BOG candidate looks for voice in mandatory bar discussion

Listen to this article

The State Bar of Wisconsin released its list of candidates vying for two-year terms on the Board of Governors starting on July 1.

While six of the 22 people running for 17 vacancies are currently on the board, one other name stands out among those trying to win a seat. Madison attorney and 2006 State Bar President Steven A. Levine is looking to rejoin the board after a three-year absence.

Levine is competing with five other candidates for four vacancies in District 9, which covers Dane County. His motivation for returning to the board after a three-year absence is rooted in his longtime support for a voluntary bar.

“The most important thing is to get the issue before the Supreme Court,” he said. “I’ll continue working for a voluntary bar whether I’m on the board or not.”

But Levine is in the minority of those who are seeking a seat on the board primarily to participate in the debate over whether the bar should remain mandatory.

Several other candidates said that while the issue is important, it didn’t factor into their decision to run.

“There wasn’t any fire in my belly on this particular issue,” said attorney Brian L. Anderson, also running in District 9.

The same is true for attorney Drew J. Cochrane, who is vying for a seat in the same district. He decided to run simply as a way to get more involved with the bar.

Anderson suggested there could be other aspiring board members with strong feelings on the topic, but noted that only the Supreme Court has the authority to change the membership status of the bar.

“I hope even those people who feel strongly and are motivated to run are not doing so thinking they have a lot of say in the matter,” he said. “Ultimately, all they can do is petition the court.”

Report recommends petition

At its Feb. 26 meeting, the current board discussed a report from the Strategic Planning Committee on how to proceed in the ongoing mandatory versus voluntary debate.

The committee recommended that the bar draft a petition asking the Supreme Court to “review the status of the integrated bar.”

Though the board did not take a position on the recommendation, it will in the near future, which is the primary reason Levine wants to return.

“My main reason for running is to support the report,” he said.

Once a topic is discussed by the board, it typically returns to the agenda as an action item at the following meeting. In this case, that would occur on May 5, during the bar’s annual convention.

President-elect James C. Boll said there are two ways the debate could go, and both allow for new members to influence the issue.

If the board supports the proposal to have the court decide the question, then new board members will have the opportunity to help craft the petition. If the board opposes the recommendation, the issue could be sent back to the Strategic Planning Committee for additional review and voted on again in the future.

“If the board doesn’t vote for the proposal, there will be continuing action on the subject,” Boll said.

Since there is no guarantee that the issue will be decided at either the May or June meetings, new governors, who begin their terms on July 1, may have an opportunity to vote in the future.

“I think the vote is going to be very close, and if it fails in May, I want to be there to vote in the future,” Levine said.

Sixty percent of the board must approve the resolution for it to move forward, and it’s not clear if that level of support exists now.

“I think some board members are still undecided,” Boll said.