Oregon State Bar

Meeting of the Board of Governors

July 21-22, 2000 – Pendleton

Mission Statement: The mission of the Oregon State Bar is to serve justice by promoting respect for the rule of law, by improving the quality of legal services, and by increasing access to justice.

Open Session Minutes

The meeting was called to order by President Rew on Friday, July 21, 2000 at 1:30 p.m. The open session on Friday was from 1:30 p.m. to 1:45 p.m., from 1:50 p.m. to 3:20 p.m., and from 4:15 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.; and on Saturday, July 22 and from 8:10 a.m. to 10:55 a.m. (on Friday recessed to the Judicial Proceedings agenda from 4:50 p.m. to 5:15 p.m., and recessed to the Executive Session agenda from 1:45 p.m. to 1:50 p.m., 3:20 p.m. to 4:15 p.m., and 4:30 p.m. to 4:50 p.m.). All members of the Board of Governors were present with the exception of Mary Burrows on Friday and Saturday, and David Orf on Saturday. Staff present, for all or portions of the meeting, were Karen Garst, Executive Director; Denise Cline, MCLE Administrator; Jennifer Maldonado, Convention Coordinator; Bob Oleson, Public Affairs Director; Kay Pulju, Communications Manager; George Riemer, General Counsel; and Rod Wegener, Chief Financial Officer. Others present were Gary Ackley, PLF Board Member and Barbara Fishleder, PLF Director of Loss Prevention.

1.Report of Officers

A.Report of the President

1.Meeting with Chief Justice Carson

Mr. Rew discussed highlights of the June 29 meeting with Chief Justice Carson, also attended by Mr. Oleson and Mr. Riemer. He felt these meetings are maintaining a good rapport with the court system.

2.Reports from regional HOD meetings in June

Mr. Rew reported on productive discussions at the regional HOD meetings. Spirited discussion about CLE publications issues had raised many new considerations that will need to be studied further.

3.2000 ABA/NCBP Meeting report

Mr. Rew felt the NCBP Annual Meeting in New York was excellent and referred to his written report attached to the agenda.

Mr. Harnden commented further on the professionalism program that did an excellent job of focusing the need for attorneys to build trust among themselves and their clients. A program on volunteerism also presented ways to involve bar members in establishing a long-term commitment to serving on bar committees, sections, boards and other groups as well as priorities such as access to justice. Ms. Garst indicated she will make tapes and materials from these programs available to board members.

4.Commission on Professionalism report

Mr. Rew indicated the joint bar/bench Commission on Professionalism has resumed meeting and that discussions are underway with Barbara Fishleder for PLF to assume liaison responsibilities with the commission.

B.Report of the President-Elect

1.Timing of appointments for BOG committees, OSB committee contacts and other 'year-end' plans

Mr. Harnden reviewed changes in the process and timing for board member appointments to BOG committees and OSB groups as outlined on exhibit page 7.

2.Review format and topics for November BOG retreat

Mr. Harnden indicated that the board's November planning retreat will be a transition for incoming and outgoing board members and officers to plan for the 2001 board year. The shift will be from the board learning about what strategic planning is to applying this knowledge to determine priorities for the bar. He asked board members to provide him with input about topics for the planning session.

Mr. Ackley asked about plans for the joint BOG/PLF Board meeting that had been considered for the November board meeting. Options were discussed about when to schedule the meeting. Mr. Harnden indicated the focus on strategic planning in November would detract from the purpose of the joint meeting with the PLF BOD. The joint BOG/PLF meeting will be scheduled either December, 2000 or January, 2001.


C.Report of the Executive Director

1.Reminder – August 15 conference call meeting at noon to approve HOD agenda

Ms. Garst reminded the BOG to calendar this important special board meeting to approve the 2000 House of Delegates agenda.

2.2000 ABA/NCBP Meeting report

Ms. Garst described her meeting with the president of the French Bar Association to discuss MDP in Europe. She learned that issues raised in the U.S. were the same in Europe in spite of a totally different legal system. Rumors that MDP is being accepted in Europe appear to be greatly exaggerated and they hope that the ABA will take steps to stop MDP in this country.

Ms. Garst distributed an article about issues from new ABA President Martha Barnett. She also distributed results of the OSB survey of sections on MDP.

3.Executive Session - Update on staff operations

Ms. Garst briefly updated the board on the status of staff operations.

