HomeMy WebLinkAbout989 LenigBefore:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
In Re: Dale Lenig File Docket: 95- 024 -C2
. Date Decided: 12/7/95
Date Mailed: 12/13/95
Daneen E. Reese, Chair
Austin M. Lee, Vice Chair
Roy W. Wilt
Allan M. Kluger
John R. Showers
Rev. Joseph G. Quinn
Boyd E. Wolff
The Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission
conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the
State Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. §401 At seq.
Written notice of the specific allegation(s) was served at the
commencement of the investigation. A Findings Report was issued
and served upon completion of the investigation which constituted
the Complaint by the Investigation Division. An Answer was not
timely filed and a hearing was deemed waived. The record is
complete. This adjudication of the Commission is hereby issued
which sets forth the individual Allegations, Findings of Fact,
Discussion, Conclusions of Law and Order.
This adjudication is final and will be made available as a
public document thirty days after issuance. However,
reconsideration may be requested which will defer public release of
this adjudication pending action on the request by the Commission.
A request for reconsideration does not affect the finality of this
adjudication. A reconsideration request must be received at this
Commission within thirty days of issuance and must include a
detailed explanation of the reasons as to why reconsideration
should be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code §21.29(b).
The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance
with Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S. §408(h). Any person who violates
confidentiality of the Ethics Law is guilty of a misdemeanor
subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for not
more than one year, 65 P.S. §409(e). Confidentiality does not
preclude discussing this case with an attorney at law.
Jenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 2
I. ALLEGATION:
That Dale Lenig, a public official in his capacity as a
Supervisor for Little Mahanoy Township, Northumberland County,
violated the following provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 9 of
1989) when his company, Lenig Contracting, entered into contracts
with the township for snow removal, road maintenance and repairs
and leasing of equipment without an open and public process; and
when he participated in payments to his company.
Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 provides:
Section 3. Restricted Activities
(a) No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that
constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 P.S.
§403 (a) .
Section 3. Restricted activities
(f) No public official or public
employee or his spouse or child or any
business in which the person or his spouse or
child is associated shall enter into any
contract valued at $500 or more with the
governmental body with which the public
official or public employee is associated or
any subcontract valued at $500 or more with
any person who has been awarded a contract
with the governmental body with which the
public official or public employee is
associated, unless the contract has been
awarded through an open and public process,
including prior public notice and subsequent
public disclosure of all proposals considered
and contracts awarded. In such a case, the
public official or public employee shall not
have any supervisory or overall responsibility
for the implementation or administration of
the contract. Any contract or subcontract
made in violation of this subsection shall be
voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction
if the suit is commenced within 90 days of the
making of the contract or subcontract. 65
P.S. §403(f)
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 3
II. FINDINGS:
Section 2. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest."
Use by a public official or public employee of
the authority of his office or employment or
any confidential information received through
his holding public office or employment for
the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a
member of his immediate family or a business
with which he or a member of his immediate
family is associated. "Conflict" or "conflict
of interest" does not include an action having
a de minimis economic impact or which affects
to the same degree a class consisting of the
general public or a subclass consisting of an
industry, occupation or other group which
includes the public official or public
employee, a member of his immediate family or
a business with which he or a member of his
Immediate family is associated. 65 P.S. §402.
r
1. On February 16, 1995, the Investigative Division of the State
Ethics Commission received an unsworn complaint alleging that
Dale Lenig violated provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 9
of 1989) .
2. Upon review of the complaint by the Director of Investigations
a recommendation was made to the Executive Director to approve
an own- motion preliminary inquiry.
3. At the direction of the Executive Director, the Investigative
Division initiated an own- motion preliminary inquiry on March
9, 1995.
4. The preliminary inquiry was completed within sixty days.
5. On May 3, 1995, a letter was forwarded to Dale Lenig, by the
Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission informing
him that a complaint against him was received by the
Investigative Division and that a full investigation was being
commenced.
a. Said letter was forwarded by certified mail, No. P 016
239 203.
b. The domestic return receipt bore the signature of Betty
Lenig, with a delivery date of May 4, 1995.
6. The full investigation was commenced at the direction of the
Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission.
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 4
7. The Investigative Complaint was mailed to the Respondent on
October 11, 1995.
8. Dale Lenig has served as a Supervisor of Little Mahanoy
Township, Northumberland County, since April 2, 1990.
a. Lenig completed the unexpired term of Supervisor William
Latsha who died.
b. Lenig was subsequently elected to a full term.
c. Lenig has served as Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
since January, 1991.
