October 21, 2010 in City

District judges’ schedules difficult to track

Lineups aren’t sent to other offices

• Print
• Email
• Share

An effort to prevent political use of information about their daily duties seems to have backfired on Spokane County District Court judges.

Instead, they handed critics an opportunity to accuse them of being secretive.

“What do they have to hide?” asked attorney Timothy Note, who is running against Judge Debra Hayes in the Nov. 2 general election.

Note has raised questions during his campaign about how many days district judges actually work.

The judges decided at their Oct. 6 weekly meeting to quit distributing daily lineup sheets that indicate which judges are presiding over which dockets.

The sheets are no longer being sent to 50 or 60 recipients, including probation and sheriff’s employees, and even bailiffs. Instead, a single copy is placed at the front desk of the judges’ administrative office.

What’s more, judges decided the documents eventually should be shredded.

Several judges who talked about the decision agreed that the lineup sheets are not a valid record of whether a judge is at work.

The sheets don’t specify whether a judge is away on court business or just taking time off. They also don’t show whether a trial ended early, freeing up a judge’s time.

“The purpose of the lineup sheet was to locate the judges, to list the particular dockets they were doing and the judicial assistants assigned to them,” Presiding Judge Vance Peterson said. “It was not to monitor attendance.”

However, minutes of the judges’ Oct. 6 meeting suggest they think the lineup sheets have some record-keeping value.

The judges agreed to keep one year’s lineup sheets for three months into the following year “for any payroll adjustments.” State law requires District Court judges’ pay to be docked if temporary judges have to fill in for them more than 30 days a year for reasons not excused by law.

Peterson said little money is available this year to hire fill-in judges, and the regular judges are filling in for one another.

State law allows all district judges – who are paid $141,700 a year – 30 vacation days. Any continuing education or teaching stints do not count against their vacation time.

Peterson declined to provide details of the decision, but several judges said the action was by consensus. Judges Patti Connolly Walker and Gregory Tripp weren’t present.

Judge John Cooney said Judge Richard White argued against the proposal, and he and Peterson agreed with White.

“None of us were really strongly objecting to it,” Cooney said. “Those (weekly luncheon) meetings aren’t always the best.”

Peterson, White, Cooney, Walker and Hayes responded to a Spokesman-Review request for comment.

They said the lineup information and more-detailed accounts of their activities are computerized. Also, they said they keep their own records and generally are prepared to release them.

“My life is an open book as far as I am concerned,” Cooney said.

Note said he made a public records request to determine how many days off each judge has taken and his request was denied.

Hayes said she released her sick-leave information Sept. 15 in response to a public records request by Note supporter Dan Lambert. Court Administrator Virginia Rockwood told Lambert the disclosure was voluntary because courts are exempt from the state Public Records Act.

That exemption was carved out by state Supreme Court decisions.

“I think it’s shocking and appalling that an entire branch of government has exempted itself from the Public Records Act,” Note said. “We are simply asking, ‘Are the judges at work?’ That’s a very basic question.”

Lambert gave the newspaper a copy of a chart he received, showing dates and reasons for Hayes’ 50 days of leave in 2009. Reasons included time with her family on the first anniversary of her son’s death and hospitalizations.

Hayes said she suffered pneumonia and coughed so hard she broke a rib, and a car crash later re-fractured the rib.

Lambert asked only for information on 2009, but Hayes said she took about a month of leave in 2008 when her son, Joe, died.

“I am very disappointed that anybody would use a family tragedy for political gain,” Hayes said.

She said all of the time off was covered by leave time she accumulated as a deputy prosecutor and judge. County employees accrue one sick day a month.

“That sick time was built up because, quite frankly, I don’t get sick very often,” Hayes said, adding that she hasn’t taken any leave this year.

Hayes said she thinks questions about her attendance are a red herring to cover defense attorneys’ objections to her introduction of a rule to get tough on drunken drivers.

She said the rule, adopted last spring by a bare majority of District Court judges, gives police discretion to require drunken-driving suspects to remain in jail up to 48 hours for a bail hearing before a judge.

Hayes said the rule extends a policy that already applies to felony and domestic violence suspects.

Previously, any drunken-driving suspect with $50 for a bond fee could get out of jail immediately, she said.

10 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  hawken on October 21 at 7:13 a.m.

  Judges should be no less accountable to the electorate than any other government employee!

  “Secretive Government” is much different than “Government Secrets.” There are legitimate “Government Secrets” relating to national security and such.

  “Secretive Government” should be totally unacceptable, including the judiciary.

  The legislature should pass legislation to require all judges to disclose their schedules and account for their time.

  Meanwhile, the Spokesman Review has the “bully pulpit” in this community. The SR should not relent until all judges publish their daily schedules for the public.

• 

  CommonSenseJoe on October 21 at 7:45 a.m.

