Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Development and Access Management of

University Parkway

Cheryl Musgrave Objections

May 9, 2017

Paragraph 1: Parties “…by and between the Vanderburgh County Commissioners, the

Evansville-Vanderburgh Area Plan Commission (APC) and the Evansville Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)…

�  The Commissioners are an elected body and act in an Executive capacity.

�  The APC and MPO are appointed boards. �  The majority of the appointees on the APC are

appointed by city or other non-county entities

I will preserve the will of the people and not place the Commissioners on an equal footing with appointed boards or give other appointment authorities additional planning authority outside city/town limits.

Paragraph 2: Location …..Shall include the boundaries of the University

Parkway Corridor Management and Land Use Plan, further described as SR66 to the north; SR62 to the

south; Schutte Road, Peerless Road, a line connecting Peerless Road to Church Road, ad Church Road to the east; and the Vanderburgh/Posey County line to the

west

These boundaries are not the same as the plan study boundaries. These boundaries include all of University Parkway.

I oppose the expansion of the boundary.

Paragraph 3: Purpose The purpose of this MOU is to ensure that the Vanderburgh County Commissioners, the APC and MPO will adhere to and implement the University Parkway Corridor Management and Land Use Plan (PLAN)….

First, the PLAN is not yet written. I will not approve any plan in advance of its completion.

Second, this process may eliminate property owner rights to due process and is potentially unconstitutional. I swore to uphold the Constitution and reject this purpose on those grounds.

Third, this requires present and future Commissioners to guarantee how they will vote. This is unlawful by Indiana statute.

Paragraph 3 a Establish a common understanding regarding the

importance of University Parkway for regional mobility

I support this provision.

Paragraph 3 b Provide for the mutual acceptance of the University

Parkway Corridor Management and Land Use Plan as a shared vision of the corridor and its deficiencies

and needs

The PLAN is not yet written. I cannot support a plan I have not read.

Paragraph 3 c �  Establish a shared commitment to managing and

improving the corridor to preserve safety and mobility in a manner that is consistent with the

University Parkway Corridor Management and Land Use Plan

The PLAN is not yet written. I cannot support a plan I have not read.

Paragraph 3 d Provide a framework for multi-agency (Vanderburgh County

Commissioners, APC and MPO) coordination and cooperation in development review and access permitting

decisions that impact the corridor

The Vanderburgh County Commissioners are not an agency, but are the elected representatives of the people serving in an EXECUTIVE capacity.

As elected executives, the Commissioners oversee and/or rule upon decisions of the APC or MPO in public meetings. Advance directive/consent is not legal and deprives property owners of due process and may be unconstitutional.

Paragraph 3 e Adopt appropriate amendments to the Zoning Code to

help implement the final PLAN

The PLAN is not yet written. I cannot support a plan I have not read. Advance directive/consent is not legal and deprives property owners and citizens of due process and may be unconstitutional.

Paragraph 4 �  All Parties understand that the University Parkway

Corridor Management and Land Use Plan is paid for using Federal transportation funds in the amount of

$106,900 and local funds in the amount of $173,490 paid by Vanderburgh County.

A prior version of this document continued: If the purposed outlined in the MOU are not adhered to, or the access management guidelines established by the PLAN are not adhered to, the Vanderburgh County Commissioners will reimburse the Federal transportation funding of $106,000 to the MPO

The appointed boards sought to FINE the Commissioners for failing to abide by the MOU. The appointed boards seek to FINE the current and future elected Commissioners, overrule the democratic process, and dictate the land’s use!

Additional agreements, 1 �  1. University Parkway is a vitally important

roadway for western Vanderburgh County and the surrounding region. The primary function of the roadway is to carry large volumes of traffic with minimal delays. Access to University Parkway will only be allowed at existing access points, unless a new access point is agreed upon by the MPO.

The voters elect the Vanderburgh County Commissioners to make access point decisions and I will not hand over this authority to an appointed board. In addition, it may deprive property owners of due process and may be unconstitutional.

Additional agreements, 2 �  2. Land use and transportation are highly

interrelated elements of our community. Because new development with the corridor is likely, proper land use planning and access management are necessary to prevent potential negative affects (sic) to mobility and safety for users of the roadway.

Vanderburgh County already has sufficient processes in place to ensure positive effects to mobility and safety for users of the roadway.

Additional agreements, 3 �  3. Consideration of requests for new access points

along the corridor will be coordinated with the MPO

The Commissioners may at their discretion confer with the MPO on additional access points. I do not support creating an obligation to do so.

Additional agreements, 4 �  4. Development approval decisions will be made in a

manner that is consistent with and supportive of the PLAN, unless it is agreed upon by the APC that a departure from the PLAN is in the best interest of the corridor.

The voters elect the Vanderburgh County Commissioners to make most development approval decisions outside city/town limits and I will not hand over this authority to an appointed board. In addition, it may deprive property owners of due process and may be unconstitutional.

Additional agreements, 5 �  5. As opportunities arise, through rezoning,

redevelopment, change in use of existing properties, or road construction, all feasible efforts will be made to improve access spacing and design in a manner that is consistent with the PLAN

The PLAN is not yet written. I will not approve any plan in advance of its completion.

Additional agreements, 6 �  Any modifications or amendments to this PLAN

must be agreed upon by all of the Parties

The PLAN is not yet written. I will not approve any plan in advance of its completion nor will I agree to make the Vanderburgh County Commissioners, an elected body, equal in authority to appointed boards.

Additional agreements, 7 �  MPO will be an invited member of the Site Review

Committee by the APC Executive Director for all site plans submitted within the study area of the PLAN upon final adoption of the PLAN by the Parties.

I oppose increasing the authority of the MPO as a member of Site Review. This inclusion could prevent the issuing of building permits if the PLAN (not yet written) is “violated” by a developer’s proposal.

Further, the study area boundaries within the MOU are vastly larger than the actual study area boundaries.

Even after the PLAN is written, I do not support gifting the authority of the Commissioners to the MPO.

Summary I reject:

�  Attempts to make appointed bureaucrats dictators of land use and development on University Parkway (or anywhere else)

�  Create greater opportunities for “back door” consolidation by giving city appointees more authority over county development

�  Attempts to undermine property rights