Five members of the Committee find that the course you have followed is appropriate and perhaps the safest. I do not believe disclosure is mandated by the Code in every case. I believe it depends on the amount involved in every case. Also it may depend on the percentage of the total bank stock owned by the Judge and his family. Moreover, the bank is not a party in the cited cases.
Disclosure is the same as an offer to recuse or disqualify.
Then the Judge and his wife may be required to divest themselves of the bank stock because of frequent disqualification. In sum, a majority of the Committee's members endorse the practice you have been following which appears to satisfy Canon 3 generally and 3D specifically. The committee is expressly charged with rendering advisory opinions interpreting the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct to specific circumstances confronting or affecting a judge or judicial candidate. Its opinions are advisory to the inquiring party, to the Judicial Qualifications Commission and to the judiciary at large. Conduct that is consistent with an advisory opinion issued by the committee may be evidence of good faith on the part of the judge, but the Judicial Qualifications Commission is not bound by the interpretive opinions issued by the committee.