  Note’s “us vs. them” mentality - “What do THEY have to hide” - is sure to win him friends if he were to get elected to the bench. I also wonder if he’d be as forthcoming with information of this nature if he were elected… just wondering. Having to account for every single absence as Hayes has had to do in this election is a little ridiculous.

• 

  liarsinnews on October 21 at 8:03 a.m.

  The usual double standards we see in government. Seems to me, its just one of the reasons which contributes to a broken justice system. All one has to do is look at some of the low life characters released by some judges and commits a crime. Child molesters comes to mind.

• 

  kaywrightmcg2003 on October 21 at 8:39 a.m.

  I could not ever imagine losing one of my children and going back to work so soon as it seems Judge Hayes did. I applaude her work ethic and for taking a stand against drunk drivers.

• 

  Pat O'Leary on October 21 at 10:24 a.m.

  The loss of a child is certainly reason to take time off, however, time over and above that allowed should be taken as unpaid leave. These people work for us and are paid by us, they are not self employed. At $150,000 per year they should be able to take leave without a paycheck for a few days. I would imagine that a clerk at the county courthouse would certainly not be able to take paid leave on a whim or even a death in the family. As usual, one set of rules for the high and mighty, and another for those at the bottom.

• 

  caroline2 on October 21 at 12:12 p.m.

  According to the article Judge Hayes claimed that she took 50 days off in 2009. Did I read that right? 10 weeks off at public expense? That is 20% of the year. I understand she did lose a child to a heroin overdose in the summer of 2008 and took a month off after that. The Family Medical Leave Act requires that you use your accrued sick time and when that is exhausted any additional time off is at your own expense.

  It is a judge’s job to hold citizens accountable. I find it troubling that the majority of District Court Judges would vote to hide their own accountability by shredding their attendance records. I want to have faith in my elected officials, and that requires transparency not secrecy.

• 

  pprogers on October 21 at 12:35 p.m.

  I don’t think judges should be elected. Getting elected requires getting political contributions, and judges may then be beholden to contributors just like other politicians. I like the judicial appointment and retention process in Alaska, where I lived for 32 years until I moved back to this area last year. Read further if you are interested in how that process works.

  The following text was copied from http://www.courts.alaska.gov/ctinfo.htm#appointment.

  “Alaska has a merit selection system for judges and justices. The governor appoints a supreme court justice or a judge of the court of appeals, superior court, or district court from a list of qualified candidates submitted by the Alaska Judicial Council. The governor has 45 days from receipt of the list to make the appointment.

  (The judicial council is comprised of the chief justice, who serves as chairperson and ex officio member; three attorney members appointed by the Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar Association and three non-attorney members appointed by the governor and subject to confirmation by a majority of the members of the state legislature in joint session. Council members serve six-year terms).

  All judges and justices in Alaska periodically must stand for retention (approval by the voters).

  Each supreme court justice and each court of appeals judge is subject to approval or rejection by a majority of voters statewide on a nonpartisan ballot at the first general election held more than three years after appointment. Thereafter, each justice must participate in a retention election every ten years, each court of appeals judge must participate every eight years.

  Each superior court judge is subject to approval or rejection by the voters in the judge’s judicial district at the first general election held more than three years after appointment. Thereafter, the judge is subject to approval or rejection every sixth year. Each district court judge must run in a retention election in his or her judicial district at the first general election held more than two years after appointment, and then every fourth year thereafter. State laws that require judges to participate in retention elections do not apply to magistrates.

  The Alaska Judicial Council, which must report to the Alaska State Legislature and the Alaska Supreme Court at least once every two years, is assisted by an executive director and support staff.”

• 

  liarsinnews on October 21 at 1:31 p.m.

  One thing that should be mentioned is the huge public pension plan the judges receive. Its even better than the political pimps in US congress get.

• 

  Mary on October 21 at 8:43 p.m.

  Judge Debra Hayes has proven leadership skills, outstanding academic credentials and a history of involvement in the community. She more than carries her work load and Ihave not heard any legitimate complaints about her abilities.
  Tim Note is a criminal defense attorney with little experience and no community service. Judge Hayes has been an outstanding judge. Judge Hayes opponent Tim Note would need considerable on the job training and has no experience whatsoever filling in as a temporary judge (judge protem) although I understand he has declined the opportunity to receive training as a judge pro tem.
  Voting for Judge Debra Hayes is a “no brainer”

• 

  DoubleDan on October 25 at 10:06 a.m.

  Tim Note has the same years of legal experience that she had before taking the bench. A recent Bar Poll rates Mr. Note higher in the categories of integrity and judicial temperament. As to legitimate complaints about her ability, I would not expect lawyers any more than doctors or police to self-identify the weakest among them. None of the other judges have drawn opponents. If the issue is work ethic and ability in district court one has to ask why only this judge has an opponent. I can draw the conclusion this is a problem in her courtroom. Tim Note is a bright attorney and he will transition easily to being a judge.