Judicial retention results. A tough call on "curing" violations. Friday's "mixed pickle".
Judicial retention results
The results are not official yet, but given the percentages I'm seeing, it seems as though every single judge up for retention in Colorado got retained.
The first link below is to the Secretary of State's election results page and it's showing a pretty near clean sweep. All of them made it.
There was only one close call and that was from the state's 9th judicial district. I put an article on that one second below in case you wanted to read up on it.
I am not surprised by the result here. By and large I think that most people just go on autopilot with judges. It's natural enough. It saves time.
Instead of wallowing in loss, however, I want to point out something to you. I looked back at 2022's retention election** at the appellate level to compare retention votes. I put a link to that data third below.
A pattern emerged this year compared to previous. The percentage voting AGAINST retention in 2022 was about 30% across judges. This year's, across the high-level races is a few ticks up.
What does this mean to me? It means opportunity, it means a chance for growth. I heard a lot more noise this year about not retaining judges than in previous years. I am going to assume that this did move the percentages (albeit a little).
The votes on judges are not set in stone. It's not automatic retention.
I think we should start to revisit how we are evaluating judges and what exactly goes in the Blue Book. I think also that we should start spending more time discussing judicial retention with each other, perhaps just about as much time as we do on ballot issues.
I am going to think over ways to do my part. You do the same and let's revisit this closer to 2026.
**Unless I'm mistaken, we vote to retain judges on even year elections, there was no 2023 numbers I could find. Also note that different levels of judge (district, appellate, etc.) are voted on at different times.
https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CO/122598/web.345435/#/summary?category=C_9
https://www.postindependent.com/news/ninth-judicial-judge-looks-to-be-narrowly-retained/
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Results/Abstract/2022/general/retention/appealsCourt.html
Tough call on "curing" violations.
The CFOIC article below details their brief to the Colorado Supreme Court re. the ability for public bodies to "cure" a violation of Colorado Open Meetings Law (COML).
Let's back up first and talk about what "curing" means. In a broad sense, to "cure" an error in the legal sense is to fix the mistake or get yourself back in compliance.
Sometimes the ability to cure something is spelled out directly in law. If a tenant is doing something that breaks the terms of his or her lease, the landlord sends out a "cure or quit" notice and the tenant has a chance to either stop the violation or the lease is broken.
In the context of COML, curing a mistake might refer to fixing an earlier error. COML has certain notice requirements and let's say that a school board didn't give proper notice that they intended to discuss firing a superintendent at a meeting. They have the meeting, discuss, and fire the superintendent.
Someone calls foul and the board then tries to "cure" the mistake by giving proper notice for a future meeting where they .. discuss, and then fire the superintendent.
That, in theory, cures the violation, but does it meet the spirit and text of the law?
This sort of thing is the substance of the article (and is related to an example actually in the article). CFOIC is sending a brief to the Supreme Court as they (the court) take up a case similar to my example above.
CFOIC's position is complex, and an earlier precedent allows for a cure process for some violations of COML, but I think that what they are arguing here is that, while there may be a path to cure a violation, that cure should not stop the party that called out the violation from getting its attorney fees.
For more on that, I excerpted the (lengthy but ) relevant part of the article in the attached screenshot.
It's hard for me to come to clarity on this one. I see the arguments that CFOIC makes. I don't think I disagree.
But I do think that there has been some abuse of getting attorney's fees for what I see as easily cured violations of COML, that do not in any way cause someone hundreds of miles away any harm, however. The Pagosa Springs self-appointed Attorney General being the quintessential example (see the second link below).
The cynical side of me also can't help but see this as lawyers protecting a revenue source. That same cynical side also thinks that without some sort of consequence, some sting, in the enforcement of COML against a governing body, there is no reason for them to be more careful or learn.
Perhaps a middle course is best here. If you see a violation, point it out directly to the board and it's cured, no harm, no foul.
If the board fights you and won't fix it without a lawsuit, but then cures prior to a judgment leaving you with attorney's fees, then you can collect your attorney fees.
There has to be some way to not leave those trying to call out violations of COML without there being a financial incentive for those that arrogate unto themselves the status of "Attorney General" so they can cash in.
"In a pickle" means the liquid, not the foodstuff.
That time of the week again. Time for something fun and not related to politics.
I don't mention it here much, but I do a fair bit of pickling. I make a mean bread and butter chip (among others). I'd love to share the secret to the recipe, but then it wouldn't be a secret would it?
I recently tried a new recipe this year and thought I'd share. It's linked first below. This was quite a novel one for me because it's the first recipe I've done where the pickle (pickles are the food, but it's also the term used for the liquid which you use to pickle the pickles -- ain't English fun?) had wine in it.
I grew some hot and sweet cherry peppers this year, so I used them in the recipe (along with some store-bought red and green bells). Peeling a thousand-odd cherry peppers was tedious, but the results have been delicious.
Serving suggestion? I have put them on my carne asada sandwiches (thin sliced grilled skirt steak) and Italian sausage sandwiches. I have yet to try it on a pizza per the recipe, but it's on my list.
This recipe is definitely a keeper for next year, thought I may just stick to bells with a few hot cherries thrown in for zest.
If you want to try it but are nervous about canning, don't can them. I bet you they'd do just fine as refrigerator pickles. You would just need to store them in the fridge.
Oh, and canning or not, don't forget to let them soak for about 2 weeks (at least) to come to full flavor.
One last thing. Pickling is also a term used in metalworking. For the curious, I put a Wikipedia link below the recipe.
That's it for the week. Have a good rest of your Friday and back at it Sunday!
https://www.ballmasonjars.com/blog?cid=pickled-roasted-peppers
\
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickling_(metal)#:~:text=Pickling%20is%20a%20metal%20surface,to%20remove%20the%20surface%20impurities.
I love today's column - especially the judge retention issue, and the recipe. Gonna try it! (the recipe, not the judge retention...)