Professional Documents
Culture Documents
May 2012 Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) Board of Governors Materials Book
May 2012 Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) Board of Governors Materials Book
May 2012 Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) Board of Governors Materials Book
Board of Governors
Special Meeting
May 22,2012
WSBA Offices
Seattle, Washington
Board of Governors Special Meeting
May 22, 2012
WSBA Offices
Seattle, WA
AGENDA
1. AGENDA .......................................................................................................................... 2
a. Recommendations re: Carryover Items from April 27-28, 2012, BOG Meeting ......... 24
WSBA Leadership Institute (WLI) ........................................................................ 26
Washington Young Lawyers Division (WYLD) .................................................... 29
Volunteer Travel Reimbursement
Other Miscellaneous Items
b. Budget and Audit Committee Recommendations from May 16, 2012, Meeting ........ 57
2
WSBA
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
MEMO
TO: WSBA Board of Governors
FROM: Paula Littlewood
DATE: May 14,2012
RE: APR 28 (Limited License Legal Technicians Rule)
ACTION: Approve proposed response to Chief Justice Madsen's email dated April27, 2012,
regarding suggested revisions to APR 28.
Regarding Chief Justice Madsen's request for a response to Justice Wiggins' proposed revisions
to APR 28, General Counsel Jean McElroy, Chief Disciplinary Council Doug Ende, Admissions
Manager Bobby Henry, and Assistant General Counsel Julie Shankland reviewed the suggested
revisions and are of the opinion that the suggestions are neither problematic nor objectionable.
With respect to the suggestion to subdivide subsection (H)(5), however, they recommend the
addition of"unless" clauses at the end of both subsection (H)(5) and new subsection (H)(6), as
follows (suggested additional language highlighted in yellow):
6) Negotiate or negotiations of the client's legal rights and responsibilities, or communicate with
another person the client's position or convey to the client the position of another party, unless
permitted by GR 24(b);
Their recommendation is based on the opinion that anything that constitutes the practice of law,
but is expressly permitted for non-lawyers under GR 24(b), should be something the Limited
License Legal Technicians are not prohibited from doing. The "unless permitted by GR 24(b)"
clause applies more broadly than to just the activities of representing a client in court
proceedings, formal administrative adjudicative proceedings, or other formal dispute resolution
processes.
On behalf of the court, I want to thank you for your input regarding APR 28. The court
discussed the rule at its April 25, 2012 en bane conference. We took the version of the
rule that was published for comment in January 2009 off the table for the limited purpose
of substituting the amended rule as proposed by the Practice of Law Board in February
2012. The court tabled the rule again until our June 6 en bane conference.
In addition, at a court Rules Committee meeting, one of the justices made suggested
amendments to the substituted rule, which I am attaching. The court is interested in your
feedback regarding any comments or concerns you may have with the justice's suggested
changes before our June 6 meeting.
Thank you.
(]3ar6ara ;Marfsen
4
m.q~~upr~:ttte ar~url
~tah~ .of ~MJrinBhm
CHARLES K. WIGG.INS
.JUSTICE (350) 357-2025
TEMPLE OF' .JUSTICE E-MAIL .J_C.WIGGINS@COI,JRTS.WA.GOV
POST OF'F'ICE BOX 40929
OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON
98504-0929
MEMORANDUM
Section (H)(6) says that an LLLT may not "[p]rovide services to a client in
connection with a legal matter in another state. " I'm not sure we should prohibit the
provision of legal $ervices in another state if those services are authorized by the law of
the other state. I think we might want to qualify this by addition language such as,
"unless permitted by the laws of that state to perform such services for the client."
5
Memorandum to Rules Committee
April 23, 2012 Rules Committee Meeting
Tab 6, APR 28
The deletiqn suggests that the POL Board might intend that the LLLT is permitted
to negotiate on behalf of the client.
Sectiori (F), which describes the permissible scope of practice of an LLLT, says
nothing about any authority of the LLLT to negotiate on behalf of a client.
Section (G), which describes the conditions under which an LLLT can practice,
includes the requirement at (3)(a) that the LL~T must enter into a written contract with
the client including an explanation of the services the LLLT may perform and stating that
the LLLT "may not appear or represent the cli~nt in court, formal administrative
proceedings, or other formal dispute resolution process or negotiate the client's legal
rights or responsibilities, unless permitted under GR 24(b)."[1J
1 GR 24(b) states:
6
Memorandum to Rules Committee
Apri123, 2012 Rules Committee Meeting
Tab 6, APR 28
Section (H), which lists prohibited practices, provides in part that the LLLT nlay
not:
3. It seems to me tliat sections (G) and {1-i) are written to prohibit the
LLLT from negotiating, but that one could argue that the prohibition against negotiation
is only in formal d.ispute resolution processes, not in informal negotiations. Or one could
even argue that communicating offers back and forth isn't negotiation. Neither
argument is likely to prevail, but J don't think we should allow even a glimmer of the
possibility that the LLLT is allowed to negotiate for the client.
I am not wed to. this language. My goal is ~imply to make clear that the LLLT
cannot negotiate for the client. This proposal was presented .to us as a way to assist
clients who could not otherwise afforda lawyer or a c;:ost-effecti.ve way to prepare their
own documents and obtain advice on navigating the court process .
(11) Such other activities that the Supreme Court has determined by
published opinion do not constitute the unlicensed or unauthorized practice
of law or that have been permitted under a regulatory system established by
the Supreme Court.
3
... 7
CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED
A) Purpose. The Civil Legal Needs Study (2003), commissioned by the Supreme
Court, clearly established that the legal needs of the consuming public are not
currently being met. The public is entitled to be assured that legal services are
rendered only by qualified trained legal practitioners. Only the legal profession is
authorized to provide such services. The purpose of this rule is to authorize certain
persons to render limited legal assistance or advice in defined approved practice
areas of law. This rule sAaU prescribe. the conditions of and limitations upon the
provision of such services in order to protect the public and ensure that only trained
and qualified legal practitioners may provide the same. This rule is intended to
permit trained Limited License Legal Technicians to provide limited legal assistance
under carefully regulated circumstances in ways that expand the affordability of
quality legal assistance which protects the public interest.
B) Definitions. For purposes of this rule, the following definitions will apply:
:1} "Approved and reviewed by a la~o'lyer'' means that a lawyer has supervised the
legal work and dooumented that supervision by the lawyer's signature and bar
number.
~~)"Board" when used alone means the Praotioe of Law Limited License Legal
Technician Board.
a~)"Lawyer'' means a person licensed and eligible to practice law in any U.S.
jurisdiction in aooordanoe with the APR's to engage in the general praotioe of law in
the State of VVashington and whose aotivities are go,.temed by the RPC's.
8
6) "Reviewed and approved by a Washington lawyer'' means that a Washington
lawyer has personally supervised the legal work and documented that supervision
by the Washington lawyer's signature and bar number.
a) "May" means "has discretion to," "has a right to," or "is permitted to..."-:-
b) "Must" or "shall" mean "is required to..."-=-
c) "Should" means recommended but not required.
(a) Recommending practice areas of law for LLLTs. subject to approval by the
Supreme Court:
(c) Administering the examinations required under this rule which shall. at a
minimum. cover the rules of professional conduct applicable to Limited
License Legal Technicians. rules relating to the attorney-client privilege.
procedural rules and substantive law issues related to one or more
approved practice areas:
9
(d) Determining LLLT Continuing Legal Education (LLLT CLE) requirements
and approval of LLLT CLE programs:
(g) Establishing and collecting examination fees. LLLT CLE fees. annual
license fees. and other fees in such amounts approved by the Supreme
Court as are necessary to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the
Board: and
(h) Such other activities and functions as are expressly provided for in this rule.
3). Rules and Regulations. The Board shall propose rules and regulations for
adoption by the Supreme Court that:
10
supervision of a Iawver. provided that at least one year is under a
Washington Iawver; or
b) Those who are graduates of any other program set out in sub seotion (a)
a
need years experiense.
5) Pro Bono Servise Requirement. Complete at least 20 hours of pro bono servise to
a legal servises organication approved by the Commission within the t\vo years
prior to taking the Legal Teshnisian examination.
+4) {)a#r.Application. Execute under oath and file with the Commission Board ~two
copies of his/her application, in such form as may be required by the Commission
Board requires. In the event of the An applicant's failure or refusal of an
applioant to furnish aAY information or proof, or to ansvt'er any interrogatories of
requested by the Commission Board or pertinent to the pending application.,..tRe
Commission may be grounds for denial of ~the application.
8)Examination Fee. Pay, upon the filing of the application, the examination fee and
11
any other required application fees as established by the Commission Board and
approved by the Supreme Court.
1) Examination. Take and pass the examinations required under these rules:
4) Meet all other licensing requirements set forth in the rules and regulations
proposed by the Board and adopted by the Supreme Court.
Q.E) Scope of Practice Authorized by Limited Practice Rule. The Limited License
Legal Technician shall ascertain whether the issue is within the defined practice area
for which the LLLT is licensed. It if is not, the LLLT shall not provide the services
required on this issue and shall inform the client that the client should seek the
services of a lawyer. If the issue is within the defined practice area, the LLLT may
undertake the following only in the defined area(s) of law for whish the Legal
Teohnioian has been oertified:
1) Asoertain whether the problem_is within the defined praotioe area, and if so,
eObtain relevant facts, and explain the relevancy of such information to the
client;
3) Inform the client of applicable procedures for proper service of prooess for
motion papers, and proper filing prooedures of legal documents;
6) Select and complete forms that have been approved by the State of
Washington, either through a governmental agency or by the Administrative
12
Office of the Courts or the content of which is specified by statute; federal
forms; forms prepared by a Washington lawyer; or forms approved by the
Commission Board; and advise the client of the significance of the selected
forms to the client's case;
7) Perform legal research and draft legal letters and pleadings documents beyond
what is permitted in the previous paragraph, if the work is reviewed and
approved by a Washington lawyer;
\A/hile aoting within the scope of authority set forth in this rule, the relationship betiNeen
the Legal Technician and the client shall be governed by all rules, m<peotations,
priJileges and considerations that govern the relationship bet\veen lawyers and their
clients.