2.OSB Committees, Sections, Councils, Divisions and Task Forces

A.Client Security Fund

Mr. Scott discussed the following ten claims against three attorneys:

1.CSF Claim No. 99-28 – Simmons v. Gloyn

2.CSF Claim No. 99-32 – Marca v. Gloyn

3.CSF Claim No. 00-03 – Hiveley v. Gloyn

4.CSF Claim No. 00-15 – Reynolds v. McNamara

5.CSF Claim No. 99-49 – Morrow v. Anunsen

6.CSF Claim No. 99-50 – Corno v. Anunsen

7.CSF Claim No. 99-54 – Curtis v. Anunsen

8.CSF Claim No. 99-56 – Herndon v. Anunsen

9.CSF Claim No. 00-01 – Hansen v. Anunsen

10.CSF Claim No. 00-02 – Havercroft v. Anunsen

The Client Security Fund Committee felt it would be a hardship for these claimants to purse their claims to judgment and recommended the BOG waive that element. Regarding claims against Mr. Gloyn, Mr. Scott described a recent trend of the CSF Committee sometimes recommending that a party other than the claimant be paid without any apparent legal basis or justification. Mr. Scott recommended to approve three claims -- CSF Claims No. 99-32 – Marca v. Gloyn, No. 00-03 – Hiveley v. Gloyn, and No. 00-15 – Reynolds v. McNamara – and to refer the others back to the CSF Committee for further study.

Mr. Scott asked the board for input concerning the $5,000 claim resulting from a bankruptcy proceeding in CSF Claim No. 99-49 – Morrow v. Anunsen. He was not inclined to favor a payment that went into a bankruptcy proceeding. Regarding the other five Anunson claims, he raised the issue whether it was requiring too much to ask each individual claimant to reduce their claim to judgement.

Mr. Scott discussed other details of the listed claims and a discussion ensued about the pros and cons of requiring claimants to go to court to get a judgment on a small claim, the $50,000 cap on claims and related statutory guidelines. It was suggested the board itemize these issues and ask the CSF Committee to explore related policy considerations for recommendation to the BOG.

Action:Mr. Williamson moved, Mr. Scott seconded, to approve CSF Claims No. 99-32 – Marca v. Gloyn, No. 00-03 – Hiveley v. Gloyn, and No. 00-15 – Reynolds v. McNamara. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Williams seconded, to form a BOG special committee, composed of Mr. Scott, Mr. Hytowitz, Mr. Hittle and Mr. Tyner, to outline issues raised by the board for CSF Committee consideration. A friendly amendment was accepted for the special committee to meet jointly with the CSF Committee and Ms. Stevens concerning these issues. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

Action:Mr. Tyner moved to approve CSF Claim No. No. 99-28 – Simmons v. Gloyn. The motion died for lack of a second.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Scott seconded, to postpone consideration of CSF Claims in the matters of Simmons v. Gloyn and the six Anunsen claims listed above. The motion was approved by the board (14-1-1; no Tyner; absent Burrows).

3.BOG Committees, Special Committees, Task Forces and Study Groups

A.Policy & Governance Committee

1.Bylaw amendment restricting section donation requests

Mr. Baldwin presented the recommendation to approve a new BOG Policy 7.500 prohibiting donations by sections except with prior approval of the BOG, excluding the 2nd sentence in the proposed policy shown on agenda exhibit page 16. BOG Policy 11.800(A) which addresses Keller concerns is included in the proposed policy.


Action:Mr. Baldwin moved, Mr. Harnden seconded, to waive the one meeting notice required by Bar Bylaw 4.2(B) in order to take action on proposed BOG Policy 7.500. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

Action:The Policy & Governance Committee moved to approve BOG Policy 7.500 to read as follows, 'Sections may make donations to charitable causes only with prior approval of the Board of Governors. For sections that are not entirely self-supporting, as described in Article IX, Section 5(B) of the Standard Section Bylaws, the prospective donee must show that the donation fits within the limitations set forth in BOG Policy 11.800(A).' The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

2.Bylaw and BOG Policy amendments regarding BOG officer elections

Mr. Baldwin discussed the proposal to move the timing of BOG officer elections from the July meeting to the November meeting to give new members more time to consider candidates for president-elect. The committee recommended to hold future BOG officer elections at the September/October board meeting held in conjunction with the House of Delegates meeting. It was felt this would give newly elected officers more time to consider plans for the board's November planning retreat.

Action:The Policy & Governance Committee moved to waive the one meeting notice required by Bar Bylaw 4.2(B) in order to take action on OSB Bylaws and BOG Policy amendments regarding BOG officer elections and the payment date for annual dues. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

Action:The Policy & Governance Committee moved to approve changes to the timing of BOG officer elections in OSB Bylaw Article 5.5, 5.6 and 5.9 as shown in the attached exhibit. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

EXHIBIT, p. 1-2

3.Bylaw and BOG Policy amendments regarding payment date for annual dues

Mr. Baldwin reviewed recommended OSB Bylaw and BOG Policy amendments regarding the due date for annual membership fees. The one meeting notice to take action on these matters was waived in preceding item 3.A.2.

