WSBA

WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION

Board of Governors
Special Meeting

Public Session Materials

May 22,2012
WSBA Offices
Seattle, Washington
 Board of Governors Special Meeting
May 22, 2012
WSBA Offices
Seattle, WA

AGENDA

8:00 A.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION

9:00 A.M. PUBLIC SESSION

1. AGENDA .......................................................................................................................... 2

2. RESPONSE TO PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO APR 28 (LIMITED LICENSE

LEGAL TECHNICIAN RULE) ........................................................................................... 3

3. FISCAL MATTERS Governor Nancy Isserlis, Treasurer

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

Paula C. Littlewood direct line: 206-239-2120

fax: 206-727-8310
e-mail: paulal@wsba.org

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):

5) Represent a client in court pro,cee:amtgs, udicative proceedings, or

other formal dispute resolution process,

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.

If you have questions or need anything further, please advise.

Working Together to Champion Justice

Washington State Bar Association 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 600 I Seattle, WA 98101 206-239-2120 I fax: 206-727-8310
3
From: Keown, Julie [mailto:Julie.Keown@courts.wa.gov] On Behalf Of Madsen, Justice
Barbara A.
Sent: Friday, April27, 2012 1:14PM
To: Nick Berning; Paula Littlewood
Cc: SUP DL - JUSTICES; Julie Shankland; Margaret Shane; Sullins, Nan
Subject: APR 28

Dear Nick and Paula,

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

To: Rules Committee

C. Johnson, J., Chair
Chambers, J.
Owens, J.
J.M. Johnson, J.

FROM: Wiggins, J. efL~

DATE: Apri120, 2012

RE: April2.3, 2012 Rules Committee Meeting, Tab 6, APR 28

I have two suggested revisions to the rule.

Prohibition against performinq services in other states.

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."

Can an LLLT negotiate for the client?

1. I have a question about the meaning of the rule and a suggestion to

make clear what I think is the intent, but which might not be the intent.

2. I assume that an LLLT cannot negotiate on the client's behalf with an

opposing party, counsel, opposing LLLT, or any other representative of the opposing
party. But the rule is unclear on this point. The POL Board deleted the following
s~ntence from the Definitions section (8)(4): ''The legal technician does not represent
the client in col:lrt proceedings or negotiations, bl:lt provides limited legal assistance as
set forth in this r~;:~le to a pro se 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:

Exceptions and Exclusions: Whether or not they constitute the

practice of law, the following are permitted:

(1) Practicing law authorized by a limited license to practice pursuant

to Admission to Practice Rules 8 (special admission for: a particular purpose
or action; indigent representation; educational purposes; emeritus
membership; house counsel), 9 (legal interns), .12 (limited practice for closing
officers), or 14 (limited practice for foreign.law consultants).

(2) Serving as a court house facilitator pursuant to court rule.

. (3). Acting as a lay represent~tive authorized by administrative

agencies or tribunals.

(4) Serving in a neutral capacity as a mediator, arbitrator, conciliator,

or facilitator.

(5) Participation in labor negotiations, arbitrations or conciliations

arising under collective bargaining rights or agreements.

(6) Providing assistance to another to complete a form provided by a

court for protection under RCW chapters 10.14 (harassment) or 26.50
(domestic violence prevention) when no fee is charged to do so.

(7) Acting as a legislative lobbyist. .

. .
(8) Sale .of legal for111s in any format.

(9) Activities which are preempted by Federal law.

2

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:

5) Represent a client in court proceedings, formal administrative

adjudicative proceedings, or other formal dispute resolution process or
negotiations of the client's legal rights or responsibilities, unless permitted by GR
24 (b).

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 suggest that we divide subsection (H)(5) and strengthen it as follows:

5) Represent a client in court proceedings, formal administrative

adjudicative proceedings, or other formal dispute resolution process;
v

. Negotiate or negotiations of the client's legal rights or

6)
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);

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 .

. . 4. I look forward to considering the thoughts of each of you on these

proposals.

(1 0) Serving in a neutral capacity as a clerk or court employee

providing information to the public pursuant to Supreme Court Order.

(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

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 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.

~1)"APR" means the Supreme Court's Admission to Practice Rules.

~~)"Board" when used alone means the Praotioe of Law Limited License Legal
Technician Board.

4) "Commission" 'Athen used alone means the Nonlawyer Praotioe Commission

whish is authori;rod and direoted to oarry out the funotions established by this rule.

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.

9!)"Limited License Legal Technician" means a person qualified by education.

training and work experience who is authorized to engage in the limited practice of
law in approved practice areas of law as specified by this rule and related
regulations fU-I.es. The legal teohnioian does not represent the olient in oourt
prooeedings or negotiations, but pro);ides limited legal assistanoe as set forth in this
rule to a pro so olient.

+.)"Paralegal/legal assistant" sAaU mean. a person qualified by education, training

or work experience, who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation,
governmental agency or other entity and who performs specifically delegated
substantive ~law-related work for which a lawyer is responsible.