1~) A Limited License Legal Technician must have a principal place of business
having a physical street address staffed office for the acceptance of service of
process in the State of Washington.:.i
23) A Limited License Legal Technician must P.personally perform the authorized
services for the client and may not delegate these to a non-licensed person.
The Legal Technician shall not supervise a non certified individual to perform
the seF\'ices in the legartechnician's plaoe. Nothing in this prohibition shall
prevent a person who is not certified a licensed LLLT from performing
translation services.:.-;-aAEI
34)Prior to the performance of the services, the Limited License Legal Technician
shall enter into a written contract with the client. signed by both the client and
the Limited License Legal Technician. that includes the following provisions:
13
or negotiate the client's legal rights or responsibilities. unless
permitted under GR 24(b);
(c) A statement that upon the client's request, the LLLT shall provide to
the client any documents submitted by the client to the Limited
License Legal Technician may not be retained by the Legal
Teohnioian for any purpose, inoluding payment of oompensation or
eests;
(d) A statement that the Limited License Legal Technician is not a lawyer
and may only perform limited legal services. This statement shall be
on the faoe-first page of the contract in minimum twelve-point bold
type print;
(f) A statement that the client has the right to rescind the contract at any
time and receive a full refund of unearned fees. This statement shall
be conspicuously set forth in the contract; and
4) A Limited License Legal Technician may not provide services that exceed the
scope of practice to a olient who requires assistanoe mmeeding the soope of
praotioe authorized by this rule, and shall inform the client, in such instance,
that the client requires should seek the services of a lawyer. The soope of
praotioe shall be determined as pro'lided in regulations adopted by the
Commission and appro'led by the Board and the Supreme Court.
56) 1\ Legal Teohnioian must sign all pleadings oompleted by the Legal Teohnioian
and in elude her oertifioate number. A document prepared by an LLLP shall
include the LLLP's name, signature and license number beneath the signature
of the client.
.P.H) Prohibited Acts. In the course of dealing with clients or prospective clients, a
Limited License Legal Technician shall not:
1) Make any statement that the Limited License Legal Technician can or will
obtain special favors from or has special influence with any court or
14
fI
I
governmental agency;
3) Refuse to return documents supplied by, prepared by, or paid for by the client~
upon the request of the client. These documents must be returned upon
request even if there is a fee dispute between the Limited License Legal
Technician and the client; SF
&I) Represent or otherwise provide legal or law related services to a client, except
as permitted by law or elsmvhere in this rule or associated rules and
regulations:-:-
2) Pre BoRa PI:IBiise SenliGO. Eaoh Legal Teohnioian should aspire to render at
leastao hours of pro bono publioo servioe per year.
H) Finanoial Responsibilities
15
perf.or!flance of services per!flitted by this r~::~le. The Each Limited License Legal
Technician shall annually provide proof of financial responsibility shall be in
such form and in such amount as the Colfllflission Board may by regulation
prescribe.
2:~)Annual Fee. Each certified Limited License Legal Technician fFH:fSt shall pay the
annual license fee established by the Colfllflission Board and approved by the
Supreme Court.
-1-J,) Existing Law Unchanged. This rule shall in no way e*pand, narrow or affeot
modify existing law prohibiting non-lawvers from practicing law or giving legal advice
other than as authorized under this rule or associated rules and regulations. fn-th.e
follo'Ning areas as they apply to both lawyers, and Legal Technicians engaged in the
lilflited practice of law, ~::~nder the e*ol~::~sive reg~::~latory a~::~thority of the S~::~prelfle Court in
the State of 'Nashington:
2) Conflicts of interest that !flay arise between the certified Legal Technician and a
client or cl::lsto!fler; and
3) The lack of a~::~thority of a Legal Technician to give legal advice 'tvithol::lt being
licensed to practice law other than an a~::~thori:z:ed under this mle.
2) Legal Technicians Limited License Legal Technicians shall be held to the same
ethical standards as a lawyer, e*cept to the O*tent that the RPCs conflict with
these mles, in which ease these rules shall apply of the Limited License Legal
Technicians' Rules of Professional Conduct. which shall create an LLLT IOLTA
program for the proper handling of funds coming into the possession of the Limited
License Legal Technician.
3) All funds that co!fle into a Legal Technician's possession are s~::~bjeot to RPC
..:f.....4.98The Washington law of attorney-client privilege and law of a Iawver's
fiduciary responsibility to the client shall apply to the Limited License Legal
Technician-client relationship to the same extent as it would apply to an attorney-
client relationship.
16
New Admission to Practice Rule 28: Limited Practice Rule for
Limited License Legal Technicians
A) Purpose. The Civil Legal Needs Study (2003), commissioned by the Supreme
Court, clearly established that the legal needs of the consuming public are not
currently being met. The public is entitled to be assured that legal services are
rendered only by qualified trained legal practitioners. Only the legal profession is
authorized to provide such services. The purpose of this rule is to authorize certain
persons to render limited legal assistance or advice in approved practice areas of
law. This rule shall prescribes the conditions of and limitations upon the provision of
such services in order to protect the public and ensure that only trained and qualified
legal practitioners may provide the same. This rule is intended to permit trained
Limited License Legal Technicians to provide limited legal assistance under carefully
regulated circumstances in ways that expand the affordability of quality legal
assistance which protects the public interest.
B) Definitions. For purposes of this rule, the following definitions will apply:
2) "Board" when used alone means the Limited License Legal Technician Board.
3) "Lawyer'' means a person licensed and eligible to practice law in any U.S.
jurisdiction.
Page 1 of7
17
9) "Washington lawyer'' means a person licensed and eligible to practice law in
Washington and who is an active or emeritus member of the Washington State Bar
Association.
a) "May'' means "has discretion to," "has a right to," or "is permitted to".
b) "Must" or "shall" mean "is required to.
c) "Should" means recommended but not required.
(a) Recommending practice areas of law for LLLTs, subject to approval by the
Supreme Court;
(c) Administering the examinations required under this rule which shall, at a
minimum, cover the rules of professional conduct applicable to Limited
License Legal Technicians, rules relating to the attorney-client privilege,
procedural rules and substantive law issues related to one or more
approved practice areas;
(g) Establishing and collecting examination fees, LLLT CLE fees, annual
license fees, and other fees in such amounts approved by the Supreme
Court as are necessary to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the
Board; and
Page2 of7
18
(h) Such other activities and functions as are expressly provided for in this rule.
3) Rules and Regulations. The Board shall propose rules and regulations for
adoption by the Supreme Court that:
4) Application. Execute under oath and file with the Board two copies of his/her
Page 3 of7
19
application, in such form as the Board requires. An applicant's failure to furnish
information requested by the Board or pertinent to the pending application-may
be grounds for denial of the application.
5) Examination Fee. Pay, upon the filing of the application, the examination fee and
any other required application fees as established by the Board and approved by
the Supreme Court.
1) Examination. Take and pass the examinations required under these rules;
4) Meet all other licensing requirements set forth in the rules and regulations
proposed by the Board and adopted by the Supreme Court.
1) Obtain relevant facts, and explain the relevancy of such information to the client;
3) Inform the client of applicable procedures for proper service of process and filing
of legal documents;
5) Review documents or exhibits that the client has received from the opposing
side, and explain them to the.client;
Page 4 of7
20
6) Select and complete forms that have been approved by the State of
Washington, either through a governmental agency or by the Administrative
Office of the Courts or the content of which is specified by statute; federal
forms; forms prepared by a Washington lawyer; or forms approved by the
Board; and advise the client of the significance of the selected forms to the
client's case;
7) Perform legal research and draft legal letters and pleadings documents beyond
what is permitted in the previous paragraph, if the work is reviewed and
approved by a Washington lawyer;
3) Prior to the performance of the services, the Limited License Legal Technician
shall enter into a written contract with the client, signed by both the client and
the Limited License Legal Technician that includes the following provisions:
(b) Identification of all fees and costs to be charged to the client for the
services to be performed;
(c) A statement that upon the client's request, the LLLT shall provide to
the client any documents submitted by the client to the Limited
Page 5 of7
21
License Legal Technician;
(d) A statement that the Limited License Legal Technician is not a lawyer
and may only perform limited legal services. This statement shall be
on the :faGe-first page of the contract in minimum twelve-point bold
type print;
(f) A statement that the client has the right to rescind the contract at any
time and receive a full refund of unearned fees. This statement shall
be conspicuously set forth in the contract; and
(g) Any other conditions required by the rules and regulations of the
Board.
4) A Limited License Legal Technician may not provide services that exceed the
scope of practice authorized by this rule, and shall inform the client, in such
instance, that the client requires should seek the services of a lawyer.
5) A document prepared by an LLLP shall include the LLLP's name, signature and
license number beneath the signature of the client.
1) Make any statement that the Limited License Legal Technician can or will
obtain special favors from or has special influence with any court or
governmental agency;
3) Refuse to return documents supplied by, prepared by, or paid for by the client,
upon the request of the client. These documents must be returned upon
request even if there is a fee dispute between the Limited License Legal
Technician and the client; SF
Page 6 of7
22
proceedings, or other formal dispute resolution process or negotiations of the
client's legal rights or responsibilities, unless permitted by GR 24{b);
3) Annual Fee. Each Limited License Legal Technician shall pay the annual
license fee established by the Board and approved by the Supreme Court.
J) Existing Law Unchanged. This rule shall in no way modify existing law prohibiting
non-lawyers from practicing law or giving legal advice other than as authorized under
this rule or associated rules and regulations.
1) Limited License Legal Technicians acting within the scope of authority set forth
in this rule shall be held to the standard of care of a Washington lawyer.
2) Limited License Legal Technicians shall be held to the ethical standards of the
Limited License Legal Technicians' Rules of Professional Conduct, which shall
create an LLLT IOLTA program for the proper handling of funds coming into the
possession of the Limited License Legal Technician.