Action:The Policy & Governance Committee moved to approve amendments to OSB Bylaw 3.5 and BOG Policies 10.301, 10.302, 10.401 and 15.700 regarding the due date for annual membership fees, shown on agenda exhibit pages 21-23. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

4.Consider request to sponsor a plaque for Senator Wayne Morse

Mr. Baldwin presented the recommendation of the Policy & Governance Committee to take no action on the request to contribute $1,000 for a plaque to honor Senator Wayne Morse. The committee felt the board's annual awards program would continue to be its primary avenue to honor the legal community and members of the bar.

B.Budget & Finance Committee

1.2001 Budget Executive Summary

Mr. Scott provided an overview of the 2001 Executive Summary Budget which outlined any new policy or revisions affecting the budget; the financial implications of any planning recommendations; new programs or modifications to current year programming; and established the membership fee for the 2001 budget year. He indicated the preliminary budget excludes financial projections related to proposed changes to CLE Publications being developed for the final budget. The budget includes a proposed $50 increase in membership fees. Mr. Rew commented that the budget does provide for some short-term projections for facilities.

Ms. Garst summarized the recommendation of the Budget & Finance Committee to adopt the $50 increase in membership fees that encompasses ongoing services for existing programs over the next three years and potential funding for facilities improvement. At the board's November planning retreat consideration will be given to additional staffing requirements for ongoing programs, and how much to allot to future OSB office facilities improvements. Mr. Rew discussed the presentation of the recommended fee resolution at the 2000 House of Delegates meeting and supporting financial analysis. Mr. Scott felt that the $50 increase is analogous to a cost of living increase to support existing bar programs. Mr. Hittle proposed a report separate from the budget to the House of Delegates about future facilities improvements to alert the HOD and members about this need. A lengthy discussion ensued.

Ms. Garst encouraged the board to consider how it wishes to resume its study of improvements to OSB/PLF office facilities and consider viable options to initiate the process. Will it be the BOG or BOG/PLF Facilities Study Group? Mr. Harnden discussed the merits of the approach recommended in his following motion. Ms. Cohen encouraged the board to look at this very carefully because a future board will need to request funding in a fee resolution and 'sell it' at a future HOD meeting. Mr. Wegener explained that the $50 increase is necessary to maintain the existing level of programming, including new or enhanced programs identified in the budget summary to a certain level, and remain within the reserve for 2001.

Mr. Davis felt the charge to the joint facilities committee was clear in regard to the options to explore and indicated that the recommendations will most likely present challenging decisions to the BOG and the BOD. Mr. Hittle discussed the reasons behind his view that the PLF and OSB staff should remain in the same building and emphasized that that the bar and PLF are one organization that will best serve the membership and the public from the same office facility. Discussion continued about timing of a joint BOG/BOD meeting around December 1. Ms. Garst indicated she would work with PLF to schedule the joint meeting.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Williamson seconded, to resume studying options to improve OSB/PLF office facilities by asking the BOG/PLF Study Group to develop facilities options and prioritized recommendations supported by the analyses at the next joint BOG/PLF meeting; and for the decision to be made jointly by the BOG and BOD. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

2.Approve 2001 fee resolution

The discussion about the 2001 fee resolution was included in preceding agenda item 4.B.1.

Action:The Budget & Finance Committee moved to approve the OSB 2001 fee resolution to increase the general membership fee by $50.00 and to establish the date by which the membership fee is due of January 31, 2001. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

3.Executive Session - Proposed performance bonus for Ms. Garst and Mr. Riemer

The board met in executive session to discuss the bonus proposed (at the June 30 special board meeting) for Ms. Garst and Mr. Riemer for their hard work in assisting the board in its review of the governance structure and operation of the PLF over the past nine months. Staff left the room during this discussion. The following motion was made in open session:

Action:Mr. Tyner moved, Ms. Rinehart seconded, to award an additional one-week vacation in 2000 to Ms. Garst as a performance bonus for her hard work and dedication this year. In addition, the board felt it was Ms. Garst's decision how to award Mr. Riemer and Ms. Pulju for their special efforts in this regard. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).


