ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SECTION
Annual Report for 2006-2007
Submitted by Linda F. Close

During the past year, the ADR Section has continued its efforts to reach more members and define itself as an organization for all practitioners of ADR.  These efforts paid off in a membership increase of nearly 10%from last year to this! 

Section Visibility/Accessibility
Visibility is important to our growth and relevance to members.  The Publications Committee this year established a list serve for our members.  This provides a quick way for members to learn of significant developments in case law, hobnob about problem issues and review pending legislation.  The Committee has also initiated an advertising campaign to attract more members and has worked with MSBA staff to refine our webpage.  The webpage is more attractive, contains more information, and is easier to navigate than in the past. 

The Mediation Committee of the Section has been working on a community outreach project that will advertise mediation as a way to solve problems in the community.  We have ordered materials from the Maryland statewide ADR organization that we will adapt to use in Minnesota.  The materials will also help advertise “selectadr,” the web-based MSBA source for finding neutrals.

Projects
Bylaws:  The Section embarked on discussions of our organization’s structure and how they promote, or do not, inclusiveness of ADR practitioners.  With a view to making the Section more responsive to the needs of our membership and potential membership, an ad hoc committee has drafted substantial revisions to our Bylaws. This draft will be presented to the membership in the fall.
Grant guidelines:  The Section has long held a substantial balance in its treasury.  An ad hoc committee has drafted guidelines that provide standards for the Section to award gifts to organizations or individuals who propose projects of special interest to the Section.  These guidelines will be presented to the membership in the fall.
Collaborative Law Rule:  The ADR Review Board sought our comments on a proposed rule about collaborative law.  An ad hoc committee of Section members drafted comments, presented them to the Section for its feedback and approval, and then submitted the comments to the ADR Review Board.  This effort stimulated thoughtful discussion about how we define ADR and where its limits may be.

Legislation
RUAA:  The Section sought approval of MSBA to support the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act, which many Section members have toiled over for several years.  Despite the absence of any written opposition to the RUAA, approval was withheld.  The Section will pursue leave to support the legislation as a Section.
UMA:  The Section continued its work on refining the Uniform Mediation Act.  The Section expects the legislation to be ready to present to MSBA next year.
Miscellaneous:  The Section monitored bills that affect ADR practice.  The list serve helped us communicate about these bills and obtain membership feedback about proposed legislation.

Programs
Providing membership with continuing education opportunities is important to our mission as a section.   To ensure maximum attendance, we provide conference call access to our lunch hour programs.  We also provide a podcast, accessible through our website, following the program.  During the year we presented the following programs for CLE credit:

• International Arbitration and Mediation: Thomas Fiutak and Madge Thorsen shared their experience as neutrals and representatives of parties in international ADR settings. 

• Yoga and Mediation: Attorney, neutral and yoga instructor Michael A. Hellwich taught yoga techniques and explained how they can held us become better neutrals.

• Minnesota No-Fault Arbitrations: Wil Fluegel, Roger Kramer, and Kate Stifter provided section members with an overview of the system that has been in use for more than 30 years.

• Impairment and ADR: Joan Bibelhausen and Dan O'Connell addressed the topics of dealing with impaired persons in ADR.

• Hot Topics in Commercial and Construction ADR: Dave Allgeyer and Bob Huber discussed modern party-appointed arbitrator standards, new standards for appeal of arbitrations, class actions in arbitration, and a variety of other topics in the commercial and construction arenas.

• Proposed Rule on Collaborative Law: The Section continued its dialogue about the interface between collaborative law and neutral-based ADR. 

• Statewide ADR--the Maryland Model: Speaker Rachel Wohl explained how Maryland started up its statewide ADR office. 

• Community Mediation: Beth-Bailey Allen, Ahmed Sirleaf, Marcela Sotela, and  Jeanne Zimmer discussed the challenges of providing services in a community setting as the community evolves.

• Collaborative Law and the Evolution of Rule 114A: Collaborative law practitioners Linda Wray and Judith Johnson described the development of proposed rule 114A for collaborative practitioners.

Treasury
The ADR Section’s treasury has held at about $20,000-25,000 for several years.  The healthy treasury has prompted efforts in the areas of public education and, as discussed above, giving.  The Section continues to be one of the best “deals” practitioners enjoy:  we have maintained dues at $25.00 per year, and membership is free to law students.

In sum, the Section continues to be a vital organization with a bright future.  The members of our executive council for the coming year, like those of the past year, care about the present and future of ADR in Minnesota.  They have creative ideas about ADR and the energy to implement new programs to expand the use of ADR.

12 July 2007                                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                                                        Linda F. Close
                                                                        2006-07 ADR Section Chair  

- Last Updated 08/03/07 -