Algonquin Township Clerk Claims Official Misconduct and Eavesdropping

The Algonquin Township Board was missing Supervisor Chuck Lutzow at Wednesday’s meeting. He was sick.

In her report to the Algonquin Township Board at the end of Wednesday’s meeting, Clerk Karen Lukasik reported that she has two temperature controlled upstairs rooms in Building 6.

“They have been secured,” she said, telling of changing the locks.

Then she told the Board that “Keith noticed [a camera] was hidden up in the rafters.”

She continued that she didn’t know about its installation.

“It was purchased back in June.

“I would have thought I would have been told..

Trustee David Chapman explained that it was bought from Quill.

“I’m not going to say anymore about the criminal investigation about the eavesdropping and official misconduct.”

Trustee Rachael Lawrence asked, “Is it still there.?

“I have no further comment,’ Lukasik.

Lawrence said it was a “Supervisor’s purchase.”

Chapman contended, “It came out of the Road and Bridge [Fund], not the Supervisor’s Office.”

I happened to be sitting next to Road Commissioner Andrew Gasser and asked him in writing,

“Did you pay for the camera?  Did you install the camera?”

He wrote, “No.”

[After the meeting, I told Chapman Gasser’s reply.

[In any email later Wednesday night, Chapman admitted he was wrong other than when he said the camera had been purchased as “office supply.”]

“I would like to know more about the criminal conduct,” Lawrence said.

Acting Supervisor Dan Shea wondered the importance of the subject.

“It is not a lawsuit.

“I intend to seed further investigation about it.

“I’m gong to search what I have to do.

“I’m not going into Executive Session [about it[].”

Trustee Melissa Victor asked, “Are there any more hidden cameras that anyone else is aware of?”

There was no answer.


Algonquin Township Clerk Claims Official Misconduct and Eavesdropping — 12 Comments

  1. A bunch of losers fighting over control of the ashes of an antiquated unit of government.

  2. Maybe that’s the one, if there is one, being referred to as if it were recently “hidden”.

    Could it have been there (if there is one) since 2016?

  3. So Chuck was hiding?

    No problems, our patronage dude Ryan runs that office anyway.

    Was he asked about the camera?

  4. we want the camera bob! or the refund.

    You don’t deserve it , its called theft,we demand everything you and your family stole from this twshp,vacation money,clothing,around the clock,ect ect ect,tic toc tic toc

  5. This camera has nothing to do with 2016 budget.

    It was purchased out of the supervisors budget this year.

    Lutzow better hire a criminal attorney and not charge it to the Township.

    Willful and wanton discretions to the office, now he’s personally liable.

  6. Rickey, he’s ultimately responsible for purchases from his office.

    It was purchased on his watch. I assume he monitors those purchases and approves them?

    He’s screwed if there was a camera there and it’s in his bills.

    Just my two sense.

  7. I don’t understand what the big deal is.

    Security Camera(s) in the workplace are common.

  8. Can’t wait to hear more on these illegal cameras!


    A patronage hire of Provenzano was a good pick for corruption.

    Runs in the family!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.