4.Resolution for mandatory assessment regarding electronic version of CLE publications

Mr. Scott reported on the committee's consideration of a resolution to the 2000 HOD to conduct a study to make CLE publications available on the Internet. The committee felt more research was needed to determine the feasibility to transition CLE publications to the Internet. Discussion continued about whether the BOG should study the matter, refer it to the HOD, or report on it to the HOD.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Tyner seconded, to incorporate into the President's or Treasurer's Report at the 2000 HOD Meeting the Board of Governors' plans to study the feasibility of making CLE publications available on the Internet. The motion was approved by the board (14-1-1; no Williamson; absent Burrows).

C.Public Affairs Committee

1.Update on legislative activities and current issues

Mr. Harnden reported on the Public Affairs Committee’s review of the legislative races. The committee members have been very active in assisting attorneys running for the legislature and determining who the members might be on key committees. A list of the candidates is available in the recent issue of the Capitol Insider. BOG members will be invited to attend various functions to support attorney legislator candidates.

Mr. Harnden mentioned recent criticism of the child abuse reporting requirement for lawyers but noted that it has been the law for approximately twenty-five years.

Mr. Harnden also referred to ongoing correspondence from Follansbee & Associates critical of the Consumer Law Section's CLE held in June, 2000 on Child Abuse Reporting. He also commented on the very positive feedback received from others about the CLE. Ms. Cohen indicated she was preparing a response to Ms. Follansbee and others, which is being reviewed by staff, from the perspective of a public member.

In regard to the Judicial Administration Committee, current and future ballot measures were discussed - some of which are in the early development stages. Mr. Harnden also discussed the status of SJR 7 and the LC 84 amendment to establish a judicial merit selection commission being dealt with by the Judicial Administration Committee and other groups. Potential changes to the appellate selection process being considered by the legislature were discussed at length, including Gleaves Committee recommendations. The minutes from the Judicial Administration Committee are attached.

EXHIBIT, p. 3-6

Mr. Harnden also reported on the following: (1) The State Judges Association has decided that its main focus at the legislature next year will be raising judicial salaries. (2) Various law improvement updates. (3) Plans underway for an annual orientation session with various bar groups and legislators on how to move things through the legislature. Mr. Williamson reviewed proposed Ballot Measure 91 and another ballot measure that would significantly cut the State General Fund budget and result in long-term cuts to state revenue. This would have a severe impact on Oregon’s judicial system. Mr. Williamson distributed and proposed the following resolution in this regard.

Action:Mr. Lopez moved, Ms. Cohen seconded, to submit to the 2000 House of Delegates for approval the attached Board of Governors resolution opposing two ballot measures that would severely reduce funds available to the State General Fund, and as a result, the Judicial Department. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

EXHIBIT, p. 18

D.Strategic Planning Committee [Mr. Davis]

1.Status Report

Mr. Davis reported on the progress of the Strategic Planning Committee. The SPC has concentrated its efforts on designing a matrix outlining the goals of each bar program and service under four broad functions. This matrix is designed for use by the Board of Governors at its annual retreat vis-à-vis changes in OSB program mix. He explained that a large portion of the budget is allocated to mandatory items over which little discretionary authority can be exercised.

A year ago the Strategic Planning Committee set a goal to educate members of the bar about the issue of MDP. While the goals may have not been met regarding the level of understanding by members about MDP, there is more awareness of it at this time. One of the conclusions made was to present a CLE on MDP at the 2000 HOD meeting.

Regarding the future of the Strategic Planning Committee, Mr. Davis reported the conclusion that bar strategic issues discussions need to take place at the board level. Therefore, it was being recommended that the committee be disbanded and the transition be made to a work session format at board meetings. As major issues emerge, the board can discuss them and consider whether to appoint a task force to study them and report back to the board. Mr. Rew thanked Mr. Davis, Ms. Garst and Mr. Harnden for the analysis about the future of strategic planning for the bar and indicated he agreed with the proposal.

Mr. Davis addressed the Ombudsman pilot project included in the preliminary 2001 budget and wondered if the analysis was forthcoming regarding its value and whether it should be continued. Ms. Garst discussed how this and other program analyses might be accomplished by the board at its annual planning session now that the Strategic Planning Committee is being phased out. She indicated the Ombudsman pilot project was included in the 2001 budget projections because the 'cart has been placed before the horse.' This is an example of a placeholder in the budget that may or may not be continued based on the BOG's analysis of bar priorities and resources in November. The use of the strategic planning matrix is a tool to facilitate planning annually rather than helter skelter during the year.

Mr. Hytowitz expressed concern that members and the House of Delegates do not understand that a large portion of the budget goes to mandatory programs. Ms. Garst encouraged the board to look at the OSB Annual Report insert in the Bulletin and see how the information is presented to members and to provide feedback in that regard. It's a graphic presentation of 'here's where your money goes.' She indicated that ideas on how depict the lack of budget flexibility in programs to the members would be greatly appreciated.

