Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520-321/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

AND THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-90-0520 LKK JFM P (E.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.

 /

CARLOS PEREZ, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. C 05-5241 JSW (N.D. Cal.)

v.

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 3073 Filed 10/07/08 Page 1 of 4
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

2

JOHN ARMSTRONG, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. C 94-2307 CW (N.D. Cal.) 

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, ORDER APPROVING SPACE

et al., COORDINATION AGREEMENT

Defendants.

 /

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. 

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 3073 Filed 10/07/08 Page 2 of 4
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

3

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

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 3073 Filed 10/07/08 Page 3 of 4
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

4

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. 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 3073 Filed 10/07/08 Page 4 of 4