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.

8) "RPC" means the RYles of PFofessional CondYot.

9Z)"Substantive ~law-related work" ~mean work performed by a peFSon

that requires knowledge of legal concepts and is customarily, but not necessarily,
performed by a lawyer.

4-Q) "Supervised" means a lawyer personally directs, approves and has

responsibility for work performed by the Limited License Legal Technician.

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.

1Q4-) Words of authority:

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.

C) Limited License Legal Technician Board.

1) Establishment. There is hereby established a Limited License Legal

Technician Board. The Board shall consist of 13 members appointed by the
Supreme Court of the State of Washington. nine of whom shall be active
Washington lawyers. and four of whom shall be non-lawyer Washington
residents. At least one member shall be a legal educator. The members
shall initially be appointed to staggered terms of one to three years.
Thereafter. appointments shall be for three year terms. No member may
serve more than two consecutive full three year terms.

2) Board Responsibilities. The Board shall be responsible for the following:

(a) Recommending practice areas of law for LLLTs. subject to approval by the
Supreme Court:

(b) Processing applications and fees. and screening applicants:

(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:

(e) Approving education and experience requirements for licensure in approved

practice areas:

(Q Establishing and over-seeing committees and tenure of members:

(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:

(a) establish procedures for grievances and disciplinary proceedings:

(b) establish trust account requirements and procedures:

(c) establish rules of professional and ethical conduct: and

(d) implement the other provisions of this rule.

GD) Certifiaatien Requirements for Applicants. An applicant for oertifioation

licensure as a Limited License Legal Technician shall:

1) Age. Be at least 18 years of age.

2) Moral Character and Fitness to Practice. Be of good moral character and

demonstrate fitness to practice as a Limited License Legal Technician.

3) Education and Experience. Flave groduated from a paFalegalllegal assistant

progFam that is approved by the 1\meFioan BaF 1\ssooiation oF the Commission
and is Have the following education and experience:

a) (i) An associate degree or equivalent program. or a bachelor degree, in

paralegal/legal assistant studies that oonsists of a minimum of 90 quarteF
houFs (QOO olook houFS oF 60 semesteF houFS) of whish at least 45
quarteF houFS (450 olook houFS oF ao semesteF houFS) aro substantive
legal oouFSes studies approved by the American Bar Association or the
Board. together with a minimum of two years experience, as a
paralegal/legal assistant doing substantive law-related work under the

10
 supervision of a Iawver. provided that at least one year is under a
Washington Iawver; or

b) A bashelor's degree program in paralegal/legal assistant studies; or

e) ffiLA post-baccalaureate certificate program in paralegal/legal assistant

studies approved by the Board. together with a minimum of three years
experience as a paralegal/legal assistant doing substantive law-related
work under the supervision of a Iawver. provided that at least one year is
under a Washington Iawver: and,':'

b) Complete at least 20 hours of pro bono legal service in Washington as

approved by the Board. within two years prior to taking the Limited
License Legal Technician examination.

In all cases. the paralegal/legal assistant experience must be acquired after

completing the education requirement. unless waived by the Board for good
cause shown.

4) Experiense. Possess the following substantive legal experiense as a

paralegal/legal assistant under the supervision of a lavt'yer:

a) Those .vith an assosiates degree from an Amerioan Bar Assosiation

approved institution or who hold a bashelor's degree need a minimum of
2 years experiense; 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.

6) Examination. Satisfaotorily somplete an examination whish shall, at a minimum,

sever the rules of professional sondust applisable to Legal Teshnisians, rules of
ethiss, rules relating to the attorney sliont privilege, prosedural rules and
substantive lmv issues related to one or more dissrete areas of praotise.

+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.

El Licensing Requirements. In order to be licensed as a Limited License Legal

Technician. all applicants must:

1) Examination. Take and pass the examinations required under these rules:

2) Annual License Fee. Pay the annual license fee:

3) Financial ResponsibilitY. Show proof of ability to respond in damages resulting

from his or her acts or omissions in the performance of services permitted by this
rules. The proof of financial responsibility shall be in such form and in such
amount as the Board may by regulation prescribe; and

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;

2) Inform the client of applicable procedures, including deadlines, documents

which must be filed, and the anticipated course of the legal proceeding;

3) Inform the client of applicable procedures for proper service of prooess for
motion papers, and proper filing prooedures of legal documents;

4) Provide the client with self-help materials prepared by a Washington lawyer or

approved by the Commission Board, which contain information as to statutory
about relevant legal requirements, case law basis for the client's claim, and
venue and jurisdiction requirements;

5) Review pleadings documents or exhibits presented by that the client has

received from the opposing side, and explain them to the client doouments;

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;

8) Advise a client as to other documents that may be necessary to the client's

case (such as exhibits, witness declarations, or party declarations), and explain
how such additional documents or pleadings may affect the client's case;

9) Assist the client in obtaining necessary documents, such as birth, death, or

marriage certificates.

