Martwick, Lapointe vote YES to require tampons in boys’ school bathrooms

Bill headed to governor’s desk would place another unfunded mandate on local school districts

If you were forgetting just how far to the whacko-left Illinois’ legislature has gone under its Democratic supermajority…  here’s a reminder.

Local politicians want tampons in boys’ school bathrooms

During the Spring session of the Illinois legislature that ended May 31st, the Illinois assembly voted to require local schools – at taxpayer expense – to place tampons in bathrooms.

It would also require that tampons be placed in boys’ bathrooms.

Two of your local “representatives”, IL 19th House district Lindsey Lapointe, and 10th district IL senator Robert Martwick, both voted YES.

IL 20th house rep Donald Stephens, voted NO.

Lapointe represents east of Harlem and south of Montrose; Stephens covers north of Montrose and west of Harlem.

Martwick covers all of Norridge.

Low turnout in local elections keep incumbents in power

Voter records show over two thirds of registered voters didn’t participate in April’s local election

The numbers have it – most Norridge residents don’t care about their local government bodies.

Turnout for the April 2021 elections was low, at 32%

This isn’t an opinion, it’s fact: only 32% of registered voters cast a ballot in the April 2021 general election.

That means 68% of registered voters didn’t vote. Over 2/3rds.

It’s the lowest voter participation on record for a Village President election.

2019 also saw the lowest turnout for a trustee election, at 18%.

By comparison, official records show over 70% of the electorate came out to vote in the November 2020 US presidential election. Why the difference?

Trump was clearly the draw for that election. Norridge residents came out to vote for him or against him. Trump won all Norridge precincts but one.

By comparison, voter enthusiasm was low for either Benigno or Tannhauser.

Benigno was deemed close to the uber corrupt Illinois Democratic establishment, and Tannhauser had all the charisma of a cardboard box.

Benigno was doing well early on, but his campaign seemed to fall apart mid February.

The fatal blow very likely came when he touted Democratic endorsements from the likes of Illinois US Senator Dick Durbin and IL Secretary of State Jesse White.

The result? Conservative Republicans, independents, and nonpartisan voters who may have been inclined to support Benigno, stayed home. Benigno needed those voters to win.

Benigno was a long time close associate of White, having been his deputy and chief of staff, and wanted his endorsement.

Except, Norridge doesn’t care about Jesse White. Norridge was more interested in what policies would change with Benigno as mayor.

The race reverted to a popularity contest. He who could get his supporters out to the polls, wins.


The results also suggest some conclusions.

Norridge residents are apparently OK with the Chicago 38th Ward deciding who sits on the Norridge Village board or who becomes Village President, or even who is allowed to run for office.

It re-affirmed that the Polish community in Norridge doesn’t care about local government, and won’t participate in local elections.

They didn’t even care about the scandal of the unjustified arrest of a Polish resident replacing his own fence.

This is significant, because Poles make up the majority of the population in Norridge, over 60% by some estimates.

Unfortunately for them, lack of involvement in elections isn’t going to help getting their concerns addressed… if you don’t vote, nobody is going to take you seriously.

Trend not looking good for Norridge “Improvement” Party

On the other hand, the trend of the past 3 elections clearly shows things turning against the Norridge “Improvement” Party

Even with his stumbles, Benigno was able to substantially narrow the gap to 233 votes, down from 555 in 2017.

With IL 10th District senator Robert Martwick likely to have his district “gerrymandered” out of Norridge, Tannhauser’s regime will likely be cut off from Chicago 38th Ward Democratic support. That gap will narrow even more.

Tannhauser seems to have been spooked enough of the shrinking numbers gap, as he sent out a letter this week asking to “work together” with those who voted against him/for the opposition.

Benigno seemed to win the battle of policies and ideas. Someone could take that and run with it.

If enough Norridge voters suddenly decide to base their votes on policies, rather than individual relationships… or, heaven forbid, there’s more than 18% to 32% turnout… NIP, and their parasitic patronage army of friends and relatives – and the waste of taxpayer funds that goes along with them – are toast.

2021 local general election endorsements

I am voting for these candidates/referendums in the local 2021 April 6 general election

Norridge Village board – Tom Benigno (Norridge Village President), write in Anna Mitera and Adam Chudzik (Norridge Village Trustee), write in C Aleksandra Siemaszko (Norridge Village Clerk)


District 80 board of education – write in Christopher Monson (4 year term), Maria Lala (4 year term), Orenzo Berardi (2 year term)

Norwood Park Township – Anthony Beckman (Township Supervisor), Michael Lupo (Highway Commissioner), George Ballis (Township Clerk), Constadinos “Gus” Rapatas, Paul Malicki, Mandy Lushniak, and Kevin Hanley (Township Trustee), NONE (Township Assessor)

Norridge Park District tax increase referendum – NO

3 non binding referendums – left blank

Adam Chudzik, Norridge

Norridge homeowner harassed, arrested for replacing own fence

Village official in police report claimed another party owned fence without proof

Most people try to keep government at arm’s length at the best of times.

