State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 89-07

Question

Is a judge prohibited from participating as a member of a city transition committee? If a judge cannot be a member of the committee, could the judge attend for informational purposes only, but not as a voting member? If a judge cannot participate in any way, could a court staff member serve as a voting member or a non-voting liaison to the court?

Answer

[Our answer is premised on the following representations made to the committee: 1) the district court judge has been asked to serve as a member of the transition team which is preparing information needed to create a new city; 2) while city council campaigning is occurring, a transition committee of noncandidates is preparing information and proposed ordinances for adoption by the city council once they take office; and 3) one of the issues the city will face is whether to file their citations in the existing court or set up a municipal court and whether to set up a municipal violations bureau within the district court.]
CJC Canon 4(A) and Canon 5(G) would permit the judge to serve as a voting member of the city transition team. However, the judge should disclose the circumstance that the use of a municipal court rather than a district court could have a fiscal impact on the district court and should confine participation to those issues which affect the law, the legal system or the administration of justice and decline to participate in the development of other matters of policy and the drafting of proposed ordinances.

The Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct effective January 1, 2011. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

CJC 3.1
CJC 3.7
CJC 3.4

Opinion 89-07

05/22/1989

 

Privacy and Disclaimer NoticesSitemap

© Copyright 2024. Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts.

S3