Board's shared values are violated

by Joseph J. Bell

Recently there have been letters to the California Bar Journal and to State Bar officials questioning our contract to restructure our office of governmental affairs in Sacramento. Also, recent statements by some public members of the board of governors about the lobbying services contract and subsequent events related to the California Bar Journal editorial advisory board require clarification.

During my two-and-a-half years on the board, I have learned that we are a diverse group, and, though we may have conflicting philosophies, we can achieve remarkable things when we act on shared values.

Alternatively, we can devastate each other and the bar when we violate what should be shared values. To some degree, that has happened recently.

For the information of our constituents, these are the facts behind certain misleading allegations reported in the press:

• We have had one of the most effective and respected legislative programs in Sacramento under Mel Assagai's direction (81 percent of the bills we sponsored in 1996 became law);
• In November 1996, there was full board agreement for the lobbying services contract to be out-sourced to Mel Assagai; a process to do that was established and the conditions the board imposed were met;
• The board fully discussed the out-sourcing issue before the contract negotiations began;
• Over the past five years, the total budget for the office of governmental affairs has averaged $916,399 per year, and the current contract saves us $158,000 over the next two years;
• The final contract price was not solely for compensation to Mel Assagai for lobbying, but also for staff, assistants, overhead, conferencing with bar leaders and other services;
• Each board member is bound by Business & Professions Code §6026.5(d), which requires confidentiality for such contract discussions to protect our employees' and contractors' rights, which are not "legal niceties" or "arcane laws with which attorneys cover their actions," as public member Peter Kaye has claimed;
• To conduct the lobbyist contract negotiations openly would have been impractical for a 23-member board, could have violated the contractor's privacy rights and protections, and could have hampered the board's ability to discuss the contract with candor and without legal reprisal and invited political maneuvering on behalf of potential candidates;
• Two-year dues bills have been the norm for the past 10 years, and that long-standing policy was unanimously endorsed by the board on March 21, 1997;
• The State Bar is not simply an entity whose activities may be of interest to the public; it is also a professional organization whose members have institutional interests that require strong and effective representation in Sacramento;
• Whatever the merits of creating a more effective editorial advisory board for the Bar Journal, after the current board committee appointments were made in October 1996, Peter Kaye was not a member of the editorial advisory board and thus had no special status to "get rid of," as claimed by public member Wendy Borcherdt;
• Nothing done by the board would or could forfeit Peter Kaye's First Amendment rights since he has continued to publicize his opinions in the California Bar Journal and elsewhere.

It is unfortunate that the facts regarding these recent events have not been accurately reported. Despite all of the controversy, the State Bar's legislative program is on track and our contributions to improving legislation are moving along efficiently.

For that, I acknowledge the efforts of Mel Assagai, our staff, including Larry Doyle and Fredericka Moore, as well as the large contingent of lawyers from all over the state who volunteer their time to work on legislation.

Joseph J. Bell of Grass Valley, a vice president of the board of governors, is chair of the Legislative & Court Relations Committee.