Mr. Harnden praised Mr. Davis and Ms. Garst for their leadership to establish a very effective strategic planning process for the bar. This effort represented an enormous amount of work, done on 6-8 Saturdays a year, by the members of the Strategic Planning Committee.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Hytowitz seconded, to approve a resolution to thank Gordon Davis for three years of leadership as chair of the Strategic Planning Committee and to extend thanks to the House of Delegates members who also served on the committee. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

Ms. Garst mentioned her report on the bar's strategic planning matrix and linking of outcome measurements at the ABA/NABE Annual Meeting in New York. Most of the other bars are not doing program outcome measurements. Over 50 percent of the people in her workshop asked for copies of the materials. She felt that even though the OSB may not where it hoped to be in terms of strategic planning, progress is being made.

2.Appointment of new chair

This item was not considered due to plans to disband the Strategic Planning Committee.

E.Access to Justice Committee

1.Proposed HOD Resolution to assist funding of Joint Access Initiative

Mr. Harnden presented a HOD resolution that the bar contribute $50,000 from its excess reserve to the Joint Access Initiative, as discussed in the July 21 work session with the Campaign for Equal Justice. Mr. Hittle asked why this was being done now in consideration of the BOG's strategic planning process to review these matters in November? Mr. Tyner explained it is the fruition of a long process and that seed money is needed now. He felt it is an 'off budget' item that will facilitate a long process by the Access to Justice Committee to secure substantial new revenue. Mr. Rew described it as a continuation of funds committed in prior years for the Access to Justice Conference that will go towards raising $10 million. Mr. Harnden indicated this effort would be subject to the development of measurable outcomes and provision of budget details at the November, 2000 planning session.

Mr. Hittle reiterated the importance of following the strategic planning process and concerns about using up the bar's excess reserve funds, and that $50,000 or more will be expected for this purpose in subsequent years. Mr. Davis felt the BOG is fooling itself if it thinks this is a one-time request and that reserves may not be there in the future which may necessitate dipping into funds allocated to bar programs. Ms. Garst indicated the board had discussed the value of its strategic planning process earlier in the day and agreed that such projects should not be approached in a piece meal fashion without considering the whole picture. It's difficult to set priorities in this fashion and it's easier to start a program than stop one. She described the November planning session as being critical in terms of the discipline to plan for this project as an 'on-line item' in relationship to other proposed new programs, e.g., is it more important than staffing the Professionalism Commission or the Government Relations addition? We can stay on track by talking with the HOD about potentials and avoiding piecemeal commitments.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Tyner seconded, to approve contributing $50,000 to the Joint Access Initiative to be financed from the bar's 2001 excess reserve. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

2.Status of Legal Needs Assessment

There was no report on this item.

3.Legal Aid Open House

Mr. Harnden reported on open house events scheduled for October 18, 2000 for all the Legal Aid offices to be co-sponsored by the OSB, Campaign for Equal Justice, Chief Justice, Governor's Office and the Citizens Conference. Six OSB sponsored kiosks will be set up (they do not create any budgetary impact). Board of Governors members will be asked to appear and speak at these events. Information will be forthcoming from Kay Pulju.

The kiosks provide computers linked to the OSB web. The project is anticipated to save money because of how funds are spent on Tel-Law and other services now. Ms. Garst also mentioned plans for the kiosks to be available at courthouses and the Multnomah County Central Library.

F.Executive Director Review Special Committee

1.Executive director performance review report

Ms. Sowle reported on the structure and history of the executive director performance review process. Originally the review was more like a popularity contest. With the development of the strategic planning process the focus changed to goal setting and measurement against key standards. Karen has provided input in this regard. It is desired to set the goals for the executive director this November and then began to measure performance against those goals. A list of key standards and measurements for the executive director in 2001, approved by the special committee, was discussed. Ms. Sowle indicated that interviews will be conducted with key board members, key staff and others in the community and the interviews will be designed around the goals and standards document. It is planned that evaluation results will be reviewed each year at the board's November planning retreat.

Ms. Garst commented that the revised performance evaluation process for the executive director aligns with the process used for OSB staff. It clearly identifies at the beginning of the year the key results expected to be achieved and measured over the next twelve months. Ms. Sowle described the process as a professional collaboration between staff and supervisor that achieves meaningful results.

