>The State Bar should be governed by a board of 17 — nine lawyers appointed by the Supreme Court and eight publicly appointed members. All should serve four-year terms. And the bar’s current “integrated” structure, combining regulatory and trade association functions, raises serious ethical issues and needs reform.
Or . . .
The State Bar should continue to be governed by a lawyer-dominated board with some public members. Candidates could be vetted to insure adequate qualifications, but the appointment power of political entities is unwelcome. The integrated status should be retained as the best structure to oversee public protection.
Or . . .
The bar should be independent of any state agency. To avoid the possibility of unintended consequences, no changes to the agency’s structure or mandate should be adopted until data is collected to determine whether the bar is fulfilling its various functions.
These suggestions and dozens of others are under consideration by a legislatively mandated task force appointed to recommend improvements to the bar’s public protection efforts. Two hearings last month and a survey of 20,000 bar members drew responses that ran the gamut and addressed issues ranging from what the board of governors should be called to whether the bar violates open meeting laws to the role of the Supreme Court.
Full Article and Source:
Panel Hears no Shortage of Opinions on How to Reform State Bar