regina Cruise	Supervising Child Support Officer
Ricky Barajas	Supervising Child Support Officer
Rochelle Savage	Executive Secretary
Shannon Fowler	Supervising Child Support Officer
Stacy Collins	Deputy Director
Stephen Wallace	Retired (Program Specialist 1)
San Francisco
Anh Tran	Executive Secretary I
Freda Chen	Retired (Child Support Officer II)
Peter Cheng	Accountant III
Zhicong “Robert” Liao	Senior Account Clerk
Philip Singh	Public Relations Assistant
San Luis Obispo
Christine Rice	Retired (Supervising Legal Clerk II)
David Beaudin	Administrative Services Manager II
San Mateo
Jocelyn Arroliga-Miranda	Child Support Analyst
Maria Castro	Child Support Analyst
Sandra Andrade	Child Support Analyst
Timothy Crockett	Customer Care Coordinator
Solano
Dennis Williams	Child Support Specialist – Supervisor
Elizar Morla	Child Support Specialist – Journey Level
Kimberly Dunworth	Child Support Attorney – Supervisor
Stanislaus
Angela Shelton	Manager
Carol Ochoa	Retired (Supervising Legal Clerk)
Deborah Shindler	Retired (Child Support Officer)
Karen Lumpkin	Manager
Kim Britt	Manager III
Michael Olesen	Account Clerk
Ventura
Elina Avagimova	Attorney
Michael OCAMPO	Attorney
William (Pat) Solomon	Child Support Distribution Specialist Supervisor

By Sharon Wardale-Trejo, Regional Director – Merced/Mariposa Regional DCSS

On October 12, 2017, Governor Brown signed into law Senate Bill 380, creatively titled CalWORKs: child support. This article will be pretty technical in nature, so for those of you working with aided participants, read on! For those of you wanting to expand your understanding of the inter-related nature of public assistance and child support, read on! For those of you suffering from insomnia, read on! You never know, it might help. For everyone else, I hope the following article is both helpful and informative. Buckle in, keep your hands and arms inside, and let’s take a ride.

Effective November 1, 2018, this law will enable a CalWORKs applicant or recipient to exclude stepsiblings or half-siblings of an eligible child from the number of needy persons in the same assistance unit (AU) for purposes of determining maximum aid payment (MAP) for that family. In lieu of CalWORKs cash aid for the stepsibling or half-sibling, the applicant or recipient would be able to directly receive any monthly child support collections. The family would still be eligible for a disregard and any cash aid for the child remaining on aid.

So, this law is giving CalWORKs applicants or recipients, in mixed-family scenarios, the ability to decide if they want those step children or half-siblings to be included in the AU and be eligible for CalWORKs cash aid or if they would prefer to instead receive the child support collections directly. To qualify, a stepsibling or half-sibling must live with at least one eligible child receiving CalWORKs.  The stepsibling or half-sibling is a child for whom child support payments are received and the monthly child support payments received for the child must be greater than the monthly amount of aid that the child would have received had they not been excluded from the grant. Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) ran a query of the statewide caseload and anticipates approximately 4,300 existing cases could qualify. This law affects currently aided families and CalWORKs applicants as they come into the program, so potential case figures will fluctuate.

Any child support payments received directly by the family for the child as a result of the new law are excluded from consideration as income in determining eligibility or grant amounts for the remainder of the AU. The child who is removed from the AU remains eligible for Medi-Cal and CalFresh program benefits. Make sense? Good. Now, how’s that all going to work?

Several local child support agency (LCSA) representatives have been participating on a workgroup made up of members from Department of Social Services (CDSS), DCSS, and the automation systems for both to work through how this new law will be implemented. CDSS is required to notify all applicants for assistance of this new law change. Draft letters are being developed and reviewed by the workgroup. DCSS will also be communicating with customers regarding the new law change.