G.Annual Meeting Study Group

1.Recommendations regarding the OSB annual/biennial meeting

Mr. Williamson presented options for the OSB convention in 2002 and recommendations for 2001. The House of Delegates approved in 1999 approved a resolution for a committee to study whether it was possible to have a cost efficient annual meeting in the even numbered years. The study group met several times, was ably assisted by staff, and several surveys were used to gather information. He discussed details of a proposed meeting format in 2002 (shown on agenda exhibit page 55) with a shortened agenda.

Mr. Williamson indicated there is no way to guarantee the success of this new approach, but that it is the Annual Meeting Study Group's recommendation to try it. A sample budget estimate was provided on agenda exhibit page 59. The committee recommends that staff select the best location to provide the most cost effective setting to delivering the proposed annual meeting format to members.

A discussion ensued about expenses and budget considerations, the criteria to measure the success or failure of the event and demographics regarding age of members that attend annual meetings. Ms. Garst explained that HOD expenses are a separate governance line item and should not be used in calculating the cost of the convention. Mr. Williamson indicated that the goal for the annual meeting is to avoid losing money - to break even. He felt the sense of the Annual Meeting Study Group was that the collegiality, professionalism and development of leadership are worthwhile even if a small loss ($10,000-$20,000) would be incurred. Mr. Tyner requested that criteria be established for presentation to the House of Delegates. Ms. Maldonado commented that the percentage of new members attending is smaller than other member groups and she will provide to the board those numbers for the past ten years. Mr. Lopez discussed that a 'critical mass' turnout is important and what an acceptable loss is, e.g., if 200 people show up and have a good time, is that a success in an organization of more than 10,000 members? A discussion ensued about ways to improve attendance including encouraging sections to hold annual meetings at the same time.

Action:Mr. Williamson moved, Mr. Harnden seconded, to submit to the 2000 House of Delegates a resolution from the Board of Governors proposing a new OSB Annual Meeting format. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

EXHIBIT, p. 18-19

4.Professional Liability Fund

A.Follow-up from Joint BOG/PLF Board on June 30, 2000

Mr. Rew reported on his attendance at recent PLF Board meetings. He discussed highlights from the summary of actions at the joint BOG/BOD meeting on June 30, 2000 (agenda exhibit page 60).

B.Update on PLF CEO search

Mr. Ackley reported that the PLF CEO search was slow but has recently picked up its pace in terms of numbers of applicants. When asked, Ms. Fishleder indicated that if a strong candidate does not appear from the applicants that the search will be extended until the right person is found. Mr. Rew reported on a call from Roger Pringle indicating that the quality of the applicants has been improving significantly. Interviews for the new PLF CEO will be conducted in August.

C.Amendment to PLF Policy 4.400 – Claims Settlement Procedures

Ms. Fishleder presented the request to amend PLF Policy 4.400 to increase PLF Board oversight of claims in excess of $50,000. The new provision would only apply where a judgment has already been rendered and was designed to improve communication between the PLF Claims Department and the BOD.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Mr. Tyner seconded, to amend PLF Policy 4.400 - Claims Settlement. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

D.Assignment of liaisons to the Board of Governors and the PLF Board

Mr. Rew reported he would be a PLF Board liaison for the remainder of 2000 in addition to Sarah Rinehart (two-year term) and Mary Burrows (public member). BOG members assigned to the PLF CEO search committee are Mr. Rew, Mr. Orf and Ms. Cohen. Mr. Ackley reported that PLF directors Gary Ackley, Bob Nunn and Ric Weaver will be liaisons to the BOG.

Ms. Rinehart discussed proposed amendments for DR 1-103(E)(2) and BOG Policy 14.600(B) based on suggestions made by David Hytowitz and Tom Tongue. Mr. Rew and Ms. Rinehart indicated they did not want to be present for the discussion of sensitive claims matters at PLF Board meetings, and Ms. Rinehart wondered if the proposed DR amendment should be submitted to the 2000 HOD. A 0discussion ensued about BOG members and members of the 'radar screen committee' being privy to this information when claims problems arise as recommended by the PLF Policies and Procedures Task Force. Ms. Fishleder felt that information provided to the radar committee would exclude names and reduce exposure to confidential claims information. Ms. Garst inquired how the BOG would be alerted when claims handling problems occurred. Mr. Ackley felt that claims marginally 'outside the box' will go directly the 'radar screen committee', even if it's just a hypothetical discussion excluding specific information.

