Rich Miller at CapFax has a long post about, among other things, the UI selling tickets to the Rose Bowl to elected officials.
Generally, I don't have a problem with any of this - the bigwigs are paying for the tickets, and if it can earn the University a little goodwill with the anti-Higher Education Democrats who run this state, I'm all for it.
I am amused, thought, that Senate President Emil Jones wanted four tickets. I guess his disdain for all things related to the University doesn't extend to the football team's bandwagon. (But, again, if that's what it takes to make him appreciate the larger mission of the UI, so be it. I hope President Jones enjoys the game...)
Rod going to lend him his plane?
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
Want to have some fun? check out who is actually sitting in those seats on game day and ask them how much they paid for the tickets. :)
Wonder if he will be taking Frerichs and his wife on the plane with him? I hear they're pretty close pals.
Rex,,,,I would think one of the big power companies would be having people going,,,I am sure he could hitch a ride on the corp. jet. Or maybe even his stepson,,,,the one that got millions of dollars in state money on merit,,for his company,,they must have a corp. jet also. I am sure he can get a ride out there. I hope some one had their camera phone on at the Hanna Montana concert,,,,maybe they got Blago doing the boogie in the seats.
When the flagship campus of the State University plays in a sporting event that will net the University millions of dollars in direct and indirect revenue, our state leaders ought to be there and I have no problem paying the reasonable cost of their travel as representatives of the State, nor their tickets. Perhaps it will benefit the University in the long run for those leaders to have greater love for the UIUC.
Bruce
"Blago doing the boogie"
He has been doing that since his first day, and we have been paying the Juke Box.
Anonymous 10:58
Nor would I, except considering past history, I think you are dreaming.
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
I wonder what the State ethics test says about this? I have a problem with Emil Jones, who has done everything in his power to enhance Chicago STate's budget, at the expense of other universities in this STate, essentially going to the head of the ticket line, ahead of season ticket holders and taxpayers who actually pay their bills, and who don't try to benefit at the expense of others. Frankly, I'd love to see whether he actually attends, or if he gives them away to buy more influence. We shouldn't have to give our politicians perks like this in order to secure decent funding for the university, and shame on them for taking advantage of this.
Emil Jones has more control over the future well-being of the UIUC than does Richard Hermann. Do you think Hermann has to pay for his ticket and travel?
Sounds like more of the same in Illinois - the rules are different if you're a politician or somebody with clout. While the rest of us try to do the right thing and play by the rules these people write their own rules. Funny how their rules seem to benefit them at the expense of the people who pay their salaries (that would be us)
Joe flunked the ethics test at U of I.
It's one thing to give tix and trips to alumni through the foundation when the payback is a $1 mil gift. It's another to give money to politicians who Joe nees to fund his capital budget and get him out of other, er, um, ethical problems.
If I recall correctly, you can't receive gifts over a certain amount as a state employee---and since the governor's office had to take the ethics test this year, I would assume it would apply to Blagojevich. As for Emil, he's elected, so I don't know. He's probably governed under different rules.
If the tickets were *bought*, it's probably not a ethical violation. If anyone was given tickets for any reason other than *working* at the Rose Bowl (fundraising, team support, etc.), then it could be a problem, I would think.
Technically, at the very least, I would think the tickets would be considered state property. You can't just *give away* state property.... You would be basically stealing revenue from the state.
Holy crap, state dignitaries going to sporting events!
Well LSU gave the same thing to the Governor and state senators in Louisiana and they bought in to it. But our Governor said no and is working January 2 so he is saying here. I don’t agree with his decision I would have went. Go ILLINI
These tickets are, in essence, a state asset, paid for with tax money. No one, and I mean NO one, should be given a single ticket.
Not until I can call and use the state planes free of charge like King Rod does.
When games are played at the Assembly Hall, I assume Bruce Weber is not required to buy a ticket. That's because he works there. Same is true for Richard Hermann at the Assembly Hall. If he is sitting in the bleachers he happens to be at work and I suspect his mind is working and he is observing things around him.
Same is true for all the Trustees. And Emil Jones. His job, by virtue of election, is to work for the State of Illinois. Here's a big event with millions of dollars at stake and he should have to buy a ticket to observe it? Sure it may be fun to watch a game, but I like my job too, so should I have to pay admission to go to work because I find it enjoyable?
Anonymous 8:07
By that logic, I think every waitress on the face of the planet would be entitled to free meals at the place where they work. After all, they're watching the dynamics of the resteraunt, they're mentally guaging how long it will take for an order to come up, typically pre-bussing by stacking plates neatly when they're done, and making sure that they are making life easy on their servers by not making special requests one at a time every five minutes.
Why should they have to pay for that food? Haven't they earned it just because they're employees?
/end mode=sarcasm
Kem
My son and a lot of his friends worked at restaurants when in school. They all got free food at the restaurants where they worked.
Anonymous 12:22:
I had exactly one restaraunt in the nine (fast food and waiting tables) food service jobs that I worked in that offered free meals, and that was only when the GM wasn't working.
Generally, it's anywhere from 20% off to 75% off, and the 75% off that I heard about was only a temporary increase from the standard 20% because they had kicked butt on the cleanliness inspection. 50% was the most common discount, and some restaraunts put a restriction on that-- you're only able to draw the discount if you've worked a shift that day.
Typically, food service employees still pay for their food. They may not pay as much as you do, but there's no such thing as a free lunch. Except for where your son and his friends worked. Not sure how they pulled that off, but good for them in finding restaraunts that fed their help for free. It's definately not standard operating procedure.
Kem
When one is working at a restaurant, one is not governed by state ethics laws. State workers are.
Plus, your analogy of waitresses eating while working is not quite accurate. A similar analogy would be if waitresses gave away free meals to others---without the owner's permission.
No matter what the policy, the tickets are revenue generators for the university---and by extension, the state. You can't give away state property to anyone---period. Especially when the football program isn't self-sustaining (refer to IP's post about athletic program revenue). Nor is the state at this time.
And I can't see how politicians can say they are *working* at the game. Their jobs entail writing and passing legislation---not footballs.
Sure, it might help them with visibility, but that's not their *job*.... The coaches, the support personnel, sure. They will actually be working.
If these tickets were purchased, then I'm thinking there isn't much problem---other than the fact that they received *special treatment* which is abhorrent to me regardless of who the recipient is....
justkem:
I worked in two different restaurants in two different cities: IHOP in Champaign (where I was on the inaugural crew from 1974-1977) and Wag's in Mattoon (in 1979). Both offered one free meal per shift, with a price cap.
I also had a number of friends at the time who worked in other restaurants around town (Sambo's, Lum's, Uncle John's, the White Horse, Taffies, etc.), and they all had similar policies. Of course, this was thirty years ago.
I have no idea what it's like today, but historically it was a standard practice for businesses in the food service industry to feed their employees. I'm not saying it was universal, but it was definitely very widespread.
You've got me curious now as to when that all might have changed...
gamera:
I'm not sure why there's a need to split hairs here about who best represents our elected officials in my restaraunt analogy. The point remains the same: it's not a sound business practice to lose money to build loyalty when the people you're trying to build loyalty with could just as easily be "appreciated" with a 20% off benefit. I'm not completely against the idea of the "business lunch" where our elected officials pick up some of the tab, but don't pay full price. That builds goodwill when the funding decisions are up for cuts. "Special treatment" is a part of life. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.
As far as the comments about it not being their "job", my original post was kind of dripping with sarcasm. I'm not in favor of freebies, and I utterly reject the notion that going to a football game is work.
Kevin: It was 50% off when I was working at the campus IHOP in 1998. The times, they are a changin'.
Kem