This new law isn’t mandatory. A CalWORKs applicant or recipient can have the option to continue to receive CalWORKs cash aid for all of the children in the AU. If they wish to exclude a stepsibling or half-sibling, they must submit their request in writing. The County Welfare Department (CWD) will work with the CalWORKs applicants or recipients to make a determination of eligibility. To do so, the worker will need to know amounts of child support collected each month on behalf of the stepsibling or half-sibling. Currently, monthly statements from CSE do not provide detail of child support collections at the child level.

To determine how much child support was collected on behalf of an individual child, the CalWORKs applicant or recipient will need to share with their CWD worker their child support order and then review monthly statements to determine if the child support received on behalf of the stepsibling or half-sibling exceeds the portion of the monthly cash aid they would have received. To be able to do this, the child support order must reflect monthly child support obligations allocated per child versus an unallocated lump sum. If the child support order is unallocated, then the CalWORKs applicant or recipient will have to request a modification of their child support order to allocate the monthly child support obligation per child.

CDSS is recommending the CWD worker review monthly statements and notes they may be unable to make a determination if inadequate documentation is provided. Ultimately, the worker will be looking for consistent child support payments over a period of time so as to be reasonably sure that the family will not be negatively impacted by opting-out a stepsibling or half-sibling.

Once a child has been excluded from the AU under the SB 380 rule, the child can only be added back into the AU:

1. When the Semi-Annual Report (SAR 7) is due;
2. When the AU’s Annual Redetermination is due;
3. When the CalWORKs applicant or recipient voluntarily reports mid-period that the child support payments have decreased or ended, and they request the child be added back to the AU.

So, what are some of the challenges that may arise from this new law change? Education of customers and our partners. Due to a current lack of automated solutions, this process will be manual initially. Child Support customers may be able to get copies of their orders and payment histories through Customer Connect, but helping them and our partners at the CWD to understand the documents will be a critical role for our staff.

Unallocated orders may also be a challenge when they originated through dissolution or are from other states. Not all LCSAs establish allocated orders, but the allocation at the child level will be necessary for this process.  So, you may see an increase in requests for modification and that may have an impact on your courts. Lastly, system functionality for identifying child(ren) who have been excluded from the assistance unit is something DCSS and LCSA staff are currently working on. There is also discussion in the workgroup of how to improve the automation related to this process.

With the November 1, 2018, implementation date fast approaching, we are working to address many of these challenges and give recommendations on how to process these cases in your county. We will be sharing updates on our progress for this effort through the CSDA Policy, Program and Regulations Committee.

By Amy Miragliotta, Deputy Director, San Diego County DCSS

Saving for college can be a challenge for anyone, but perhaps it can be more so for families who rely on a non-custodial parent for child support payments. About 60 percent of the families in the San Diego caseload are living at or below the poverty line.  Education is one key factor that can help individuals out of poverty. San Diego is committed to aid in breaking the cycle of poverty and provide educational opportunities for children.

To help address this challenge, the San Diego County Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) implemented a college savings program called Parents Investing in Education (P.I.E.). San Diego is working with the State of California ScholarShare program that currently offers a match up to $250. In addition, San Diego DCSS worked with State DCSS to create a pilot program for PAA debt reduction. For some parents who might be in arrears to the state for past support, parents may qualify for a reduction of that debt as deposits are made into the child’s college savings account.

Research shows that it doesn’t even take an enormous savings to instill a college-bound mindset in children. A parent can deposit just $5 a month to start building the savings.

Children with $1 to $499 in college savings are three times more likely to attend post-secondary education and four times more likely to graduate from post-secondary education, according to statistics from Prosperity Now (formerly Center for Economic Development CFED).

Once enrolled in the program, a state-sponsored plan manager assists in setting up the account.

San Diego DCSS is still in the earliest stages of implementation, engaging in widespread advertising of the program to their customers. We have offered workshops onsite and partnered with local banking institutions to offer financial planning and financial literacy. Case managers will be talking to parents about the new program at each interaction. We are also developing a commercial to be shown online and in their office lobbies.

San Diego DCSS believes this is not only going to help parents build relationships and be engaged with their child, but it will also benefit their child’s future. Both parents will feel involved in the child’s future and the child will know their parents are interested in their educational success. This program is another effort to show the parents we serve that our department cares about their children’s future and not just their money. We hope this model can be replicated in other departments within the state.

