Arbitrator to decide by year’s end on Keller
dues objection
An arbitrator’s decision is expected by the end of the year in
a proceeding to determine how costs associated with the State Bar of
Wisconsin’s attorney public image campaign should be treated.
Briefs and other materials required to make a decision have been
received by arbitrator Christopher Honeyman. He has indicated to the
parties that he expects to make his decision by late December.
The arbitration process was initiated by three attorneys, including
former State Bar President Steve Levine, who argue that the Bar should
have included image campaign expenditures in the Keller dues
rebate for fiscal year 2009. The objectors assert that the Bar’s
public image campaign expenditures are not “sufficiently
related” to either “regulating the legal profession”
or “improving the quality of legal services.” The Bar
responds that, among other things, the public image campaign is germane
to these Bar missions by noting the importance of (declining) public
confidence in the legal profession as an element of the quality of legal
services and that the public image campaign was created to improve that
public perception.
The campaign, which operates under the direction of the Public Image
Committee, addresses the public's perception of the profession through
30-second television ads broadcast on a rotating basis around the state
and similar outreach activities.
The Bar’s Board of Governors establishes the
association’s dues as part of the annual budget process. Under
Keller, the Bar cannot use compulsory dues of objecting members
for political or ideological activities that are not reasonably related
to regulating the legal profession or improving the quality of legal
services.
Keller allows members to decline to support such activities
that have been designated by the Board of Governors. The amount is
calculated using financial statements and activities for the Bar’s
most recent audited fiscal year.
The arbitration process is established by SCR 10.03(5)(b), which
provides, in part, that “A member of the state bar who contends
that the state bar incorrectly set the amount of dues that can be
withheld may deliver to the state bar a written demand for
arbitration.” State Bar bylaw Article I, Section 5 further
addresses this process and provides, in part, that upon receipt of such
an arbitration demand, “the State Bar shall apply for an
appointment of an impartial arbitrator to the Chief Judge of the Federal
District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.”