9. Dale Lenig is self - employed buying and selling coal.
Lenig is the owner of Dale Lenig Coal Washery.
Lenig has been involved in this family run business for
over thirty years.
Lenig's company owns
trucks.
10. Little Mahanoy Township has a population
hundred and fifty residents.
a. It has no municipal building.
a .
b.
c .
a backhoe,
payloader and dump
of approximately
four
b. The township does not have a full -time road crew to
maintain approximately eight miles of roads and bridges.
c. The township does employ one part -time road worker.
11. Little Mahanoy township has utilized outside contractors for
road maintenance, repairs and snow removal for over thirty
years.
a. The supervisors determined that it would not be cost
effective to purchase equipment and hire employees to
maintain eight miles of road.
12. At the annual reorganization meetings of the Little Mahanoy
Township Supervisors rates are set for the rental of
equipment.
a. Rates are set for snow plow, dump truck, payloader,
laborers and pick -up truck.
13. Hourly rates for equipment rental have been set by the Little
Mahanoy Board of Supervisors at reorganization meetings on the
following dates:
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 5
DATE
01/02/90
01/07/91
01/06/92
01/04/93
01/03/94
01/03/95
SNOW PLOW DUMP TRUCK PAYLOADER BACI&OE PICK -UP TRUCK
$35.00
$35.00
$28.00
$38.00
$42.00
$42.00
$17.00
$20.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
$22.00
$25.00
$40.00
$45.00
$45.00
$35.00
$35.00
$35.00
$35.00
$35.00
14. Dale Lenig has been present at the reorganization meetings
held in 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995.
a. Minutes do not reflect votes of the individual
supervisors in regards to setting rates for various
equipment.
b. Rates set were by a consensus of the board of
supervisors.
c. Dale Lenig has participated in the setting of rates every
year since 1991.
15. Little Mahanoy Township has utilized the services of Dale
Lenig exclusively for road maintenance and snow removal for
approximately thirty years.
b. Quotes were not solicited from other companies for this
type of work.
c. The nearest companies are approximately twenty miles
away.
16. The services performed by Lenig in regard to snowplowing were
initiated without direction from the board of supervisors.
a. Lenig had performed snow plowing services prior to his
appointment as township supervisor and was authorized to
begin plowing at his discretion as weather conditions
dictated.
17. Road maintenance and /or repairs were conducted after
consultation by Lenig with Roadmaster Walter Klock.
18. Since serving as a township supervisor, Dale Lenig has billed
Little Mahanoy Township for services and has been paid as
follows:
$10.
$10.00
$10.00
Lenia, 95- 024 -C2
Page 6
DATE OF
SERVICE
1990
06/18/90
09/24/90
10/17/90
1221
01/09/91
01/11/91
01/12/91
02/01/92
04/01/91
04/12/91
04/17/91
04/25/91
11/04/91
1992
01/16/92
01/18/92
01/20/92
01/26/92
