Auspicious Agenda From The Beginning He Does Plan To Work For Team-Building, Collegiality And Communication.

Richard Guy, the new chief justice of Washington’s Supreme Court, senses that the public, these days, may feel “government is not such a good occupation.” If anyone can change that unfortunate impression, he’s the kind of leader to do it.

The state’s highest-ranking judge has deep roots in Spokane. He practiced law here for many years and served on the Spokane County Superior Court bench. When he left for the Temple of Justice in Olympia nine years ago, he took with him a reputation for personal decency and professional excellence. Not an ideologue, he instead considers himself “an old-fashioned judge,” one who works case by case and year by year for fairness, common sense, moderation, and improving quality in government.

After his peers on the high court elected him chief justice, Guy began to outline an agenda.

In all likelihood, this agenda will not light bonfires of controversy the way reforms in the other branches of government tend to do. Rather, this is substantive, incremental, constructive - the stuff of which steadily improving government is made.

Asked about this year’s reports of fragmentation among the nine Supreme Court justices, Guy says the situation is not as bad as publicity indicated. However, he does plan to work for teambuilding, collegiality and communication. He applauds vigorous debate on the issues but says flatly that opinions in the future will not contain personal invective among justices. He also says he’ll press the court to hammer out clear majority rulings for the sake of all who must comply with them. Good for him. When the justices agree on the result in a case but write several separate, differing statements about their rationale, confusion results.

Guy proposes a constitutional amendment defining minimum qualifications for the bench. This responds to candidates who’ve sought election to the high court only a few years after graduating from law school. Guy recommends at least five years’ experience as a lawyer to become a Superior Court judge, seven years for the Court of Appeals and 10 years for the Supreme Court. He’s right; judges must know their work well.

Finally, in January, Guy will ask the Legislature to shoulder the full cost of Superior Court judges’ salaries. Now, counties must pay half the cost and have been slow to hire needed judges because they lack the funds. This has led to case backlogs that deny people access to justice. Costing $26 million a year, this proposal belongs high on the Legislature’s priorities.

Guy’s goals, after all, deserve support: improving professionalism and service in a branch of government that works beyond the spotlight but nonetheless is crucial to a free and orderly society.