<div dir="ltr"><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">Fellow WSBA Members,<span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal">As you know, each year the WSBA is required to permit its
member to take a Keller deduction for the amount of your bar dues that the Bar
Association estimates it spent on “political or ideological activities that are
not reasonably related to the regulation of the legal profession or improving
the quality of legal services.” <span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal">As you may have noticed, in recent years (and especially in
2017) the WSBA has increasingly engaged in partisan political activity that has
nothing to do with regulating the practice of law. However, the amount of the
Keller deduction as a proportion of our bar dues has changed very little in
recent years. For this reason, I decided to pay attention to how the Keller
deduction was calculated this year. What I found was disappointing, but sadly
not surprising:<b> The Keller deduction
should be four times larger than the WSBA calculated. </b>I know the dollar
amount doesn’t seem like much given the increasing amount of your bar dues, but
the First Amendment implications of this are huge. The Constitution is clear:
you cannot be compelled to pay for political and ideological speech with which
you disagree. For this reason alone, I have sent a formal request for
arbitration of the amount of the Keller deduction to the WSBA. <span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal">Unfortunately, based on my reading of the rules for
challenging the Keller deduction, I cannot challenge the deduction on behalf of
all WSBA members. <b><u>If you want your
Keller deduction to be corrected, you must submit your own request for
arbitration to the WSBA in writing no later than February 1, 2018.<span></span></u></b></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal">Per information on the WSBA website: “Delivery may be made
in person or by first-class mail, and mailed demands will be deemed delivered
upon mailing. Demands shall include the name and address of the member or
members demanding arbitration, a brief statement of the claim or objection, and
the signature of each objecting member.” (<a href="https://www.wsba.org/docs/default-source/licensing/keller-deduction-overview.pdf?sfvrsn=9f3538f1_4">https://www.wsba.org/docs/default-source/licensing/keller-deduction-overview.pdf?sfvrsn=9f3538f1_4</a>
) I assume this means you cannot submit your demand via email. <span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><b>Below I have included the text of the demand letter I sent to the WSBA, which you may copy and sign and send to the WSBA. </b>Feel free to edit
or change it however you see fit before you send it. If you think there is
something I have missed, please let me know. I expect that the WSBA will
consolidate these requests for arbitration, and I am fully prepared to defend
all of the claims made in my letter on behalf of everyone who sends in a
similar demand. <span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><b style="font-style:italic">Please feel free to forward this on to anyone you think might be interested in having this information or post it on other listserves. </b>I am not a member of any other listserves and do not have the capacity to send this to all WSBA members, but I would like the information to get out to as many people as possible so they can have the opportunity to be informed about what the WSBA has been up to. </p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><b><i>What if I already paid my dues for 2018? </i></b>My understanding is
that you can still request arbitration and a refund for the proper amount of
the Keller deduction once it has been determined. <span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><b><u>Sample Demand Letter:</u></b></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing">Washington State Bar Association<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing">1325 Fourth Ave.<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing">Suite 600<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing">Seattle, WA 98101-2539<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing"><span> </span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">RE: Request for Arbitration Regarding the Keller deduction<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">To Whom It May Concern,<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">This is a formal demand for arbitration regarding the amount
of the Keller deduction for the 2018 year. I allege that the Keller deduction
was calculated improperly in the following manner:<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>Political and ideological activities not related
to direct and indirect lobbying for legislation were not included in the
calculation of the Keller deduction. These activities include:<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:1in"><span style="font-family:"Courier New"">o<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The cost of the Decoding the Law series, as this
series was entirely one-sided political argumentation in opposition to the
death penalty, Initiative 1552, President’s Trump’s travel bans, and espousing
political positions on race and police activity. No individuals representing
the other side of these extremely controversial political ideologies were given
the opportunity to present at any of the Decoding the Law presentations, and
numerous statements of political opinion were made by the presenters;<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:1in"><span style="font-family:"Courier New"">o<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>A large portion of the expenses of the Access to
Justice Board, which engages in substantial political activity, including:<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span style="font-family:Wingdings">§<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The August 21, 2017 letter to Chief Justice Mary
Fairhurst regarding Proposed ER 413 -
Admissibility of Immigration Status (see September BOG meeting materials pg.
