It is good that the State Bar responded and advised the membership of Mark Gifford's salary.   Wyoming Bar Watch hopes the State Bar is prepared to justify the need to pay Mark Gifford $150,000.   The State Bar did not offer any explanation or rationale for the extraordinary salary.  District court judges are paid $150,000 a year and supreme court justices a reported $165,000.  Why would a part time prosecutor job with the State Bar merit the same salary as a disctrict court judge?  The job of Wyoming Supreme Court Justice and Wyoming District Court Judge is rigorous. The job of bar counsel has always been part time, there has been no significant increase in the attorney population, and most targeted Wyoming lawyers appear to take stipulated discipline.  Other lawyers have suggested the willingness to stipulate to discipline in questionable circumstances stems from a lack of due process in the process.  Perhaps it stems from the Board of Professional Responsibility's refusal to reject the approach of Mark Gifford, even when that approach is overly agressive.

It makes more sense to have one lawyer investigate the alleged misconduct and another lawyer to prosecute that misconduct -- on a case by case basis. This is the system that Colorado employs.  Wyoming Bar Watch mentions the Colorado system as Mark Gifford points to that state's system as one after which Wyoming should model itself.

The idea that no other qualified candidates applied for the job is not believable for the reason that every Wyomign attorney knows one or two other attorneys that applied for the job and were willing to take a lesser salary.  Something is definitely fishy.

Finally, if the Wyoming State Bar is going to offer explanations to questions raised about the conduct of Mark Gifford, it may wish to do so through someone other than Ms. Sharon Wilkerson.  The scandal surrounding their relationship removes credibility from any response.  Perhaps that scandal is rumor, but it exists.