\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.

G) Conditions Under Which A Limited License Legal Technician May Provide

Services. A Legal Technician may render seF\'ices authorized by this rule only under
the follovting conditions and with the follmving limitations:

4) Be certified pursuant to these rules.:.

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:

(a) An explanation of the services to be performed, including a

conspicuous statement that the Limited License Legal Technician may
not appear or represent the client in court, formal administrative
adjudicative proceedings. or other formal dispute resolution process

13
 or negotiate the client's legal rights or responsibilities. unless
permitted under GR 24(b);

(b) Identification of all oompensation 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
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;

(e) A statement describing the Limited License Legal Technician's duty to

protect the confidentiality of information provided by the client and the
Limited License Legal Technician's work product associated with the
services sought or provided by the Limited License Legal Technician;

(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) St:wh-Any other conditions as the Commission may required by the

rules ~nd regulations of the Board.

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;

2) Retain any oompensation fees or costs for services not performed;

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

4) Represent or advertise, in connection with the provision of services, other legal

titles or credentials that could cause a client to believe that the Limited License
Legal Technician possesses professional legal skills beyond those authorized
by the oertifioate license for 'Nhioh held by the Limited License Legal
Technician~ is approved.

5) Represent a client in court proceedings. formal administrative adjudicative

proceedings. or other formal dispute resolution process or negotiations of the
client's legal rights or responsibilities. unless permitted by GR 24(b);

6) Provide services to a client in connection with a legal matter in another state;

&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:-:-

8) Otherwise violate the Limited License Legal Technicians' Rules of Professional

Conduct.

G!) Continuing Certifioation. Licensing Requirements.

1) Continuing Education Requirements. Each Limited License Legal Technician

annually must complete a minimum the Board-approved number of credit hours
of approved or aooredited eduoatien as presoribed in courses or activities
approved by Commission regulations the Board, during eaoh oalendar year in
oourses oertified by the Commission to be appropriate for study by Legal
Teohnioians pursuant to this rule; provided that the Limited License Legal
Technician shall not be required to comply with this subsection during the
calendar year in which he or she is initially oertified licensed.

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

4-'l:.)Financia/ Responsibility. Eaoh oertified Legal Teohnioian shall show proof of

ability to respond in damages resulting from hislher aots or omissions in the

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:

1) The fid~::~ciary relationship between a certified Legal Technician and hislher

custo!flers or clients;

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.

JK) Professional Responsibility and Limited License Legal Technician-Client

Relationship.

1) As grantees by the S~::~pre!fle Co1::1rt of a~::~thority heretofore reserved e*cl~::~sively

to lawyers, Legal Technicians 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) 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:

1) "APR" means the Supreme Court's Admission to Practice Rules.

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.

4) "Limited License Legal Technician" means a person qualified by education,

training and work experience who is authorized to engage in the limited practice of
law in approved practice areas of law as specified by this rule and related
regulations.

5) "Paralegal/legal assistant" means a person qualified by education, training or

work experience, who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation,
governmental agency or other entity and who performs specifically delegated
substantive law-related work for which a lawyer is responsible.

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.

7) "Substantive law-related work" means work that requires knowledge of legal

concepts and is customarily, but not necessarily, performed by a lawyer.

8) "Supervised" means a lawyer personally directs, approves and has responsibility

for work performed by the Limited License Legal Technician.

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.

10) Words of authority:

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.

C) Limited License Legal Technician Board.

1) Establishment. There is hereby established a Limited License Legal

Technician Board. The Board shall consist of 13 members appointed by the
Supreme Court of the State of Washington, nine of whom shall be active
Washington lawyers, and four of whom shall be non-lawyer Washington
residents. At least one member shall be a legal educator. The members
shall initially be appointed to staggered terms of one to three years.
Thereafter, appointments shall be for three year terms. No member may
serve more than two consecutive full three year terms.

2) Board Responsibilities. The Board shall be responsible for the following:

(a) Recommending practice areas of law for LLLTs, subject to approval by the
Supreme Court;

(b) Processing applications .and fees, and screening applicants;

(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;

(d) Determining LLLT Continuing Legal Education (LLLT CLE) requirements.

and approval of LLLT CLE programs;

(e) Approving education and experience requirements for licensure in approved

practice areas;

(f) Establishing and over-seeing committees and tenure of members;

(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:

(a) Establish procedures for grievances and disciplinary proceedings;

(b) Establish trust account requirements and procedures;

(c) Establish rules of professional and ethical conduct; and

(d) Implement the other provisions of this rule.

D) Requirements for Applicants. An applicant for licensure as a Limited License

Legal Technician shall:

1) Age. Be at least 18 years of age.

2) Moral Character and Fitness to Practice. Be of good moral character and

demonstrate fitness to practice as a Limited License Legal Technician.

3) Education and Experience. Have the following education and experience:

a) (i) An associate degree or equivalent program, or a bachelor degree, in

paralegal/legal assistant studies approved by the American Bar
Association or the Board, together with a minimum of two years
experience as a paralegal/legal assistant doing substantive law-related
work under the supervision of a lawyer, provided that at least one year is
under a Washington lawyer; or

(ii) A post-baccalaureate certificate program in paralegal/legal

assistant studies approved by the Board, together with a minimum of
three years experience as a paralegal/legal assistant doing substantive
law-related work under the supervision of a lawyer, provided that at least
one year is under a Washington lawyer; and

b) Complete at least 20 hours of pro bono legal service in Washington as

approved by the Board, within two years prior to taking the Limited
License Legal Technician examination.

In all cases, the paralegal/legal assistant experience must be acquired after

completing the education requirement, unless waived by the Board for good
cause shown.

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.

E) Licensing Requirements. In order to be licensed as a Limited License Legal

Technician, all applicants must:

1) Examination. Take and pass the examinations required under these rules;

2) Annual License Fee. Pay the annual license fee;

3) Financial Responsibility. Show proof of ability to respond in damages resulting

from his or her acts or omissions in the performance of services permitted by this
rules. The proof of financial responsibility shall be in such form and in such
amount as the Board may by regulation prescribe; and

4) Meet all other licensing requirements set forth in the rules and regulations
proposed by the Board and adopted by the Supreme Court.

F) 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 LLLTis 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:

1) Obtain relevant facts, and explain the relevancy of such information to the client;

2) Inform the client of applicable procedures, including deadlines, documents

which must be filed, and the anticipated course of the legal proceeding;

3) Inform the client of applicable procedures for proper service of process and filing
of legal documents;

4) Provide the client with self-help materials prepared by a Washington lawyer or

approved by the Board, which contain information about relevant legal
requirements, case law basis for the client's claim, and venue and jurisdiction
requirements;

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;

8) Advise a client as to other documents that may be necessary to the client's

case (such as exhibits, witness declarations, or party declarations), and explain
how such additional documents or pleadings may affect the client's case;

9) Assist the client in obtaining necessary documents, such as birth, death, or

marriage certificates.

G) Conditions Under Which A Limited License Legal Technician May Provide

Services.

1) A Limited License Legal Technician must have a principal place of business

having a physical street address for the acceptance of service of process in the
State of Washington;

2) A Limited License Legal Technician must personally perform the authorized

services for the client and may not delegate these to a non-licensed person.
Nothing in this prohibition shall prevent a person who is not a licensed LLLT
from performing translation services;

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:

(a) An explanation of the services to be performed, including a

conspicuous statement that the Limited License Legal Technician may
not appear or represent the client in court, formal administrative
adjudicative proceedings, or other formal dispute resolution process
or negotiate the client's legal rights or responsibilities, unless
permitted under GR 24(b );

(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;

(e) A statement describing the Limited License Legal Technician's duty to

protect the confidentiality of information provided by the client and the
Limited License Legal Technician's work product associated with the
services sought or provided by the Limited License Legal Technician;

(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.

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
governmental agency;

2) Retain any fees or costs for services not performed;

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

4) Represent or advertise, in connection with the provision of services, other legal

titles or credentials that could cause a client to believe that the Limited License
Legal Technician possesses professional legal skills beyond those authorized
by the license held by the Limited License Legal Technician;

5) Represent a client in court proceedings, formal administrative adjudicative

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);

6) Provide services to a client in connection with a legal matter in another state;

7) Represent or otherwise provide legal or law related services to a client, except

as permitted by law, this rule or associated rules and regulations;

8) Otherwise violate the Limited License Legal Technicians' Rules of Professional

Conduct.

I) Continuing Licensing Requirements.

1) Continuing Education Requirements. Each Limited License Legal Technician

annually must complete the Board-approved number of credit hours in courses
or activities approved by the Board; provided that the Limited License Legal
Technician shall not be required to comply with this subsection during the
calendar year in which he or she is initially licensed.

2) Financial Responsibility. Each Limited License Legal Technician shall annually

provide proof of financial responsibility in such form and in such amount as the
Board may by regulation prescribe.

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.

K) Professional Responsibility and Limited License Legal Technician-Client

Relationship.

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.

3) The Washington law of attorney-client privilege and law of a lawyer'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.

Page 7 of7

23
 WSBA
To: Board of Governors

From: Paula Littlewood, Executive Director

Re: Carryover Items from April2012 BOG Meeting

Date: May 17,2012

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:

TABLED: The BOG deferred voting on the following items:

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:

1. To reaffirm the WSBA' s mission, guiding principles and strategic goals.

2. To use $1 million from reserves to offset expenses in FY2013.
3. To reduce BOG expenses by at least $100,000 in 2013, and to direct B&A to identify a menu
of proposed BOG expenses that will be presented at the May meeting.
4. To eliminate the annual Access to Justice conference as an event funded and staffed by
WSBA.
5. To reduce $200,000 in staff-related expenses without compromising the ability to retain
necessary staff.
6. To modify the policy on support of"Sections Administration" costs so that the section per-
member charge covers 100% ofthe cost of direct expenses and Section Team
staffing. Approximately $77,000 in savings.
7. To impose a hiring freeze except for mission-critical positions, as determined by the
Executive Director.

Total Approved Cuts to Date:

To date, the following reductions have been approved by the BOG:

Reduce BOG Expenses $100,000

Reduce staff-related Expenses $200,000
Increase Section per-member charge: $77,000

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")

Dear BOG Members:

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.

In short, we propose moving all WLI administrative functions and the

program's physical location from the offices of the WSBA to the UW Law
School. The Advisory Board sees this as a win-win and hopes that a
majority of the BOG will approve this resolution at the May 22nd meeting.

Best regards,

James F. Williams l Perkins Coie LLP

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800
Seattle, WA 98101-3099
Direct Dial: 206.359.3543
Cell#: 206.697.9603
Facsimile: 206.359.4543 26
Email: JWilliams@perkinscoie.com
 WSBA
WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
BOARD OF GOVERNORS

Resolution Transferring Administrative Control and Responsibility for the

WSBA Leadership Institute ("WLI") From the WSBA to the
University of Washington School of Law ("UW Law School")
WHEREAS, the WLI was launched in 2004 by the WSBA Board of Governors (11BOG11 )
with a mission to recruit and train for leadership positions, and to retain in the practice of law in the
State of Washington, attorneys who have been admitted for no less than three years and no greater
than ten years, with an emphasis on racial, ethnic, gender, sexual orientation, disability, cultural and
geographic diversity within the State; and

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;

NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Resolved That:

1. The WSBA will provide the WLI with full funding for fiscal year 2012-13 in the form
of $40,000 for reimbursement of expenses associated with food, travel, lodging,
curriculum materials, and transportation ("Operating Expenses") and continued
administrative support through the positions that are currently in place at the WSBA to
ensure that there is no break in the program during transition;

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

CC: WSBA Board of Governors

WYLD Board of Trustees

From: Margaret Morgan, Associate Director for Publications and Professional Development
Brian Salts-Halcomb, WYLD Liaison

Re: Recommendation to transition the WYLD to Standing Committee

Date: May 17,2012

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:

1) Statewide young lawyer involvement

o Through the use of minimal funds for travel, an expanded use of the WSBA's
videoconferencing technology, and a carefully-coordinated recruitment process, the
committee could maintain the statewide reach of the current WYLD Board of
Trustees. It is not the Board of Trustees meetings that ensure the WYLD has a
statewide reach, but rather the geographic representation found on the board; this
could be replicated on a committee. One of the primary tasks of the committee would
be to introduce new lawyers to all WSBA activities and resources. The committee
would retain the WYLD's role as a welcoming point and accessible group for new
lawyers.

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

To: WSBA Board of Governors

From: Washington Young Lawyers Division (WYLD) Board of Trustees
Re: Analysis of Division, Section, and Committee Structures- Pros and Cons
Date: May 14,2012

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.

Washington Young Lawvers Division (WYLD)

Pros:
No additional dues/charges to join the Division
Accessible, member-focused, relevant
Centralized structure presents an excellent communication opportunity for WSBA - Members
can learn more about WSBA through local trustee, rather than seeking out information from
WSBA website or other means
Many ideas for WSBA programs originated in WYLD (Moderate Means, Ten Minute
Mentor, Trial Advocacy Program)
Experiential leadership training & development (broader than "diversity" focus ofWLI);
process of implementing projects & participating in statewide leadership beneficial for
leadership development and career satisfaction of young/new lawyers
Contacts every member of the Bar at one point in their career and offers the WSBA the first
chance of impacting careers and making a good impression (first chance to combat the "out
oftouch" feeling members are expressing now)
Voice for young lawyers in larger WSBA discussions (seat on the BOG; opportunity to
explore issues with WYLD leadership)
Significant changes to leadership structure have occurred in past 3-4 years, including
implementation of Section Liaison Program; current leadership includes about sixty (60)
young lawyers who serve as trustees, committee chairs, section liaisons, with over 100
young/new lawyers who serve as leaders and participate on WYLD committees and

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

Young Lawyers Section:

Pros:
Potential to be financially self-sustaining entity (not supported by WSBA dues/license fees)
Self-governance (as compared to current staff-driven model ofWYLD)

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.

