BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
As Introduced
Hearing Date: July 3, 2012
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
SK
SUBJECT
Attorneys: Annual Membership Fees
DESCRIPTION
This bill would authorize the State Bar of California (State Bar
or the Bar) to collect active membership dues of up to $410 for
the year 2013. Consistent with existing law, those dues would
fund only mandatory programs of the State Bar, and members can
deduct $5 if they did not wish to support lobbying and other
legislative activities. Members can also deduct an additional
$5 if they did not wish to fund access and elimination of bias
programs. Existing law, until January 1, 2014, also directs
$10 of membership dues to legal services purposes unless a
member elects not to support those activities.
BACKGROUND
The State Bar of California is a public corporation. Attorneys
who wish to practice law in California generally must be
admitted and licensed in this state and must be a member of the
State Bar. (Cal. Const. art. VI, Sec. 9.) The State Bar of
California is the largest state bar in the country. As of April
2012, the State Bar had 175,849 active members and 50,255
inactive members, which represents a slight annual increase in
both active members and inactive members. Total State Bar
membership is listed at 238,287, which includes 2,086 Judge
members and 10,097 members who are "Not Eligible to Practice
Law."
The Bar's programs are financed mostly by annual membership dues
paid by attorneys as well as other fees paid by applicants
seeking to practice law.
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 2 of ?
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law requires all attorneys who practice law in
California to be members of the State Bar and establishes the
State Bar for the purpose of regulating the legal profession.
Pursuant to the State Bar Act, the annual mandatory membership
fee set by the State Bar's Board of Governors to pay for
discipline and other functions must be ratified by the
Legislature. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6000 et seq.)
Existing law authorizes the State Bar to collect $315 in annual
membership fees from active members with a one-year only $10
rebate in 2012, for a total annual dues bill of $400 for the
year 2012 only. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.) The other $95
is pursuant to statutory authorization to assess annually the
following fees: $40 for the Client Security Fund (Bus. & Prof.
Code Sec. 6140.55); $25 for disciplinary activities (Bus. &
Prof. Code Sec. 6140.6); $10 to fund the Lawyer Assistance
Program (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.9); $10 special assessment
to fund information technology upgrades (expires January 1,
2014) (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.35); and $10 for the Building
Fund (expires January 1, 2014) (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.3).
Existing law authorizes the State Bar to collect $75 in annual
membership fees from inactive members with a one-year only $10
rebate in 2012, for a total annual dues bill of $115. (Bus. &
Prof. Code Sec. 6141.) The other $50 is pursuant to statutory
authorization to assess annually the following fees: $10 for the
Client Security Fund (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.55); $25 for
disciplinary activities (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.6); $5 to
fund the Lawyer Assistance Program (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec.
6140.9); and $10 for the Building Fund (expires January 1, 2014)
(Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.3).
Existing case law , Keller v. State Bar of California (1990) 496
U.S. 1, prohibits the use by the State Bar of mandatory dues to
fund political and ideological activities, as a violation of a
member's First Amendment freedom of speech rights, where such
expenditures were not necessarily or reasonably incurred for the
purpose of regulating the legal profession or improving the
quality of the legal services available to the people of the
state. Existing law allows members to deduct up to $5 from the
mandatory dues if the member does not wish to fund legislative
activities and non-Keller lobbying and activities with his or
her dues. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.05, Keller v. State Bar
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 3 of ?
of California (1990) 496 U.S. 1.)
Existing law , until January 1, 2014, directs $10 of membership
dues to legal services purposes unless a member elects not to
support those activities. (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 6140.01.)
This bill would authorize the State Bar to collect active
membership dues of up to $410 for the year 2013.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
In support of the bill, the author notes that "Ýl]egislative
authorization is required and this is part of the Senate and
Assembly Judiciary Committees' annual oversight responsibilities
of the Bar."
2.Major reforms contained in SB 163 (Evans, Chapter 417,
Statutes of 2011), last year's membership dues bill
Last year, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB
163, which contained substantial and extensive changes to the
State Bar's governance structure. In particular, the bill
renamed the State Bar's Board of Governors as the Board of
Trustees and revised the composition and size of that board to
be made up of six public members appointed by the Governor and
the Legislature, as provided under existing law, and 13 attorney
members. Under SB 163, the 13 attorney members now consist of
six attorney members elected from State Bar Districts based on
the six court of appeal districts, five attorney members
appointed by the Supreme Court, and two attorney members
appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and the Speaker of
the Assembly. By making these changes, SB 163 reduced the size
of the board from 23 to 19 members, phased in over a three-year
period. SB 163 also provided that the protection of the public
shall be the highest priority for the State Bar and the Board of
Trustees.