By Diane Potts, Center for the Support of Families

 “People will forget what you said. People will forget what you did. But people will never forget how you made them feel.” – Maya Angelou

Studies consistently show that people care more about the fairness of the process than the ultimate outcome. That perception is at the heart of procedural justice. By incorporating procedural justice principles into the daily work in child support, parents are more likely to pay voluntarily and regularly because they believe that the process was fair.

There are five elements of procedural justice. First, parents must feel that they have a voice and ability to participate meaningfully in the child support proceedings, whether in the county office or courthouse. Parents desperately want the opportunity to tell their story and feel that the decision-maker has taken that story into account when making their decision. The second related principle is that parents must believe in the neutrality of the process; namely, that the decision-maker is not biased against them.

Respect is the third element of procedural justice. Parents want to be treated with dignity, and it can be as easy as making eye contact and not multitasking when parents are speaking about their case. The element of understanding is next. Parents need to feel that they understand the process and how decisions are made. Child support professionals can help by avoiding acronyms and using easy-to-understand language. Finally, parents want to perceive that the child support professionals and judges hearing their cases are helpful and want to arrive at the correct result in the case.

The way child support professionals listen to parents is important to the elements of procedural justice. Through emphatic listening flows understanding about the challenges that parents are facing, without judging their situation or decisions. On the other hand, procedural justice suffers from biases. Everyone has implicit biases that operate unintentionally, unconsciously, and quickly to influence perception and behavior. Implicit biases about the child support program are all around, such as when parents believe that the program only cares about custodial parents or only about the money. Child support professionals also carry implicit biases into their child support work, but there are strategies to self-correct those biases to ensure the five elements of procedural justice in child support cases and proceedings.

Parents face multiple barriers to paying child support. In order to use empathetic listening, we need to understand those barriers that include: temporary, part-time, and minimum wage employment; criminal history; strained relationships with the other parent; lack of a relationship with the child; avoidance; and multiple family obligations.

The Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt (PJAC) grants are testing whether providing alternatives to contempt that are guided by procedural justice principles will increase cost-effectiveness and reliable child support payments. Both San Bernardino and Riverside Counties are grantees and currently in the testing phase of the initiative. The Center for Support of Families (CSF) provided procedural justice and other training for staff in San Bernardino and Riverside earlier this year. This fall, CSF will be conducting several more days of procedural justice training in different locations in California. We hope to see you there!

By David Kilgore, Director – California Department of Child Support Services

Thank you all for the congratulations.  I am truly looking forward serving as your Director for California Child Support Services.  Hopefully it will be longer than six months and I make it through to the next Governor’s administrative appointments!

As for the future of the program, many have already asked in what direction I hope to take the program… Every position I go into I have a plan, and every time I feel like I have to throw out that plan on day one because I find that I really didn’t know what the issues actually were.  I’m guessing the same will happen here.  So, anything beyond this point may or may not happen… (That should give me some wiggle room…)

I have a good grasp on how things work at the LCSA level, but I know very little about the inner workings of the State.  I even mentioned this during my interview and worried that it might be a negative.  Turns out, that became a positive.  They’d rather I ask a lot of questions and interact with Agency more closely to build a stronger communication path between the two departments.  So, that’s a big one… build great partners with Agency and the Department of Finance.

We also talked a lot about the State/LCSA dynamic and what the State should be focusing its time on.  There are some things that only the State can do.  Management of CSE is a good example.  I’d like to get a better handle on all those things that the LCSAs depend solely on the State to accomplish and focus efforts in those areas.  All the other stuff that can be either jointly handled by the State/LCSAs or State/CSDA or just by the LCSAs/CSDA should be pushed out for others to handle and lead allowing the State to just support and enable as needed.

