Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the Kansas Commission on Judicial Performance, and what does it do?
2. Who serves on the Commission on Judicial Performance?
3. Which judges are evaluated?
4. How was I selected to receive a questionnaire?
5. How will my completed questionnaire be used?
6. Will the judge I evaluate be able to see my completed questionnaire?
7. Do I have to fill out the questionnaire?
8. Why should I fill out the questionnaire?
9. Are the overall results of the judicial performance surveys available to the public? How can I see them?
10. I lost my questionnaire. How can I obtain a replacement?
11. I feel my attorney is doing a poor job representing me. Can the Commission on Judicial Performance help me?
12. I believe the attorney for the other side did something illegal or unethical. What should I do?
13. I would like to evaluate a judge other than the one I was requested to evaluate. Can I do that?
14. What if I think the judge did something illegal or unethical? Should I tell the Commission on Judicial Performance?
15. I think the judge made a number of legal errors in his or her decision. What can the Commission on Judicial Performance do about that?
16. I have been asked to evaluate a judge, but I have never been in that judge's courtroom and have not had any experience with that judge. What should I do?
17. If I have more questions about the Commission, the judicial evaluation process, or the questionnaire I received, who should I contact?
    

1.  What is the Kansas Commission on Judicial Performance, and what does it do?

The Kansas Commission on Judicial Performance was established by the state legislature in 2006.  Its goals are:

1. to improve the judicial performance of individual judges and justices and thereby improve the judiciary as a whole;
2. where judges and justices are subject to retention election, to disseminate the results of the judicial performance evaluation process to enable voters to make informed decisions about continuing judges and justices in office; and
3. to protect judicial independence while promoting public accountability of the judiciary.

To accomplish these goals, the Commission on Judicial Performance conducts evaluations of judges and justices and provides those evaluations to the judges and justices for self-improvement. For those judges and justices who are subject to retention elections, the Commission also makes a public recommendation regarding whether the judge or justice should be retained in office. A key part of the Commission's evaluation process is the surveying of persons who have had sufficient experience with a judge or justice to form an opinion about the performance of the judge or justice such as attorneys, litigants, jurors, witnesses, law enforcement officers, victims, court staff and others. Persons surveyed are asked to evaluate the judges and justices on their ability, integrity, impartiality, communication skills, professionalism, temperament and administrative capacity suitable to the jurisdiction and level of court.

Top

2.  Who serves on the Commission on Judicial Performance?

The Commission consists of thirteen members, six of whom must be non-lawyers and six of whom must be lawyers, judges or justices. The Chair must be a lawyer, judge or justice. At least one lawyer member and one non-lawyer member must reside in each congressional district. Members are appointed by the Judicial Council. The current members of the Commission on Judicial Performance are:

• Richard F. Hayse, Chair; Topeka, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 4-year term ending June 30, 2010.
• A. Dale Chaffin, Mission, non-lawyer from the Third Congressional District, appointed March 25, 2008, to complete the term of Gary Alexander which term will expire June 30, 2010.
• Sara S. Beezley, Girard, lawyer from the Second Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 2-year term ending on June 30, 2008.
• Senator Donald Betts, Wichita, non-lawyer, at-large position, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 2-year term ending on June 30, 2008.
• Professor James Concannon, Topeka, lawyer, at-large position, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 4-year term ending on June 30, 2010.
• Gloria Farha Flentje, Wichita, lawyer from the Fourth Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 4-year term ending on June 30, 2010.
• Martha Garcia, Wichita, non-lawyer from the Fourth Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 2-year term ending on June 30, 2008.
• Dr. Richard P. Heil, Hays, non-lawyer from the First Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 2-year term ending on June 30, 2008.
• Nancy Kindling, Topeka, non-lawyer from the Second Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 4-year term ending on June 30, 2010.
• Honorable Larry McClain, Overland Park, retired district court judge from the Third Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 2-year term ending on June 30, 2008.
• Representative Michael R. O'Neal, Hutchinson, lawyer from the First Congressional District, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 4-year term ending on June 30, 2010.
• Dr. Malia Reddick, Des Moines, IA, non-lawyer, at-large position, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 4-year term ending on June 30, 2010.
• Honorable Fred N. Six, Lawrence, retired Supreme Court Justice, at-large position, appointed July 1, 2006, for a 2-year term ending on June 30, 2008.

Top

3.  Which judges are evaluated?

The Commission evaluates a total of 263 fulltime judges and justices. These include Kansas Supreme Court justices, Kansas Court of Appeals judges, and all district judges and district magistrate judges across the state. The Commission will begin the process of evaluating senior judges (judges who have officially retired but continue to work on a part-time basis pursuant to K.S.A. 20-2622) in 2009 and expects to prepare its first report in 2009. The Commission does not evaluate municipal court judges.

