The Tacoma-Pierce County Bar Association’s new survey rating the performance of the county’s Superior Court judges makes it easy to tell the top performers from the worst.

That should be valuable ammunition for potential challengers, who have until Friday to file for election. The public – and the bench itself – would be well served if at least a few sitting judges have to answer to voters this year.

The last time an incumbent Superior Court judge was tossed out by the voters was in 2000, when Judge Rudy Tollefson was defeated after being formally disciplined for judicial misconduct.

Open seats on the bench sometimes result in a race. Sometimes a newly appointed judge facing his or her first election will draw an opponent. Otherwise, judges facing re-election typically get a free ride.

The pattern is understandable, given the risk, trouble and expense attorneys face if they decide to take on a sitting judge. The difficulty voters have in making informed judgments on judicial candidates is another key factor.

That’s why the Tacoma-Pierce County Bar Association’s survey project rating the county’s 22 Superior Court judges is such a valuable public service. It helps the bar as well, because attorneys – and their clients – have a great stake in working with professional and competent judges.

The bar’s results resemble those of a more limited judicial evaluation survey The News Tribune conducted four years ago. The similarities reinforce the credibility of both surveys.

As in the TNT survey, the local bar rates court veterans James Orlando, Tom Felnagel, Gary Steiner and Lisa Worswick as the cream of the crop. In a pleasant surprise, they are joined in the top tier by John Hickman and Susan Serko, both of whom have served only since 2006.

Now here’s where the ratings sting – and provide the most value: 14-year veteran Sergio Armijo and five-year veteran Bev Grant rank at the bottom of the class. They received consistently low ratings in legal ability, integrity and impartiality, professionalism and administrative skills.

Linda Lee, Katherine Stolz, Frederick Fleming and John McCarthy also fared poorly.

McCarthy’s low rating raises eyebrows, given his decade of experience on the bench and his favorable rating in The News Tribune’s survey. McCarthy once received a mysterious “unqualified” rating from the Municipal League; it was unfair because it was unexplained. This time, however, the poor rating comes from a credible process.

McCarthy, it seems, needs to do some soul-searching about the basis for his low marks.

The bar association dismayed the judges by posting online not only the ratings but also the anonymous comments submitted by the participants. The judges believed the association had promised not to do that.

It should be noted that even the best judges drew some negative comments, and some poorly rated judges drew praise. If any challengers misuse such anonymous comments in their campaigns this fall, we’ll be the first to call them out. We recommend voters place more emphasis on the ratings rather than the anonymous comments.

Naturally, sitting judges don’t much like getting report cards, but Pierce County’s judges cooperated admirably with the bar’s rating process. The bench wins more respect when it acknowledges that its members should be held accountable for performance.