Page 7 of7
23
WSBA
To: Board of Governors
The WSBA Board of Governors met April27-28. During this meeting, it heard public
comments on the Budget & Audit Committee recommendations, participated in a facilitated
discussion of its mission focus areas and strategic priorities, and then took action on some of
Budget and Audit's recommendations. Outlined below are both the items acted on at the April
BOG meeting as well as those items still pending:
1. Eliminate funding for positions on WSBA standing committees, boards, and task forces (this
includes volunteer travel). Possible savings $167,000.
2. Transition the WYLD to an unfunded WSBA standing committee. Possible savings
$153,000.
3. Eliminate funding for the WSBA Leadership Institute. Possible savings $127,000.
4. Explore moving Bar News online to achieve cost savings (note: more research is needed
regarding possible models and fiscal impacts).
5. Eliminate $5,000 votingforjudges.org donation.
6. Eliminate $500 accommodation fund which is never used due to other funding that is
available (but not eliminate WSBA's accommodation policy).
7. Eliminate $5,600 in funding for ABA Delegates (WSBA's 7 delegates are currently paid
$800/year stipend to cover the costs of attending ABA meetings).
8. Move New Lawyer Education into CLE Seminars Budget. Note: this is not a structural
change, but a change in how the program is funded (so it will no longer be funded by license
fees).
9. Charge members for subscription to Casemaker so that costs could be covered and it
becomes revenue-neutral (cost savings: $48,000).
10. Ask the Supreme Court to increase the Pro Hac Vice fees (additional revenue TBD).
24
APPROVED. The BOG passed the following motions at the April meeting:
Total: $377,000
25
From: Williams, James F. (Perkins Coie) [mailto:JWilliams@perkinscoie.com]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 1:59 PM
To: steve@crosslandlaw.net; steve-wsba@sgtoolelaw.com; armstronglaw@comcast.net; philip@burifunston.com; 'Tracy
Flood'; micheleradosevich@dwt.com; nancy.isserlis@gmail.com; rogerleishman@dwt.com;
smachler@osbornmachler.com; judy@diamondmassong.com; dan.ford@columbialegal.org; vharkins@rhhk.com;
bkelly@localaccess.com; lkerr@kerrlawgroup.net; silvermanlaw@earthlink.net; wviall@williamskastner.com; Paula
Littlewood; Jean McElroy
Cc: 'Ronald Ward'; 'Bobbe Bridge'; 'Owens, Justice Susan'; 'JBeaver@GrahamDunn.com'; Dial, Ellen Conedera (Perkins
Coie); 'DHunt@pendoreille.org'; 'diankha.linear@expeditors.com'; 'Luna@pwrlk.com';
'ricardo _rna rtinez@wawd .uscourts .gov'; 'kevin@southwellorourke.com'; 'Craig .Sims@seattle .gov';
'ktesty@u.washington.edu'; 'Yu, Mary'; 'fltracylaw@aol.com'; 'vh_lara@hotmail.com'; 'lorraine.lee@oah.wa.gov';
'Anderson, Marcine'; Kness, Carol (Perkins Coie)
Subject: FW: Proposed BOG Resolution Transferring WSBA Leadership Institute to the University of Washington School
of Law ("UW Law School")
Since our April 28th presentation at the BOG meeting, the WSBA
Leadership Institute Advisory Board has moved forward with answering the
question of what the WLI would do after fiscal year 2013 if the WSBA
provides us with one more year of full funding. The attached resolution
answers that question in a way that allows the WSBA to maintain its
affiliation with the WLI but shed the majority of the costs associated with
operating the program.
UW Law School Dean Kellye Testy has generously offered to serve as the
WLI's new administrative home after the 2013 class year. The Law School
will not be in a position to fund WLI's out-of-pocket expenses, and the
Advisory Board will have the task of addressing this issue. The attached
resolution leaves open the possibility that after 2013 the WSBA can
consider, at its discretion, continuing to fund part or all oJ WLI's out -of-
pocket expenses.
Best regards,
WHEREAS, the WLI has successfully executed on its mission since 2004 by graduating
seven classes ofWLI Fellows from counties throughout the State of Washington, with volunteer
support from members of the bar and the judiciary, with in-kind and monetary contributions from
law firms and corporations, and with WSBA funding and administrative support; and
WHEREAS, the WLI has become an important part of the WSBA's effort to diversify the
legal profession and encourage inclusion of historically underrepresented members of the community
in leadership positions throughout the State of Washington; and
WHEREAS, the April6, 2012, WSBA membership vote in favor ofthe 2012 License Fee
Referendum will result in a loss of approximately $3.6 million of revenue, severely restricting the
WSBA's ability to fund the WLI; and
WHEREAS, the WSBA seeks to expand the resources available to fund the WLI's current
operation and expand the number of programs that will be available in the future to fulfill the WLI's
mission; and -
WHEREAS, the UW Law School and the WLI have a common interest in training diverse
attorneys for leadership within the various communities where they reside and work throughout the
State of Washington and within the WSBA; and
WHEREAS, the BOG and the UW Law School have a desire to work collaboratively to
continue the WLI's mission for the benefit of WSBA's members and the communities they serve; and
WHEREAS, the UW Law School has the ability and desire to house the WLI and to provide
ongoing administrative and curriculum support, assuring the continuation of the WLI program in the
future but will need assistance with the WLI's out-of-pocket expenses; and
27
WHEREAS, the WSBA has an ongoing interest in the WLI's success, wishes to maintain a
connection with the WLI, and wishes to contribute towards the WLI's out-of-pocket expenses subject
to the WSBA's ability and available resources in any particular year;
2. As of September 30, 2013, control of and responsibility for the WLI shall be transferred
from the WSBA to the UW Law School;
3. The UW Law School will create an Advisory Board for the WLI at the UW Law
School which will include, as inaugural members, the existing WLI Advisory Board,
and one continuing position to be filled from time to time by appointment by the
WSBA President;
4. During the period commencing on the date of this Resolution and ending September 30,
2013, the WSBA, the WLI Advisory Board, the WSBA acting through its Exeeutive
Director and, to the extent appropriate, the Washington Bar Foundation ("WBF"), will
agree to plans to effect the orderly transition of the WLI, including among other things,
(i) access by the UW Law School to the WSBA's website, member lists, electronic
distribution system, publications, and other media resources for the purpose of
advertising the WLI and recruiting candidates; (ii) use of the names "WSBA
Leadership Institute" and/or "WLI;" (iii) appomtment of the members of the WLI
Advisory Board to positions on the Advisory Board to the WLI at the UW Law School;
and (iv) application of funds held by the WBF, now or in the future, and designated for
the support and promotion of the WLI; and;
5. The BOG may, at its discretion, continue contributions towards the WLI's Operating
Expenses after September 30,2013.
APPROVED by the Washington State Bar Association Board of Governors this_ day
of 2012.
Paula C. Littlewood, WSBA Secretary and Dean Kellye Y. Testy, University of Washington
Executive Director School of Law
-2-
28
WSBA
To: Paula Littlewood, Executive Director
Julie Mass, Deputy Director for Administration and Professional Development
From: Margaret Morgan, Associate Director for Publications and Professional Development
Brian Salts-Halcomb, WYLD Liaison
Recommendation:
Reaffirm the organization's commitment to engage with and to support new lawyers.
Take action on the Budget and Audit Committee's recommendation to transition WSBA's new
lawyer structure from a division to a standing committee.
Transitioning to a standing committee would signify the following steps to implement for FY13.
1) Transition the current WYLD Board of Trustees into the first committee appointees.
Statf and the Board of Trustees will partner to:
a. Establish the committee's procedures and work product based on previously
defined focus areas.
b. Establish a budget in line with current standing committee expenditures (not to
exceed $1 0,000).
c. Establish transition plans for current WYLD projects that do not work within a
committee structure.
2) Reduce dedicated staffing to the WYLD. Determine appropriate committee staffing model.
As requested, we have outlined below our thoughts and considerations about the Budget and
Audit Committee recommendation to transition the WYLD to a standing committee.
While the recommendation arose amidst our current budget-reduction process, the reasons for
this transition have a much broader origin. Ultimately, we believe the proposed committee
structure has the potential to strengthen rather than diminish WSBA' s support of new lawyers.
However, many WYLD leaders and members have real concern that this transition would signify
reduced commitment to supporting new bar members and developing future leaders. We ask that
the board reaffirm its commitment to new lawyers, and to clarify that this transition would mean
a structural - rather than mission/values - change.
Washington State Bar Association 1325 Fourth Avenue, Ste 600/ Seattle, WA 98101-2539 206-443-9722 I fax: 206-727-8310
29
Background
The Board of Governors established the Washington Young Lawyers Division in 1986 following
a report from a special task force on young lawyers. Prior to 1986, new members could choose to
join the Young Lawyers Section. The change to a division included: automatic membership
(defining all new members under an age/eligibility criteria as division members); dedicated staff
support; a young lawyers newsletter; and a young lawyers network, which now exists as the
WYLD Board of Trustees. The division sought to involve greater numbers of new lawyers in
state bar activities and to address the unique needs of members new to the profession.
Since its founding, the WYLD has an admirable history of creating initiatives that have
transformed the bar and provided assistance to many new professionals. The WYLD has worked
to provide public service opportunities that appeal to the new practitioner and build skills, has
built unique educational programs that address specific new lawyer issues, and has provided
venues for new lawyers to establish a network of professional support. The WSBA has benefited
greatly from the young lawyers who built these programs, and those leaders were provided an
opportunity to develop and grow as bar leaders.
Structural Concerns
Throughout the history ofthe WYLD, however, tension has existed about how its structure
integrates with other WSBA programs and entities. In establishing the WYLD, WSBA had in
essence built a leadership and membership structure parallel to its Board of Governors and the
committees and members it governs. This resulted in the WYLD being viewed, during some
periods, as a sort of"shadow" bar, a part ofWSBA, but separate in its priorities and processes.
Such a characterization is perhaps inevitable, given the inherent challenges of having a separate
division of a class of members within a membership organization.