02/12/92
TYPE OF
SERVICE
Truck -
Truck -
Backhoe
1990 TOTAL
Ashing - 3
Ashes
Plowing
Plowing
Ashes
Plowing - 1.5 hrs
Ashes
Truck - 1
Backhoe -
Truck - 6
Backhoe -
Truck - 1
Backhoe -
Truck - 2
Payloader
Sand Blasting,
Paint, Snow Blower $215.00
1991 TOTAL
5 hrs
9 hrs
- 2.5 hrs
hrs
2 hrs
2 hrs
hr
2 hrs
hrs
1.5 hrs
.5 hrs
5 hrs
hrs
- 1.5 hrs
Ash Roads - 2 hrs
Ashes
Welding lgts - 1 hr
Hook up lgts - 1 hr
Ash Roads - 1.5 hrs
Ashes
Plowing - 2.5 hrs
Ashes
Plowing - 1.5 hrs
TOTAL
AMOUNT
$ 80.00
$153.00
$ 87.50
$210.00
$530.50
$ 80.00
$ 32.00
$ 87.50
$ 70.00
$ 16.00
$ 52.50
$ 20.00
$383.00
$ 20.00
$ 70.00
$210.00
$ 30.00
$ 30.00
$175.00
$ 30.00
$ 60.00
$625.00
$1,234.77
$ 76.00
$ 21.00
$ 30.00
$ 57.00
$ 21.00
$ 95.00
$ 21.00
$321.00
$ 57.00
CHECK,,
194
223
237
266
272
387
371
404
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 7
02/13/92
02/14/92
03/12/92
03/19/92
03/23/92
04/21/92
04/28/92
05/07/92
07/07/92
07/08/92
07/10/92
07/22/92
08/05/92
08/17/92
08/22/92
12/10/92
12/28/92
1993
01/11/93
01/12/93
Plowing - 2.5 hrs $ 95.00
Plowing - 4 hrs $152.00
Ashes $ 49.00
$353.00
Ash Roads - 2 hrs $ 76.00
Ashes $ 14.00
Plowing - 2.5 hrs $ 95.00
Plowing - 1.5 hrs
Ashes
Truck - 3.5 hrs
Truck - 2 hrs
Backhoe - 4 hrs
Truck - 1 hr
Backhoe - 3 hrs
Payloader - 8 hrs
Truck - 3 hrs
Payloader - 5 hrs
Truck - 5.5 hrs
Truck - 2 hrs
Tracker - 2.5 hrs
Tracker - 5.5 hrs
Truck - 2 hrs
Payloader - 3 hrs
Truck - 1.5 hrs
Cutting, mowing
Plowing - 3 hrs
Truck - 1.5 hrs
Ashes
1992 TOTAL
$ 57.00
$ 14.00
$256.00
$ 87.50
$ 50.00
$140.00
$277.50
$105.00
$ 25.00
$130.00
$320.00
$200.00
$220.00
$137.50
$ 50.00
$ 45.00
$ 99.00
$1,071.50
$ 50.00
$135.00
$ 37.50
$ 20.00
$242.50
$114.00
$ 57.00
$ 21.00
$192.00
$2,843.50
Trk Ashing - 2 hrs $ 76.00
Ashes $ 21.00
Ashing - 1.5 hrs $ 57.00
Ashes $ 21.00
411
423
442
453
101 (State Fund)
530
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 8
01/29/93 Ashing - 1.5 hrs $ 57.00
Ashes $ 10.50
02/01/93 Ashing - 1.5 hrs $ 57.00
Ashes $ 21.00
$320.50 546
02/06/93 Ashing - 1.5 hrs $ 57.00
Ashes $ 21.00
02/12/93 Plowing - 2.5 hrs $ 95.00
Ashes $ 21.00
02/13/93 Plowing - 4 hrs $152.00
02/15/93 Ashing - 1 hr $ 38.00
Ashes $ 10.50
02/16/93 Plowing - 4 hrs $152.00
Ashes $ 14.00
02/17/93 Plowing - 2.5 hrs $ 95.00
Ashes $ 10.50
02/18/93 Ashing 1 hr $ 38.00
Ashes $ 14.00
02/21/93 Plowing - 2 hrs $ 76.00
02/22/93 Plowing - 3.5 hrs $133.00
Ashes $ 21.00
02/25/93 Plowing - 1.5 hrs $ 57.00
Ashing $ 21.00
02/24/93 Fixing Plow $ 22.50
$1,086.50 552
03/06/93 Plowing - 1.5 hrs $ 57.00
03/11/93 Plowing - 1 hr $ 38.00
Ashes $ 6.00
03/13/93 Plowing - 4.5 hrs $171.00
03/14/93 Plowing - 3 hrs $114.00
03/15/93 Plowing - 5 hrs $190.00
$576.00
05/07/93 Backhoe - 5 hrs $175.00
Truck - 2 hrs $ 50.00
05/18/93 Payloader - 10.5 hrs$472.50
Truck - 10.5 hrs $262.50
$960.00 590
06/25/93 Truck - 5 hrs $125.00 609
08/09/93 Truck - 9 hrs
08/10/93 Truck - 4 hrs $325.00 625
12/06/93 Remount Snow $465.00
Plow, hydraulic
systems, 6 gal.
