Arlington Heights, IL – As the dust settled from Arlington Heights’ April 2025 local election, I caught up with former village board candidate Martin Bauer over a casual Zoom chat. It was the day after the big trustee race, and despite coming up short in a crowded field of eight candidates (for four seats), Martin’s mood was upbeat and reflective. In fact, the first thing he told me was how “yesterday was an unexpected day” – not so much because he lost (he admits he always knew it was “an uphill battle”), but because of how the results defied expectations. “I’m totally fine with the outcome,” he insisted, noting that in the end “the nice thing about a democracy is that voters have the last word, and the voters have spoken, so it’s all good.”
That gracious attitude set the tone for a candid and wide-ranging conversation. We chatted about everything from low voter turnout and campaign trail frustrations to the influence of local media and political parties. Along the way, Martin shared what he learned during his run for trustee and his hopes for the future of civic engagement in Arlington Heights. I also couldn’t resist sprinkling in some of my own thoughts – after all, this was as much a friendly post-election debrief as it was an interview. What follows is a feature-style recap of our discussion, blending Martin’s insights with a bit of my personal commentary.
Election Night Surprises and Voter Turnout
Election Day 2025 in Arlington Heights had a few surprises up its sleeve. For one, the voter turnout was both encouraging and underwhelming at the same time. Only about 13,362 ballots were cast in the village – roughly 23.9% of registered voters. That’s actually higher than the dismal ~14% turnout of the last local election, but still a far cry from robust participation. Martin wasn’t shocked by the low numbers. “People vote when they feel like something’s at stake,” he observed. “If they don’t really care – and let’s face it, most people don’t pay that much attention to what’s going on locally (they should, but they don’t) – then they stay home.” In other words, unless a local issue grabs them by the collar, a lot of residents simply tune out municipal elections.
We both lamented this perennial challenge of getting neighbors to the polls. Early voting had been promoted by all the candidates, but nobody really pushed mail-in voting despite its growing popularity. I asked Martin whether he thought making mail-in ballots a bigger part of the campaign would have changed the outcome. He didn’t think so. As an actuary by profession, Martin had dug into the data from recent elections and found that many voters were already voting early or by mail. By Election Day, most who cared to vote had done so. “I don’t think it changes the outcome,” he said of any mail-in ballot push, noting that in bigger elections as much as two-thirds of votes are cast before the actual day. The real issue, in his view, is interest: if people aren’t engaged, the convenient option of mailing a ballot isn’t going to magically boost turnout.
Still, the outcome itself had Martin a bit stunned. He congratulated the winners – Jim Bertucci, Carina Santa Maria, Greg Zyck, and Bill Manganaro took the four trustee seats – but he admitted he “was surprised by the outcome of the election” in terms of who those winners were. Why? Because it upended some conventional wisdom about Arlington Heights politics. For years, a key predictor of success in these races was the backing of the major local newspaper (more on that soon). Martin pointed out that historically the Daily Herald’s endorsements boast an “almost 100% success record at picking the ultimate winners.” Typically, a few thousand undecided or “low-information” voters will just trust the newspaper’s picks when they get to the ballot. This time, however, that pattern didn’t hold. One high-profile candidate, Colin Gilbert, had nearly every establishment advantage – a Herald endorsement, a background of civic involvement, even a flood of campaign money – yet Gilbert lost. In fact, he placed fifth, just out of the running. Another candidate, Argie Karafotias (also endorsed by the paper), finished even further down. Clearly, something different was in the air this cycle.
Martin’s take? The partisan winds blew through town. Although village board races are officially nonpartisan, this election saw an unusual level of involvement by local party figures – particularly from the Democrats. “This time around it was much more partisan,” Martin said. Popular state Rep. Mary Beth Canty, a Democrat from Arlington Heights, openly backed a slate of candidates (the eventual winners), making it well known who her party supported. Martin suspects that, against the backdrop of broader dissatisfaction with national politics, a lot of voters responded to those signals. In his quick post-election analysis, the coordinated effort by local Democrats was “extremely successful” – not just in the village trustee contest but also in nearby township races, where long-held Republican seats flipped to Democrats the same night. As a result, traditional factors like newspaper endorsements or even individual resumes mattered less. Partisan affiliation (or at least the perception of it) might have been the deciding factor for many voters.
