1. (1) For purposes of disclosure, commissioners shall:

   1. (a) make disclosures at the monthly commission meeting prior to the first scheduled meeting at which the retention evaluation reports for a given class of judges will be discussed or, in any event, no later than the beginning of the meeting at which a particular judge's evaluation is considered; and
   2. (b) disclose to the commission any professional or personal relationship or conflict of interest with a judge that may affect an unbiased evaluation of the judge.

2. (2) Relationships that may affect an unbiased evaluation of the judge include any contact or association that might influence a commissioner's ability to fairly and reasonably evaluate the performance of any judge or to assess that judge without bias or prejudice, including but not limited to:

   1. (a) family relationships to a state, municipal, or county judge within the third degree (grandparents, parents or parents-in-law, aunts or uncles, children, nieces and nephews and their spouses);
   2. (b) any business relationship between the commissioner and the judge;
   3. (c) any personal litigation directly or indirectly involving the judge and the commissioner, the commissioner's family or the commissioner's business.
3. (3) A commissioner exhibits bias or prejudice when the commissioner is predisposed to decide a cause or an issue in a way that does not leave the commissioner's mind open to exercising the commissioner's duties impartially in a particular case.
4. (4) After making a disclosure, a commissioner may voluntarily recuse him or herself if the commissioner believes the relationship with the judge will impact an unbiased evaluation of the judge.
5. (5) Recusal will preclude a commissioner from participating in the commission's evaluation of the judge and from voting on whether to recommend the judge for retention.

6. (6) A commissioner may move to vote on the disqualification of another commissioner if:

   1. (a) the other commissioner makes a disclosure and does not voluntarily recuse, and that commissioner's impartiality might reasonably be questioned; or
   2. (b) the other commissioner does not make a disclosure, but known circumstances suggest that the commissioner's impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

7. (7) To disqualify a commissioner:

   1. (a) a motion to disqualify must be seconded; and
   2. (b) ratified by a two-thirds vote of those present.
8. (8) During the discussion concerning possible disqualification, any commissioner may raise any facts concerning another commissioner's ability to fairly and reasonably evaluate the performance of any judge without bias or prejudice.
9. (9) Disqualification encompasses exclusion both from participating in the commission's evaluation of a judge and from voting on whether to recommend the judge for retention.

KEY: internal operating procedures, reporting improper attempts to influence, conflicts of interest, confidentiality

Date of Last Change: September 23, 2019

Notice of Continuation: December 2, 2024

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 78A-12-201 through 78A-12-206