Under Rule 2-9.3 (b) - (e), Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, active members of the Bar may file a specific objection to any legislative position adopted by the Board of Governors.
Objections properly filed within 45 days of this News issue will be considered for a refund of that portion of mandatory membership fees applicable to the contested legislative position, within an additional 45 days. The Bar’s governing board has the option to grant the appropriate refund to an objector or to refer the matter to arbitration. The arbitration process will determine solely whether the legislative position is within those acceptable activities for which compulsory membership fees may be used under applicable constitutional law. The objecting member’s fees allocable to the contested legislative position will be escrowed promptly upon receipt of the objection, and any refund will bear legal interest.
Any active member may provide written notice to the executive director of The Florida Bar, setting forth an objection to a particular legislative position. Failure to object within 45 days of this News issue will constitute a waiver of any right to object to a particular legislative position within this notice.
The policy requires the Bar to notice such legislative positions in the next available News issue following their adoption.
Pursuant to Standing Board Policy 9.21(d), on November 27, the president, president-elect and Legislation Committee chair approved the following Florida Bar positions:
• “Supports amending the constitution to allow the Supreme Court to adopt rules to provide for cross-county assignment of county judges within each judicial circuit in order to address workload issues within the state courts system.”
• “Supports amending the constitution to require funding for communications services, existing radio systems, and existing multi-agency criminal justice information systems for public defenders’ offices, state attorneys’ offices, and the offices of the clerks of the circuit and county courts performing court-related functions and to require state funding for trial court technology.”