Rule 28-303. Evaluation procedure.

A. Review of information. Upon receipt of a report and completion of the review of all information collected from questionnaires pursuant to Rule 28-205 NMRA, the commission shall schedule an interview with the judge being evaluated. B. Evaluation guidelines. The commission may follow, but shall not be limited to, the guidelines set forth in Rule 28-401 NMRA regarding the criteria used in evaluating the performance of judges. C. Mandatory interview. Each judge subject to a mid-term or retention election evaluation shall be interviewed by the commission. Neither the commission nor the judge may waive the interview. The interview shall be conducted for such a period of time as is necessary to address the concerns of the commission members and the judge being evaluated. Prior to the interview, the judge may submit written information to the commission. D. Preparation of narrative profile. Following an interview, the chair of the commission shall provide the judge, in writing, a complete draft of the narrative summary and proposed retention recommendation. The narrative profile shall conform to the requirements provided by Rules 28-301 and 28-302 NMRA of these rules. E. Response to narrative profile. Within ten (10) days after receipt of draft of the narrative summary and proposed retention recommendation, the judge being evaluated may respond to the proposed draft narrative summary and proposed recommendation. Any response shall be directed to the chair of the commission. If the responding judge requests an additional interview with the commission, the judge may be given an opportunity to meet with the commission to address the contents of the narrative profile. The commission may redraft the narrative profile prior to releasing it to the public. F. Recommendation. In addition to the information included in a narrative profile, the commission shall make a recommendation regarding the retention of each judge who has declared intent to stand for retention. The recommendation shall be "Retain", "Do not retain" or "No opinion". A recommendation of "Retain" or "Do not retain" shall require at least eight (8) affirmative votes of the commission. A "No opinion" recommendation shall be given only when the commission concludes that the results of the information gathered are not sufficiently clear to make a firm recommendation. A "No opinion" recommendation shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation. Any commission member may abstain from voting. G. Changes to final narrative. The commission, upon a change of circumstances, after notice to the judge has the discretion to revise the final narrative or recommendation. H. Release of the narrative profile and recommendation. The narrative profile and the recommendation of the commission will be released to the judge within fourteen (14) days following completion of the narrative profile and recommendation, and to the public no less than forty-five (45) days before the general election. The following shall apply to the dissemination of judicial performance evaluations of judges subject to retention elections: (1) General distribution. The commission may make the information, or a summary of the information, available in a printed medium at courthouses, libraries, retail and other practical outlets. (2) Newspaper. The information, or a summary of the information, may be provided to newspapers and other print media. (3) Radio and Television. The commission may utilize public service announcement air time on radio and television stations. Public service announcements will direct the listener to the availability of the information. (4) Internet. The commission may post narrative profiles and retention recommendations on its website. (5) Paid advertising. The commission may purchase paid advertising as it deems appropriate. I. Non-participation by judges. The commission, at its sole discretion, may recommend "Do not retain" when a judge refuses to participate in the evaluation process. J. Preparation of Interim Evaluation Report. Following an interview, the chair of the commission shall provide the judge in writing with a draft Interim Evaluation Report, including an overall assessment of the judge, as well as specific strengths (if any), specific weaknesses (if any), and an improvement plan, if needed. The commission shall follow-up with the judge as needed on the improvement plan.