Notes from the Editor

AuthorLauren E. Catoe
THE CONSTRUCTION LAWYER 3Volume 41, Issue 4, 2022
continued on page 7
From Contracts to Columns
After over a decade of being on
the editorial team for The Con-
struction Lawyer, I actually have
to write a column. As someone
who spends many of her days
drafting and scrutinizing con-
struction contract language, this
most denitely is outside of my
comfort zone. My former law partner, mentor, and past
chair of the Forum, George Meyer, used to say that I
would live in my comfort zone 100 percent of the time
if I could. Well George, I am about to tip-toe out of it.
Though the thought of writing a column gives me
anxiety, I derive great comfort from having worked with
and learned from four wonderful past editors of this jour-
nal: John Ralls, Stephen Hess, Michael Branca, and John
Foust. Each of them had a slightly different approach to
the editor position, but the one consistency among all of
them was that they delivered great content to the Forum’s
membership. Actually, I just thought of a second consis-
tency: none of them kicked me off of The Construction
Lawyer team, even when I was late in editing an article
or proofreading my assigned pages within an issue about
to go to print. I thank them for their patience, leadership,
and friendship.
Lucking Out
I also have lucked out with a great group of Forum mem-
bers willing to help me take on the challenge of producing
this quarterly journal over the course of the next year.
Some are new to The Construction Lawyer team and oth-
ers are veterans who are willing to commit another year
of their lives to this endeavor. I look forward to intro-
ducing them to you in future columns. For now, I would
like to recognize Chris Burke, who will serve as associate
editor for the next three years. Some may think of that as
a three-year sentence (during which he will have to put
up with me on a regular basis), but I prefer to refer to it
as a three-year term. Chris is fantastic and already has
brought some great new ideas to the table.
Now is probably a good time for me to calm the fears
of some of our Forum traditionalists: my overall goal
for my tenure as editor is to continue to publish law-jour-
nal–quality articles that are of interest to the Forum’s
members. I am a rm believer in the adage, “If it ain’t
broke, don’t x it.” Our team will strive to publish content
in furtherance of the Forum’s mission: “to serve the con-
struction industry through education and leadership while
building the best construction lawyers.” You may notice
some minor tweaks here and there in future issues, but
nothing too drastic. I think we have some readers who are
still in shock over the font update a couple of years ago,
and trust me, I get it—change can be hard (remember, I
would permanently reside in my comfort zone if I could).
The YLD Weighs In
This issue is brought to you by the Forum’s Young Law-
yers Division (YLD). Some time ago, the YLD committed
to “taking over” this issue, and each of the three articles
included herein were authored or co-authored by YLD
members. Thank you to Luke Larocca, current YLD
chair, as well as all of the authors who identied and
generated the content for this edition. You made my job
a little easier this rst go ’round.
The rst of the three articles, The Need for Model Leg-
islation in Connection with Private Investment in Public
Infrastructure Projects, is provided by Emily Anderson
and Jade Davis. In their article, Emily and Jade start off
with a discussion of crumbling infrastructure throughout
the United States and the need for large-scale investment
in quality infrastructure as a means of achieving sustain-
able economic growth. They note that the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (the infrastructure bill) is a good
start, but they argue that effective use of public-private
partnerships (P3s) in the infrastructure sector is critical.
Emily and Jade survey the status of P3 legislation in vari-
ous jurisdictions throughout the United States and point
to case law as a means of demonstrating discrepancies
and other shortcomings that arise due to the current state
of P3 legislation. They conclude their article by making
a case for legislative reform, the goal of which should be
consistency and clarity that allows for P3s “to serve as a
viable solution to xing the nation’s deteriorating infra-
structure and need for substantial funding.”
In Quicker but Less Dirty: The Biden Administration
Both Streamlines But Also Seeks to Expand NEPA Envi-
ronmental Review, Elaine Lee and Athena Rutherford
review changes to the National Environmental Protec-
tion Act (NEPA) process resulting from the passage of
the infrastructure bill. They also discuss modications
recently proposed by the White House Council on Envi-
ronmental Quality to its regulations implementing NEPA.
Elaine and Athena consider whether the changes to NEPA
arising out of the infrastructure bill will improve the
NEPA process by addressing some of its common criti-
cisms. In sum, this article is an important read for anyone
who represents clients involved in federally funded con-
struction projects because NEPA compliance could very
well be on the critical path for those projects.
The topic of our third article is another timely one.
Over the past few years, many companies and organiza-
tions have committed to implementing new or expanded
Lauren Catoe
By Lauren Catoe
Published in
The Construction Lawyer
, Volume 41, Number 4. © 2022 American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not
be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT