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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT