April 2001

Letters

I attended the annual meeting in Spokane and was surprised to understand that apparently the Board of Governors had received a report from Mr. Welden (general counsel of the WSBA), and had agreed to create an additional "minority" seat on the board.

It was interesting to me, since I forgot for a moment that organizational directorships frequently have the power to increase or decrease their number on motion, dependent upon the authorities contained in initial governing documents (articles and bylaws).

As a result, I asked my local board representative how this happened and if he could send me a copy of the organizational authorities of the WSBA outlining this process.

He advised me of Mr. Welden's oral opinion and suggested I contact him. I did so.

Mr. Welden promptly and courteously responded that the organizational authorities for the WSBA are the State Bar Act, RCW 2.48, and General Rule 12 of the Washington Court Rules. He further advised that the Bylaws could be found at www.wsba.org/info/bylaws/. 

Mr. Welden also disclosed that the required formal amendment to the Bylaws to carry out the decision to establish a minority representation seat on the board had not yet been implemented, but that such an amendment did not require the vote of the membership.

He advised that the nomination and selection procedures were not determined, and to keep in touch with the governor from my district.

After reviewing the organizational authorities and Bylaws, I discovered that Mr. Welden's oral opinion was apparently correct, although the members can petition for a vote pursuant to Bylaw Article III and RCW 2.48.050(7).

In a letter to my governor, I also commented that if the Bar Association is a state agency (RCW 2.48.010) with the powers and purposes granted by RCW 2.48 and GR 12, it may appear that the provisions of RCW 49.60-400 could preclude this proposal. I asked my governor to keep me advised, and I am sure he will.

Ironically, at the bar convention (Celebration 2000) Mr. David Hall was a keynote speaker, and his presentation was reprinted in the December 2000 issue of the Bar News. Was I somehow missing something? Was the decision to create a minority seat responsive to Mr. Hall's plea? If so, was it a meaningful response?

After reading and rereading Mr. Hall's presentation, I concluded that the Board of Governors' decision was not relevant, nor did it in reality contribute to Mr. Hall's goals.

Is this decision in response to some actual discrimination on the part of the Bar in the past concerning nomination and election of governors? Is there any evidence that minorities (however you define that category) have been discouraged, much less prevented, from applying or running for these geographical seats? If so, I would be interested in the details, and perhaps then I would support this notion. Until then, however, it smacks of tokenism and meaningless "feel good" accomplishment. Would any self-respecting "minority" really feel good about occupying this undefined seat?

I think the board's decision should be rethought, and if they pursue this idea, that it has some meaningful consequences, duties and responsibilities, not only for the Bar as a whole, but also for the groups intended to be franchised.

I now understand that because of 14th Amendment issues the Board of Governors has abandoned the "minority seat" undertaking, but has decided to pursue Bylaw amendments for two "underrepresented group" seats, to be defined, identified and selected by the board. Isn't semantics wonderful? Isn't it wonderful that our bar dues will now be used to support these two additional seats? I am not aware of how the current demographics of the present Board of Governors fit into this "underrepresented" grouping, but I suppose that the list could include young lawyers, gays, lesbians, bald men, elder attorneys, King County lawyers, judges, students, law school professors, and just about any other arbitrary and capricious characterization you could think of. My, what great work our board is doing, and how financially responsible they are. I must admit they have exceeded even my meager expectations.

Back to table of contents >>