 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
Bar News - August 17, 2001 The Benefits of Inactive Membership Editor’s note: A number of inactive Bar members have expressed concern over the recent $50 dues increase for nearly all Bar Association membership categories, including inactive. The dues increase, approved at the June 4 membership meeting, was the first in seven years. The following is an excerpt of NHBA President Peter Hutchins’ response to some of the concerns expressed by inactive members over the dues increase. I UNDERSTAND THAT some inactive members have expressed concerns that the across-the-board $50 dues increase is a much higher percentage increase compared to the dues paid by active members. Just so you’ll understand a bit of the reasoning, however, I offer the following. We have had one dues increase in 21 years. This includes inactive members, many of whom may have only recently become inactive (which means they enjoyed all of the bar’s services for most of the 21 years with only a $15 dues increase back in 1993). While an inactive member, in theory, does not benefit from bar services as an active in-state member does, neither does he contribute through volunteer efforts to the ongoing operation of the bar. Therefore, while inactive members receive less (by choosing to become inactive), they also contribute less (both in dues and in volunteer efforts upon which the bar relies). Also, our publications (Bar News and Bar Journal) are among the best in the country – we have won numerous awards for their quality. Bar News certainly serves to keep inactive members totally apprised of what is going on, which would significantly ease a return to active practice. In Massachusetts, for example, a subscription to the state bar’s Lawyers Weekly (which cannot hold a candle to Bar News) costs members an additional $200 above and beyond dues. In NH, our bar publications are free with the membership. To that extent, inactive members are receiving a disproportionate benefit to the active members, who pay more in dues. Also, our technological advances equally serve active and inactive members. The Web site makes us worldwide, and I would suggest is of great benefit to inactive members who live far away. In addition, our membership database, mailings, etc. apply to all members, active or inactive. In the last two years our technological upgrades have cost over $200,000. These advances benefit all members, but such investments contributed to the need for a dues increase. Further, cost of living increases necessary to simply operate the association should also be borne equally, in my view. Without an association up and running, there would be no such thing as inactive status, and the benefits of being inactive…would be gone. Finally, our CLE materials and other committee publications are available to inactive, as well as active, members – equally. Therefore, I feel that the across-the-board increase at this time is fair. However, you will note that in the other (approved) bylaws change, which gives the Board of Governors authority to increase dues in the future without the need for a membership meeting, a 15 percent cap is imposed. This does anticipate that further dues increases (or decreases) would be implemented on the percentage basis you suggested. I think that if the bar had simply increased its dues over the years, like other organizations, to correspond to the increase in the cost of living and cost of doing business, and if that had been done on a pro rata basis, we would have no need for the current $50 increase. However, since the dues have not been increased for so long, it seems that an across-the-board reflective adjustment is proper to bring us up to date with current reality. I hope this addresses your concerns (even if it is not the answer you may have hoped for).
|
|
Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store New Hampshire Bar Association |
