Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dues Hardship Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bar governors seek bylaw change to expand hardship exemption for dues; request fiscal and equity analyses
Summary
The Board of Governors discussed a proposal to allow members to request a hardship exemption for bar dues three times in a career and to raise the income threshold from 200% to 270% of the federal poverty level (the ALICE metric). Governors asked for fiscal and equity analyses and for draft bylaw language to return for formal readings.
Get email alerts on the Dues Hardship Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Governor Jordan Couch introduced a proposal to expand the Bar Association’s hardship exemption for annual dues and asked the Board of Governors to authorize staff to draft bylaw language and prepare fiscal and equity analyses before formal readings.
Couch said the proposal would do two things: increase the number of times a member may request a hardship exemption in a career from two to three, and change the income threshold for eligibility from 200% of the federal poverty level to 270% (the ALICE metric). “This proposal is very straightforward,” Couch said, adding the change would likely increase requests and that a rough estimate for the cost would be about one dollar per member in dues.
The proposal grew out of an earlier 2020 board decision that extended the exemption from one year to two and a later suggestion, credited to Nancy Clark in prior discussion, to consider broader hardship-based relief. Couch told the board that after the 2020 change the number of second-time requests rose sharply in 2020–2021 and then stabilized at roughly 30–35 such requests per year.
Why it matters
Board members framed the change as a targeted way to help members experiencing short-term financial crisis — including medical leave, temporary unemployment or other life events — without creating broad categorical exemptions. Chief Garcia and Chief Nagoski (both of whom participated in the discussion) supported developing a limited, opt-in mechanism. “There is something preferable, to provide exemption for those that really need them,” Chief Nagoski said.
Discussion highlights
Several governors raised questions about scope and terminology. Governor Rathbone asked whether this was a first read; Couch clarified that the board was being asked to agree in principle to pursue drafting and analysis so the change can return as a formal first reading. Governor Dresden suggested renaming the program from “exemption” to a term such as “scholarship” or “grant” to reduce stigma for applicants. Multiple speakers, including Governor Villeneuve and President-elect Adewale, endorsed using member-engagement committees to vet details before the full board acts.
Some governors pressed on the population this would affect. Governor Bloom expressed skepticism about how many practicing lawyers would fall below the proposed threshold, saying, “I gotta wonder if... public defenders, doesn't that pay more than $42,000 a year?” Couch and other governors responded that the measure is intended to address transient or unusual hardships; Couch noted the ALICE 270% figure corresponds to about $42,000 for a single person in Washington and that even that level can represent effective poverty for some members.
Equity and access-to-justice framing
Several speakers urged that the program be framed as part of access to justice and equity work rather than a narrow billing exemption. Nancy Hawkins said many Bar members do not work in large firms with benefits and recounted representing low-income clients and years in which she did not earn $42,000. “An organization that is supposed to be working on equity and justice issues needs to be more understanding of what the average person's income is,” Hawkins said.
Next steps and board direction
The consensus from the discussion was to proceed with staff work: draft the bylaw amendment (changing the numeric thresholds), perform a fiscal impact analysis and produce an equity analysis, then return the proposed bylaw change for formal first and second readings. Couch and Chief Garcia said they would bring back revised language and analyses reflecting the meeting feedback. The board did not take a formal vote during this discussion; members characterized the outcome as direction to staff and committees rather than final action.
Ending
Board members encouraged committee-level vetting and member engagement prior to formal readings. Governor Couch and Chief Garcia will return the draft bylaw language, fiscal estimate and equity analysis to the Board of Governors for the formal first reading once those materials are complete.

