|
|
Enron Mail |
For your consideration in preparation for Friday's meeting.
David < -----Original Message----- < From: Bradford G. Keithley [mailto:bgkeithley@jonesday.com] < Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 9:08 AM < To: David Winn < Cc: Patrick H. Martin; 'Jim Armour'; Stuart Hollimon; Tim West; < Janice Hartrick < Subject: Thoughts in Preparation for Special SWLF Meeting < < In anticipation of this Friday's meeting I thought I it might be < useful to synthesize my thoughts on the Membership Committee report. < As you did with the responses on the Program Committee questionnaire, < please feel free to circulate these thoughts as appropriate. I have < copied these thoughts directly to the members of the Membership < Committee, Jim, Stuart, Tim and Janice (if I have left anyone out I < apologize in advance): < < 1. The general outline of the Committee's report is great and I < commend the Committee for its efforts. I support expanding the scope < of the Center, moving to a simplified dues based membership and < rotating (with some modification) the membership of the Executive < Committee. < < 2. I have some concerns with some of the specifics inside that < broad outline, however. < < a. My perspective is somewhat parochial. I am concerned < primarily about preserving the Center as a vibrant forum for oil & gas < lawyers. I concur in the recommendation of the Membership Committee < to expand the scope of the Center to include a broad segment of the < energy industry, but we should be careful to find a way to do so which < does not impair the ability also to maintain focus on specific < segments of the industry. As a way of accomplishing this goal, my < thought would be to provide for separate "practice groups" (e.g., < committees) within the Center for oil & gas, power, energy marketing & < trading ("emt") and coal & nuclear ("energy mining") (and possibly < others). There would be no limitation on belonging to more than one < practice group. (As a side note, this would actually serve to < increase Jones Day's participation because we would have separate < lawyers on each committee who might not otherwise participate if we < did not provide an opportunity for such "pluralism"). < < b. As part of the effort at maintaining "pluralism," my < thought also is to provide for a seat on the Executive Committee for < the chair of each practice group. This would help avoid the potential < that the Center might become dominated (as occurred, for example, with < the old SONREEL) by one group or another. To assist in < institutionalizing the diversity, the Executive Committee would be < composed of the officers, the chairs of the various committees < (program, membership, information, etc.) and the chair of each < practice group. In order to preserve the rotation anticipated by the < Membership Committee recommendations, the chairs of the committees and < practice groups could be limited to two year terms. They would stay < on the Executive Committee once their term as chair expired only if < selected to an officer position within the Center. The initial terms < of the practice group chairs could be staggered so that not every < chair would rotate off at the same time. In order to provide maximum < opportunity for participation in leadership positions, the term of the < officers could be set to a year. < < c. I think it is also important as a part of maintaining < "pluralism" to ensure that the individual practice groups (rather than < an overall Program Committee) serve as the primary focus for the < development and presentation most of the Center's programs. In other < words, the oil & gas practice group would be responsible for the < Annual Oil & Gas Institute; the power practice group would be < responsible for developing an Annual Power Institute and so on. This < would ensure that the Center's programs remain responsive to the < individual interests of the practice areas rather than become tilted < in one direction or another. The practice groups could decide to put < on joint programs with each other and, each year, the overall program < committee chair would decide whether to put on one or more overall < programs (such as an "Introduction to Energy Law" program). < < d. While I would leave it to the individual practice groups < to decide on the location and length of the Institutes, I must admit < that I am uncomfortable with going to a one-day Annual Oil & Gas < Institute. I think that such an approach would limit the ability of < the chairs to provide quality programming and would limit the < attractiveness of the programs. Thinking personally for a moment, I < would be less inclined to incur the travel dollars (or to authorize < the travel dollars of others in the Firm) if they are only going to < "buy" a one-day program. If we are going to incur CLE-related travel < dollars, especially to remote sites such as Calgary or London, my view < is that the bigger bang (credits) for the buck, the better. < < e. Finally, as a potential contributor, I want to make < certain that the significant contributors have some continuing role in < the operation of the Center, even if they don't have a representative < on the Executive Committee. I think that the Advisory Committee is < well placed to serve that function. To that end I would suggest that < the Advisory Committee be composed of former officers (in the manner < suggested by the Membership Committee report), plus a member < designated by every company/firm stepping up to a given dues level. < Unlike the Executive Committee, the members of the Advisory Committee < (other than those participating in their status as former officers) < should not be required to rotate. A company/firm can maintain its < same delegate to the Advisory Committee for as long as it desires. < This would preserve some continuity and, also, not interfere with < decisions made by those bodies maintaining financial commitments to < the Center. < < Anyway, these are my thoughts. I look forward to the discussion < Friday. < < _________________________________ < The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains < information that may be confidential, be protected by the attorney < client or other applicable privileges, or constitute non-public < information. It is intended to be conveyed only to the designated < recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this message, < please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete < it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or < reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not < authorized and may be unlawful. Thank you. < < < Bradford G. Keithley < Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue < < Jones Day Building Chase Tower < 2727 North Harwood 600 Travis Street, Suite 6500 < Dallas, Texas 75201 Houston, Texas 77002 < < Tel/Cell 214-675-0038 < Fax 214-969-5100 < Email bgkeithley@jonesday.com < AOL IM/MSN Messenger bgkeithley < < <<Bradford G. Keithley (Bradford G. Keithley).vcf<< - Bradford G. Keithley (Bradford G. Keithley).vcf
|