In the last four years, significant changes have occurred that reflect the desire for a deeper
integration of the WYLD within the WSBA:
In 2008, the WYLD Liaison job description was rewritten to emphasize strategic support
in addition to program logistics. Additional support staff time was allocated to assist
WYLD.
Through a lengthy Program Review process and in consultation with the WYLD Board
of Trustees:
o WYLD programs duplicative of other WSBA programs - such as the WYLD
Committee for Diversity and WYLD CLE Committee -were transitioned or
"sunset-ed."
o The WYLD developed three focus areas to guide its activities: member outreach
and leadership, transition to practice, and public service/pro bono.
o The WYLD budget was decreased in certain areas to better align with WSBA
priorities and fiscal responsibility.
These changes are valuable, and the work of the WYLD to move towards integration is
commendable. Yet in the background of all of this work remains the question, "Does this
structure best achieve our goals to connect new lawyers to bar activities and support new
practitioners?" The Program Review Committee and previous Board of Governors have had
significant misgivings about this structure, and the WYLD Board and staff have spent much of
their time grappling with how best to organize the division. We believe some inherent
weaknesses to the current structure include:
30
Isolation - "Division" signifies separateness, and this can isolate the very members that
we are trying to integrate into the bar. While the WSBA commits to include and support
new lawyers, the idea of a separate division seems to suggest that new lawyers should
care for themselves. It can provide barriers to infusing the bar with new energy and ideas.
A separate division causes continued questions about governance and connection to
WSBA-wide organizational vision and strategic goals.
Cost- the division model, with a board and many committees/projects, requires
significant staffing and direct expenses. It is not feasible to operate a board of 20 trustees,
five to seven committees, and three to five events each month with significantly less staff
resources than currently allocated. Yet it is likely unsustainable for WSBA to continue
this level of commitment of funds.
Planning- the extended structure of board and committees provides obstacles to
developing lasting projects with measurable impact. The WYLD has admittedly struggled
- given the volume of new members/volunteers and new ideas that begin each year- to
define where to place its energy and how to institutionalize its projects so that they live
on past the term of the leaders who created them.
WSBA's Role- the WYLD Board continues to weigh what value WSBA's young
lawyers division should/can provide when there are already many active county young
lawyer divisions. The current structure devotes many resources to gathering the Board of
Trustees and small groups of lawyers in various locations around the state. WSBA may
be better equipped to work on systemic issues that can serve the entire young lawyer
population statewide. We can already see this transition through programs like moderate
means, New Lawyer Education, and the young lawyer section liaison program- where
the WYLD has provided initiative and guidance to transform statewide services. Yet the
transfer of these ideas to the greater bar is more difficult with a separate division.
Standing Committee
Transitioning to a WSBA Young Lawyers Committee not only addresses budget-reduction, but
could alleviate many of the concerns above. WSBA committees have produced deep impact for
the bar and profession. The committee would retain the main purposes of the WYLD: 1) to
encourage the interest and participation of new and young lawyers and law students in the
activities ofthe bar; 2) to develop and conduct programs of interest and value to new and young
lawyers (consistent with the division's three focus areas), and; 3) to uphold and support the
Guiding Principles of the bar. These committee members would have a vital role to connect with
new lawyers in their geographic area and engage them in bar activities and resources.
Additionally, this committee would have the opportunity to focus on specific projects in more
integrated coordination with bar staff, the Board of Governors, and other WSBA entities.
It will take some time to determine the specific structure and procedures for the committee, but
we are confident a structure could be built which incorporates:
31
2) Impact of new lawyers throughout the bar.
o Without the staff resources currently devoted exclusively to WYLD, and with a more
collapsed structure, WSBA will need to work to integrate new lawyers throughout the
bar. This is a good thing for the organization! A broader group ofWSBA staff would
need to take responsibility to ensure that the young lawyers committee is connected to
appropriate issues and resources to meet the needs of new lawyers. While one person
would have the primary liaison responsibility to this committee, a more streamlined
structure could enhance the points of connection for young lawyers throughout
WSBA. For example, in working with committee members to establish meeting
topics/agenda, staff from Justice and Diversity Initiatives may participate to discuss
related public service initiatives; staff from Education and Professional Development
would be involved to discuss projects involving the WSBA Sections and CLE; the
Board of Governors may look to the committee for input on subjects important to new
lawyers. This model has already begun, with the WYLD working more closely with
program staff including the New Lawyer Education Development Specialist and
Public Service Program Manager. The committee structure further emphasizes that
new lawyer issues be addressed throughout the bar, rather than only within the
division.
o Additionally, this new structure makes clear the intention to institutionalize and
support young lawyer ideas and programs, rather than to have the WYLD plan in
isolation. The young lawyer committee would still have room to implement outreach,
networking events, and new ideas, but these would have a more developed context
and breadth of support. WYLD has served to develop new leaders, yet the WYLD
structure has often provided a false impression for new leaders that they should plan
programs in a vacuum. A more connected structure helps support new leaders to learn
the skills of making change and impact within an organization's priorities.
There is significant flexibility within a committee to respond to the ideas and needs that
continually arise from a young lawyer population. The main components of this transition -
reduced WYLD staffing; less dollars committed to programming; and a collapsing of the WYLD
board and committees into one committee - need not result in a deep change to the services to
young lawyers involved with the WSBA, and should provide a more comprehensive approach to
investing in the young lawyer leaders who commit their time to the bar.
Conclusion
If the Board of Governors adopts the recommendation to transition the WYLD to a standing
committee structure, the decision can come from a deep commitment to building organizational
efficiencies - and a belief that the decision, in fact, will enhance the integration and impact of
new lawyers in the association. However, this solution is misguided if it comes from any sense
that the role and import of new lawyers should be in any way diminished in the "new WSBA."
Thank you for your careful consideration of the recommendation.
32
WASHINGTON YOUNG LA WYERS DIVISION
As you are likely aware, the WYLD is opposed to the Budget & Audit Committee proposal
recommending the ''transition" ofthe Washington Young Lawyers Division (WYLD) to an
unfunded standing committee, which will negatively impact young lawyer participation in the
WSBA. The WYLD is core to integrating all new and young lawyers into the WSBA and
encouraging their participation in the WSBA's many programs, activities, and entities, and to
helping integrate them into our profession.
We write to formally submit for your consideration the WYLD budget-reduction proposal we
previously circulated via e-mail, which contemplates retaining the current Division structure, and
also to provide you with a list of positive and negative aspects of various young lawyer entity
models. Ultimately, while open to discussing further changes to its structure, the WYLD Board
of Trustees feels the Division's present structure best serves one of the largest constituencies of
the WSBA.
33
Memo to Board of Governors
May 14, 2012 -Page 2 of 3
programs. Future plans include greater oversight of standing committees (member outreach,
pro bono & public service) by Board of Trustees
Concerted efforts by trustees have led to significantly increased numbers of applications for
leadership positions
Cons:
Cost (has largely been addressed by budget proposal; WYLD will need to explore other
funding avenues such as relationship with WSBF)
Awareness~ some young/new lawyers do not know they are members of the WYLD
Cons:
Cost - many young/new lawyers are not in a financial position to pay additional section dues
Because of cost, membership could shift to primarily large-firm attorneys; those in
Seattle/King County would be most likely to participate
Section (versus Division) and requirement to pay dues to belong could increase negative
perception that WSBA is irrelevant and offers very little that is accessible (outside ofKing
County)
Potential overlap/duplication with local young lawyer groups, which typically do not charge
for membership
Standing Committee:
Pros:
Leadership structure could utilize current BOT members; future vacancies could be
appointed by BOG to lend greater ''prestige" and enhance application process
Could be supplemental entity to include new lawyers who are not traditionally interested in
WYLD ("second-career" attorneys, etc.) and to advise WSBA/WYLD
Cons:
No funding, no staffing
Budget & Audit Committee Proposal is unclear about the purpose, function, role of
committee; does not define what ability the committee would have to seek funding from
WSBA, engage in fundraising, or seek grants
Would not offer sense of ownership & investment in WSBA that the Division does (the
nomenclature is very important)
More difficult to recruit committee members if applicants do not know what they will work
on as committee members
Standing committee could increase negative perception that WSBA is irrelevant and offers
very little that is accessible (outside ofKing County)
Public Service/Pro Bono projects would be difficult to organize and implement on a
statewide basis if standing committee lacked geographical diversity (if unfunded)
34
Memo to Board of Governors
May 14,2012- Page 3 of3
No local bar outreach for members practicing outside of King County for events and projects
tied to the WSBA
Again, we believe the current structure of the WYLD is an "affmity group" that new and young
lawyers are naturally attracted to, that encourages new and young lawyers to participate in the
WSBA, and which is an important and integrated part of the WSBA. Thank you for your
consideration of this memo, the budget proposal, and the memo submitted for the April meeting.
35
FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Notes
Seminar Registrations $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $0.00
Trial Advocacy Program $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $0.00 Transition to NLE
Bridging the Gap Conference $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Transitioned to KCBA
Total Revenue $14,000.00 $12,000.00 $0.00
Direct Expenses:
YLD Committee Admin. $700.00 $1,200.00 $800.00
CLE Committee $250.00 $250.00 $250.00
Editorial Advisory Board $200.00 $200.00 $200.00
Membership Committee $2,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,000.00
Comm for Diversity $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Public Service Committee $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
First Responder Will Clinic $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 Transition to WSBF/alt.