Mr. Hytowitz asked for clarification about why BOG liaisons are attending PLF Board meetings if they are not there to spot claims issues. Are they just there to listen to routine agenda matters? Ms. Rinehart felt that as a BOD liaison she would feel more comfortable with protection in regard to PLF claims confidentiality. The liaisons’ level of involvement was also discussed in the situation where a discipline issue arises from a PLF claims matter. Mr. Rew asked Mr. Riemer to study this matter and make recommendations. Mr. Riemer indicated his understanding was that the special committee was to consider potentially controversial claims defense strategies and lawsuits filed in excess of $300,000 against the PLF as an entity. In the event the bar is named a defendant, then the BOG will be provided that confidential information. On claims strategies matters, the BOG does not receive that information. Does the BOG, in its oversight role, want that information? If so, the board needs to address the concerns of Mr. Hytowitz and Ms. Rinehart. Mr. Williamson felt it was important for the liaisons to have the option for protection because there will be times when the information is received accidentally or it is requested.

Mr. Riemer discussed options concerning the possible amendment of DR 1-103(E)(2).

Action:Mr. Hittle moved, Ms. Rinehart seconded, to submit to the 2000 House of Delegates an amendment to DR 1-103(E)(2) to address the issues discussed. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

EXHIBIT, p. 19

Mr. Riemer indicated the board would be presented with the language of the specific amendment for approval during its conference call to approve the 2000 HOD agenda on August 15, 2000.

Ms. Garst asked for guidance to answer questions about how this process is going to work. Ms. Rinehart also asked for clarification about board expectations relating to her role as a liaison to the BOD. The ensuing discussion indicated that the liaisons to the BOD are there to be informed about PLF matters that will be presented to the BOG for approval. Over and above that, the role is somewhat discretionary and will undoubtedly evolve over time. Ms. Garst felt that each of the three liaisons need to be informed about what is expected of them, so they are not assuming different roles and responsibilities at the BOD meetings.

The possible amendment of BOG Policy 14.600(B) was discussed and will be considered at the September board meeting.

Mr. Ackley reported that Tom Peachey has worked hard with PLF staff to implement the joint recommendations. A PLF Claims Committee meeting is scheduled on August 11 at which Bruce Shafer will present recommendations regarding claims handling to align with the task force’s recommendations. Other matters in the works include staff interaction. Mr. Ackley commented, in regard to confidentiality concerns, that the BOD wants the BOG to feel positive about the policies that the PLF is using. He indicated he would work with Mr. Riemer regarding confidentiality and disclosure concerns.

Ms. Garst asked about the members of the PLF 'radar screen committee.' Mr. Rew indicated it would be the three BOG members assigned as BOD liaisons.

5.Appearances/Special Issues

A.House of Delegates

1.Preliminary 2000 HOD agenda

Mr. Riemer reviewed the three additional HOD agenda items approved at this board meeting and minor housekeeping corrections.

Action:Mr. Williamson moved, Mr. Harnden seconded, to add the following three items to the 2000 HOD agenda: (a) amendment to DR 1-103(E)(2); (b) the BOG resolution regarding ballot measures that would severely reduce funds available to the State General Fund; and (c) the BOG resolution proposing a new OSB Annual Meeting format. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

EXHIBIT, p. 7-23

a.Plans for CLE on MDP

Mr. Riemer described the free CLE scheduled to start at 8:15 a.m. on Saturday, September 23 prior to the 2000 HOD Meeting. It will simply be a replay of an ABA program on Multidisciplinary Practice. No 'live' presenters are planned.

b.Meeting format, BOG member participation and other presenters

The 2000 HOD agenda was discussed and board members were assigned as presenters as shown on the attached exhibit.


Ms. Garst will be sending to the board a list of HOD members and the background information on the fee increase prior to the regional HOD meetings in August. Mr. Hittle discussed the timing to alert the HOD about the potential for new facilities to house the OSB and PLF staff. He suggested that the President's report might include a report on the crowded office space situation and the need to begin planning in this regard.

2.Plans for regional HOD meetings in August

Board members discussed their availability to participate in the HOD Regional meetings in August.

B.Proposed Admissions Rule on Corporate Counsel

Mr. Riemer reviewed the recommendation that the board consider the merits of an admissions rule providing that lawyers who are admitted in other jurisdictions may be admitted in Oregon, without passing the bar examination, if their practice in Oregon is limited to serving as house counsel for a corporation or other business entity. He indicated that about 10-12 states have corporate counsel rules. The rule makes it clear that a house counsel attorney’s only client is to be his or her corporate employer.

John Tyner discussed the history of this matter. The issue was studied by the UPL Committee in 1997, the UPL Commitee presented its recommendations to the BOG in July, 1998, the BOG referred it to the BBX for further study, and it has been a carryover item on the BOG agenda now for nearly six months. He indicated that the UPL Committee is very interested in having this matter resolved. It has been worked on very hard by both the UPL Committee and the BBX. Mr. Harnden mentioned minor changes regarding BBX Rule 15.05(1)(b) which refers to an affidavit, which will not be part of the rule. The agreement by the BBX and the Corporate Counsel Section was that an affidavit of verification was needed, but its form has not been agreed upon. Mr. Harnden also discussed a proposed wording changes as follows: (1) at the end of Admission Rule 15.05(7)(b), '…only as house counsel or the equivalent;'. (2) Admission Rule 15.05(9) and (10), '…, within three six months from..'.