PRESIDENT PRESIDENT-ELECT NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT AT-LARGE

Dainen Penta, Seattle
dainen.penta@gmail,com
WYLD LIAISON
Brian Sa!ts-Ha!comb
DE NOVO EDITOR
Claire Been
Beth Bratton, Wenatchee Jordan Miller, Wenatchee Alma Zuniga, Yakima RaShelle Davis, Olympia
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT NORTHWEST DISTRICT SOUTHEAST DISTRICT BOARD OF GOVERNORS LIAISON
KJiri Petrasek, Everett Diana Bob, Bellingham Nanette Blackburn, Kennewick Vacant
WASHINGTON YOUNG PENINSULA DISTRICT SOUTHWEST DISTRICT LAW STUDENT TRUSTEES
LAWYERS DMSION Elizabeth Cable, Suquamish Daniel Gasperino, Vancouver Lindsay Box, Gonzaga University
BOARD OF TRUSTEES Frank Rui$, Seattle University
PIERCE DISTRICT GREATER SPOKANE DISTRICT Eric Rhoades, University ofWashinSton
KING DISTRICT Chris Msharry, Tacoma Robin Haynes, Spokane
Vincent Humphrey, Seattle
Scott Husbands, Seattle SNOHOMISH DISTRICT GREATER OLYMPIA DISTRICT
Stacy Marchesano, Seattle Michael O'Meara, Everett Megan Card, Olympia

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

Total Direct Expenses $73,550.00 $65,350.00 $28,600.00

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

Total Budget $206,226.00 $187,942.00 FY13 target of $59,100

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

LAURA PARRISH, PRESIDENTBLBCT THE IOWA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION

301 WESTBROADWAY YOUNG LA WYERS DIVISION
POBOX28 6ZS B. COURT AVENUE
DECORAH, lA S2101 DES MOINES, lA 503091904
(563) 382-4226 (S 15) 2433179
FAX (563) 3823783 PAX (SIS}2432Sll
!parrl~h@.IJ!j!Je[lawdeOTh.eom www.lombar.org

May 10,2012

VIA EMAIL

President Crossland and Board of Oovemol's

1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 600
Seattle, WA 98101-2539
Email: Steve@cl'osslandlaw.net
Email: Paula@"sba.Qrg
Email: Naucy.Jsserlis@gmail.com
Email: Marg~etS@wsba.org

Re: Opposition to Eliminating the WYLD

Dear President Crossland and Board of Governors:

. ! .. .
We wlite to oppose the'e,linrlna1ion of the Washington Young Lawyers Division
Structure and Financing. We learned of this proposal at the ABA YLD Spring Conference in
Nashville, TN. We ask that you vote against the proposal to effectively eliminate the WYLD.
We urge you to work with WYLD leaders and other young and new lawyer members to create a
structure and budget for the WYLD which responds to the budgetary challenges all Bar
Associations currently face.

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.

Thank you for allowing us to submit t1rls comment. We would be happy to

discuss our con1ments further, Please do not eliminate the WYLD structure and budget.

Ian Russell, Secretary

Robert Gainer,
Representative

38
 r x, > " r< ...1 h\ ~ l " A "' h,h r t"'""
Texas Young Lawyers Association

TYlA 1414 Colorado Austin, Texas 78701-1627

800.204.2222, Ext. 1529, 512.427.1529, FAX:
512.427.4117

OFFICERS May 10,2012

President
Natalie Cobb Koehler, Meridian

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

Secretary RE: Opposition to Eliminating the WYLD Division and Funding

Sarah Rogers, Dallas

Treasurer Dear President Crossland and Colleagues:

Natasha L. Brooks, Midland
On behalf of the Texas Young Lawyers Association, I am writing this letter in opposition
President-Elect
C.E. Rhodes, Houston to eliminate the Washington Young Lawyers Division (WYLD). The WYLD is an inte-
gral part of your bar association as well as the American Bar Association Young Lawyers
Chair-Elect
Alyssa J. Long. San Antonio
Division (ABA YLD).

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

May 11, 2012

Minnesota.
State Bar
Association Dear President Crossland and Board of Governors:

600 Nicollet Mall

We, the New Lawyers Section of the Minnesota State Bar Association, were
Suite380 recently advised that the WSBA Board of Governors is considering a change
Minneapolis, MN 55402-1039 involving the WYLD. We are writing to express our opposition to such a
www.mnbar.org move, and to urge you to collaborate and consult with the WYLD leaders and
other young and new lawyer members to produce a structure and budget for
Telephone the WYLD which is responsive to the changes brought forth by the
612-333-1183
Natio11al referendum and which ensures the Division is relevant and valuable to
1-800-882-MSBA WYLD members.
Fax
612-333-4927
The New Lawyers Section of the MSBA is dedicated to promoting
involvement of new lawyers in professional activities on the state and
President
Brent B. Routman national level through organization, educational, and networking
Minneapolis opportunities. The members of our section believe that it is a critical
Pmident-Eka
professional resource for young lawyers that offers each of our members
Robert Enger opportunities to emi.ch both the professional legal community and the
Bemidji community at large through leadership and service. For many, many of our
Treamrer members, the New Lawyers Section has been a training ground for bar
Phil Duran leaders at the local, state and national level and has consiStently provided
Minneapolis public service opportunities to our community as well as providing valuable
Secretary training and networking opportunities for our young lawyers. We believe
Richard H. Kyle, Jr. that the WYLD provides similar services and benefits to the young lawyers
St. Paul
of your state.
Tim Groshens We think it is important to note the large contributions being made to the
Executive Director
legal community by the WYLD and the benefit that we believe all young
lawyers gain from the activities of the WYLD. Currently, there are 15
WYLD members that have been appointed or elected to leadership positions
within the ABA YLD. Many of our own members have had the opportunity
to network and collaborate with young lawyers of the WYLD through ABA
YLD activities. Your young lawyers consistently provide a shining example
to the young lawyers across the country. We are proud to call the members
of the WYLD colleagues.