That led us to discuss a somewhat worrying question: Are local elections becoming too much like national elections? Martin, an independent-minded candidate, voiced concern that our village might be at the start of a trend where local races become hyper-partisan battles. “There is a concern that local elections will become equally partisan as state or national elections,” he said. “At which point the individual candidate is no longer as relevant as the letter they have behind their name, and I think that’s unfortunate.” In his ideal world, neighbors would judge candidates on their local knowledge, ideas, and community ties – not on a party machine’s backing. If voters simply choose the “D” or “R” next to a name without digging deeper, we risk losing the nuanced, issue-focused discussions that local government needs. That was one of Martin’s biggest takeaways from April 2025: Arlington Heights might be headed into a new era of partisan-slated municipal politics, for better or worse.
The Campaign: From “Table Stakes” to Future Challenges
Before we got too deep into what went wrong (or right) this election, I asked Martin to reflect on the campaign itself. What did he think of the conversation during the race? Were there ideas he wished had gotten more attention? His answer revealed a bit of frustration about the campaign discourse.
According to Martin, much of the campaigning revolved around what he calls “the same old” issues – basically the table stakes of local government. Every candidate, for instance, talked about keeping taxes in check, replacing old lead water pipes, and improving storm water drainage. “Yes, taxes – big deal. Yes, lead pipe replacement – big deal. We already know that’s necessary. Storm water mitigation – all of those things to me are table stakes,” he said with a slight grin, as if to acknowledge of course those basics are important. But those are also the obvious topics everyone agrees on. Martin had hoped to push the dialogue into less familiar territory – the challenges and opportunities that aren’t yet fully on the village’s radar. In the various candidate forums and debates, he tried to inject some forward-thinking points, though it didn’t always catch fire with the moderators or other candidates.
So, what “truly new concerns” did Martin want to talk about? He rattled off a few that he believes Arlington Heights needs to start planning for now:
-
The Retail Shift: Our shopping habits have changed dramatically. Martin lives on Ridge Avenue, and he can’t help but notice “an Amazon delivery truck running up and down the street 5 or 6 times a day.” Online shopping is booming, which has “significant implications for brick-and-mortar retail.” What happens to our local stores and malls in the Amazon era? Martin felt this deserved more discussion, beyond generic statements that we need development.
-
Generational Housing Preferences: Martin pointed out a generational divide in how people want to live. Older residents often prefer single-family homes, while younger folks are gravitating toward condos and apartments, valuing flexibility over putting down roots. There was some talk of affordable housing during the campaign, but virtually no debate about what these shifting preferences mean long-term for Arlington Heights’ housing stock and planning.
-
Remote Work and Office Space: As Martin spoke to me midday, he waved at his home office surroundings. “I sit here at home in the middle of the afternoon – it’s the middle of my work day. I work from home as opposed to from the office,” he noted. Commercial real estate is suffering from these new work-from-home norms. What does that mean for all the office parks and business districts in our village? Martin believes we should be thinking ahead about how to adapt to this new reality.
-
Transportation & Infrastructure: Given these lifestyle shifts, Martin is a proponent of making the village more bicycle-friendly. “Transportation is different, and I for one would like there to be more bicycle-friendly infrastructure,” he said, “so we’re not completely tied down to cars as everything, as is still in 2025 the standard in suburbia.” In a town built around the automobile, he knows this idea might be an uphill battle (indeed it didn’t gain much traction in the campaign), but he sees a need for diversifying how we get around.
Martin suspects that some voters did care about these forward-looking issues – he heard plenty of questions at doors and on social media about things like the proposed Chicago Bears stadium development, or how to attract young families to town. But on the public stage, the candidates mostly stuck to safe, broad themes. “Local elections don’t have really stark differences in positions, even between left and right,” Martin said. Everyone tried to sound prudent and positive, and perhaps avoid controversy. For example, every candidate claimed to be “fiscally conservative” (Martin chuckled at this, doubting all of them truly are) and everyone voiced some support for the Bears’ move (even if privately their stances may differ on details). Hot-button social issues or bold proposals were largely absent from the forums. “Some of the potentially most controversial topics… were really not brought up much,” Martin recalled, clearly a bit disappointed. Even the idea of expanding certain village services – one area where at least one candidate hinted at doing more – never evolved into a substantial debate.
“I almost was disappointed that there wasn’t more that bubbled up,” Martin admitted. He truly wanted a richer conversation about the village’s future. Unfortunately, those Amazon trucks, remote workers, and bike lanes didn’t become central campaign talking points. The reality of campaign life, as he wryly noted, is that “we can only answer the questions that we are given.” And the questions he got at debates tended to be about the usual topics (taxes, development in general, public safety, etc.), not the visionary stuff. Still, Martin doesn’t regret trying to broaden the conversation. If nothing else, he hopes he planted a few seeds that village leaders and residents will mull over in the months and years ahead.
Media, Transparency, and Picking Up the Slack
One theme that intertwined with our discussion was the role of the media and transparency in local politics. As a community blogger/reporter myself, this is something I’m particularly passionate (and admittedly opinionated) about. The Arlington Heights race offered a case study in how local media influence works – and sometimes fails – in a changing information landscape.
Earlier, Martin mentioned the Daily Herald’s historical sway over elections. As the only daily newspaper dedicated to the suburbs (with an office long based in Arlington Heights), the Herald has traditionally been the source for election coverage and candidate endorsements. This time, however, the Herald’s picks didn’t automatically translate into victories. Martin actually found a silver lining in that: “On a certain level, I’m glad that it is not the Daily Herald that picks the winners,” he said. The idea that an editorial board could essentially anoint the trustees struck him as undemocratic – “a little bit of a pseudo-democracy,” as he put it. So while his own loss stung, Martin takes comfort that voters weren’t just following the newspaper blindly.
But if the newspaper’s influence wanes and it’s replaced by partisan influence, is that any better? Martin sees it as a mixed bag. He’d prefer an engaged, independent electorate over either a media-driven or party-driven outcome. For local media folks like me, his message was clear: step up, because there’s work to be done. Martin acknowledged that “journalism isn’t what it used to be.” Newspapers have shrinking staffs and resources these days, meaning they often can’t dig as deep or cover as much as they did in years past. “In a time of declining abilities of traditional print media, it is important for others to pick up the slack,” he said. “The Internet has resulted in a democratization of information flow. Fifty years ago, you could not have hammered out information and have the reach that you can have now.” In other words, local news blogs, citizen journalists, and engaged residents on social media can and should fill the gaps that the big media outlets might miss.
I have to admit, I beamed a little at this part of our chat. As someone who has been doggedly reporting on village happenings (often on my own dime and time), it felt validating to hear Martin champion the role of nontraditional media. He even argued that our local government needs to adapt to this reality: “The village ought to get with the times and say, yup, if you have a meaningful outlet – whatever that is – it doesn’t have to be a physical newspaper for us to treat you that way,” he said. “There ought to be a public interest in allowing people to share information because… the reason for the press isn’t just the amusement of the people, it’s to, frankly, dig up dirt when it exists and to uncover things. And if the established media can’t do that anymore, then somebody else needs to pick up the slack.” (Emphasis mine, because yes!)
This topic hit close to home for me. Regular readers will know I had uncovered a story during the campaign about one of the candidates (Mr. Karafotias) operating his business for months with an expired liquor license. It involved some FOIA requests and persistence on my part – the kind of investigative grunt work that, ideally, a well-resourced newspaper would do. I wrote about the issue, and it raised eyebrows because that candidate had been endorsed by the Daily Herald despite the unanswered questions in his background. Many in the community wondered how the major paper missed (or ignored) such a detail. In our interview, I asked Martin what he thought about that situation. While he was careful not to attack any individual, he did say the Herald “didn’t do their due diligence” on at least one of their endorsements. It exemplified the limits of old-school media in the current day. (To be fair, as Martin noted, the Herald is juggling coverage of dozens of towns and races – they simply don’t have the staff to deeply vet every single candidate like a dedicated local blogger might.)
