by:  Diane Benjamin

Alderman Rob Fazzini spelled out exactly where Bloomington stands financially at the Budget Workshop on Saturday.  Start watching at 3:08:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTvdmisMbPA&list=UUS8WR70NFd2XMmFYRDHEGEw

While Rob did a great job spelling out how bad the city finances look, I don’t agree with Rob’s philosophy of borrowing more money to get out of the mess prior Councils created.  The staff reductions a few years ago weren’t nearly enough re-structuring.  What do families do when overwhelmed with expenses?  Cut spending Cut spending Cut spending.  If you are a Dave Ramsey fan: rice and beans, beans and rice.

Bloomington is in critical condition, they just don’t want you to know.  The Pantagraph is covering for them and making you believe everything is fine.  Did you see any reports from Saturday about pension funding?  Maybe pensions will go away if nobody talks about it Pantagraph?  The City of Bloomington has been kicking the can down the road for decades.  Pensions aren’t funded, maintenance isn’t funded for existing structures, spending on roads has been far less than adequate for at least a decade.  Previous Councils have only wanted to GIVE citizens things they didn’t know they wanted.   They have created citizens who want to be entertained, it’s time for grown-ups to manage the city instead of the mental midgets.  Check out what aldermen have always voted YES on the budgets, and which ONE votes no – Alderwoman Stearns.  She tried to explain why cuts are needed, Mayor Renner shut her down.

Congrats on the recap Rob, too bad the local media wasn’t paying attention!  Keep pounding the Council with the facts.

But then the clueless Fazzini sent the following.   He doesn’t think the citizens of Bloomington understood what utopia is would be to have 3 at-large aldermen and only 5 representing the entire town.  Sorry Rob, they did understand that it wouldn’t be utopia.  They also understood it was never a grassroots effort.  They didn’t appreciate a sitting alderman leading the way to less representation.  Democracy is NOT government trying to impose their will on the people.  Besides, we aren’t a democracy.  Research it Rob.

This should be my last communication regarding the modified ward referendum.  Let me say a special THANK YOU to everyone who participated in gathering signatures and a big thank you to everyone who joined  the 4,515 people who voted YES.  Unfortunately there were 6,360 people who voted NO.  As I did radio and newspaper interviews the night of the election, I hope I represented all of us by sharing my disappointments and my appreciation for living in a DEMOCRACY.  

Let me give you a short recap of the comments and tone of these interviews.  My first comment was that it was good that Illinois law allowed an option to a sitting city council not willing to let voters decide an issue as important as the form of governance.  To be able to gather enough signatures to place the issue on the ballot as a binding referendum means we had already won what was most important.  We allowed the voters the opportunity to make this decision.  Because the NO votes outnumbered the YES votes certainly was a disappointment and I enumerated three reasons:  First, the city would not enjoy a better form of government.  Second, a minority of only 30% of the voters were making a decision for the majority who did not care enough to learn about the issue and take the time to vote.  Third, the elected aldermen chose not to take a leadership role in an issue of this importance whether it was FOR or AGAINST the modified ward system.  Even with that said, my overall tone of the interviews was positive because we all worked to give the voters the right to make an important decision.  Now it is up to all of us to embrace the decision and do the best we can under the current system.  That is how DEMOCRACY should work, and I answered an emphatic NO when asked if I would lead another effort to change to the modified ward system in the future.

Robert B. Fazzini

.

.

.