The Alaska Judicial Council is an independent citizens commission established in Alaska's constitution. By law, the council helps voters make informed decisions on whether to retain judges for another term.
The council conducts a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of each judge. The council reviews judges' integrity, diligence, legal ability, fairness, demeanor, ability to manage their case loads, and overall performance of their judicial responsibilities in and out of the courtroom. The council publishes summaries of its evaluations on its website (www.ajc.state.ak.us) and in the state election pamphlet.
The council recommends that voters retain all judges except Anchorage District Court Judge Richard Postma. This is only the third time since 1988 that the council has recommended against the retention of a judge. The recommendation is based on a review of hundreds of documents, e-mail correspondence, survey results, and numerous interviews including a lengthy interview with Judge Postma accompanied by his attorney.
Daily News Alaska Voices blogger Kevin Clarkson recently questioned the council's recommendation on Judge Postma. Mr. Clarkson did not contact the council but agreed to reconsider his criticism if more information became available. Unlike the comments Judge Postma presumably selected to provide to Mr. Clarkson, much of the feedback the council received about Judge Postma was unfavorable.
Judge Postma alleged that he was given an unfair workload. He then claimed that the calendaring of his case load was racially biased. Judge Postma is Hispanic. The council carefully investigated this allegation and determined that Judge Postma's case load was the same as other judges. The council found no evidence to support Judge Postma's allegation of racism. The council is not insensitive to matters of race. The council nominated Judge Postma for appointment to the bench. The council's recent nominations resulted in the appointments of Hispanic and African-American judges.
Mr. Clarkson referred to internal court memoranda to suggest that criticism of Judge Postma is unwarranted. These memoranda were written over one year ago. The council relied on Judge Postma's more recent conduct. Judge Postma's communications to court staff and other judges in the past year are very troubling. Only a few examples are possible in this limited space.
In September 2009, Judge Postma demanded to be placed on paid administrative leave or be assigned non-courtroom responsibilities in which case he would "come into work and spend the day throwing up in my office bathroom." At his request, the court placed Judge Postma on paid administrative leave for about six weeks. Then, Judge Postma falsely and repeatedly claimed he had been suspended.
In December, Judge Postma sent angry e-mails containing false allegations in the middle of the night to other judges and court staff. His frequent loss of temper and instability required the court to disable Judge Postma's security access to the Anchorage courthouse.
The court temporarily reassigned Judge Postma to Palmer for several months with the hope that a lighter case load and a change of scenery would eventually enable the judge to resume the Anchorage position to which he was appointed. Upon returning to Anchorage, the judge continued to engage in inappropriate communications and rejected reasonable court efforts to address his concerns.
In April, the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct found probable cause that Judge Postma suffers from mental health difficulties that are or may become permanent and which render him unable to fulfill the duties of his office. Judge Postma has been paid to stay home since then.
Judge Postma's irrational behavior has placed an enormous burden on the court and the public. The court has hired another judge to do Judge Postma's job while he is on paid leave.
Recently, the judge posted a picture on the Internet of himself interacting with monkeys. The caption reads, "Photographic proof that I get along just fine with the staff of the District Court Calendaring office."
Council members consider whether voters should feel reasonably comfortable with a judge who decides their important matters. After a thorough investigation, the council concluded that Judge Postma is not that judge.
Larry Cohn is executive director of the Alaska Judicial Council.
By LARRY COHN