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

Washington State Bar Association

1325 Fourth Ave., Ste. 600 Seattle, WA
98101-2539

Via E-mail to: paulal@wsba.org. nancy.isserlis@gmail.com, steve@crosslandlaw.net

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 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.

Very truly Y,Ours,

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,

.Elizabeth Apostola Loren Hildebrandt

Co-Chair, New Lawyers Section Co-Chair, New Lawyers Section
Alaska Bar Association Alaska Bar Association

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

JIIA EMAIL to paulal@wsba.orv;; nancy.isserlis@emall.com; steve@crosslandlaw.net

Washington State Bar Association
1325 Fourth. Avenue, Suite 600
Seattle, Washington 98101-2539

Re: Opposition to the Elimination of the WYLD Division Structure and Funding

Dear President Crossland and WSBA Board of Governors:

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.

With kindest regards,

~~--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

Mr. Stephen Crossland, President

Washington State Bar Association
1325 - 4th Ave, Suite 600
Seattle, WA 981 01

May 15, 2012

Dear President Crossland:

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,

Robert A. Clifford Justin L. Heather

President Chair
The Chicago Bar Association The Chicago Bar Association Young Lawyers Section

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

VIA EMAIL ONLY

MargaretS@wsba.org
Kevin A. Spellacy
Mkhae!J. Ford'
May 15,2012
Michael T. Fcichting~'f'
Steven R. S<Chwe~man+.,
Michael D. LaFountaine
Washington State Bar Association
Ronald W. Brandenburg
Bradley W. Hanson Attn: President Crossland
Kenneth H. Bayli 1325 4th Ave Ste 600
Michael C. Rajkow.ki Seattle, WA 98101-2539
Dyan J. F.bcrt0
Luke M. Scitcrt
Robert P. Cunningham RE: Opposition to Eliminating the Washington Young Lawyer's Division
Melinda M. Sanders Our File #00002.00806
Thomas J. Christenson
John H. Wenker
Dear President Crossland and WSBA Board of Governors:
Shelly M. Davis
James S. McAlpine'
Laura A. Mochrlc I recently attended the American Bar Association's Young Lawyers Division Spring
Cully R. Kjellberg Conference as a delegate on behalf of the Minnesota State Bar Association New
W. Benjamin Winger
Garin L. Strobl
Lawyer's Section. While at the conference, I met Attorney Beth Bratton who was very
Sarah R. Jewell concerned about the potential loss ofthe Washington Young Lawyer's Division funding
QlCoumrl'
and elimination of its existence as an affiliate to the American Bar Association Young
John]. lluds' Lawyer's Division.
Retired:
John D. Q,inlivan
The conference was my very first ABA Young Lawyers Division Conference which I
Keith F. Hughes have attended. I graduated from law school last year and began practicing last fall. I
Gerald L. Thorccn found the Young Lawyers Division Conference to be extremely informative and helpful
Dennis .J. (Mike) Sullivan as a new young lawyer. What I find especially useful for young lawyers in this type of a
'Qu<~lijied ADR Nflllml conference is not Just the CLEs and nationally recognized speakers and seminars, it was
t MSBA Cm{titd Ci<il 'l'ri.lf Sptdali.<t
Amt!ni-an Col!t.ogt-r.(l''lht:.'l & l'".sltt!c Cotmsl'l the opportunity to meet other young attorneys in the same level of practice who at some
0 ,;1lffJ

0
litt'11Sc'd in S;;uth l>llkOftl
/1/so liumtd in North Dtlkqtu
A!JtJ lkc'71Std in IVi,,,-omin
point will be delegating work to colleagues. The stories I heard of more senior attorneys
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.

Thank you for your consideration.