hydraulic oil $ 24.00
Lenin, 95- 024 -C2
Page 9
12/25/93
12/26/93
1994
Power Steering
Fluid $ 1.50
Iron -bolts $ 15.00
$505.50
Ashing - 2 hrs $ 76.00
Ashes $ 24.00
Plowing - 3 hrs $114.00
$214.00
1993 TOTAL $4,112.50
01/04/94 Plowing - 6 hrs
01/05/94 Plowing - 3 hrs
01/07/94 Plowing - 3 hrs
01/08/94 Plowing - 4 hrs
01/09/94 Plowing - 4 hrs
01/12/94 Plowing - 4 hrs
01/15/94 Plowing - 3 hrs
01/17/94 Plowing - 3 hrs
01/18/94 Plowing - 5 hrs
01/29/94 Plowing - 2 hrs
01/20/94 Plowing - 2 hrs
01/26/94 Plowing - 4 hrs
01/28/94 Plowing - 3 hrs
46 hrs = $1,932.00
02/03/94 Ashing - 1.5 hrs $ 65.00
02/04/94 Ashing - 2 hrs $ 84.00
Ashes $ 16.00
02/08/94 Plowing - 3 hrs $126.00
02/09/94 Plowing - 3.5 hrs $147.00
Ashes $ 20.00
02/11/94 Plowing - 4 hrs $168.00
02/23/94 Plowing - 4 hrs $168.00
02/24/94 Plowing - 2.5 hrs $105.00
Ashes $ 12.00
666
667
01/04/94 Ashes $ 24.00
01/05/94 Ashes $ 20.00
01/07/94 Ashes $ 36.00
01/08/94 Ashes $ 36.00
01/09/94 Ashes $ 36.00
01/12/94 Ashes $ 8.00
01/15/94 Ashes $ 24.00
01/20/94 Ashes $ 24.00
01/26/94 Ashes $ 24.00
01/28/94 Ashes $ 24.00
$256.00
TOTAL $2,188.00 680
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 10
03/03/94 Plowing - 7 hrs $294.00
$1,203.00 693
03/09/94 Payloader/
Plowing - 3 hrs $135.00
03/10/94 Payloader/
Plowing - 3 hrs $126.00
03/19/94 Payloader/
Plowing - 2 hrs $ 84.00
$345.00 709
05/10/94 Payloader - 4 hrs $180.00
Truck - 3 hrs $ 75.00
05/17/94 Snowplow repair $ 45.00
05/24/95 Backhoe - 3.5 hrs $122.50
Truck - 2.5 hrs $ 62.50
$485.00 730
06/22/94 Truck - 4.5 hrs $112.50 739
10/07/94 Truck - 3.5 hrs $ 87.50
10/12/94 Payloader - 4.5 hrs $202.50
10/29/94 Payloader - 3 hrs $135.00
11/05/94 Payloader - 2 hrs $ 90.00
$515.00 786
11/10/94 Weld snow plow
shoes $ 35.00 798
1994 TOTAL $4,883.50
1995
01/08/95 Ashing - 2 hrs $ 84.00
02/04/95 Plowing - 5 hrs $210.00
Ashing $ 24.00
02/05/95 Plowing - 3 hrs $126.00
Ashing $ 8.00
02/06/95 Plowing - 2 hrs
$536.00 823
02/15/95 Ashing - 2 hrs $ 84.00
Ashes $ 24.00
02/16/95 Ashing - 2 hrs $ 84.00
Ashes $ 24.00
02/26/95 Plowing - 2.5 hrs $105.00
Ashes $ 12.00
02/27/95 Ashing - 1.5 hrs $ 63.00
Ashes $ 20.00
$416.00 828
1995 TOTAL $952.00
Leniq, 95- 024 -C2
Page 11
19. The following amounts have been paid to Dale Lenig,by Little
Mahanoy Township for snow removal, equipment rental and road
repairs:
1990:
1991:
1992:
1993:
1994:
1995:
$ 530.50
$ 1,234.77
$ 2,843.50
$ 4,112.50
$ 4,883.50
$ 952.00
$14,556.00
20. As a Little Mahanoy Township Supervisor Dale Lenig
participated in the process of approving and dispensing checks
to him.
a. Lenig co- signed all of the checks listed in Finding #21.
b. Lenig participated in the votes of the board of
supervisors approving payments to himself.
c. The votes to approve payments were always unanimous.
