Panel could lose funding in dispute over state audit

State lawmakers on Monday suggested that funding for a small but powerful agency that disciplines unethical judges could be affected if it does not release thousands of confidential judicial complaints and investigations to the state auditor.

The first audit of the San Francisco-based Commission on Judicial Performance was approved by a state legislative committee in August 2016 and has been stalled ever since as the commission has fought in court to keep the records secret.

A San Francisco Superior Court judge ruled in December that the state constitution gives the 11-member commission the power to shield certain records, effectively trumping the auditor’s legislative authority to review government agencies.

State Auditor Elaine Howle has appealed.

But in a budget subcommittee hearing Monday in Sacramento, state lawmakers expressed frustration with the length of the standoff over the audit, indicating that it would be hard to approve funding for the agency if the legislature has no means to review how the commission is functioning.

“We are concerned about oversight,” said Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a San Diego Democrat who chairs the public safety subcommittee. “To continue to fund things that we have no information about, that we don’t have a sense of certainty that it’s operating in a manner that’s in the best interest of the people of California, makes it very difficult to do that.”

The governor’s Jan. 10 budget proposal requested about $5.2 million for the commission this year, or about $160,000 more than was approved last year.

The commission, established in 1960, oversees roughly 2,000 judges and receives about 1,200 complaints a year, with only a small fraction resulting in public proceedings.

In comments before the subcommittee, the commission’s newly selected director-chief counsel, Gregory Dresser, expressed concerns that the records could become publicly accessible if released to the auditor. The auditor has disputed this, arguing that the records would be subject to the same exemptions as medical and tax information.

“What the commission needs is it needs certainty that all confidential records in the hands of the auditor could remain confidential,” Dresser said.

Lawmakers urged the commission and the auditor to try and work out their differences outside of court. The commission’s budget likely will be voted on by the subcommittee in May before the overall budget is taken up by the legislature and the governor.