Obviously, the relationship between the State and the LCSAs is very important to me and to Agency.  Everyone (LCSA and State staff) is looking for better, more positive, interactions when communicating and working across those lines.  I want to be able to trust and know that the LCSAs are delivering amazing services to our constituents and I want the LCSAs to know and trust that the State will be there to support the LCSAs in that effort.  I think you have already seen the State’s efforts to emphasize doing this already… the procurement letter, as an example.  I’d like to continue and broaden that effort.

And, of course, the funding is on the forefront of all of this.  I was extremely disappointed to see this latest effort fall short in the 11th hour.  I’m heartened to see that we’ll be adding $3 million to our ongoing allocation though.  Obviously, there is much more work to be done to get our program into a more sustainable and positive fiscal situation.  It has to be the center of attention over the summer if we are to go at this again for the next budget cycle starting in the fall.  This is where I feel I will be spending most of my time in the near future (and likely a good portion of your time as well).  A lot of groundwork has been laid for us.  We (the program as a whole) have momentum to capitalize on:  The LCSAs getting more comfortable engaging their local legislatures and adding child support to their respective legislative platforms, CSDA is positioned to more successfully support and advocate for the program, and the State will be doing its part (I’d say more, but I don’t know!  Or maybe I shouldn’t say more…I have no idea).

As far as leadership styles go, I come from a place of “yes,” so if it seems feasible/doable, I’ll likely say, “Give it a shot and tell me how it goes.”  That’s how I’ll approach it internally at the State as well as interactions with the LCSAs.  If something works, let’s build on it.  If it doesn’t work, let’s scrap it and move on to something else.  I cannot say I really fit into any particular ‘leadership style.’  Hopefully you will find me approachable and engaged.  I like to see things through to completion and am always tackling projects with the biggest impacts possible.  I’m terribly impatient, which isn’t a particularly good quality to have in government and may be the death of me one day.  I don’t think having children has improved this in the slightest.  I’m not the details-oriented guy—I like to think things up, kick things off, and then let others do what they are great at and bring the project to conclusion.  I’m not going to be checking in on people’s progress constantly, but I’m definitely paying attention to the deadline.  I like to remove barriers.  There’s nothing like the feeling of making someone else’s job better/easier.  You’ll have to chat with the folks from Riverside, LA, San Bern, and Tulare for the negative leadership attributes.  I’m sure there are some, but they are hardly worth mentioning…they already gave me the job after all.

Lastly, I’m open to suggestions, great and small.  I already have a growing list of suggestions and I’m sure more are coming.  I’ve been told my email address is david.kilgore@dcss.ca.gov.  Colynn McConnell is currently running my future State life until we get things squared away at the State.  She can help set up any meetings I may need to be at after the 25th.

The rest we’ll just have to figure out as we go.

By Carrie Topliffe, Director (Retired June 8, 2018) – Santa Barbara County DCSS

Whether you’ve just gotten new funding and intend to expand your operations or are desperate to reduce your costs by moving to a cheaper location, be prepared for major challenges when you move or open a new building.  This job should be managed by someone with a meticulous attention to detail, and a great sense of humor—because the universe will be laughing at you, and you might as well be in on the joke.

Santa Barbara recently moved its south county office from expensive leased space to much less expensive (and nicer!) space in a county-owned building.  Actually, it is not correct to say “moved,” using the past tense, because we have actually been in the process of moving since late March, and the move is not yet complete as of early June.

So, my first recommendation is that you have contingency plans for all the major aspects of your move, since you will be working with lots of moving parts controlled by lots of other entities, making timing and sequencing out of your sole control.  First, of course, you have to find a new space that is available at a time when you are contractually permitted to depart your old space.  Check.  However, in our case, the new building had to be remodeled to accommodate our security needs, and all it took was a few delayed shipments of building materials, and the adjusted work schedules of a few subcontractors, to ensure that our new building would not be available on the date that we moved from our old building.  A typical Plan B for such a situation would have been an agreement with the old landlord to “hold over” in the old building, at an agreed-upon price.  Alas, in our situation, that was not to be.  Our contingency plans have therefore included telecommuting, working from our north county office, and working in areas of our new building minimally impacted by the remodeling, none of which I recommend as an alternative to holding over. 

