Sept. 4, 2024 – Next month, two candidates square off for the post of State Bar of Wisconsin president-elect in a special election to fill a vacancy.

In this Q&A, candidates Dan D. Gartzke of Madison and David E. Lasker of Mauston discuss their ideas for meeting the challenges facing the State Bar, if elected.

Gartzke (U.W. 1986) is with Boardman & Clark LLP, Madison. Lasker (U.W. 1973) is Juneau County corporation counsel.

Find out more about the candidates in the Aug. 7, 2024, issue of InsideTrack and on their election pages on WisBar.org.

The winner will serve out the remainder of the president-elect term, followed by a one-year term as president starting on July 1, 2025.

Electronic voting begins Oct. 10. See more information on voting in this election.

Here’s why this special election is needed.

The State Bar has about 25,000 members (15,000 active in Wisconsin), 24 sections, and 4 divisions. How can the State Bar best serve a membership with diverse needs and different challenges?

David Lasker: Communication is key, most particularly listening by soliciting feedback and hearing what members have to say. We should celebrate our diversity, be open and inclusive in our attitudes, and respect each other whatever our differences. I believe this is already basically in the culture of the State Bar.

Dan Gartzke: I believe there are pathways to progress that invite engagement from members across the board while not requiring any particular section or subset of membership to sacrifice their best interests. An example of such an approach is my proposed focus on mentorship programs.

A good mentoring program can raise the profession as a whole while being tailored to account for factors such as the location, practice area, practice level, and priorities of the attorneys involved.

A government lawyer in Madison will have differing mentoring needs from an attorney in Green Bay. A solo practitioner in a rural community will have different needs from an attorney in an urban area and an associate in a large firm will have further needs. All can benefit from guidance on the basic principles of being the best lawyer possible.

The goal is to allow someone seeking and someone offering mentorship to choose from options that best meet both parties’ needs. Attorneys should be able to self-select between mentors and mentees. I also think any program could be tailored to be situational, based on particular short-term needs, and immediate questions.

What, if anything, should the State Bar be doing differently to ensure that the organization is providing significant value for all members?

Dan Gartzke:We must continue to listen to our membership and consider their needs. This is a two-way street and membership must make their voices heard. When asking for input we must understand we may not always like the responses we get.

Sometimes the Bar cannot respond with the relief requested. I think almost every practitioner would like to reduce bar dues. I think that is particularly true of government lawyers and solo practitioners, who have to pay their own dues instead of lawyers in firms who are insulated from feeling the pinch directly because their dues are paid out of general overhead.

The answer, unfortunately, is not just to reduce bar dues. State Bar staff have done an admirable job of keeping the lid on those expenses. I understand the State Bar works with foresight to incrementally increase dues so it is not such a shock by having occasional, larger increases.

So, my specific answer is the State Bar should continue to work judiciously and cautiously with spending your State Bar dues to maximize return to the membership. I plan to use my year as president-elect to circulate around the state and solicit input into the mentorship opportunities I plan to promote as president.

David Lasker: This question is related to the first question above. As noted in my response, there is tremendous value for those who would seek it. So, I think we must encourage members to use those services in particular that would help them.

The question of value to the member implicates the issue of State Bar dues. I think we need to better explain how the dues are determined, what benefits to each member are made possible by paying those dues, and how the dues enable the State Bar to be of service to others.

How can the State Bar play a role in ensuring rural communities have adequate legal resources?

David Lasker: Communication is important here too. Seeking advice and counsel from those members who already practice in rural areas is essential. Providing information to young lawyers and law students about the virtues and possibilities of a rural law practice, which can be lucrative, and doing what we can to support those who are choosing that path in getting started. This problem, and the problem of encouraging lawyers who graduate from our law schools to stay and practice in Wisconsin, are tough problems to solve, and we’ll have to do some serious thinking outside the box to tackle them.

Dan Gartzke: I worked in a law firm based in rural communities for about eight years. We split our practice between Green, Lafayette, and surrounding counties. I know the struggles of lawyers in those settings, and I know the difficulties have grown only more over time.

The State Bar’s role should be to encourage attorneys to take positions in rural communities and to support them so it is possible for them to stay. It is not just about encouraging lawyers to take the jobs, but giving them the support to thrive and be excellent attorneys for their clients and communities.

Mentoring and assistance are key to this. Young lawyers starting out simply do not know what they don’t know, and will benefit from having access to seasoned lawyers’ knowledge. Seasoned lawyers should be willing to freely dispense their knowledge. Both will benefit from the interaction. I have seen how much I benefit from assisting young lawyers, whose fresh perspective should be valued and whose questions call for critical thought—as the saying goes, the best way to learn something is to teach it.

State Bar President Ryan Billings has said that lawyer wellness is high on his priority list. If you eventually become president, are there any issues that you would prioritize?

Dan Gartzke:I think an excellent way to improve lawyer wellness is to increase civility in the profession.

Practicing law is inherently stressful. We take on our clients’ problems and try to solve them. We frequently deal with people in high-stress situations, and often because of mistakes they have made or bad situations they find themselves in through no fault of their own. We see people on the worst days of their lives, and I think we naturally tend to internalize the stress of trying to make it right for our clients.

We do all this in an adversarial system, which some practitioners frankly misinterpret as requiring an inherently confrontational approach. I reject the mindset that some attorneys adopt that disagreeing with opposing counsel must be done in a way that is offensive or creates unnecessary stress.

I practice family law, where we have seen a movement to a collaborative approach – in other words, a different way of solving our clients’ problems and disputes. It requires counsel jointly seeking solutions, and not just looking to the courts to solve the dispute. Obviously, some issues are intractable and must be litigated in court for whatever reason. They can still be handled respectfully without raising the temperature of the advocacy.

A collaborative system will not translate into all areas of practice, but the principles can serve most any lawyer well. The best practitioners have always sought to collaborate with the other side. This is something that can be taught through mentoring.

David Lasker: The State Bar of Wisconsin is a model among bar associations across the country. That’s a tribute to its excellence in serving lawyers and the public. My first priority would be to support what’s necessary to keep that up. Whether it’s legal assistance on an issue in their practice, mentoring, or crisis assistance with health care problems both mental and physical, the State Bar offers invaluable help.

The ongoing work of the State Bar in supporting the mental health and well-being of lawyers is monumental, and the Wisconsin Lawyers Assistance Program (WisLAP) is always of great help to those suffering from alcohol or other addictions or mental health problems.

When WisLAP started way back when, it only dealt with alcohol addiction. Since then, it has grown to deal with narcotic addiction and all other addictions. Most recently, it has expanded to help lawyers with mental health issues, too. For many years I served on the governing board of WisLAP, and in 2013, I was honored as the “WisLAP Volunteer of the Year.” Keeping that program healthy and prosperous is a high priority for me.

I also hope to enhance the relationship between the Bar and the public, who really don’t know much about attorneys other than lawyer jokes. They lack clarity about how we’re trained, what good and honest advocacy can do for them, what we do in the everyday practice of law, or for that matter why we charge the fees we do. We talk among ourselves about such things, but I am committed to better outreach with the public. Lawyers are extraordinary human beings – intelligent, well-educated, and caring people who wish to be of service to others. We practice law because we want to make a difference. It’s important that the public understands these things about us.

Lastly, I want the State Bar to introduce dementia awareness training for lawyers in CLE classes and other programs. Dementia is a significant mental health problem not only for all those suffering from it but also for those loved ones who care for them. Yet, there is growing recognition we are doing too little as a society to provide for the needs of dementia patients. Lawyers suffer from it enough to warrant our knowing more about it, but so do our loved ones, clients, and the general public. I think it would behoove us to learn more about the disease in its various forms and how best to interact with and care for those suffering from it.

Bonus Question. I am the best person to lead the State Bar because…

Dan Gartzke: I am the best person to lead the State Bar because of the perspective of my 38 years of practice, in different sized firms, in both urban and rural settings, and my prior experience in leadership roles in various local bar organizations and State Bar programs.

David Lasker: I am the best person to lead the State Bar because of my unique background and experience – as a sole proprietor, in criminal defense and personal injury work, as a civil rights lawyer, and as corporation counsel for Juneau County.

Vote in October: Look for Your Email Ballot

The special election will be held via an electronic ballot, starting Oct. 10. Members will have 15 days to vote, with the election closing at noon Oct. 25, 2024. Results will be announced Oct. 28, 2024.

To ensure you receive your State Bar election ballot, add noreply@directvote.net as an approved sender in your inbox before Oct. 10. This prevents the ballot from being identified as spam.

Please note: If you have placed any holds on emails from the State Bar, you may not receive an electronic ballot. Contact Customer Service at (800) 444-9404 to verify that your account is set up to receive your email ballot.

State Bar members with no email address on file will receive paper ballots. Paper ballots will be mailed Oct. 9, 2024, with instructions.

Why is This Special Election Needed?

The special election is required because of the following circumstances:

• The membership elected Jane Bucher as State Bar president-elect in April 2023. The president-elect serves a one-year term before serving a one-year term as president.

• Bucher announced in February 2024 that she applied for an open judicial seat on the Green County Circuit Court.

• In March 2024, Gov. Tony Evers appointed Bucher to the judicial seat.

• Under Wisconsin Supreme Court rules, judges cannot serve as State Bar officers or members of the State Bar’s Board of Governors.

• Bucher resigned as president-elect, leaving a vacancy.

• In April 2024, Ryan Billings won the election to serve as president-elect starting on July 1, 2024.

• In May, the State Bar’s Board of Governors appointed Billings to fill the vacancy at president-elect, for the remainder of Bucher’s term.

• This allowed Billings to become president on July 1, 2024.

• When Billings took office as president, it created a vacancy for president-elect.

• The special election in October will fill the vacancy.

• The new president-elect will serve until June 30, 2025, then become president of the State Bar on July 1, 2025.

A Nominating Committee identified candidates to run in the election.