Following on the heels of major discoveries of alleged public corruption by a Yoloan Rabbi relating to several members of the State Bar Board of Governors (“BOG”) in areas relating to self-dealing, conflicts of interest and lack of disclosures; the BOG recently took swift action by calling a special meeting and passing a resolution to encourage the California Legislature to adopt new and revised “Conflict of Interest” policies that would apply to all members, and establish the qualifications expected from those who serve as public members of the BOG.
As previously reported here, and according to confidential sources, State Bar’s establishment was shocked by the scope and magnitude of the revelations purveyed by YR as they relate to member Jeannine English and her husband, tribal gambling attorney Howard Dickstein.
In addition, the BOG was prompted to action by previous revelations purveyed by YR concerning CaliforniaALL, CCPF, Ruthe Ashley, Buchalter Nemer’s Holly Fujie, CCPF’s Judy Johnson; State Bar Executive Director Emeritus, Gwen Moore, Girardi & Keese’s Howard Miller, Howard Rice’s Douglas Winthrop; UNH’s Sarah Redfield; member Council on Access and Fairness, and others.
As such, according to the sources, a complaint and a request for investigation delivered to the Board of Governors on June 12, 2011 see http://tinyurl.com/jeannineenglish , relating to member Jeannine English as well as prior revelations prompted the BOG to convene a special session on June 17 to, among others, introduce amendments to the proposed legislation.
Below is a snapshot of the outcome of the meeting and the result of the vote.
All members voted “yes”, except Laura Chick, Angela Davis, George Davis, Jeannine English, Dennis Mangers, and Michael Tenenbaum.
Moreover, and according to sources, the current “conflicts of interest” policy is still lacking, and proposed revisions will soon be dispatched to the point of contact.
According to the sources, a recommendation will be proposed by which an area on the BOG website will be devoted to disclosures – similar to those appearing on court websites that provide “seminar disclosures” by judges – on which members can make public disclosures concerning matters such as membership and involvement in other organizations, foundations, business dealings, and particularly regarding litigation matters.
For example, if BOG Member A and BOG Member B presently represent plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, such information should be disclosed and otherwise be made available for public viewing.