<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">First, let me say how gratified I am that merely <i>proposing</i> subcommittees has given rise to such a broad measure of participation. The topic has generated a number of comments, and I appreciate the input and people's willingness to
get involved.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Second, let me remind everyone that the subcommittee idea is still in the design phase. The responses that I have received have been overwhelmingly positive, which tells me that we are moving in the right direction. At the same time,
I acknowledge that subcommittees can have their shortcomings. The challenge will be to maximize the benefits while dealing with the limitations.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">A number of people have suggested new subcommittees or combinations of subcommittees (e.g., life insurance, decanting, string statutes, etc.). Coming up with a comprehensive but manageable number of groups is a priority. I'll provide an
updated list soon. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Some have noted that they prefer not to have break-out sessions during the meeting. As some of you have observed, my original e-mail did not mention break-out sessions. Other committees have used break-outs as a way to facilitate discussion,
and have invited visitors to attend the break-out session of their choice. With committee meetings being shortened from 3 to 2 ½ hours, I believe break-outs would prove to be more of a challenge. At the same time, there needs to be a forum for subcommittees
to operate so that one or two members don't end up doing all of the work (or dominating the discussion)—Remember, this is a committee. We should also encourage visitor participation at the subcommittee level if they are interested. I have some ideas about
how to balance all of that, and will let you know my thoughts and ask for more input when I finish running some traps.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">One of the Chair's jobs is to set the agenda. I expect that not all subcommittees will have something to report at every meeting. Naturally, I am hopeful that subcommittees will be clamoring for time on the agenda, and I'll have to work
to allocate time fairly, sometimes deferring reports if necessary. I want to leave time for people not only to hear a subcommittee's report, but also time for committee members and visitors to comment on it and add their insights.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As my first e-mail noted, my goal is to broaden participation. I simply find that I get more from meetings (and have more fun!) when I get to hear lots of points of view, as well as the thoughts of people immersed in a topic. A shift from
a presentation format to a discussion format allows more ideas to percolate, and I think everyone benefits from being in that environment.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks and I look forward to continued discussions.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Mickey R. Davis<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Davis & Willms, PLLC<br>
3555 Timmons Lane, Suite 1250<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Houston, Texas 77027<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">(281) 786-4502 voice<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">(281) 742-2600 fax<br>
<a href="mailto:mickey@daviswillms.com"><span style="color:blue">mickey@daviswillms.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>