Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Participation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee members urge better public notice and alternatives to short written comments
Summary
Members said late or two‑sentence comments limited the committee's ability to evaluate judges and discussed ways to increase in‑person or substantive input, including better publicity and options for anonymous or protected feedback.
Members said the current public comment process sometimes produces late submissions or brief remarks that leave committee members without enough information to form a well‑rounded view. "It's valuable, I think, having that back and forth in person...To be reading, that could be publicized more," one committee member said, calling for better advance notice so people testify during the designated window rather than after committee decisions.
The Chair and other members noted that attorneys and others may be reluctant to speak publicly about judges because they may later appear in the same courtroom. "It's a good point...there's definitely an anonymity piece of it," a member said. Committee members proposed exploring ways to collect substantive input (longer testimony, remote observation, or surveys) and to publicize the public comment window more effectively.
