Senator Peake's bill to address compensation for retired judges and require a study on pay for pretrial review was amended and reported out of the Civil Subcommittee of Courts of Justice on a unanimous voice vote.

The bill, offered by Senator Peake on behalf of a constituent and several retired general district court judges, would seek reimbursement for judges required to attend judicial conferences and would direct a study of pay practices for retired judges who review briefs and memos outside of court. Peake said the measure responds to complaints that retired judges are “mandated to go to the judicial conference and not compensated.” He added that retired judges sometimes read submitted memos while waiting in chambers and “they don't pay me to review memos. They only pay me the day that I actually show up.”

Committee counsel offered a line amendment to resolve competing enactment clauses in the draft; the committee struck one set of enactment-language lines and renumbered provisions before approving the amendment. Counsel explained the change was to avoid duplicative enactment language and that the Office of the Executive Secretary (OES) preferred one version of the enactment clause.

No members of the public spoke in favor of or against the measure during the subcommittee hearing. After debate and amendment, the subcommittee voted to report the bill to the next stage. The clerk recorded the bill as reported by a vote of 7 to 0.

The committee record shows the measure as amended will require OES to study how the proposed subsection B would affect the code; the provision would not take effect until the study and any reenactment language in the bill were satisfied. The bill was advanced for further consideration in the legislative process.