Top

4.  How was I selected to receive a questionnaire?

When people appear in court, their names are usually entered into the Court's computerized database.  The Commission has contracted with an independent research company to randomly select names and addresses from this database and survey those persons about a judge or justice they have observed or interacted with.  In some areas where a judge hears few cases, all persons who have observed or interacted with the judge may be surveyed. 

Please note that the Court's database may not always be correct.  If you receive a questionnaire about a judge you have not observed or interacted with, please make a note on the front of the questionnaire and return it in the postage-paid envelope that came with the questionnaire.  If you are asked to complete a questionnaire by e-mail, click on the link to the questionnaire and there will be an opportunity to indicate that you have not observed or interacted with the judge you have been asked to evaluate.

Top

5.  How will my completed questionnaire be used?

Once you return your completed questionnaire to the independent research company conducting the survey, that company will compile the results of all of the completed questionnaires it receives into a composite report to be supplied to the Commission.  Your individual questionnaire, including any written comments that you provide, will remain confidential as to your identity.  While the company conducting the surveys will remove identifying information from any comments that you write, you should take care not to identify yourself in your written comments.

Top

6.  Will the judge I evaluate be able to see my completed questionnaire?

No, the judge will not see individual questionnaires.  The judge will only be able to see the composite report which compiles the results of all returned questionnaires.  That report will include written comments provided by persons being surveyed; however, any identifying information in the comments will be removed.

Top

7.  Do I have to fill out the questionnaire?

No, participation in the judicial performance evaluation process is strongly encouraged but not required.

Top

8.  Why should I fill out the questionnaire?

Judicial performance evaluation reports are intended to improve the judiciary and benefit the public by enabling voters to make informed decisions about retaining judges and justices in office.  Evaluation reports also let judges know what areas of their performance need improvement.  Your participation is a key part of the judicial performance evaluation process.  Unless a sufficient number of completed questionnaires are returned, the Commission will not be able to perform its duty of evaluating judges and justices.

Top

9.  Are the overall results of the judicial performance surveys available to the public?  How can I see them?

Yes, survey results and the Commission's retention recommendations will be made available at the Commission's website:  http://www.kansasjudicialperformance.org Shortly before the election, this information will also be made available through local newspapers and printed materials will be available at various public locations such as the local courthouse or library.

Top

10.  I lost my questionnaire.  How can I obtain a replacement?

If you lose your questionnaire, please contact:

Top

11.  I feel my attorney is doing a poor job representing me.  Can the Commission on Judicial Performance help me?                

No, the Commission has no authority over attorneys.  If you have a complaint about an attorney, you should contact:

Top

12.  I believe the attorney for the other side did something illegal or unethical.  What should I do?

If you have a complaint about an attorney, you should contact:

Top

13.  I would like to evaluate a judge other than the one I was requested to evaluate.  Can I do that?

You have been selected to evaluate a specific judge whom you have observed or interacted with.  You cannot use the questionnaire to evaluate any judge other than the one named on the questionnaire.  However, if you would like to make written comments about a different judge, you may write a letter to the Commission on Judicial Performance.  The letter must contain your name and address, but your identity will be kept confidential and will not be revealed to the judge.

Top

14.  What if I think the judge did something illegal or unethical?  Should I tell the Commission on Judicial Performance?

Yes, if you believe the judge did something illegal or unethical, you may include this information in the comments section of your questionnaire.  More importantly, you should also contact the Commission on Judicial Qualifications, which has the responsibility for judicial disciplinary matters:

Top

15.  I think the judge made a number of legal errors in his or her decision.  What can the Commission on Judicial Performance do about that?

The Commission can do nothing to change a judge’s decision. However, you may write any comments you would like to make about the judge's decision on your questionnaire. 

Top

16.  I have been asked to evaluate a judge, but I have never been in that judge's courtroom and have not had any experience with that judge.  What should I do?

If you receive a questionnaire about a judge you have not observed or interacted with, please make a note on the front of the questionnaire and return it in the postage-paid envelope that came with the questionnaire.  If you are asked to complete a questionnaire by e-mail, click on the link to the questionnaire and there will be an opportunity to indicate that you have not observed or interacted with the judge you have been asked to evaluate.

While you may be tempted to throw away a questionnaire about a judge with whom you have not had contact, it is important that you respond as described above.   Your response will ensure that you will not receive a follow-up questionnaire or correspondence about your failure to respond.

Top

17.  If I have more questions about the Commission, the judicial evaluation process, or the questionnaire I received, who should I contact?

If you have additional questions, please contact:

Top