Some of the key participants in your move will be your county, the state, and your vendors.  We made our preliminary arrangements about eight months before the move occurred and had plenty of time to check in with the county about its requirements for lease approval, and with the state about the relocation of our Touch Pay kiosk and the costs of the remodel.  (We were fortunate to receive a mid-year reallocation of state funding that covered our one-time costs to get the building ready.)

We set early deadlines for purging materials that we no longer needed, and there were plenty. We gave ample notice to the state and county about the things we wished to get rid of so that we could work within their disposition rules without creating any heartburn.  Also, we found that our “paperless” office was actually filled with old paper—most of it in my office and some of it dating to the DA days.  We kept some scanners and shredders busy for months getting rid of those things.  Don’t underestimate the time involved for that!

We implemented our county HR analyst’s advice that we provide as many opportunities for staff input as possible.  This was a valuable recommendation, leading to calmer, more positive staff and even several staff members informally assuming the roles of “move ambassadors.”  Involving staff as much as possible, and assigning them move responsibilities, is helpful, though it can be forgotten during the push to get the move done.  Also well received, were hosted pizza lunches at our new location to air concerns about the move.

Since our movers cost over $5,000, we needed three bids and state permission.  The state was very prompt in getting back to us, but we did go the usual (30 day) route, rather than requesting an urgent approval.  We meticulously labeled the destination location for every box and piece of equipment to make the most of a condensed three-day move period that began on a Thursday night with all the equipment being disconnected, continued through a Friday when we were closed to the public, and ended on Sunday when our IT staff got the equipment set up.

During our move, things happened fast, much money was spent, and we verged into areas where we had no prior experience.  It is especially critical to make sure that 1) the bills are received within the timeframe to qualify for funding, 2) the bills are accurate, 3) state and local purchasing approval has been received, 4) the bills get paid timely, and 5) proper audit documentation is maintained.

As we settle into our new building, we are very pleased.  The move was stressful and time consuming but provided opportunities for growth, engagement, clean-up, and teamwork.  We’ve shared some of the documents we used to keep ourselves on track, and hope they’ll be useful to you.

Moving Your Office – Relocation checklist

By first grade, I knew I would become a lawyer and had a keen desire to help others. I was born in sunny Long Beach, California. By the age of 4 my parents had divorced. Shortly after, my mom met and married a man that would move us to Mammoth Lakes, California, where I spent the majority of my childhood. Growing up in Mammoth was like living the life of a movie; we had horses to ride in the mountains and skied and sledded in the winter.  After school, my mom and I would saddle our horses and go for a ride. Growing up in rural California gave me a deep connection to nature and I get restored when among the beauty of the outdoors.

Partly raised by my grandmother, I had work ethic instilled in me from a young age. After high school I attended Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. I graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Marketing with a certificate in wine marketing.  One thing most people don’t know about me is that I have organized two wine trade shows in Mexico—one in Mexico City and one in Cancun—both on behalf of the California Wine Institute where I worked as an undergrad for a summer.  A few months after graduation I traveled to South America. I lived in Chile working for Kendall Jackson where I negotiated a land lease and oversaw the installation of an experimental crop of chardonnay vines in the La Serena region. After my adventures in South America began to feel a little too far from home, I returned and decided to pursue law school.

McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento had offered me free tuition based on my LSAT scores, so I moved to Sacramento and worked at the State Capitol while attending law school at night. During law school, I interned at the Attorney General’s Office and the Department of Personnel Administration. I thrived. I studied constitutional law in Vienna, Austria at the University of Salzburg, under U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. My final year, I was selected for the Anthony M. Kennedy Inns of Court Program which gave a select few students in their last year of law school the opportunity to have educational lunch meetings with legal practitioners from the Sacramento area.  I was also a member of the international law debate team that competed in Portland, Oregon. Upon graduation, I was in the fortunate position of having three job offers—one with McGeorge, one with a civil law firm in Sacramento, and one paid internship as a criminal prosecutor with the City of San Diego. Even though I did not rank criminal law as one of my first passions, I chose the internship. To even be selected was a tremendous honor as recruits were hand-selected and interviewed among various campuses including UC Davis, McGeorge, and the University of Colorado, to name a few. After final interviews, I was one of the three graduates hired.