Martin also touched on government transparency during the campaign. Every candidate, himself included, spoke about making Village Hall more transparent and accountable. But he admits it was hard for any candidate to distinguish themselves on that issue because, of course, everyone is going to say they favor transparency. Where the rubber meets the road is how the government actually responds to citizen inquiries and shares information. On that front, Martin believes there’s plenty of room for improvement. “I do believe that governments have to be more transparent and governments have to be more helpful,” he told me. He gave an example: when a new business or developer comes to town with an idea, the village can respond in two ways – either “How can we help you be successful?” or “Here are all the reasons we might say no.” Martin is firmly in favor of the former approach. “Government is there to help us, not to hurt us or to limit us,” he said. That philosophy extends to things like FOIA requests and public information: officials should act less like gatekeepers and more like partners willing to assist residents in understanding what’s going on.
Hearing this, I couldn’t resist a quick internal cheer. As someone who has occasionally tussled with the village over records requests (and is even pursuing a review with the state to be recognized as a media entity for FOIA purposes), I found Martin’s pro-transparency, pro-accountability stance refreshing. It’s the kind of talk we often hear on the campaign trail, but I got the sense Martin genuinely means it. He’d like to see a culture at Village Hall that’s less defensive and more service-oriented. That’s a long-term change that transcends any single election, but our conversation gave me hope that there are community leaders who will keep pushing for it.
Looking Ahead: A Break, Reflections, and Continued Engagement
After an hour of lively discussion, I finally posed the question that’s probably on many supporters’ minds: What’s next for Martin Bauer? Now that the election is over, will he stay involved or fade back into private life? Martin laughed and admitted he hasn’t mapped out his future in politics (or civic life) just yet. “I will definitely take some time off,” he said with a smile of relief. “I’m not prepared, the day after the election, to say, hey, I’m gonna do such-and-such two years from now. I really don’t know.” The man deserves a breather – running an election campaign, especially as an independent newcomer, is exhausting. He mentioned he wants to step back and “take a moment to really assess what we’ve seen” in this election before deciding any next steps.
Does that mean we might see his name on a ballot again in the future? Martin didn’t rule it out, but he also didn’t hint at any immediate plans. It sounded like he’ll spend the coming months reflecting, recharging, and staying tuned in to village affairs (albeit from the sidelines). Knowing Martin, I suspect he won’t be able to resist chiming in on local issues he’s passionate about – whether through letters to the editor, Facebook discussions, or grabbing coffee with current officials to share an idea or two. He’s invested in this community and has a lot of insight to offer, win or lose.
As for the broader future of local politics in Arlington Heights, Martin hopes this election sparks some healthy self-reflection among both voters and leaders. The village is changing – demographically, economically, and politically. Civic engagement will be more important than ever to navigate those changes. That might mean new faces stepping up, more residents paying attention to board meetings, and yes, perhaps more independent local journalism shining a light on what our officials are up to. The April 2025 race showed that outcomes aren’t preordained by the usual power brokers; there’s room for grassroots energy to make a difference. But it also sounded a warning that national-style partisanship is knocking at our door.
Before we signed off, I thanked Martin for his time and honesty. Not every unsuccessful candidate would agree to an hour-long post-mortem interview, much less approach it with humor and openness. Martin, though, was game from the get-go – fiddling with his Zoom background for a minute (“it’s giving me a hard time!” he joked) and then diving right into analysis. As we wrapped up, he told me, “Thank you… this was fun.” I was a bit taken aback that he’d call an interview like this fun, especially after a grueling campaign and a disappointing loss. But that’s Martin Bauer for you. He’s someone who genuinely enjoys civic dialogue and cares about the community, win or lose.
For Arlington Heights, having folks like Martin engaged – whether in office or as active citizens – is undeniably a good thing. Our conversation left me optimistic that even though his name won’t be on the village board, Martin Bauer will still be a voice contributing to Arlington Heights’ future. And who knows? 2027 will be here before we know it. After a bit of rest, we just might see Martin back on the campaign trail, armed with new ideas and the lessons learned from 2025. In the meantime, the work of building a better community goes on, and Martin will be the first to tell you that all of us have a part to play in that.