De Novo $200.00 $100.00 $150.00
Board/Trustee Mtgs $32,500.00 $30,500.00 $15,200.00
ABA Meetings $12,000.00 $9,000.00 $2,500.00
Seminar Expense $3,500.00 $1,500.00 $0.00
Pre-Law Conference $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00
Trial Advocacy Program $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.00 Transition to NLE
Officer Travel & Outreach $3,500.00 $3,000.00 $3,500.00
Mock Trial $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,000.00
Law School Outreach $1,000.00 $500.00 $500.00
Bar Leaders Institute $1,750.00 $1,750.00 $0.00 Apply for BLI scholarship
Annual Awards $600.00 $500.00 $500.00
Credit Card Merchant Fees $350.00 $350.00 $0.00
Indirect Expenses
Staff Training $0.00 $1,750.00 TBD by staff after review
Salary (1.60 FTE) $80,590.00 $73,290.00 TBD by staff after review
Benefits Exp $24,966.00 $25,605.00 TBD by staff after review
Other Indirect Exp $27,120.00 $23,697.00 TBD by staff after review
Total Indirect Expenses $132,676.00 $122,592.00 TBD by staff after review
36
JENNIFER ZAHRADNIK, PRESJDENT IAN RUSSELL, SECRETARY
920 12th STREET 220 N. MAIN ST., STB. 600
POBOX 283 DAVENPORT, lA 52801
BELLB PLAINE, lA 52208 (563) 324-3246
(319) 444-3285 FAX (563}3241616
FAX (319) 444-2644 !rus~ll@l-wlaw.com
J!)nnjfcr@KZtaw.net
May 10,2012
VIA EMAIL
Every State Bar Association tries to assist its members and their commitment to
service in the comm\Ulity and the profession. Young Lawyers Divisions play a critical role in
reaching these g<;mls for new and young lawyers. Eliminating the Young Lawyers Division w111
have significant consequences for young lawyers in Washington that are both known and
unknown on the future of our profession. A complete elimination of the WYLD would further
the imp1ession which was brought to light by the referendum that the WSBA as a whole is out of
touch with the needs of its members. It is not the message that should be sent to members or the
public.
The complete elimination ofthe WYLD would be a grave and likely irreversible
eiTor that ignores the needs ofyoung and new lawyers. Young Lawyers Divisions represent the
37
President Cxossland and Board of Governors
May 10,2012
Page2
future of our profession. The WYLD leadership is nn active, passionate and creative gro\lp,
based on our interactions at national ABA YLD meetings.
We appreciate the budgetary conshmnts that the WSBA faces. These ate
challenging times that require tough choices. However, eliminating the WYLD wHI reduce
opportunities for leaming and leadership for new and young lawyers.
Robert Gainer,
Representative
38
r x, > " r< ...1 h\ ~ l " A "' h,h r t"'""
Texas Young Lawyers Association
Chair
Alfonso Cabanas, San Antonio
President Crossland and the WSBA Board of Governors
1325 Fourth Avenue, Ste. 600
Vice President Seattle, Washington 98101-2539
Kristy Sims Piazza. Plano
Immediate Past President Over the past few years I have had the opportunity to serve as a judge of the Awards of
Jennifer Evans Morris , DaHas
Achievement with the ABA YLD. I have seen firsthand the amazing projects that Kari
DIRECTORS Petrasek, and other leaders like her, have produced to serve the public and the members
Brooke Ulrickson Allen, Fort of their division and the State of Washington.
Worth
Kathryn E. Boatman. Houston
Robert E. Booth, Galveston In October 2011, the WYLD was a gracious host to the ABA YLD for our fall confer-
Rebekah Steeiy Brooker, Dalias ence. This meeting showcased the best and brightest young lawyers in Washington. The
J. Daren Brown, Amarillo
Priscilla D. Camacho, San Anto
red carpet was rolled out for us and our membership greatly appreciated the time and tal-
nio ent exhibited by the members of the WYLD.
Cameron J. Cox, Denton
Angela Crusetumer, Waco
D. Lance Currie, Dallas
I understand that there our budget concerns. However, to do away with a vital part of your
Lacy L Durham. Dallas bar association would hinder the development of many of the young lawyers in your state.
Geoff A Gannaway, Houston The young lawyer divisions in every state in the nation work to promote public service
Soraya Yanar Hanshew, El Paso
Kendall Hayden, Dallas
and service to the profession. I would hate to see the State of Washington without this
Sam Houston, San Antonio resource.
Dustin M. Howell, Austin
Wendy A Humphrey, lubbock
Don Jones, Corpus Christi
I appreciate your consideration of this letter and if you have questions or need further in-
Keith 1.. Krueger, College Station put, please do not hesitate to call.
Celina A. lopez, Houston
Becky Mata, Fort Worth
Amanda Navarette, Odessa
Sincerely,
Erin O'Driscoll, Houston
Chike Okpara, Austin
Leif Oison, Houston
Danny Razo, El Paso
Kenneth C. Riney. Dallas Natalie Cobb Koehler
Jose Sanchez, Longview TYLA President
ShivaH Sham1a, T~>xarkana
Kimberly Smith, Frisco
C. Barrett Thomas, Abilene
Paul Tu, Houston
Victor Villarreal, laredo
Brandy M. Wingate, McAllen
Baylor Wortham, Beaumont
39
MSBA
A
The elimination of the WYLD would also seem to hinder the recruitment of
young lawyers and drastically reduce their bar involvement in your
state. The changes being considered could have a very negative effect on
14211A
40
MSBA
...
your membership in both the short-term as well as long. When many
organizations across the country are trying to implement programs to increase
involvement of their young lawyers, it would seem counterintuitive to
consider proposals that would do the opposite.
Minnesota
State Bar
Association While it may seem unusual for Minnesotans to write to Washingtonians about
your internal bar structure, we thought the elimination of the WYLD was
600 Nicollet Mall important enough to do so. You have a tremendous collection of young
Suite380 lawyers who are actively engaged both locally and nationally. This culture of
Miimeapolill, MN 55402-1039 service should be embraced. Please vote against the proposal.
www.mnbar.org
Very truly yours,
Tekphone
612-333-1183
National
l-800-882-MSBA
Fax
. 612-333-4927
President
Charlie Delbridge
Brent E. Routn1an Chair, MSBA New Lawyers Section
Minneapolis
Prtsidmt-Ek&t
Robert Enger
Bemidji
Treasurer
Phil Duran
Minneapolis
Secretary
Richard H. Kyle, Jr.
St. Paul
Tim Groshens
Executive Director
14-211A
41
..B:I'Iird.. :c-.:m
h Iu:~r:.
Promoting Collegiality, and Good Works
P.O. Box 100362
Anchorage AK 99510-0362
We recently learned that the Washington State Bar Association Board of Governors will
be considering a broad proposal that will in effect elim~nate the Washington Young Lawyers
Division (WYLD), along with the elimination of other important programs and services currently
offered by the WSBA. We write to urge the Board of Governors to vote against this proposal as
it pertains to the WYLD. We urge you to not pursue such drastic measures and instead choose
the more moderate approach of working with the WYLD leaders and other young lawyers to
achieve a structure and budget which is responsive to the budgetary and other challenges brought
forth by the referendum and which ensures that the WYLD continues to provide the important
and valuable services it currently does.
The WYLD is the cornerstone for connecting young lawyers and preparing them for their
practice in Washington. These individuals make up approximately one-quarter of the WSBA
membership and the elimination of this important program would not only detrimentally effect
the public service provided within Washington, but would have far-reaching consequences of
further disconnecting the WSBA from its members, both young and old. Our Anchorage Young
Lawyers Section is a vibrant and critical part of our community reaching far beyond the confines
of Anchorage to provide important public service to those in need and to provide significant
networking and other opportunities to our young lawyers. While we certainly understand the
difficulty of balancing budgets and trimming excess, we have worked to continue to provide our
42
Young Lawyers Section with a significant budget which allows them to provide innumerable
valuable services. We know that our community would suffer an enormous loss if our young
lawyers section was eliminated. We hope that you will consider carefully the long term effect of
the actions that you are proposing to take and recognize their devastatingeffect on your
community at large.
Our experience with the WYLD as something of a sister organization has shown their
leadership to be an enthusiastic, creative and motivated group with high reaching goals to
enhance the profession as a whole, but specifically to perform substantial and important work in
Washington as they have for so many years. I am hopeful that the Board of Governors will vote
against the proposal to completely eliminate the WYLD and support a proposition in favor of a
practical approach that allows the WYLD the opportunity to work with the Washington BOG to
prepare and present an alternative budget option that reduces the WYLD budget while preserving
its purpose and the significant service it provides.
Cf2;~k~fJ-/)
~
-~ -~~--C~
tt. /rr/~ ~- ~ I?
Elizabeth Apostola,
President, Anchorage Bar Association
Former President, Anchorage Bar Association Young Lawyers Section
District Representative to the American Bar Association, Young Lawyers Division
43
Dear President Crossland and Board of Governors:
We recently learned that the Washington State Bar Association Board of Governors will
be considering a broad proposal that will in effect eliminate the Washington Young Lawyers
Division (WYLD), along with the elimination of other important programs and ~rvices currently
offered by the WSBA. We write to urge the Board of Governors to vote against this proposal as
it pertains to the WYLD. It seems unbelievable to think that the Board of Governors would not
be able to work with the WYLD leaders and other young lawyers to achieve a structure and
budget which is responsive to the budgetary and other challenges brought forth by the
referendum and which ensures that the WYLD continues to provide the important and valuable
services it currently does.
The WYLD is. the cornerstone for connecting young lawyers and preparing them for their
practice in Washington. These individuals make up approximately one-quarter of the WSBA
membership and the elimination of this important program would not only detrimentally effect
the public service provided within Washington but would have far-reaching consequences of
further disconnecting the WSBA with itS members, both young and old. Here in Alaska, while
we have also been hit by difficult budget decisions and have eliminated the majority of our
excess budget items, the one thing our board members have repeatedly stood up and fought for is
the funding we provide to our New Lawyers Section. We understand the important role that our .
young lawyers play in our community at large and hope that you will recognize this as well.
Our experience with the WYLD indicates that their leadership is enthusiastic and
motivated to enhance the profession as a whole, but specifically has done substantial and
important work in Washington. We are hopeful that the Board of Governors will vote against
the proposal to completely eliminate the WYLD and support a proposition in favor of a practical
approach that allows the WYLD the opportunity to work with the Washington BOG to prepare
and present an alternative budget option that reduces the WYLD budget while preserving its
purpose and the significant service it provides.
Tiuu:tk you for your consideration of this important matter.