After passing the bar exam, I was offered a full-time position as a Deputy City Attorney in the criminal misdemeanor unit of the City of San Diego. I tried domestic violence misdemeanors in court. One memorable case I managed was where a man had hit his wife with a hammer in the head. To this day, I remember that case and many others where women not only suffered serious abuse but would return to the abuser because of economic or other pressures identified in Lenore Walker’s “cycle of abuse.” During my tenure, City Attorney, Casey Gwinn, put the City Attorney’s Office on the political and social services map by creating the first Family Justice Center where domestic violence victims and families received, or were referred to, a wide range of services. Working for Casey was very inspiring for me as a young prosecutor. He showed me that one did not have to work in the private industry to have a positive impact in people’s lives, and that even within government, a person’s compassion can change outdated bureaucratic systems if we challenge ourselves to do things better than before.

In 2003, I was one out of ninety plus applicants hired by the City of Carlsbad as a Deputy City Attorney. One could not work for a better employer. I learned so much of my leadership style from other managers at the City of Carlsbad. I continually remember the professionalism they demonstrated and respect and care that management had for one another and their employees.  In 2005, I also became a licensed California Real Estate Broker. Around this time, my soon-to-be husband and I were camping and fishing in Bishop and Mammoth Lakes frequently.  These country backroads were a familiar and welcomed change after the bustle of city life. So, I left my position in Carlsbad for a position I was offered at the County of Inyo, as Deputy County Counsel.

I married in 2007 to my hard-working, self-made husband who immigrated to the United States at the age of 5 from Mexico. Our son was born in 2010 and less than a year later I became the Director of Child Support. That bouncing baby boy is now an 8-year-old trout-fishing champion who can probably name all sport fish by name (including the best places to catch them). He loves to hop on his bicycle and hang out at our friend’s cattle ranch.  In 2012, we were blessed with a baby girl who is now 6 years old. She is compassionate and strong, and our family delights regularly in her singing and artistic creations.  I am so very blessed!

As I look back on the winding career path that sees me today working for Child Support, I remember well my mother putting me on the phone to beg my father to pay his child support when I was very young. Or calling my dad crying because I needed glasses when I was in the second grade and my mom could not afford them. Who knew that someday that girl would be a champion for others in need of child support, or that my career path would lead me back to a place from which I can help others in such a personal way.

I believe my outlook in life is the product of two things.  First, being raised in the Pacific Northwest; second, being the youngest within a very religious household.  Both of these things would train me to believe that life is bleak, cold, and miserable, but I should be happy because it can always get worse.

Consistency was not a staple of my childhood; my family was constantly moving which caused me to become light-footed as I grew older.  I was a wanderer, seeking out new experiences and opportunities as they became available.  I drifted between sports, hobbies, and extracurricular activities which gave me a “Jack of all trades” mentality.

Several months before graduating from high school, my future was changed forever.  The largest terrorist attack on America was playing out before me.  I can distinctly recall wincing as the second plane hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center.  I remember watching the news as they depicted people burning American flags in celebration.  Shortly after graduating from high school I was leaving Oregon to join the military.  I spent over eight years on active duty, most of which was overseas.  I spent a year in Korea, three in Germany, and I deployed to the Middle East three times.  In total, I traveled to 42 countries.  I loved being in the military, but life changes and I knew it was time for me to move on.

After my enlistment, I took a job with Halliburton Energy Services; I was working endless hours in the oilfields of North Dakota.  Even with a military background, the oilfields became too dangerous, so I decided to move on.  I then bounced through several construction jobs until I had the opportunity to start college.  I began my formal education at the University of Wyoming; in addition, I was enrolled in the Army ROTC program.  I graduated Magna Cum Laude with a BS in Economics and was an Army Distinguished Military Graduate.  After graduation, my wife and I had no idea where we wanted to live.  After a long and deliberate analysis, we decided to move to California’s North Coast.  We moved to a state with no friends, family, or connection, yet we wanted to make it our home.  I started working with local non-profits and I eventually received a position within the county.  I have been working for the county ever since and I have been in the Director position since July 2017.

