But will they hide judicial misconduct or mark a step toward a more open process? The vast majority of proven complaints against judges result in informal reprimands, unknown to Utahns who must periodically vote whether to retain state judges.

Soon, members of the public can speak out during a comment period before the new Judicial Conduct Commission [JCC] rules can be implemented.

The rule changes would mean:

l Informal reprimands are gone. The JCC would have the new option of dismissing a complaint with a warning if the judge agrees misconduct has occurred and the conduct is "relatively minor."

l Complaints would not be dismissed if the judge has violated conditions of a former dismissal or if the misconduct "is the same or similar" to previous misconduct.

l No government officials would be notified of dismissals with warnings. Informal reprimands are not made public now, but they are shared with the governor, the state Judicial Council and, if a justice court judge is involved, mayors.

Sen. Dave Thomas, R-South Weber, had pushed for rules that would make more discipline known to the public. On Thursday, Thomas cited the Utah Supreme Court's opinion firing former juvenile court judge Joseph Anderson earlier this year as supporting his position.

"They certainly have watered things down," he said of the proposed rules. "My fear has always been that the use of a warning will take the place of the informal reprimand and there will be no change. I hope that the JCC will understand the intent of the Supreme Court and the legislature and decide it really has to be something truly minor to get a warning, and truly minor things are the exception - not the rule."

The JCC has also pointed to the Anderson opinion as guiding its new rule changes. A footnote in the opinion noted informal reprimands are not mentioned in the state constitution and have "generally prevented both the public, and sometimes this court, from gaining any meaningful awareness of the extent and nature of judicial misconduct, if any, occurring within the judiciary."

But the court also suggested an alternative: "Should the Judicial Conduct Commission feel that no public sanction is warranted, dismissal of the complaint with a warning, or on conditions of no further misbehavior, may serve the same laudable purpose of correcting troubling but relatively minor misbehavior without offending the language of the constitution."