Gov employees too sweet to cut

By:  Diane Benjamin

A long string of local golfers took the mic last night to sing the praises of the City employees managing the three Golf Course.  They urged the Council to pass the ordinance stating they were dropping any investigation of privatizing or selling any of the courses.  Yes, David Sage – the Budget Task Force was a joke.  A joke that you were forced to participate in to make it look like the city cared.  Ditto the Citizens Summit.  Ditto Public Comment.  What citizens say is immaterial, the Council has no ability to cut spending when progressives slam them with propaganda and the opinions of fiscally conservative citizens don’t matter.

Let’s take a closer look at “GOLF”.

Only eight employees listed on the Total Compensation report for 2015 had “Golf” or “Greenskeeper” in their job title. See this link:


Description of “Misc”

*5 Includes retroactive pay, workers’ compensation, clothing allowances, vehicle benefits, retirement health savings contributions, moving expenses, tuition, reimbursements and health club reimbursements. No full-time employees received housing allowances, loans or bonuses. For employees who have separated from employment this includes payout of applicable leave time.

The salaries paid are more than the average FAMILY income.

If a private company had been hired to manage the three golf courses, the City wouldn’t have these huge expenses.  A private company would be paying salaries they can afford based on facts, not subsidizing employees with taxpayer money.

A private company would have done a better job “selling” rounds of golf because their livelihood depends on it.  Customer service would be great for the same reason.

But government employees must be protected, therefore taxpayers will foot a $522,883 transfer from the General Fund next year.  If golf rounds are down for the year it could go much higher.

Proposed Budget for 2017 –

See page 10:

Transfer from General Fund to Golf:  $522,883

Bloomington suffers from the same disease infecting Illinois.

Government employees must be protected.

We need their votes.

Another Alderman was missing last night – Buragas.

They don’t need to attend, only 5 are needed for a quorum.  David Hales admitted on WJBC this morning that outcomes are already known before the meetings.


9 thoughts on “Gov employees too sweet to cut

  1. I saw that ridiculous pay scale for greenskeepers on the list of employee pay yoiu posted before and I went to to see what they normally make. I found it is usually not more than $34,000 a year for an experienced greens keeper. The government can’t do anything with saving money in mind, they have a bottomless pool of money (the taxpayers) to draw from and if WE refuse to pay they come and take it with a gun.


    1. These employees will continue to receive their bloated income throughout their retirement from the pension provided by the City.


  2. It always irritates me that the taxpayers subsidize a sport that is primarily played by upper middle class white men. I don’t understand why the democrat mayor doesn’t put an end to it as it would allow him to claim he is a champion for the poor. My guess is that either he or his buddies play golf a lot.


    1. Guess JF thinks government should only benefit and provide services to the welfare cheats, Baby Mommas, illegal aliens, gang bangers and drug heads–the “takers” of Society. Heaven forbid that the “upper middle class white men” who pay the bills would receive any kind of reward from their tax dollars. Bet he is a big Bernie “Red” Sanders supporter.

      Don’t get me wrong, would love to see the City of Bloomington out of the entertainment business–BCPA, Judy Dome, golf courses, the whole bit. But to attack one particular venue simply because it is primarily used by the “makers” of Society smacks of putrid, envy curdled Marxism.


      1. Government has no duty to do any of these things. It has grown into a great big babysitter paid by us. Limit it to the original charter (regulation of commerce, protection of the borders and individual rights). How did it become the responsibility of local government to entertain us? If there is a market for it… someone will develop it. Now they hope a hotel will drive business to the coliseum? Certainly the attendee numbers don’t indicate existing hotels can’t handle the overflow at this point. The city has taken a step forward making the new coliseum management more accountable however, it doesn’t change the fact it shouldn’t exist as a government owned vonue to begin with. Business going to government for guarantees before proceeding with a development project is just another form of welfare.


        1. Welcome to the real world instead of the pretend one local government has created. Thank Jesse Smart, Judy Markowitz, Rich Buchanan, Steve Stockton, and Tari Renner. Thanks the citizens who don’t vote and don’t bother to inform themselves. They have allowed themselves to be destroyed.


      2. Not sure where in my post you got the idea that I think government should only provide to the so called “takers” (your term not mine). I also do not think you read many of my comments. I am definitely in the “maker” camp (again, your term not mine). I am firmly a limited government conservative. My point was to show the hypocrisy of the democrat mayor.

        Now to address the usage of the “makers” and “takers” terms, I’m curious what experience you have had with the so called “takers”. I really do not like that term. Even Paul Ryan has written about why that term is terrible. My wife and I have been foster parents for 5 years. You should try doing something like that if you have not. It changes your perspective.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s