Currently, my wife and I are both military service members.  I am a Platoon Leader of a Light Infantry unit in the Oregon National Guard.  My wife is an Air Force Reservist and her unit is stationed in England.  This arrangement causes us to be separated for significant periods, but we seem to manage well.

I have four children and plan to grow my family in the near future.  I loved growing up in a large family and I always wished to have one myself.  When the family is together, we spend the majority of time in the outdoors.  We love to hike, camp, go to the beach, and travel.  We have loved our time in California and we are continually impressed with the beauty here.

By Greg Wilson, Executive Director – Child Support Directors Association (CSDA)

The California Legislature has approved a $138.6 billion-dollar General Fund budget for fiscal year 2018-2019. Pundits expect Governor Jerry Brown to sign the budget act and make no line item vetoes.

The budget approved by lawmakers includes $673 million for local child support agencies (about $264 million state general fund and about $409 in Federal Financial Participation). Of the $673 million total appropriated, about $589 million is slated for administration and about $83 million for automation.

Included in the amounts above is a State General Fund appropriation of a $3 million increase above status quo with $6 million from Federal Financial Participation as additional funding for local child support programs. A coalition of 19 LCSAs led by San Joaquin county and working with the Child Support Directors Association had requested a $22.7 million general fund increase, and the Senate and Assembly Budget Committees and Budget Sub Committees initially approved this increase. Ultimately the budget deal that was worked out by the “Big Three” and then approved by the Budget Conference Committee reduced the increase to $3 million SGF and $6 million FFP.

The Budget Bill language directs the California Department of Child Support Services to “work with the Child Support Directors Association of California to determine an allocation schedule for these funds.” Your Association has already begun these discussions weighing the impacts of several options. The Association is expected to deliver a recommendation to the California Department of Child Support Services by early July.

Additionally, budget trailer bill language as included in Assembly Bill 1811 and Senate Bill 845 requires the Director of California Department of Child Support Services to work with the Child Support Directors Association President to identify refinements to the ongoing child support budgeting methodology and to identify programmatic operational efficiencies. The California Department of Child Support Services must submit a report to the Legislature with recommendations on those topics no later than July 1, 2019.

In addition, AB1811 and SB845 require the California Department of Child Support Services to submit an annual report on case-to-staff ratios, collections, recoupment, and number of families served. The first-year report, due to the legislature by March 1, 2019, is limited to only those counties that receive funding from the augmented $3 million.

The Legislature prioritized funding to address homelessness and affordable housing with $700 million in grants cities, plus $280 million to repay county debts related to repealed mandates, and $67 million for debris removal and property tax replacement in counties impacted by the recent wildfires and debris flows. The 2018-2019 budget also includes $1.3 billion to build ten new courthouses. The ten new courthouses are slated for: Glenn County (renovations and additions to the Willows courthouse), Imperial County (a new El Centro courthouse), Riverside County (a new Indio juvenile and family courthouse and a new Mid-County civil courthouse), Sacramento county (a new Sacramento courthouse), Shasta County (a new Redding courthouse), Siskiyou County (a new Yreka courthouse) Sonoma County (a new Santa Rosa Criminal Courthouse), Stanislaus County (a new Modesto courthouse), and Tuolumne County (a new Sonora courthouse).

The budget sets another $2 billion into the state’s uncommitted reserves leaving about $16 billion in that fund and puts $200 million into a new “safety net” reserve for social services.

The budget agreement met with some Republican opposition but given the legislative majority held by Democrats, the budget agreement was easily passed by both houses. Members of the Republican caucus warned that the budget does not address the state’s unfunded pension commitments. Democrats countered arguing that the state’s accumulated reserves will allow it to navigate the coming financial downturn. It is clear though that unfunded pension liabilities will certainly be an issue, which all county agencies will be struggling with soon.