<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/05/30/2012-proxy-season-a-shareholder-proposal-on-forum-selection-and-a-fortune-ten-company/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2026 11:30:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>A Proposal to Repeal Exclusive Forum at Chevron</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/05/30/2012-proxy-season-a-shareholder-proposal-on-forum-selection-and-a-fortune-ten-company/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=2012-proxy-season-a-shareholder-proposal-on-forum-selection-and-a-fortune-ten-company</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/05/30/2012-proxy-season-a-shareholder-proposal-on-forum-selection-and-a-fortune-ten-company/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 13:23:45 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Corporate Elections & Voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Op-Eds & Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Forum selection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NAPPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy season]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder proposals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=29316?d=20120530092345EDT</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Editor’s Note: The following post comes to us from Richard H. Koppes, administrative officer at the National Association of Public Pension Attorneys and former general counsel of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System. This post is based on an article by Mr. Koppes in the NAPPA Report. When I left CalPERS in 1996 after ten [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px"><strong>Editor’s Note:</strong> The following post comes to us from <a href="http://nappa.org/staff.asp?treeid=8&amp;id=94" target="_blank">Richard H. Koppes</a>, administrative officer at the National Association of Public Pension Attorneys and former general counsel of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System. This post is based on an article by Mr. Koppes in the <em>NAPPA Report</em>.</div>
<p>When I left CalPERS in 1996 after ten years (having founded and run their corporate governance program for all ten years), I bought shares in ten companies that I felt listen to shareowners, had or were developing good corporate governance, and would be (hopefully!) a good economic investment. Of those ten companies, eight have done very well, with one doing so-so, and one not doing so good. Chevron, a Fortune Ten Company, was one of those ten companies. I have held Chevron stock for 16 years now, and it has done quite well. </p>
<p>Spring is proxy season and my mailbox, both postal and electronic, has filled with proxy materials and annual reports. I try to read/look over all these materials and to carefully vote my proxies. Recently, I turned to my Chevron proxy and noted item No. 4, entitled: “Shareholder Proposal Regarding Exclusive Forum Provisions.” This proposal states: “RESOLVED: The shareholders of Chevron Corporation (the “Company”) hereby ask the board of directors to repeal the Company’s “exclusive forum” bylaw which was unilaterally adopted by the board of directors and which generally requires shareholders to bring certain types of legal actions only in Delaware, the state where the Company is incorporated.” </p>
<p>I have fought for good corporate governance for over 26 years, first as a CalPERS “shareowner activist,” and then as a counselor to corporate boards for the last 15+ years, and as a corporate board member of various public companies for the last 13 years. </p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/05/30/2012-proxy-season-a-shareholder-proposal-on-forum-selection-and-a-fortune-ten-company/#more-29316" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading A Proposal to Repeal Exclusive Forum at Chevron">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/05/30/2012-proxy-season-a-shareholder-proposal-on-forum-selection-and-a-fortune-ten-company/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
