If we removed everyone from a board or commission who wasn’t an attorney and who made a practical suggestion without navigating statutory authority, we wouldn’t have anyone left to serve.

It’s true that the McCurdy would be easier to transfer to a new owner and more marketable down the road if the parking lot were owned by the same entity that owns the structure.

A review of the relevant statute (36-7-14-22) outlines a path for conveyance of the parking lot to the owner of the McCurdy if that were so desired by the Economic Redevelopment Commission. While appraisals and a bid process would be required, the ERC could ultimately convey the property to whomever it determined would best facilitate the redevelopment plan.

However, the fact that the statute does not prohibit Ms. Musgrave’s suggestion is not what is most disturbing about the events of yesterday and today. What’s most disturbing is the hallmark characteristic of the Winnecke Administration in attacking personally anyone who dares to ask questions, seek transparency or suggest an alternate path.

We have seen numerous instances in public meetings where Steve Schaefer, Mike Shopmeyer and Kelley Coures became irate and lobbed personal insults at Ms. Musgrave for asking questions. What I have never seen is a response from Ms. Musgrave that was anything but calm and professional. Ms. Musgrave epitomizes professionalism. She represents an era that has apparently passed in Evansville- an era where members of the community and government could interact on tough issues without the person raising the issue being attacked personally and dismissed from the public arena.

When Ms. Musgrave made her suggestion Tuesday, there was no statement made by the ERC attorney or Mr. Coures that the relevant statute was complicated or prohibited her suggestion. Her suggestion was made in passing and was not discussed. Instead, the media and at least one member of city council were contacted and an attack launched on Ms. Musgrave for allegedly calling for an illegal act. Whatever happened to the use of the public meeting as the best place for government actions to be discussed and debated?

It’s unfortunate that opinions and thoughts for which the Winnecke Administration doesn’t agree must be so harshly attacked. The last 3.5 years of this methodology has had a chilling effect on public debate and has left the community without a forum for determining what’s best for progress and what progress even means to a majority of people. When people who question or challenge government action or plans are called obstructionists, crazy, stupid, acting with political motivation, etc. it leaves less people at the table to make decisions and the community suffers from such bullying.

We support Cheryl Musgrave in her role on the ERC and as an active member of the community who has a right to question her government and should live without fear of retaliation that negatively affects her family or her ability to earn a living. It’s not only a right to publicly challenge government action but a duty we all share. These are just words. We should welcome every voice and be grateful people care enough to show up and give an opinion.

Signed,

Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley 3th Ward City Councilwoman

Connie Robinson. 4th Ward City Councilwoman

Al Lindsey 6th Ward City Councilman

Conor O’Daniels City Councilman at Large

I am writing to clarify exactly where we are with regard to the negotiations between the Evansville Vanderburgh School Corporation and Teamsters Local 215.

There have been two issues that the School Administration has insisted must be addressed in these negotiations.  One is to have employees have the choice as to whether or not they join the union or pay an agency fee, and the other is to have the School Board be the final arbiter of employee grievances.

While we felt it was unfair and unnecessary to change the existing perfectly legal agency fee provision, in the spirit of compromise, we agreed to allow the employee a choice on joining the union or paying agency fees.  Under our proposal all existing employees will have a ten (10) day period to opt out of union representation and the fees associated with that representation, and all new employees will have the choice as to whether or not they join the union.  The EVSC can now stop repeating over and over that our union won’t agree to do away with the agency shop.

The demand by the EVSC to be the final step in the grievance procedure is a proposal that no fair minded person could ever agree to.  The School Board is the party that approves and signs this contract.  In other words, it is a party to the contract.  There is nothing fair or just about a dispute resolution procedure where one party to the dispute gets to act as judge and jury.

Based on the response we have gotten, it is clear to me that the overwhelming majority of this community also agrees that the School Board should not be the final arbiter of disputes.

We have made a variety of proposals on this issue, but have been unwilling to agree with the Board being the final step of the grievance procedure.

Because of the EVSC’s negotiating approach, none of our members’ proposals or concerns have even been talked about.

Last year, the EVSC held quickie elections on union “recertification” for both our bus driver unit and secretarial unit.  The bus drivers affirmed their desire for union representation by a vote of 120-27 and the secretaries affirmed their desire for union representation by a vote of 70-27.

At that time Superintendent David Smith said “our employees have a voice, and they certainly have spoken.  As we have said before, we will honor their wishes.”  It is time for those words to be lived up to.

Sincerely,

Chuck Whobrey

President and Business Manager of Teamsters Local 215