IS IT TRUE April 27, 2012
IS IT TRUE that a number that has reached at least 5 and maybe as high as 7 members of the Roberts Stadium Task Force have now come out and stated that the conclusions on Page 13 do not reflect the conclusions of the group but only the conclusions of the writer of Page 13 who was the leader of the group of 15 Larry Steenberg?…that only one person has come forward to back Steenberg’s assertion that Page 13 was always part of the study and that it was not added late?…that the one person who is backing Steenberg’s assertion is local banker Luke Yeager?…that careful examination of the statements will lead to the conclusion that all can be telling the truth?…that it is reasonable to expect that all 15 members of the task force would be on board in expecting that there would be a conclusion at the end of the report?…that having a conclusion is not at issue here, but what is at issue is whether the conclusion reflects the beliefs of the group?…that it clearly does not with as many dissenters as there are?…that Steenberg did indeed meet the deadline to accommodate Mayor Winnecke’s request?…that shoving the page in after the 14 other members were finished and emailing it to them before the Mayor’s deadline would technically meet those requirements?…that we are certain at this point that the task force members do not substantially agree with the “conclusion†and that the “conclusion†really was written and inserted without the sanction of the task force?
IS IT TRUE that even though everyone is most likely telling the truth including Ella Johnson Watson, Mayor Winnecke’s Director of Communication who posted a paragraph that supports the assertion that Page 13 was put into the study after the task force was thanked and before the study was released to Mayor Winnecke?…that most people when faced with reading a 13 page document go right to the conclusion before deciding whether or not to read the whole document?…that this conclusion does not necessarily support the words on the other 12 pages?…that a conclusion reader would come away with the wrong impression of what “the 15 person task force†thought?…that for this misleading nature of the conclusion this report gets the first SNEGAL award of 2012?
IS IT TRUE that one thing is for sure and that is the implied conclusion that an Events Center like Roberts Stadium could be built new for less than the $6.5 Million that the study said it would cost to refurbish Roberts into?…that any fool knows that you cannot recreate Roberts Stadium for $6.5 Million?…that it is even unlikely that a 6,000 seat outdoor rodeo rink could be built for $6.5 Million?…that if one would scale the $600,000 that the Evansville Redevelopment Commission spent on a small parking lot at the McCurdy Hotel that the Roberts Stadium parking lot would fetch $60 Million if the ERC was buying?…that in all reality the parking lot at Roberts could be build new for $10 Million to $12 Million from scratch?…that the parking lot alone negates the central assertion of the SNEGAL CONCLUSION of the Roberts Stadium Task Force?
IS IT TRUE that we have been curious about the McCurdy Convalescent home for bats and pigeons?…that we are hoping to see some work going on down there as we always encourage private business projects that do not rely on public assistance to move forward?…that we still think that turning the McCurdy back into a grand hotel is the best use of the building but prefer apartments to a pile of rubble?
If it is true “that most people when faced with reading a 13 page document go right to the conclusion before deciding whether or not to read the whole document,” then those persons who do so should not be on a committee that produced the document.
Apparently if you are a reporter for the C&P, all you read is the conclusion.
And that is what the author of Page 13 was counting on when it was put in after the fact. He got the headline his masters wanted until Jordan and a few others called him out for it. Now they are over on the CP trying their best to shoot the messenger.
In the week following his receipt of the thank you note and notification of the published report, did Jordan read the summary/conclussions and cost estimates for his subcommittee’s report before spouting off to the press two days ago?
I have no idea what Jordan read. He never said that pages 1 – 12 were not there before so I just figured he had seen them or he would have cried foul about the whole report and not just page 13.
This Roberts Stadium Task Force is starting to resemble the inept bungling of the old ERC that left us with the Historic McCurdy Hotel and Executive Inn debacles.
The City County Observer asks if it’s true “that most people when faced with reading a 13 page document (actually it’s a 20-page document) go right to the conclusion before deciding whether or not to read the whole document.â€
I have to ask, what would prompt most people to turn directly to page 13 of this particular report when there is no table of contents identifying the location of ‘the conclusion?’ So how would ‘most people’ even know to turn immediately to page 13? I mean since page 13 is not the last page, what would prompt “most people” to flip to page 13?
Furthermore, page 13 is titled “SOME General Conclusions,” which certainly does not indicate that it represents a complete summary, rather just “some general” conclussions. (Of course that raises the issue, where is the complete summary of the whole committee’s findings?)
Also contained in the report are the individual subcommittees’ “summary/conclusions.” For example, on page 6 you’ll find the sports subcommittee’s “sumamary/conclusion.”
So, why wouldn’t “most people” stop at page 6, “when faced with reading a 13 page document,” and speed read the sports committee’s summary conclussions before deciding whether or not to read the whole document? Likewise with regard to the entertainment/exposition subcommittee’s summary/conclussions on page 10.
Now a suggestion for the committee chairman. Since it’s alleged that you took the time to insert the now infamous Page 13 postscripted “conclussion” section into the report, why don’t you insert a table of contents for “most folks” whose lives are so busy that they must skip on past the body of a report and get right to the “conclussions?”
Better yet just have someone compile a one-page digest of the task force’s findings, and publish that rather than this 20-page document that is way too much for “most people” to bother with. Do it like the local newspaper does and gear it to the 8th grade reader’s level so it doesn’t leave everyone so befuddled.
I think asking the chairman to insert a table of contents would a be a bit too much to ask for someone that isn’t capable of attaching a report to a thank you email (even though he was able to attach the report to the subcommittee chairs and get it to the C&P). I think that was the best reason that you gave on why he didn’t send it to all of the committee members before it was published, wasn’t it? Wouldn’t want to overload him or anything.
Yes, agreed. I made a mistake! I should say “insert” a table of contents – one that I assume he’ll have someone else produce. Same as I said “have someone compile a one-page digest of the task force’s findings.” It’s certainly not my intent to tax anyone’s technical capabilities.
I’m not a blue ribbon task force member or a structural engineer and at the risk this idea may seem “out there” to experts, but why doesn’t someone close the McCurdy Hotel windows that have been left wide open for the past few years?? It’s not hard to see. The open windows face west on Riverside Drive so they let in all the wind driven rain as most of our storms come from the west. It is possible this caused damage to the building next to the $600,000 parking lot.
When are people finally going to listen and just SELL Reoberts Stadium and get it off the books?
It’s not that difficult to reduce a budget, but you have to shrink the size of government and the expectations of what you think government should be in the business of doing. Developing real estate is NOT something government should be doing. I think we have some very clear examples here of why not
Comments are closed.