;~
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

President Crossland and the WSBA Board of Governors

1325 Fourth Avenue, Ste. 600
Seattle, Washington 98101-2539

Dear President Crossland and WSBA Board of Governors:

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,

Is/ Samantha M Hults

Samantha M. Hults
2012 Young L~wyer' s Division Chair
New Mexico State Bar

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

Dear Board of Governors of the Washington State Bar Association:

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,

Leslie A.W. Satterlee, Esq., President

Maricopa County Bar Association Young Lawyers Division

56
 WSBA
To: Board of Governors

From: Budget and Audit Committee

Re: Recommendations for FY 13 Budget and Strategic Priorities

Date: May 17,2012

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

From: Paula Littlewood, Executive Director

and the Executive Management Team

Re: FY13 Budget and Strategic Priorities

Date: May 14,2012

Outlined in this memo are the following:

An update on the gap that needs to be closed for FY13 in expenses.
An outline ofvarious programs that staff needs resource allocation decisions on.
An update on staffing reductions proposed for FY13.

1. Revenue Loss and Expense Reduction

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.

The fiscal picture post-referendum looks like this:

$3,600,000 Total loss of revenue from reduction in license fees to $325

Offset by additional revenue available as we head into FY13:

$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

Offset further by:

$1,000,000 use of unrestricted reserve funds approved by BOG at the April2012 meeting

Adjusted Total Lost Revenue for FY13: $1,276,405

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.

Given this information, the Board of Governors has three options:

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?

Practice of Law Board

The Practice of Law Board (POLB) serves many functions: investigating unauthorized practice
oflaw (UPL) claims; educating our members and the public about UPL; and fulfilling the charge
under GR 24 to help enhance access to the justice system. The question is how many resources
WSBA should put into these efforts, particularly given the fact that our own analysis shows that
our impact in the UPL arena has been limited. These functions are set by court rule (GR 25),
which also requires the Bar to provide an administrator and additional staff support as designated
by the Executive Director.

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).

Option 1: Keep existing staff (2 FTEs) and support current programming.

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.

Option 3: Little or no Lawyer Services. Reduce to only one function, or eliminate

entirely.

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 1: Maintain current staffing level (2 FTE). Continue to develop a strategic,

robust program for building cultural competence within WSBA's
organization and membership. Continue to build credibility with external
stakeholders, and explore bringing the judicial institute in-house.

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.

Public Service Programs

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.

Option 3: Relinquish the Olympia office and eliminate or significantly reduce

services.

3. Staffing Resources

The Executive Management Team is focused on preparing the organization to implement

programming based on the answers to the questions outlined above. To ensure flexibility in
staffing, we have frozen a number of open positions (except those that were identified as critical)
and we expect to freeze future non-critical vacancies that arise due to normal attrition. We have
prepared a number of staff reduction models that, together with some strategic reorganizing, will
allow us to deliver on the Board's priorities and realize operational efficiencies. All scenarios
consider and include WSBA's regulatory and internal support functions.

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

ofthe Washington State Bar Association

Julie Mass May 15,2012

Deputy Director for Administration
And Professional Development
Washington State Bar Association
1325 Fourth Avenue, Ste 600
Seattle, WA 98101-2.539

RE: Fiscal Impact of Referendum

.Dear Julie:

This letter is in response to the recent referendum which has resulted in a

mandatory reduction i1;1 the WSBA budget. We understand the Board. of Governors
and staffis working hard to facilitate the budget reductions with the least impact on
services. We appreciate the work you are doip.gy~p:ymu~h. . . . .
The Elder Law Section would like to go. on record supporting the work of Kathryn
Leathers as Legislative Liaison. She has been a true gift not only to our Section, but
also to the vulnerable populations we serve. Her credibility, year round hard work
and knowledge of the legislative structure has allowed us to develop relationships
with key legislators as well as those who need further education on the issues. As a
result, we are now viewed as honest brokers of legislation facing elders and
vulnerable adults rather than adversaries. That is a significant improvement and one
we do not want to lose.
As you analyze the difficult decisions ahead, we respectfully request that you do
not include the position held by Kathryn Leathers as an option for budget reduction.
It would be a significant loss generally to the Bar Association's presence in Olympia
and a tremendous loss to the Elder Law Section and the vulnerable populations we
serve.
Thank you for considering this letter. Please do not hesitate to contact me to
discuss this further.

cc: Executive Committee

Vern Harkins

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;

DUr~ ~~v~ $~~ our$eGtions~ lE;~tiQn:( n:uiil1iple biBs~ session),

and our Sectionleader$review and.proVide'~en~~ . . ;J;iillsthat pertam. to the

=::::::=.:~;;.=~~u;;::.:;::.~Qte

65
 a&ually ,testifying bd<t~~'vat'jp'IJS com~~~ in theHou,se.and ~ate.: tWSBA's

===e;~lr4~;~.<<
hili$, and w~

sessi:Ol:'tS, weare invited to

J. ...,.. ,u,....,"'I,J.',~v. thetecord of

' {lSe!ist<!rfttie,artd our

of~ te:athers, we could

,~~~nutee, :is at1~tli:rltg t.lheiB~~f~';of.Qoye~o~

itt1~:son aboulour
1'1"''""""'..' prot:Jilezt:Ui pr co~cating With
. ,.. or me know. 'W~ are glad to be of~rvice/c . .

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