Sincerely,
44
Mailing Address:
P.O.Box650 Attorneys ~md Counselors at Law
Corey D. Hinshaw
Jackson, Minissippi 39205 601-965-1822
Telephone: (601} 965-1900 ehlnshaw@watkinseager.eom
. Facsimile: (601} 965-1901
May 14,2012
Re: Opposition to the Elimination of the WYLD Division Structure and Funding
I write to you today in my position as ABA YLD District Representative for District 13
(MS) and on behalf of the Young Lawyers Division of the Mississippi Bar. I am personally
aware of the significant contributions members of the Washington Young Lawyers Division
(WYLD) have made to the ABA YLD and know that the effective elimination of the WYLD
would have far-reaching consequences to members of the bar in your state as well as to the
citizens of your communities and state. Young lawyers affiliates across the country provide a
significant service to not only young lawyers but also to the bar as a whole and to their respective
states and communities. On behalf of the Mississippi Bar YLD, I strongly encourage you to
oppose the current proposal before you to eliminate the WYLD structure and funding mechanism
and make the WYLD merely an unfunded state bar standing committee.
I recently learned at the ABA YLD Spring Conference that the Washington State Bar
Association (WSBA) Board ofGovernors is considering a sweeping proposal to effectively eliminate
the WYLD, along with the complete elimination of other important WSBA programs and services.
I write to you today to urge the Board of Governors to vote against this proposal as it pertains to the
WYLD. I urge you to collaborate and consult with WYLD leaders and other young and new lawyer
members to produce a structure and budget for the WYLD which is responsive to the challenges
brought forth by the referendum and which ensures the Division is relevant and valuable to WYLD
members.
The decision to eliminate the WYLD would no doubt detrimentally impact many
opportunities for service within the WSBA and would have far-reaching consequences on the future
of the legal profession. A complete elimination ofthe WYLD structure and funding is certainly not
the solution, and would have the effect of alienating many young lawyers from the WSBA and
alienating young lawyers in Washington from the ABA YLD.
Watkins & Eager PLLC The Emporium Building 400 East Capitol Street Jackson, Mississippi 39201
45
WSBA
May 14,2012
Page2 of2
The effective elimination of the WYLD would be a grave and detrimental error that would
ignore the needs of young and new lawyers and have significant consequences to the Washington
State Bar in its entirety. Young lawyers are the future of our profession and make up approximately
one-quarter of the WSBA membership or approximately 6,500 WSBA members. I have had the
opportunity to witness some of the WYLD leadership in action, and lmow them to be full of energy,
enthusiasm, and creative ideas for the betterment of the bar and the profession. I am hopeful that
the WSBA Board of Governors will vote against the proposal to effectively eliminate the WYLD
and support a proposition in favor of a practical approach that allows the WYLD the opportunity to
work with the Board of Governors to prepare and present an alternative budget option that reduces
the WYLD budget while preserving its purpose and service. I thank you for your time and attention
to this matter as well as your consideration of my letter and urge you again to oppose the proposal
which is before you and would effectively eliminate the WYLD.
~~--z/
Corey D. Hinshaw
'
ABA YLD District Representative)
District 13 (MS)
46
30 Bank Street
PO Box 350
New Britain
Connecticut CT 06050-0350
Bar Association (860) 223-4400
fax (860)223-4488
Visit www.ctbar.org
We write on behalf of the Connecticut Bar Association Young Lawyers Section (CBA/YLS) to encourage
the Washington State Bar Association to provide our colleagues in the Washington Young Lawyers Division
(WYLD), with the resources necessary to continue its work. In our view, an investment today in WYLD will
pay high yields in the development of the future leaders of your bar.
We offer the Connecticut experience as representative of what the Washington State Bar Association can
reap from investment in its young lawyers division. First, participation in CBA/YLS activities provides
many Connecticut attorneys with the opportunity to build personal and professional relationships that might
not otherwise exist, given the increasingly depersonalized and specialized nature oflegal practice. While
building these relationships, Connecticut's young lawyers contribute materially to the needs of the bar,
routinely organizing more than thirty continuing legal education programs annually while providing other
networking events that give members the opportunity to meet each other and other leaders in the legal
community. The CBA/YLS also serves as the public service arm of the bar in reaching out to public schools
to educate students about the legal system and the rule oflaw, serving meals in soup kitchens, and organizing
pro bono opportunities appropriate for new lawyers.
These activities collectively have made the CBA/YLS a valuable training ground for the future leaders of our
state's bar, with, for example, Ralph Monaco, our bar association's immediate past president, being just the
most recent CBA/YLS Chairperson to serve as our state's bar president. Beyond the bar association,
CBA/YLS alums have gone on to serve as, for example, the Chief Judge of our state's Appellate Court, the
executive director of the bar association, general counsel to numerous corporations and have held other
leadership positions in politics and government. To this day, nearly all still speak fondly of their time in
"young lawyers" in developing the relationships that led to their future success.
In closing, we urge you to recognize the very real value that WYLD, like all young lawyers' organizations,
provides to the future of the profession. We hope you continue your history of investment in your
association by supporting the WYLD and its endeavors as the base for your future.
Respectfully,
Jonathan Weiner
~
Dana Hrelic
CBA/YLS Chair ABA-YLD District Representative
47
Directors
Jason Gordon
Ashly Iacullo
Jemlfer Irmen
Kilthrvn Carso USS
Greg McMahon
Young Lawyers Section
Jonathan MrauniiC
Rebekah R;Jshidfarokhl The Chicago Bar Association
Martin Sinclair
James Sowka 312.554.2032 phone 312.554.2054 fax
Byron Wardlaw ..,..., yls@chicagobar.org www.chicagobar.org
Special Project
~ ...;...-
COordinators
Jessica Bednarz
Malcolm HarsCh May 15,2012
Matthew Jenkins
Kenya Jenkins-W11ght
Richard Klenzler
Helena Llvltz Via email to:
Renee Roffle
w. Brandon Rogers paulal@wsba.org
Gabby Sapia
nancy.isserlis@gmail.com
committee Chairs
susanMton steve@crosslandlaw.net
VIckie Argueta
Jeffrey Arnold
sara Arravo Francis
Andrea Belard
Washington State Bar Association
Alexis Bettl5
Jeremy Boeder
1325 Fourth Ave., Ste. 600
Ben Boroski
Barry Brotine
Seattle, WA 98101-2539
Maryam Brotrle
Jim Cerami
Jeft'Oement RE: Owosition to eliminating WYLD structure and funding
Jocelyn Combleet
Natosha CUyler-Sherman
Blbak Oas
James Davidson Dear President Crossland and WSBA Board of Governors:
Deborah Dencer LolliS
Nora Doherty
Michael Dudek
Colin Dunn We are writing on behalf of The Chicago Bar Association ("CBA'') and its Young
Pat Eckler
Kelly Elmore Lawyers Section ("CBA YLS"). Recently, as we understand it, the Budget and Audit
Daniel Elrod
JuHa Floyd
Committee of the Washington State Bar Association (''WSBA") has proposed that the
Undsay Foye
KiiiiSa Gary
Washington Young Lawyers Division ("WYLD") be drastically changed by "eliminating
Svetlana Gltman
JessiCa Godell
the current 'division' structure and replacing it with an unfunded WSBA standing
Scott Golden
Matthew Hafeleln
committee." The CBA and CBA YLS strongly urge you to vote against this drastic
Christine Harney
Christopher Harney
change for the following reasons.
Abbie Henry
Elizabeth Hermann Smith
Nicholas Holand We believe that the elimination of the division structure and funding of the
Daniel Hwang
Aaron Janik WYLD would hann the future ofthe WSBA and its young lawyers. Young lawyers need
David Johnson
Jefferey Kiltz a distinct division to welcome them and provide leadership opportunities that they might
Jason Kleinman
Lakshmf Lakshmanan not otherwise receive from the wider association. That is to say, a distinct young lawyers
Travis Ufe
Ryan Lipinski division is a training ground and allows an easier path to transition to leadership and
Nicole Madigan
Marta Maras activity within the ''big bar." Eliminating and defunding the WYLD will send a stark
Erin Masters
Patrick McHale
message that will likely result in young lawyers disengaging from the WSBA or, at a
Mitch Morinec
Adriana Moreno Nevarez
minimum, feeling that young lawyers are not welcome with the WSBA.
Elana Nightingale Dawson
11m O'ConneU
Kyle OlSon
Jordan Palmore
Our experience with the CBA and CBA YLS is that lawyers will generally not
Alexander Pappas
Mike Passananti
become involved and active members of the bar association if they do not do so within
Brandon Peck their first five years of practice. Thus, if the WYLD ceases to exist, it is likely that
Brad Perkins
Eric Pranenstiel member involvement and activity in the WSBA will be dramatically reduced thereby
M. Ryan Pinkston
steven Reynolds depriving the WSBA of healthy leadership in the near future.
steve Schochetman
David Scriven-Young
Peter Senechalle
Car1Spomy
Amlr Tahmassebl
Melissa Tllonnlna There is yet another reason for which the WYLD should stay intact and funded:
Nicholas Tatro
Alhson Torrence the WYLD does fantastic work. The WYLD is a national leader and sets a great example
Alexander Tslnman
John TUfano, Jr. that is followed by other young lawyer bar association groups across the country.
Heather Tullo
PatrlckWartan
Jacqueline Wemz
AbfzerZB1121
Ethan Zellzer 20112012 Officers: YLS Chair, Justin L Heather First VIce-Chair, Natacha D. von Will second Vice Chair, Mary K. Curry
Ryan Zeller Member Service Manager, Vikram R. Barad Public: Service Manager, Matthew A. Passen Project Ofllcer, Paul J. Ochmanek, Jr.
Immediate Past Chair Project Officer, Patrick B. Markey Secretary/Treasurer, Brian K. Jones Co-Editors, YLS Journal, Yelena M. Shagall and Adam D. Sheppard
JIU Eckert McCaU YLS Administrative Director, Jennifer Bertolino .
48
For example, the CBA YLS recently organized an "All Bar Summit" where many Chicago-area young
lawyer groups were invited to share ideas and collaborate with each other. The CBA YLS patterned
this event after a similar program that the WYLD organized a few years ago. Many members of the
WYLD have also been very active in the American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division and
have represented the WSBA and the State of Washington in the best possible fashion on a national
stage.