392-93)<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span style="font-family:Wingdings">§<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>Comments before the FCC regarding Net Neutrality
(see September BOG meeting materials pg. 401-410)<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:1.5in"><span style="font-family:Wingdings">§<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The cost of the Access to Justice State Plan for
the Coordinated Delivery of Civil Legal Aid to Low Income People, as it is
replete with social and political opinion statements, including numerous
references to “systemic racism” and “racial bias that has been built into our
societal fabric.” (see March BOG meeting pubic materials pg. 129-147)<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:1in"><span style="font-family:"Courier New"">o<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The expense of the publication of NW Lawyer
magazine was not included in the calculation of the Keller deduction. NW Lawyer
magazine has, in 2017 in particular, become an outlet for political opinion
pieces: publishing only articles from one political perspective, while denying
publication of articles from the other perspective. Of the 60 substantive
articles (not part of a standard section such as the President’s corner or Bar
Notes) written for NW Lawyer this year, 27.42% were political in nature. Of
these, 100% were written from a liberal/Democrat/left-leaning perspective. Not
a single article published in NW Lawyer magazine in 2017 was from a
conservative/Republican/right-leaning perspective. In fact, I am at a loss to
think of a single article published in NW Lawyer since I became a member in
2013 that was from a conservative perspective. I find it impossible to believe
that this is simply the result of a lack of submissions from conservative
writers. The Letters to the Editor section contains many such perspectives. Because
of the discriminatory manner in which articles are selected for publication in
NW Lawyer magazine, the net cost of publication of the magazine must be
considered political and ideological activity on the part of the WSBA. At the
very least, the net cost of publishing the 27.42% of articles which were
political in nature must be non-chargeable;<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The amount of general staff time spent on
legislative or political matters was multiplied by an improper percentage:
58.13% instead of 93.25%, which was the percentage of actual time spent
lobbying for or against legislation which was non-chargeable. The 58.13% figure
was obtained by dividing the number of staff hours actually spent working on
legislative activities by the number budgeted, and then multiplying that by
93.25% (the percentage of non-chargeable legislative activity). Because only
about two-thirds of the legislative budget was actually spent this year, the
percentage came out to 58.13%. However, it is improper to multiply the amount
of money <i>actually spent</i> on general
staff time, BOG meeting time, and conference calls by a number that was
obtained by counting <i>unspent<u> </u></i>hours
in the legislative budget. The proper calculation should have been multiplying
the value of general staff time actually spent by the percentage of non-chargeable
activities: 93.25%, resulting in a deduction of $.13 for this portion of the
Keller deduction, not $.08. <span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The portion of legislative and general staff
time spent on preparing opposition to the proposed restructuring of the 9<sup>th</sup>
Circuit Court of Appeals which was counted as chargeable time should be counted
as non-chargeable time. <span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpLast"><span> </span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><b>Based on the above, I
estimate that the Keller deduction was miscalculated by approximately $10.99,
pending receipt of further information necessary to make an accurate
calculation. </b><span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">Per the rules set forth for arbitration, I am requesting
information on the following information:<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>A detailed breakdown of the exact manner in
which the $5,456.30 of general staff time, (including salaries, benefits, and
overhead), BOG meeting time (overhead), and conference calls spent on meetings
where legislative or political matters were discussed was calculated;<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The total cost of the Decoding the Law Series, including
the amount of staff salaries which went into running and advertising this
series, and whether this was or was not included in the calculation of the
Keller deduction;<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>The total amount of time spent by the Access to
Justice Board on political topics, including all of the above-mentioned items
and whether time spent on any of the above was already included in the
calculation of the Keller deduction.<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style=""><span style="font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span>A list of the title and topic of every article
submitted to NW Lawyer Magazine which was <u>not</u> accepted for publication,
as well as a list of any articles which were personally solicited by members of
WSBA staff or board members from any individual on a particular topic which
were published (in order to determine whether the selection of articles for
publication was made in a socially or politically discriminatory way).<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">I look forward to receiving the WSBA’s prompt response to
this matter. <span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><span> </span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" align="right" style="text-align:right">Sincerely,<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" align="right" style="text-align:right"><span> </span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" align="right" style="text-align:right"><span> </span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" align="right" style="text-align:right">[Name]<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" align="right" style="text-align:right">[Bar number]<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">
</p><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" align="right" style="text-align:right">[Contact
information]<span></span></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><br></p><p class="gmail-MsoNormal">Sincerely,<span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoNormal">Christina Faucett<br></p><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Attorney at Law</div><div><a href="http://faucettlegal.com" target="_blank">faucettlegal.com</a></div><div>(206) 650-2420</div><div><br></div><div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-size:13.3333px">CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: </span><br style="font-size:13.3333px"><span style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-size:13.3333px">The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.</span></font><br></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>