Adoption and education law certification moved.

Proposed new certification areas in education law and adoption law have won preliminary approval of the Program Evaluation Committee, which is still looking into the minimum number of lawyers required for a certification area.

Board of Governors member and PEC Chair Ervin Gonzalez told the board at its meeting last month that the Board of Legal Specialization and Education had proposed the two new certification areas and the committee agreed they were needed.

But in approving the two new areas, which will come to the board at a future meeting for approval, Gonzalez said the committee wound up rethinking its earlier position that new certification areas should demonstrate the ability to have 75 certified lawyers within three years.

Current rules set a minimum number at 50 for a certification, he noted, and the committee, to improve administrative and financial operations, approached the BLSE about increasing the number. But the BLSE, he said, responded by suggesting the number be lowered to 25.

PEC members began to rethink their position when they considered the two new certification efforts. Gonzalez said indications are that while education law will get 75 members, "we don't believe they [adoption law] are going to get to 75 in three years. But we think it's an area that should be certified."

Having an adoption law certification will help the public by identifying lawyers in that complex but vital area, Gonzalez said, adding, "Many lawyers claim to have expertise in adoption law, and they don't."

He said the PEC has decided on a new approach to determining the numerical goals for a certified area.

"We're going to work at it backwards. We're going to find out what should be the minimum for an area, and look at the budget," Gonzalez said, adding the BLSE has pledged its assistance.

Board member and PEC member Gwynne Young said the minimum number for a certified area is more than an academic question. A small number means minimal income that may not cover administrative expenses. And, she said, there's also a problem that with only a few members it can be difficult to get a sufficient number for peer reviews when Bar members seek recertification and to find enough lawyers with time to serve on that area's certification committee.

"There really are some function issues," Young said.

On other matters, the PEC recommended and the board approved minor changes to Bar policies on presidential elections.

The alterations remove the prohibition in Rule 2-4.5 against active campaigning for Bar president-elect prior to November 15 of the year before the election, which addresses First Amendment concerns. Also modified were provisions in Standing Board Policy 2.20 to clarify what restrictions there are on campaigning for president-elect, as well as what restrictions apply to those who voluntarily limit campaigning in exchange for various free or reduced-fee assistance from the Bar.

The changes were suggested by a special committee chaired by Second District Court of Appeal Judge Morris Silberman, a former board member.

PEC, Gonzalez said, is working on several other matters, including exploring ways to give the Code and Rules of Evidence Committee more input into legislative deliberations on evidence code matters and a recommendation that the chair of the board's Disciplinary Review Committee become an automatic member of the Bar's Executive Committee.