A discussion ensued about the pros and cons of the amendments including future impacts. Mr. Williamson expressed concerns that this rule would create a slippery slope that may generate other requests to waive bar membership requirements, e.g., legal aid attorneys.

Action:Mr. Harnden moved, Ms. Sowle seconded, to recommend to the Supreme Court adoption of new Admission Rule 15.05, Admission of House Counsel, as shown on agenda exhibit pages 88-90 to include the following wording changes: (1) at the end of Admission Rule 15.05(7)(b), '…only as house counsel or the equivalent;'. (2) Admission Rule 15.05(9) and (10), '…, within three six months from..'. The motion excludes the proposed affidavit form on agenda exhibit page 91. The motion was approved by the board (12-0-2-2; absent Burrows, Orf; abstaining Hytowitz, Rinehart).

C.Consider proposal for BBX to study admission rule to allow out-of-state lawyers to practice law for legal aid and public defender organizations

Mr. Riemer presented a proposal to ask the Board of Bar Examiners to study an idea to adopt a special admission rule permitting out-of-state lawyers to provide legal aid or public defender services in Oregon without having to take and pass the Oregon Bar Examination. A number of states have similar rules.

Action:Mr. Hytowitz moved, Ms. Rinehart seconded, to request the Board of Bar Examiners to study and report back to the BOG its review concerning a proposed admission rule to allow out-of-state lawyers to practice law for legal aid and public defender organizations without taking and passing the Oregon State Bar examination. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

6.Election of 2000-2001 Officers

Mr. Rew and Ms. Garst reviewed the 2001 officer election process. Ballots were distributed to the members of the board. Candidates eligible for the office of president-elect were Mr. Lopez and Mr. Tyner. Ms. Rinehart had previously withdrawn from running for the office. Mr. Tyner and Mr. Lopez gave statements regarding their interest in being elected to the office.


Action:Angel Lopez was elected president-elect for 2001. Ballot count by candidate: Lopez - 12 (Anderson, Baldwin, Cohen, Davis, Harnden, Hittle, Lopez, Orf, Rew, Scott, Sowle, Williamson); Tyner - 3 ( Hytowitz, Rinehart, Tyner); absent – 1 (Burrows).

Action:Mr. Williamson moved, Ms. Sowle seconded, to elect Mr. Harnden as 2001 President. The motion was approved by the board (15-0-1; absent Burrows).

7.Consent Agenda

Mr. Hytowitz discussed revisions to the June 2-3, 2000 BOG minutes. Mr. Riemer agreed to review the minutes with Mr. Hytowitz. They will be presented to the board for approval in September.

Action:Mr. Hytowitz moved, Ms. Sowle seconded, to approve the following consent items. Action on the June 2-3, 2000 BOG meeting minutes was carried over to the September board meeting. The motion was approved by the board (14-0-2; absent Burrows, Orf).

A.Reading and approval of meeting minutes for June 30, 2000 special meeting minutes


B.Appointments Committee


1.Appointments to Oregon Law Commission

2.Appointment to Legal Ethics Committee

3.Appointment to Legal Aid Services of Oregon Board

4.Appointment to Metropolitan Public Defender Services, Inc.

5.Appointment to Baker/Grant County LPRC

6.Appointment to CLE Committee

7.Appointment of Out-of-State delegate to the HOD

EXHIBIT, p. 24

8.Default Agenda

A.Report of the Executive Director [Ms. Garst]

1.Operations Report

2.State Bar of California article: 'Private Discipline Winds up on the Web'


B.Budget & Finance Committee

1.Advertising on the bar’s web page

C.Client Security Fund Committee

1.CSF Claims Report

9.Good of the Order (Non-action comments, information and notice of need for possible future board action)

A.Ms. Garst presented an offer from Bryan Johnston, former legislator and dean of the Willamette University School of Management, to assist in resolving the Metropolitan Public Defenders Service strike. After discussion, it was felt that Mr. Johnston did not need the BOG’s approval to contact the Metropolitan Public Defenders Office to assist in this regard.

B.Mr. Rew expressed his appreciation to David Hittle for serving as a BOG member from Region 6 until a replacement is elected in August to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Mitzi Naucler.

return to BOG minutes index