Enron Mail

To:e-mail <.buford@enron.com<, e-mail <.james@enron.com<,james.derrick@enron.com, e-mail <.james@enron.com<, e-mail <.janice@enron.com<, e-mail <.john@enron.com<, e-mail <.john@enron.com<, e-mail <.mark@enron.com<, e-mail <.plaeger@enron.com<, e-mail <
Subject:FW: Thoughts in Preparation for Special SWLF Meeting
Cc:bgkeithley@jonesday.com, phmarti@lsu.edu, jdavidellwanger@swlegal.org
Bcc:bgkeithley@jonesday.com, phmarti@lsu.edu, jdavidellwanger@swlegal.org
Date:Tue, 16 Oct 2001 08:31:37 -0700 (PDT)

For your consideration in preparation for Friday's meeting.

< -----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