Further, the WYLD consistently makes a positive impact in the community. For example, the
WYLD has implemented Wills For Heroes, a public service project that provides free estate plamring
for first responders, including police officers and firefighters. The WYLD was also an early supporter
of another American Bar Association service project-serving Our Seniors-that provides free estate
planning for low-income seniors.
In conclusion, we believe that the WYLD is a vibrant and necessary part of the WSBA and of
the broader community of young lawyer bar groups. Without the WYLD remaining a distinct and
funded division, young lawyers in the State ofWashington-and around the country-will lose a
very meaningful organization dedicated to their needs. For these reasons, we urge you to vote against
the Budget and Audit Committee's proposal.
Sincerely,
TerrenceM. Murp~*
Executive Director
e 'fer L. Bertolino
Administrative Director
The Chicago Bar Association The Chicago Bar Association
49
50
UINLIVAN &
UGHES, P.A. Writer's Email; sjewell@quinlivan.com
ATTORNEYS AT LAW Writer's Direct Dial: (320) 2587864
0
litt'11Sc'd in S;;uth l>llkOftl
/1/so liumtd in North Dtlkqtu
point will be delegating work to colleagues. The stories I heard of more senior attorneys
A!JtJ lkc'71Std in IVi,,,-omin describing how they first met other young lawyers at conferences several years ago and
how those relationships developed into rainmaking opportunities as time went by, whet
my appetite for more of this time of interaction. There are no other conferences of this
type which get so many attorneys from other states together that are in a same
generational category and level of status in their practices. It is a unique opportunity and
one that should not be taken lightly.
I urge you on behalf of the Washington State Young Lawyers Division to please
reconsider your position in eliminating the funding and structure of this organization.
Therefore, I join in with the young lawyers from Washington State in asking for
reconsideration of the decision to eliminate the funding for this important subdivision of
the Washington Bar Association.
Mail & Fax Center Saint Cloud Offo:e Little FaDs Office
PO Box 1008 Wells Fargo Center First Street Suites
St. Cloud, MN 56302 400 South First Street, Suite 600 107 First Street SE, Suite 105
Fax 320.251.1415 St. Cloud, MN 56301 Little Falls, MN 56345
www.quinlivan.com Phone 320.251.1414 Phone 320.632.0440
51
May 15,2012
Page2
I hope that the Board of Governors will vote against the proposal to completely eliminate the
Washington Young Lawyers Division and support a proposition in favor of a balanced
approached that allows the WYLD the opportunity to work with the Board of Governors in
presenting an alternative budget option that reduces the WYLD budget while preserving it as an
organization. With the creativity of the Washington Young Lawyers and the guidance of the
Board of Governors, I am sure a proposal may be reached to preserve the WYLD and allow this
division to continue to serve its members.
;~
Sarah R Jewell
Attomey at Law
SRJ/kjt
81S1S8
C: PaulaL@wsba.org
Nancy.Isserliss@gmail.com.
Steve@Crosslandlaw.net
52
5121 Masthead NE P 0 Box 92860
STATE BAR
Albuquerque, NM 87199-Phone ( 505) 797-
6000
Fax ( 505) 828-3765 www.nmbar.org
of NEW MEXICO
Young Lawyers Division
May 15,2012
I am writing on behalf of the State Bar of New Mexico's Young Lawyers Division
("NMYLD"). Recently, we were informed that the Budget and Audit Committee of the
Washington State Bar Association has proposed eliminating the current Washington Young
Lawyers Division ("WYLD"). The NMYLD is asking that you vote against this proposal, since it
is our belief that the elimination of the WYLD would be detrimental to the future of the
Washington State Bar and its WYLD members.
The Young Lawyers Division has traditionally provided a home for new attorneys within
its associated State Bar, in which they can develop leadership skills and promote public service
projects. The YLD also serves as a professional development platform for the future leaders of
the State Bar as a whole. It is our experience, that it is the very same attorneys that develop
leadership roles in the NMYLD that end up becoming the strongest and most dedicated members
of the New Mexico Board of Bar Commissioners or other State Bar sections. The opportunity to
develop future leaders for the Washington State Bar Association will be lost without the
appreciation and knowledge that young lawyers develop for the State Bar as a whole while
serving in the WYLD.
Additionally, the Washington State Bar Association would lose an important tie to the
American Bar Association without the WYLD. The WYLD has been extremely active in the
ABANLD, which was exemplified at the October 2011 ABANLD Fall Conference. The
WYLD served as hosts of the conference, which was an integral part in launching the ABANLD
2011-2012 public service initiative Project Salute: Young Lawyers Serving Veterans. These
53
types of activities by the WYLD bring national recognition to the Washington State Bar
Association, which is invaluable. Furthermore, Young Lawyers Divisions across the country
serve an integral role as the service arm of their respective State,s Bar. Without this strong
service component, many citizens would not have access to the legal services the YLD performs
or the valuableinformation they provide at their numerous service day functions.
While the NMYLD understands that many Bars in the U.S. are facing difficult financial
decisions, we urge you to reconsider keeping this valuable resource. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
2
54
MCBA
Washington State Bar Association
1325 Fourth Ave., Ste. 600
Seattle, WA 98101-2539
RE: Opposition to eliminating the Washington State Bar Young Lawyers Division
On behalf of the Maricopa County Bar Association's Young Lawyers Division ("MCBA YLD"), we are
writing this letter to oppose the elimination of the WYLD division structure and replacing it with an
unfunded WSBA standing committee. The MCBA YLD believes the opportunities provided by a young
lawyers division with its own leadership structure are invaluable to young and new lawyers. Just as the
MCBA YLD is important to the MCBA, the WYLD is key to the strength and vitality of the WSBA.
The MCBA YLD serves young lawyers who are 36 or under or have been practicing for five years or less
in Maricopa County, Arizona. As a fellow western state, our leadership has been following the events
proposing the sun-setting of the WYLD since the Budget and Audit Committee's budget
recommendations of April17, 2012 became public. It is our understanding that the structure of the
proposed group that would replace it - a standing committee - would most likely not meet the ABA YLD
affiliate requirements, and the WYLD would be disqualified as an affiliate of the American Bar
Association Young Lawyers Division. This would eliminate one of the MCBA YLD's sister
organizations from national recognition and further diminish the already sparse representation of western
states in the national legal landscape.
The MCBA YLD has a long-standing history with the WYLD, such as Karl Petrasek (Immediate Past
WYLD President) and the ABA YLD District Representative for Washington & Oregon, who has worked
with Stefan Palys and Kiernan Curley from the MCBA YLD to help promote the legal community on the
west coast. In addition, Dainen Penta (current WYLD President) has also worked with Kiernan Curley as
a representative from the MCBA YLD to address legal issues of concern to the western United States.
We certainly appreciate the budgetary considerations leading to the consideration of this change, but we
believe that the current structure is the best option for meeting the needs of new and young lawyers in
Washington, particularly in these troubling economic times. The WYLD has been a training ground for
bar leaders at the local, state and national levels while providing high quality legal training, public
service, and networking opportunities. The WYLD is a vital pipeline into the leadership ofthe"big bar",
as well as providing new and young lawyers with a plethora of development opportunities.
55
We appreciate being able to submit this public comment and welcome the opportunity to participate in
further discussions on this issue. Again, we oppose the elimination of the WYLD Division structure and
funding by replacing it with an unfunded WSBA standing committee.
Sincerely,
56
WSBA
To: Board of Governors
The Budget and Audit Committee held a Special Meeting on May 16,2012, where a variety of
programs laid out in the attached memo were discussed (FY 13 Budget and Strategic Priorities). The
following recommendations to the Board of Governors (BOG) were adopted and are submitted for
consideration by the BOG:
Communications: The WSBA shall place a high priority on efforts to communicate and engage with
its members and the public.
Service Center: The WSBA shall keep a high-touch customer service to callers.
Practice of Law Board: The WSBA shall seek the ability to eliminate the Practice of Law Board.
Access to Justice: The WSBA shall keep the existing staff (2 FTEs) and support the current
programming for Access to Justice while the Board of Governors and the ATJ Board lobby the
Supreme Court for funding to help pay for staffing costs.
Lawver Services: The WSBA shall maintain the existing staffing level and funding and continue on
the current path of more broad-based education and outreach by following the priorities outlined in the
program review and align Lawyer Services strategically with Education and Professional Development
Department (e.g., New Lawyer Education programming and Public Service training). In addition, the
WSBA shall explore the possibility of increasing funding towards these services in FY 14.
Diversity: The WSBA shall maintain the current staffing level (2 FTE) and continue to develop a
strategic, robust program for building cultural competence within WSBA's organization and
membership. The WSBA shall also continue to build credibility with external stakeholders, and
explore bringing the judicial institute in-house.
Public Service Programs: The WSBA shall maintain the current staffmg and overall program
direction and phase out Home Foreclosure or fold it into Moderate Means by the end ofFY 13. The
WSBA shall also develop a strategic plan for the next high impact program that meets a member need,
a client need, and a public need and use existing Foundation funds and continue to collaborate with the
Foundation to engage members and the public in supporting these efforts.
Legislative: The WSBA shall maintain the current staffing and resource allocation and continue to
serve all constituencies and functions, and continue to strengthen WSBA's presence in Olympia.
WSBA Leadership Institute: The WSBA shall give the University Of Washington School Of Law
$127,000 from the FY 13 budget for the WSBA Leadership institute and work on transitioning the
WLI from the WSBA to the University of Washington effective October 1, 2012.
Washington State Bar Association 1325 Fourth Avenue, Ste 600/ Seattle, WA 98101-2539 206-443-9722 I fax: 206-727-8310
57
i.
WSBA
To: Budget and Audit Committee
While the passage of the license fee referendum has resulted in a 28% reduction in license fee
revenue commencing with the 2013 licensing cycle, a corresponding reduction of28% in
expenses does not necessarily have to be implemented with the FY13 budget due to accumulated
reserves, an anticipated surplus in FY12, and an accrual oflicense fees from the 2012 licensing
cycle that will be available in the first quarter ofthe FY13 budget.
