California Judge Admonished Over Advocacy in High School Renaming Dispute

In a recent decision by the California Commission on Judicial Performance, Sonoma County Superior Court Judge James G. Bertoli has been publicly admonished for his conduct in a local school board issue. This admonishment, reported by Above the Law, centers around Judge Bertoli’s involvement in efforts to prevent the renaming of his alma mater, Analy High School.

The controversy arose from a proposed consolidation of Analy High with El Molino High School, leading to a temporary renaming to West County High School. This decision stirred local emotions, sparking lawsuits, protests, and even attempts to recall school board members, as covered by Law360. For about eight months, Judge Bertoli was at the forefront of the movement to retain the Analy name.

  • He served on the board of the Analy Alumni Association and actively participated in events and social media to express his opposition to the name change.
  • Local media coverage frequently highlighted his status as a sitting judge, raising concerns about the influence of his judicial position.

The commission criticized Judge Bertoli for “demeaning the judicial office” with remarks such as calling his opponents “a bunch of frickin’ morons” on social media and accusing school officials of corruption. These actions raised questions about judicial ethics and the appropriate boundaries for judges engaging in public discourse.

Previous warnings to Judge Bertoli regarding the misuse of his judicial status, including promoting his band “Court ‘n’ Disaster,” were noted by the commission. Despite such admonishments, his advocacy against the school renaming succeeded when the school board eventually decided to keep the Analy name in December 2021.

Judge Bertoli’s attorney argued that the admonishment might discourage judges from exercising their right to free speech. The case highlights ongoing discussions about the intersection of professional responsibility and personal expression for members of the judiciary.

Further details on the commission’s decision can be explored in the official admonishment document.