SB 163 also gave all Bar members a $10 rebate, thus, reducing
member dues by $10 for 2012 only. The bill also increased from
$10 to $20 for the years 2012 and 2013 the amount that Bar
members may voluntarily contribute to the Bar's legal services
fund to address the ongoing crisis in funding for legal services
for lower-income Californians. Any member of the Bar may choose
not to have his or her dues used for this purpose. SB 163 also
provided that in the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years, $2 million of
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 4 of ?
non-mandatory dues would be transferred to the Bar's legal
services fund to further bolster funding for legal services
programs.
Under SB 163, the Board of Trustees was also required to
complete and implement a five-year strategic plan, to be updated
every two years. The bill required the president of the State
Bar to report to the Supreme Court, the Governor, and the Senate
and Assembly Judiciary Committees on the measures the board has
taken to implement the strategic plan and the measures the board
will need to take in the remaining years of the strategic plan
to address the projected needs contained in the plan. SB 163
required that information to be submitted in conjunction with
the submission of the board's proposed final budget which is
required under existing law by February 15th. (Bus. & Prof.
Code Sec. 6140.1.) As described in more detail below, the State
Bar submitted this plan on February 5, 2012.
3.The State Bar's Five-Year Strategic Plan
As mentioned above, SB 163 required the Bar's Board of Trustees
to complete and implement a five-year strategic plan, which was
submitted in early February. (See
http://www.calbar.ca.gov/AboutUs/Reports.aspx.) The plan noted
a number of improvements made over the last year, stating that
the Bar's new leadership had "totally Ýcommitted] itself to
satisfying its public protection mandate, especially in the area
of Ýthe] attorney discipline system." The plan further stated:
To implement this commitment, a new senior management team in
the Office of Chief Trial Counsel reinvigorated the effort to
address the backlog of discipline complaints-with tremendous
success. The backlog of active investigations was reduced
from over 1,500 to zero. The notice drafting backlog that
existed as of July 2011 was eliminated and the backlog from
cases arising after that date was reduced from 554 to 187.
All this was accomplished while absorbing the increased
caseload flowing in from the re-invigorated investigative
units.
Improvements in public protection and effective resource
management have been evident in other areas of the State Bar
as well. For example in January 2012, the Bureau of State
Audits reported that-for the first time in years-the State Bar
has no unresolved audit issues. All of the Bureau's
recommendations have been fully implemented.
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 5 of ?
The five-year strategic plan indicated that the Bar's strategy
for the next five years is to "re-tool the organization for
sustainable, lasting improvement by re-making key aspects of its
organizational culture. The essence of the State Bar's strategy
for achieving this is to insist upon change throughout the
organization." The plan then described the three large-scale
initiatives described below that the Bar is "undertaking to
carry out this strategy." As described in the strategic plan,
they are:
1.Information Technology Initiative : Under this initiative, the
State Bar will retire and replace all four of its core
software applications. This process is already underway. It
will transform the attorney discipline system from a largely
paper-driven system into a near-paperless one. It will
improve and expand access to State Bar services and
information by delivering a user-friendly, task-driven online
e-portal.
2.Physical Facilities Initiative : This initiative will
transform the physical workspace occupied by the State Bar.
Where possible, operations will be centralized in the State
Bar's headquarters in San Francisco. The headquarters
building will be reconfigured to accommodate the relocated
functions, to provide modern open-plan workspace consistent
with a silo-free culture, and to provide a more engaging
environment for the public. In Los Angeles, the State Bar
will procure workspace suitable to the reduced operational
footprint, configured in accordance with the same design goals
as in San Francisco, to achieve the same efficiency and
increased productivity.
3.Operations Re-engineering Initiative : Each of the major
service areas of the State Bar will undergo a top-to-bottom
process review and re-engineering effort. These efforts will
focus on leveraging technology to achieve efficiencies and
service improvements; identifying linkages (and possibly
duplications) across departments and service areas; and
eliminating processes which are redundant or otherwise
unnecessary.
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 6 of ?
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : State Bar of California
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
SB 163 (Evans, Chapter 417, Statutes of 2011) See Comment 2.
AB 2764 (Judiciary, Chapter 476, Statutes of 2010)
SB 55 (Corbett, Chapter 2, Statutes of 2010)
SB 641 (Corbett, 2009)
AB 3049 (Judiciary, Chapter 165, Statutes of 2008)
SB 686 (Corbett, Chapter 474, Statutes of 2007)
AB 1529 (Jones, Chapter 341, Statutes of 2005)
SB 1490 (Judiciary, Chapter 384, Statutes of 2004)
AB 1708 (Judiciary, Chapter 334, Statutes of 2003)
SB 352 (Kuehl, Chapter 24, Statutes of 2001)
SB 1367 (Schiff, Chapter 118, Statutes of 2000)
SB 144 (Schiff, Chapter 342, Statutes of 1999)
Prior Votes :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 71, Noes 0)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)
**************
AB 2685 (Committee on Judiciary)
Page 7 of ?