ILNews

From bridge builder to Boilermaker

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In trying to build two bridges across a major river between two states while coordinating with two state transportation departments, two governors, and an array of federal agencies – not to mention facing many local residents angry over the prospect of tolls – the staff of the Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority would sometimes get a little tense.

To relieve the stress, the employees would turn to the bridges authority then-Executive Director Steve Schultz, quote a random line from a movie and ask where it came from. Schultz would pause, think and then recite the movie’s title.

schultz-steve-15col.jpg Steve Schultz, legal counsel for Purdue University, stands in front of the Frederick L. Hovde Hall of Administration. (Photo courtesy Purdue University)

“On a good day, he’s got a terrific sense of humor,” said Charles Buddeke, chairman of the bridges authority. “He loves to quote lines from movies and books.”

The effort to build additional bridges over the Ohio River to connect Clark County with Kentucky languished for decades. Schultz was handed the reins just as another push for construction was started. Although he admits he did not know anything about federal transportation when he accepted the position in 2010, he helped lead the project to a groundbreaking.

Now he is using his affable personality, political acumen and legal expertise to guide another construction project – creating the in-house legal counsel position at Purdue University.

The Indianapolis native was selected by Purdue President and former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels. Schultz will be the first in-house counsel for the university, which had been the only school in the Big Ten Conference that relied solely on an outside firm for legal assistance.

He has never worked in higher education but the offer was attractive for multiple reasons. On a professional level, Schultz likes having the opportunity to work at a research institution that teaches future generations. On a personal level, he is happy to become part of a school to which his family has strong ties, namely his father who played football for the Boilermakers.

Also he was lured to the job by the chance to work with his former boss. Schultz served as chief counsel during the Daniels’ administration, and he accepted the governor’s request that he lead the bridges project.

“I just have a lot of confidence that he’s going to do great things for Purdue and really beyond Purdue,” Schultz said. “I think when he sets his mind to big challenges, he has a way of tackling them as I think he demonstrated in his tenure as governor. The opportunity to be a part of that, to maybe bring a fresh look at the challenges that face higher education and maybe bring some innovative ideas to addressing those challenges, is what attracted me.”

A generalist

Schultz described his career as an attorney as specializing in being a generalist. However he has learned from each of his positions and brings that knowledge to each new assignment.

His tenure as general counsel for Irwin Financial Corp. in Columbus introduced him to a stakeholder model which he then carried to his work in the Daniels administration as well as with the bridges project.

The model at Irwin was to balance its duties to its shareholders with its responsibilities to other stakeholders, such as regulators, customers and employees, Schultz explained. Whenever the bank had a dilemma or if there were competing interests among stakeholders, he said, the institution tried to strike the right balance and improve the tradeoffs.

Irwin struggled and eventually succumbed during the economic recession. Remembering the final 18 months at the bank, Schultz talked about how longtime customers were continually supportive.

“One of the things my Irwin experience showed was just how if you conduct yourself in the right way as a business, as a responsible corporate citizen, people will stand by you, loyalty is there,” he said. “Loyalty is there beyond the business transaction.”

Schultz began his legal career in Indianapolis at Barnes & Thornburg LLP. He had worked for former Gov. Robert Orr and then studied law at Yale and the University of Cambridge. Upon returning to Indianapolis, he settled into working in Barnes & Thornburg’s international practice group.

Robert Grand, Indianapolis managing partner at Barnes, recruited Schultz to the firm. The young attorney impressed Grand as being intelligent, hardworking and possessing a lot of common sense. Schultz rose quickly at the firm and, despite his young age, was often given first chair responsibilities.

schultzSchultz’s decision to join Daniels at Purdue underscores his commitment to public service, Grand said.

“This will be a very good role for him,” he continued. “He’s a very even-keel guy who plays well with others.”

In bringing his former chief counsel to Purdue in January, Daniels pointed to Schultz’s experience in state government and private and nonprofit sectors. The former governor described him as a tested leader who had handled tough assignments.

“Steve will ensure Purdue improves the way we procure and manage legal services and thereby help the university realize certain risk management, oversight and cost savings benefits,” Daniels wrote in an email.

Schultz plans to spend his first months at Purdue determining how to bring in-house the activities the longtime outside counsel of Stuart & Branigin LLP has historically done. Also, he will be identifying legal expertise already inside the university and developing ways to work together with that expertise.

The attorney is not sure what Daniels’ agenda for Purdue is but he has a hint from his work for the former governor.

“I think he’ll bring an innovative mindset to his position,” Schultz said. “I think he’ll also look at any particular activity that comes up in terms of whether there’s an opportunity to do it a better way. Again, if I know him, he’ll ask the question, ‘Do we even need it in the first place?’”

Bourbon and pizza

To get the bridges built in the Louisville region, the bridges authority developed a two-state solution that Schultz believes could become a model for other large-scale infrastructure projects. Specifically, the bridge project was divided into two parts with Indiana building the east-end bridge and financing it through a public-private partnership arrangement and Kentucky constructing the downtown bridge using traditional public financing methods.

During the time Schultz and Buddeke worked together at the bridges authority, Buddeke said Schultz excelled at legal research and was always steering the project. Many times the whole thing was on the verge of collapse but Buddeke would bring out a bottle of bourbon, order a pizza and Schultz would lead the group in finding a way over the obstacle.

“I would hazard to guess if it weren’t for Steve Schultz, we may not have the project,” Buddeke said.

Schultz is relocating his family to West Lafayette and preparing to expand his specialty in being a generalist into public education. To his new job, he will take a sense of pride in being a Boilermaker and, like he has in the past, will remember the lessons from his previous jobs.

From the bridges project, he said he learned what can be achieved when people dedicate themselves to serving a larger cause and put aside their differences. He also realized how being open to innovative approaches can ultimately be the key to getting things done.

“I think those are lessons that can be applied anywhere, even in higher education,” he said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT