Meeting Minutes - Transition Board
Transition Board of Directors - Legal Aid of North Carolina
July 27, 2001 Meeting (BOD Mtg #5)
Self-Help Credit Union, Greensboro, NC
Welcome/Introductions
The following Transition Board members were present: Elizabeth Cox, Linda
Rollock, Willis Williams, Leo Allison, Allen Johnson, Glenn Barfield, Jack
Holtzman, Pender McElroy, Tracy H. Barley, Caroline Myers and Rick Fay. The
following board members were absent with advance notice: David Daggett, Frank
Queen.
The following people also attended the meeting: Debra Tyler-Horton, Bill Rowe,
Celia Pistolis, Kellie Fleshman, Mary Lee Hall, Richard Klein, Hazel
Mack-Hilliard, Roselle Margolis, Ted Fillette, Kay House, Ken Schorr, Gina
Reyman, Evelyn Pursley, Dale Deese, Delsie Williams, George Hausen.
Adoption of the Meeting Agenda
Moved by Rick Fay and seconded by Willis Williams. Unanimously adopted.
Approval of the Minutes from the June 15, 2001 Meeting
Moved by Glenn Barfield and seconded by Rick Fay. Unanimously approved.
The following were offered as handouts at this meeting:
- Management/Structure Committee meeting summary from 7/20/01
- 06/15/01 Meeting Summary ("Minutes")
- Eastern Carolina Legal Services 07/26/01 letter, accompanying a 01/01
letter to LSNC’s board
Barfield Committee Report (Glenn Barfield)
The Committee Chair reported that the discussions regarding the Legal Services
of Southern Piedmont (Charlotte) and the Legal Aid Society of Northwest North
Carolina (Winston-Salem) were ongoing. Both programs were looking at the most
appropriate configuration that would best serve Charlotte and Winston-Salem.
The majority of the report focused on the discussions relating to the
Charlotte program and how their resources would be split between a non-LSC
funded and the LSC funded programs in their area. There was a good deal of
discussion about the LSSP name and state funds. Ted Fillette reported that a
LSSP proposal would be discussed with the NC Justice Center for its input and
response. Additionally, the Planning Council will also be involved with this
discussion. LSSP will continue to develop its plan to educate the members of the
bars and the public, and will also continue to collaborate on the development of
the LSSP proposal.
Some concern was expressed about LSSP and its outreach to the Latino
population from a more statewide perspective, given that Duplin County has the
highest percentage of the Spanish speaking population. Mary Lee Hall indicated
that she was interested in working with this aspect of the proposal. Willis
Williams also voiced concern about the statewide client council, which has not
had the energy spent on them as to how do they solve the problem of real
substantial client attention.
Planning Council (Gina Reyman)
The Planning Council will meet again on July 31, 2001 in Greensboro at the
Self Help Building, 8th floor conference room. Rick Fay has been
appointed to this council to represent the Transition Board. The Planning
Council has not met since June 8, 2001. The Planning Council hopes to focus on
how to integrate in the work of the Planning Council with that which the special
providers do.
Governance Committee (Glenn Barfield)
The Committee Vice Chair reported the following recommendations for board
structure:
* The LANC board should be comprised of 24 members
– 15 attorney members;
- 9 client members
(62.5% attorneys; 37.5% clients; LSC requires 60/40 or 66/33).
* Attorneys:
- Each of the former independent service areas
should have standing seat
(local/district bars nominate).
- Five regional representative lawyers
(at least one attorney member on
board from each of the regions–NCBA slots).
- Seats for affinity bars:
NC
Association of Black Lawyers;
NC
Association of Women Attorneys;
NC Academy
of Trial Lawyers;
NC Hispanic
Lawyers Association;
NC Gay &
Lesbian Attorneys;
NC
Association of Defense Attorneys (ins defense);
NC Bar
Association president-elect;
NC State
Bar (in consultation with IOLTA).
* Clients
- Two client slots from statewide client council;
- Two from local urban county organizations,
- Five from local rural county organizations (slotted
into each of the five regions).
* The NCBA president-elect to have an ex officio status that would eventually
slot out to
NCGALA as a voting status.
It is important that our board is diverse as for the attorney members also.
NCBA has been the biggest supporter as among the bar associations. It was also
suggested by the Committee that NCBA’s involvement is important for "cover."
Need to develop process for getting client members on the Board. At next
meeting, they hope to have something to sign off on for the Transition Board.
Next issue they will begin looking at is boards for local programs. Ex officio
is something to consider; way to get judges and others involved. Glenn Barfield
will get suggestions on other organizations that might be invited to the table.
Barfield Committee will not have a report for a August Transition Board
meeting, but will have a report for the September meeting. The Barfield
Committee will have requested Planning Council input by that time.
Management Committee (Tracey Barley)
The Committee Chair presented the recommendations of her committee. She
indicated that the Committee’s recommendations were based in part on the
Tull/Echols Report from October 2000.
The following are the recommendations of the Management Committee:
1. Four regions instead of one. Decision not based upon census populations.
Divided by how we would naturally divide the programs based upon the programs as
we have them currently. (West, Triad, Triangle and East)
2. There needs a central office. The location would be determined at some
point in the future.
3. There needs to be a regional office in place in the future.
4. There are required responsibilities within each region but these can be
filled by someone also filling another duty. Managing attorneys on the regional
team. Regional directors would be on a statewide management team. There would be
regional and local advisory boards that would not be responsible for budget or
personnel decisions.
There was considerable discussion about the regional divisions, particularly
about the East’s not being divided into more than one region. It was noted that
the program directors in the East had opposed one large eastern region and in
agrement regarding two regions–Northeast and Southeast–when requested to
consider the regional concept. There was also discussion about the division of
resources across the state and how the regions might be able to equalize those
resources.
Additional discussion was about the responsibilities of management, including
who would be responsible for hiring and firing managing attorneys within the
regions. Concern that the authority of the executive director would not be
diluted if he/she would have no authority.
The Board Chair asked the Management Committee to clarify the specifics of the
managing attorneys’ and regional directors’ roles and to flesh out the report
for discussion at the next Transition Board meeting.
Leo Allison moved that the Board vote on regional structure or not a regional
structure. Rick Fay seconded. 8 votes for regional concept; 2 votes against
regional concept.
The Management Committee will proceed and flesh out the regional concept,
address cost considerations and the grievance process.
Next meeting: September 28 in Chapel Hill at Camp New Hope.
(August 17 meeting is canceled)
Disclaimer
The materials contained on this website are for information and educational
purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Please contact your
Legal Aid of North Carolina office or a private attorney if you need to speak to
an attorney regarding your particular situation. See our complete
disclaimer.
Mission Statement
Legal Aid of North Carolina is a statewide, nonprofit law firm that
provides free legal services in civil matters to low-income people in
order to ensure equal access to justice and to remove legal barriers
to economic opportunity.