Several state lawmakers are at odds with the Virginia Supreme Court over whether evaluations of judges who are up for reappointment should be open to the public.
The evaluations are designed to help judges with self-improvement and to inform General Assembly members who reappoint them. But a recent order from the state Supreme Court stipulates that only members of the General Assembly should view the evaluations.
That puts lawmakers in a tough position, Del. David B. Albo, R-Fairfax, chairman of the House Courts of Justice Committee, told representatives of the Supreme Court yesterday.
"I've got the Supreme Court saying I can't do it and I'd be in contempt of court, and I've got my own personal commitment of being an elected member to my constituents that I feel I have a constitutional duty to share the information with," Albo said in a meeting attended by members of the House and Senate courts committees.
Further, the evaluations might not be exempt from Freedom of Information Act laws, said House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem. "Because it's a part of the public process of re-election, that's why I don't believe that any personnel exemption would apply," he said.
Patricia Davis, director of the judicial performance-evaluation program, said the court attempted to balance the evaluations' dual purposes.
As part of the program, conceived in 2000 by then-Del. Bob McDonnell, now the state's attorney general, attorneys evaluate a judge based on the Canons of Judicial Conduct. A retired judge working as an observer also spends a day in the judge's courtroom.
Judges in their first term are evaluated three times: at the end of their first year, midterm and then the year before the judge is up for re-appointment. In the second and subsequent terms, judges are evaluated twice.
General district court judges serve six-year terms, as do judges in juvenile and domestic relations courts. Circuit court judges serve eight-year terms.
The panel met yesterday to review judges who are up for re-election but skipped those with evaluations until the disagreement is resolved.
Del. William R. Janis, R-Henrico, drilled for specifics on how the order came about, whether all the justices voted on it, the vote results and the court's authority to dispense the order.
This is the second time in recent days that transparency in state government has become an issue. This week, a conservative group asked Republican leaders to start recording votes from House subcommittees, which can kill legislation.
A couple of Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's proposals last session died in subcommittees -- an effort to ban smoking in enclosed bars and restaurants and a proposal to create a bipartisan panel to draw legislative districts.
Contact Olympia Meola at (804) 649-6812 or omeola@timesdispatch.com.
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement