1994 Six month report of Access to Justice Board

November 28, 1994
Chief Justice James Anderson
Temple of Justice
P. O. Box 40929
Olympia, WA 98504-0929

Ron Gould, President
Washington State Bar Association
1201 Third Avenue
40th Floor
Seattle, WA 98101

re: Six month report of Access to Justice Board

Dear Chief Justice Anderson and President Gould:

On April 18, 1994, the Supreme Court entered an order establishing the Access to Justice Board. In part, that order provided for evaluative interim reports every six months to the Supreme Court and the Board of Governors regarding the work of the Board. This letter is meant to constitute that first six-month report.

After the order was received by the Bar Association, a formal presentation was made at the May 6, 1994, Board of Governors meeting. At that time discussion was held regarding the appropriate method for identifying potential nominees to the ATJ Board. A plan for wide dissemination of the vacancies was adopted and the issue was put over to the next meeting. Direct notice was sent to various interested groups and individuals.

After publication of the notice regarding the appointments in numerous publications, the Board of Governors once again considered the nominations at its June 17, 1994 meeting. By this time several names and resumes had been received. The Board of Governors felt that more time should be allowed to assure that everyone had adequate notice and the opportunity for input. This was in line with the usual policy of the Board of Governors to assure that there is sufficient notification to the membership of the Bar Association before appointments are made to boards and committees. In addition, the directive from the Supreme Court to assure that there be ethnic, gender, geographic and other diversity required the additional time in order to secure a broad range of candidates to consider.

At the Board of Governors July meeting, a report was received from a subcommittee recommending a slate of nine nominees along with a second slate of alternate nominees (to comply with a long-standing request from the Supreme Court that the Board of Governors provide more than one choice to the Court for appointments). Those lists were forwarded to the Court. On October 19, 1994 an order was received from the Court appointing the members to the Board.

In the meantime, efforts proceeded for the hiring of a designated staff person for the Access to Justice Board. A committee composed of Mary Elizabeth St. Clair, Ken Davidson, Mike McKay, Lucy Isaki and Jim Bamberger met after notice had been published nationally about the need to fill this position. Seventy five applications were received. The group was narrowed down to five to be interviewed. The committee did not find the candidate they were looking for and elected to once again publish the notice for this position. Another 25 applications were received. Once again, they were narrowed to five and interviews were conducted by the same committee.

Comprehensive materials were put together by staff for each board member. A reference book was compiled containing materials regarding many access to justice issues. A handbook with various background pieces was prepared for use during meetings.

The first choice of the committee was Joan Fairbanks. Ms. Fairbanks is a graduate of Antioch School of Law in Washington, D.C., and has spent her entire legal career in access to justice issues. She has worked as community education coordinator for Oregon Legal Services Corporation, staff attorney for Neighborhood Legal Services in Washington, D.C., as managing attorney for the Voluntary Legal Services Program of Northern California, (at the ABA) staff attorney for the Commission on Legal Problems of the Elderly, and is a pro bono "peer" consultant for the ABA'S Center for Pro Bono. Joan is relocating from California and will begin work on January 3, l99S. In the meantime, Mary Elizabeth St. Clair and Sharlene Steele have been providing staff support for the ATJ Board.

The first meeting of the Board was held on November 21, 1994 at the WSBA offices in Seattle. All members of the Board were present. I am attaching a copy of the agenda for that meeting. The meeting lasted from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Each board member made a presentation introducing themselves and talking about their vision for the Access to Justice Board Comprehensive presentations were made by Tom Chambers setting forth the history of the proposal to the Supreme Court, Ken Davidson as the former chair of the legal aid committee describing the work of that committee over the last few years, Barbara Clark from the Lega1 Foundation of Washington giving both an historical overview and her vision for the ATJ Board, Ada Shen-Jaffe from Evergreen Legal Services raising issues that need to be addressed by the ATJ Board and Leonard Schroeter giving a legal analysis of the Constitutional basis for Access to Justice.

During the meeting, the Board decided:

1. To not work on formulating a mission statement at this time, but instead using the language in the order of the Supreme Court for the purpose and mission of the Board;
2. To not consider committee structures at this time until the Board itself makes decisions on its philosophy and direction;
3. To plan future meetings for December 19, January 19, February 13 and then the third Monday of each month thereafter, each meeting scheduled to be an all day meeting.

Next the Board conducted an exercise in identifying priority issues to be addressed by the Board in the near future.

We have established the agenda for our next meeting. It will allow each member of the Board to make a presentation regarding philosophical ideas on how we should begin to tackle Access to Justice issues. Thereafter we will review the list of priorities established at our first meeting and begin working on ideas for implementation of those goals.

There was an extremely high level of enthusiasm exhibited at the first meeting. The Board members were very excited about the potential for the work of this Board. We recognize that we are' the first in the nation to use this model to attack the problems Regarding Access to Justice. We fully understand the importance of our assuring that the quality of our work is of the highest caliber not only for the citizens of this state but in recognition of our leadership role for the entire country.

PLS:lsg

Very truly yours,

Paul L. Stritmatter