They deal with government when they have to… but they don’t want to invite a monkey on their back that may not easily leave.

For one Norridge resident, government became a King Kong sized monkey on his back, that absolutely refused to get off.

It all started with one man’s desire to replace an old chain link fence, with a taller wood fence. Let’s call him “Homeowner A”.

The existing fence was on the easement between his property, and that of his neighbors. The old fence was the property of Homeowner A.

The homeowner followed proper Village procedure to apply for the permit, paid the Village’s (exorbitant) $200 fee, and received the permit.

Village Engineer Gaseor falsely claimed alternative ownership of the victim’s fence

At one point, one of his neighbors filed a complaint over the fence with the Village, claiming Homeowner A “stole” the existing fence.

The second homeowner is a landlord and his property is rented out. We’ll call him “Homeowner B”.

One big problem with the complaint: Homeowner B didn’t actually own the fence in question…. Homeowner A did.

The dispute finally ended up in the Village zoning court over an alleged code violation concerning the new fence.

Homeowner A provided proof of ownership of the old fence, addressed the issues over the alleged code violation, and the zoning court ruled in his favor.

Done and case closed, right?

That’s when the situation escalated – Homeowner A was arrested by the Norridge PD 30 seconds later, and criminally charged for theft of the fence.

Arrested for “stealing” own fence?

Let me repeat that: a Norridge resident was arrested and charged for taking down his own fence… an activity he even had a permit for.

How and why on this green earth, could this happen? Who gave the order to arrest Homeowner A and why?

Why did the Village (including the police officers involved with the case) not require Homeowner B to provide proof of ownership before making an arrest?

Per the police report, Norridge’s building commissioner Brian Gaseor claimed Homeowner B was the owner of the fence.

But if Gaseor didn’t have proof of ownership… how could Gaseor’s statement be anything other than a lie?

Homeowner A is a hard working, law-abiding resident of our Village, who may not have the greatest command of the English language. Is that grounds for arrest?

Homeowner A has been greatly harmed in several ways: he is stuck with a boatload of attorney fees and bond costs; the condition of his bonded release forbids him from traveling out of state.

This issue has significantly impacted his ability to earn a living.

When will Norridge’s current appointed mayor Daniel Tannhauser take responsibility, or conduct a investigation over this disgraceful incident?

This isn’t the first abuse of power issue I have heard perpetrated by the Norridge Improvement Party administration. However, as of this writing, it’s got to be one of, if not the worst.

All I know is… if this sort of thing can happen to Homeowner A… it can happen to Homeowner… You.

Adam Chudzik, Norridge

Tannhauser gave himself pension just one month after appointment

Daniel Tannhauser submitted for municipal employee pension shortly after he was appointed Village President

Candidates often have a plan to accomplish certain tasks within their “first 100 days” of taking office.

Daniel Tannhauser submitted for a pension shortly after taking office

It could be something like building a dog park, cancelling an unpopular public works project, or ensuring passage of a law they support.

For Daniel Tannhauser, it was getting a taxpayer funded pension for himself.

Tannhauser was not elected to the position of Village President. He was appointed on July 2 2019, following the resignation of incumbent James Chmura.

Amongst the items included in the August 28 2019 regular board meeting, was a Resolution “relating to participation by elected officials in the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund” for the office of Village President.

The date the pension “became qualified” was July 1 2019, the day before Tannhauser’s appointment, according to the resolution.

Norridge Improvement Party trustees Kucharski, Gregorio, Gelsomino and Larson, dutifully rubber-stamped the pension without discussion.

The IMRF, like all statewide pensions, is a “defined benefit” pension – that is, it provides a set pension benefit amount based on criteria such as number of years of service and salary history.

This formula has proven unsustainable as it grants benefits regardless of the fund’s ability to pay.

Defined benefit pensions do not adjust benefit amounts, for example, for failure to reach return on investment goals.

However, unlike other pensions in Illinois, this one is paid for by local dollars.

That means Tannhauser’s benefits will be borne by local taxpayers. In other words, us.

The Norridge Improvement Party sent a 3-page mailer over the weekend lavishing praise on how great Tannhauser is and will be for Norridge.

In a section titled “mayor comparison”, where Tannhauser contrasted his “grade” with that of his opponent, Tom Benigno, he claimed “none” under a column labeled “Taxpayer Pensions Secured”.

Based on the 2019 resolution above, this claim is false.

It would appear the “none” more aptly describes Daniel Tannhauser’s credibility on this issue.