By Elena Durnbaugh
Gongwer News Service
Judges across the state would have increased requirements for financial disclosure under a new administrative order being considered by the Michigan Supreme Court.
The high court on Wednesday published proposed amendments to the fourth and sixth cannons of the Code of Judicial Conduct that would require judges to file annual financial disclosures and would increase the reporting threshold for gifts for judges and their family members.
Judge David Viviano dissented from publishing the order.
The changes would strengthen language from saying judges “should” file reports to saying they “must” file annual financial disclosure reports. The cannon is also updated to allow judges to review compensation and expense reimbursement.
Judges would be required to report their information as well as the spouse’s information, including their occupation and employer. Under the financial disclosure requirements, judges would have to report any positions they hold as an officer, director or trustee.
They would have to report the source of any earned and unearned income other than income from the judge’s personal salary if the judge received $10,000 or more. Judges would be asked to report all liabilities of more than $10,000 and any stocks, bonds or securities they hold or that are held jointly with their spouse. Property would be reported, along with gifts and whether a detailed report of campaign contributions and expenditures was filed with the secretary of state.
The order also increases the aggregate value of gifts that must be reported from $375 to $1,000. Any gifts with a fair market value of less than $500 need not be aggregated.
Judge Ray Voet of the 64th District Court in Ionia County said that the order would likely come up for discussion at the next district judges meeting.
“As far as finances, do I need to provide a public record of all my finances or my spouse? I’m not sure what I think about that,” he said. “I would want to listen to some of my colleagues and have a conversation.”
Voet said that there have been several conversations over the years about financial disclosure as it relates to the judiciary.
“There’s been prior conversation we’re having about judicial security, personal identification, identifying information for judges, addresses,” he said. “The truth is there’s a line between security and transparency, and I’m not sure that’s an easy line to draw.”
He said he thought the current conversation might be borne out of the controversy over gifts accepted by U.S. Supreme Court justices.
The Michigan Supreme Court will accept public comment on the order until November 1. At that time, the court will decide how to move forward.
Gongwer News Service
Judges across the state would have increased requirements for financial disclosure under a new administrative order being considered by the Michigan Supreme Court.
The high court on Wednesday published proposed amendments to the fourth and sixth cannons of the Code of Judicial Conduct that would require judges to file annual financial disclosures and would increase the reporting threshold for gifts for judges and their family members.
Judge David Viviano dissented from publishing the order.
The changes would strengthen language from saying judges “should” file reports to saying they “must” file annual financial disclosure reports. The cannon is also updated to allow judges to review compensation and expense reimbursement.
Judges would be required to report their information as well as the spouse’s information, including their occupation and employer. Under the financial disclosure requirements, judges would have to report any positions they hold as an officer, director or trustee.
They would have to report the source of any earned and unearned income other than income from the judge’s personal salary if the judge received $10,000 or more. Judges would be asked to report all liabilities of more than $10,000 and any stocks, bonds or securities they hold or that are held jointly with their spouse. Property would be reported, along with gifts and whether a detailed report of campaign contributions and expenditures was filed with the secretary of state.
The order also increases the aggregate value of gifts that must be reported from $375 to $1,000. Any gifts with a fair market value of less than $500 need not be aggregated.
Judge Ray Voet of the 64th District Court in Ionia County said that the order would likely come up for discussion at the next district judges meeting.
“As far as finances, do I need to provide a public record of all my finances or my spouse? I’m not sure what I think about that,” he said. “I would want to listen to some of my colleagues and have a conversation.”
Voet said that there have been several conversations over the years about financial disclosure as it relates to the judiciary.
“There’s been prior conversation we’re having about judicial security, personal identification, identifying information for judges, addresses,” he said. “The truth is there’s a line between security and transparency, and I’m not sure that’s an easy line to draw.”
He said he thought the current conversation might be borne out of the controversy over gifts accepted by U.S. Supreme Court justices.
The Michigan Supreme Court will accept public comment on the order until November 1. At that time, the court will decide how to move forward.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