One of management's top priorities since the April Budget and Audit meeting has been to
understand and focus more precisely on the fiscal impact of all of these factors.
$900,000 in accrued license fee revenue from the 2012licensing cycle will be available in FY
2013 (see chart below)
$381,585 in projected additional revenue (from various license types other than active) for FY13
$42,010 in projected other revenue (all other general fund cost center projections) for FY13
Washington State Bar Association 1325 Fourth Avenue, Ste 600/ Seattle, WA 98101-2539 206-443-9722 I fax: 206-727-8310
58
Anticipated Total Lost Revenue for FY13: $2,276,405
$1,000,000 use of unrestricted reserve funds approved by BOG at the April2012 meeting
The chart below explains the $900,000 in accrued license fees for the first quarter ofFY13:
. tedDrop m
ProJeC . L.tcense Fee Revenue bQart
il u er
Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-June July-Sept Oct-Dec Jan-Sept
2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014
Fiscal Year 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014
Difference $0 ($900,000) ($900,000) ($900,000) ($900,000) ?
WSBA is required to spread its license fee revenue out across the calendar year in which it was
received, rather than fiscal year. As reflected in the chart above, this allocation of the license fees
means that revenues in the first quarter ofFY13 (Oct-Dec 2012) will still accrue at the FY12
levels (based on $450 active license fee). Revenues in the first fiscal quarter ofFY14 (Oct-Dec
2013) will then correspondingly accrue at the FY13 levels (based on $325 active license fee).
The bottom line is that the large drop in revenue will not hit WSBA full force on October 1,
2012. Instead, it will hit in both FY13 and FY14.
Thus, the reduction in expenses needed, if we want to spend $1,000,000 in reserves at the end of
FY13, is approximately $1.3 million.
1. Do not make any, or make only very minor changes, to current programming and
expenses and defer to 2014 decisions about reaching the eventual 28% reduction in
license fees. This option is possible due to additional unrestricted reserve that is
available and other anticipated savings from the FY12 budget that would cover the
projected $1.3 million gap.
2. Begin making certain reductions and changes to programming in FY13 in preparation for
the reduced revenue picture that will inevitably require significant expense reductions
absent an increased license fee or other revenue augmentation in 2014.
3. Make significant changes now to align WSBA expenses with a $3.6 million reduction in
revenue by the end ofFY13. This choice would result in significant reductions to
program and operations in the near term.
The remainder of this memo outlines strategic priority decisions Budget and Audit must consider
in order to make recommendations to the Board of Governors assuming either option 2 or 3
above is pursued.
59
2. Resource Allocation Decisions
The Executive Management Team has spent a lot of time over the past two weeks reviewing
every program and function to ascertain where reallocations of resources can be made and more
efficiencies can be found. The areas discussed below require the Board's decision on how it
would like to see the various programs executed. After the Board makes these decisions, the
Executive Management Team can provide a staffing proposal to meet the needs of the
programming.
There are eight areas in particular where input from the Board is needed:
Communications
Over the past year or more, WSBA has been accelerating efforts to communicate and engage
with its members and the public. Management seeks guidance on whether WSBA should place a
high priority on continuing to build a more robust communications and outreach function. If it
should, then management will continue to develop a long term, strategic communications plan
and the current resource allocation is adequate. If this is not a priority, then reductions can be
made. Whether continued or reduced, WSBA will continue to explore changes to BarN ews.
Decision needed: Should WSBA place a high priority on communications and public relations?
Service Center
Today, when a WSBA member or a member of the public calls WSBA, a person answers their
call "live." This high-touch level of customer service is increasingly rare in many professions
and industries. Management seeks guidance on whether WSBA should continue to provide this
level of service or should explore lower cost and/or automated options.
Decision needed: Should WSBA continue to provide this high-touch customer service to callers,
or should it explore lower-touch efficiencies, such a phone tree or blended model?
The current focus of staff time on all three functions requires lawyer/investigator time to
investigate complaints and write reports to the Board (currently~ PTE), a lawyer
administrator/counsel to the Board (currently about~ PTE) and some portion of a paralegal's
time. A shift in the focus (perhaps attempting to find a different entity for investigating
complaints, or eliminating the investigation of complaints) or methods of accomplishing the
functions of the Board (perhaps the Board could meet on an ad hoc basis if a written advisory
opinion is requested about the unauthorized practice oflaw) could change the staffing needs.
Decision needed: Should WSBA seek to eliminate the POLB, seek to keep it with changed
functions or changed methods for accomplishing its current functions, or keep it unchanged?
60
Note: In the programs below, various staffing options are outlined, but there is also the option
in each scenario to add staffing or stop doing the program altogether, which would mean no
staffing.
Access to Justice
WSBA and the ATJ Board share a valued and valuable relationship. Our Memorandum of
Understanding with the ATJ Board requires WSBA to provide a certain minimum level of
staffing: "A manager-level employee with knowledge of civil access to justice issues shall be
dedicated to supporting and coordinating the work of the ATJ Board with the understanding that
this employee may be assigned to perform other responsibilities as a WSBA staff member."
WSBA currently provides 2 PTE and associated support to the ATJ Board.
Since passage of the referendum, the ATJ Board has been collaborating with its community
stakeholders to find new "homes" or strategic partners to take over some of the ATJ Board's
committees and its annual conference.
In addition, the ATJ Board has asked the Supreme Court for $100,000 in funding for each year
of the FY13-15 biennium for operational needs (this request was forwarded to the BOG via
email).
Option2: Keep existing staff but dependent on receiving Supreme Court funding to
help pay for these staffing costs.
Option 3: Provide minimum staffing required under the MOU. This configuration
would possibly result in less strategy and analysis being done at the
staffing level.
Lawyer Services
Lawyer Services include the Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP), the Law Office Management
Assistance Program (LOMAP), and administration of the discipline system's Diversion Program.
Last year, WSBA conducted an extensive review of Lawyer Services and hired a new Associate
Director. The department is currently moving away from its focus on individual client support,
and retooling itself to better support issues with wider application, such as those faced by retiring
lawyers exiting the practice, and new lawyers entering the profession.
The question now is whether we continue down this path of more broad-based education and
outreach, as opposed to one-on-one client contact, or begin to scale back in this arena.
Option 1: Continue on this path and keep existing staffing level. Under this option,
WSBA would follow the priorities outlined in the program review and
align Lawyer Services strategically with Education and Professional
Development Department (e.g., New Lawyer Education programming and
Public Service training).
61
Option 2: Scale back on Lawyer Services. Reduce LAP and LOMAP staffing, and
maintain focus on educational outreach and diversions.
Diversity
The recent membership study provides rich demographic information for WSBA moving
forward. The question in the post-referendum world is to determine what calibration of staffing
and programming is needed as we move into this environment in the coming years.
Option 2: Eliminate one FTE, scale back programming and outreach accordingly.
Option 3: Staffing would be minimal (likely one partial FTE), the main question will
likely be whether to continue the program or not.
As the cornerstone ofWSBA's Strategic Goal to "Enhance a Culture of Service," WSBA has
launched two significant efforts in recent years. The first is the Home Foreclosure Legal Aid
Project, which is a strategic partnership with the Northwest Justice Project. The second is the
Moderate Means Program, which is a strategic partnership with the state's three law schools.
The programs, combined, have engaged hundreds ofWSBA members in public service and
helped address barriers to access to justice. Significant funding from the Attorney General's
Office, through the Bar Foundation, has fully funded NJP's participation. The Bar Foundation
has raised another $105,000 that is available to support WSBA's staffing and costs in FY13 for
both programs, though half of that is contingent upon WSBA continuing Home Foreclosure
through the end ofFY13.
Option 1: Maintain current staffing and overall program direction. Phase out Home
Foreclosure or fold it into Moderate Means by the end ofFY 13. Develop
strategic plan for the next high impact program that meets a member need,
a client need, and a public need. Use existing Foundation funds and
continue to collaborate with the Foundation to engage members and the
public in supporting these efforts.
Option 2: Reduce our footprint in this area by closing Home Foreclosure early or
redesigning Moderate Means. Forego $50k of Foundation funds but
continue building a base of modest donor support.
62
Option 3: Eliminate staffing entirely, or reduce only to modest support of volunteer-
driven efforts (like the First Responder Will Clinic) and committees (like
the Pro Bono and Legal Aid Committee). Forego existing Foundation
funds for these programs.
Legislative
WSBA's Legislative program serves the organization and the membership by supporting and
lobbying for and on behalf of the Board of Governors and various practice sections. This two
person team keeps the organization abreast of federal, state and local issues affecting the practice
oflaw.
Option 1: Maintain current staffing and resource allocation. Continue to serve all
constituencies and functions, and continue to strengthen WSBA's
presence in Olympia.
Option 2: Reduce staffing to one FTE, keep an Olympia office, and add contract
help during the legislative session.
3. Staffing Resources
A review of the various boards, panels and committees is also recommended before the final
budget is adopted in September.
63
Eld'e L~' . o!w Sla~t~innJ_l
~- ~ ( i ~It~ ~ j , _ee)~~ ~u
.Dear Julie:
64
April261 2012:
SteP~ll Crossland.
~sslMt~ Law Office
.~~i\988:tt;
Re; Meetfu;iofth~:~~:ofGb\regi~~~ Apri:1.27-28, 20ti>
respecff!or othetvieW.p()ints;
=::::::=.:~;;.=~~u;;::.:;::.~Qte
65
a&ually ,testifying bd<t~~'vat'jp'IJS com~~~ in theHou,se.and ~ate.: tWSBA's
===e;~lr4~;~.<<
hili$, and w~
Sincerely,
Ji,~.mc~
N.~thl\l~aw
Chair;:wSB;A..R.eaJ . Property( P~ol:!a-te4t.'frust9edion
cc: WSIA'RPP&tE~ecutiv~::.
Q(wemor B~~t1 I(elly (Viti ..
Kathryn.I.,ea;~s('Vi~.emtlilY
66
.~i