21. Little Mahanoy Township approved and issued checks to Dale
Lenig as follows:
MEETING CHECK CHECK AMOUNT VOTE BY
DATE DATE NUMBER OF CHECK SUPERVISORS
07/02/90 07/02/90 194 $ 80.00 3 -0
10/01/90 10/01/90 223 $ 153.00 3 -0
11/05/90 11/05/90 237 $ 87.50 3 -0
01/07/91 01/07/91 266 $ 210.00 3 -0
02/04/91 02/04/91 272 $ 383.00 3 -0
02/04/91 02/04/91 271 $ 11.77 3 -0
05/06/91 05/06/91 307 $ 625.00 3 -0
11/04/91 11/04/91 371 $ 215.00 3 -0
02/03/92 02/03/92 404 $ 321.00 3 -0
03/02/92 03/02/92 411 $ 353.00 3 -0
04/04/92 04/06/92 423 $ 256.00 3 -0
05/04/92 05/04/92 442 $ 277.50 3 -0
06/01/92 06/01/92 453 $ 130.00 3 -0
08/03/92 08/03/92 101 $ 171.50 3 -0
(State Fund)
09/08/92 09/08/92 483 $ 242.50 3 -0
01/04/93 01/04/93 530 $ 192.00 3 -0
02/01/93 02/01/93 546 $ 320.50 3 -0
03/01/93 03/01/93 552 $1,086.50 3 -0
04/05/93 04/05/93 573 $ 576.00 3 -0
06/07/93 06/07/93 590 $ 960.00 3 -0
07/05/93 07/05/93 609 $ 125.00 3 -0
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 12
09/07/93
12/06/93
01/03/94
02/07/94
03/07/94
04/04/94
06/06/94
07/05/94
11/07/94
12/04/94
02/06/95
03/06/95
09/07/93 625
12/06/93 666
01/03/94 667
02/07/94 680
Missing Check 693
04/04/94 709
06/06/94 730
07/05/94 739
11/07/94 787
12/05/94 798
02/06/95 823
03/06/95 828
TOTAL
$ 325.00
$ 505.50
$ 214.00
$2,188.00
$1,203.00
$ 345.00
$ 485.00
$ 112.50
$ 515.00
$ 35.00
$ 536.00
$ 416.00
$14,556.27
3,
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
3 -0
22. Dale Lenig was unaware that while serving as a township
supervisor any business transactions with the township would
have to be done on a bid basis.
a. Lenig was advised by Supervisor Walter Klock that he
could continue doing business with the township after
being appointed supervisor.
b. He charged rates that were set by the board at
reorganization.
c. He has the only such contracting business in the
township. The next nearest contractor is over twenty
(20) miles away.
d. The board utilized his services because of his closeness
and low prices.
e. He could not estimate his profit.
III. DISCUSSION:
As a Little Mahanoy Township Supervisor, Dale Lenig,
hereinafter Lenig, is a public official as that term is defined
under Act 9 of 1989. 65 P.S. §402. As such, his conduct is
subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law and the restrictions
therein are applicable to him.
Initially, it is noted that Section 9 of Act 9 of June 26,
1989 provides, in part, as follows:
This amendatory
violations committed
date of this act,
initiated for such
governed by the prior
act shall not apply to
prior to the effective
and causes of action
violations shall be
law, which is continued
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 13
in effect for that purpose as if this act were,
not in force. For the purposes of this
section, a violation was committed prior to
the effective date of this act if any elements
of the violation occurred prior thereto.
Since the occurrences in this case transpired after the
effective date of Act 9 (June 26, 1989), we must apply the
provisions of Act 9 to determine whether the Ethics Act was
violated.
Under Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989, a public
official /employee shall not engage in conduct that constitutes a
conflict of interest as defined above.
In addition, Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 specifically
provides in part that no public official /employee or spouse or
child or business with which he or the spouse or child is
associated may enter into a contract with his governmental body
valued at five hundred dollars or more or any subcontract valued at
five hundred dollars or more with any person who has been awarded
a contract with the governmental body with which the public
official /employee is associated unless the contract is awarded
through an open and public process including prior public notice
and subsequent public disclosure.
The allegation before us is that Dale Lenig violated Section
3(a), the conflict provision, and Section 3(f), the contracting
provision, of Act 9 of 1989 when his company, Lenig Contracting,
entered into contracts with the Township for snow removal, road
maintenance and repairs and leasing of equipment without an open
and public process and when Lenig participated in making payments
to his company.
Lenig has served as Little Mahanoy Township Supervisor since
April, 1990 and as Chairman of the Board since January, 1991. In
a private capacity, Lenig is self employed in the business of
buying and selling coal. Lenig's company owns a backhoe, payloader
and dumptrucks.
Since Mahanoy Township has a population of approximately 450
residents, there is no municipal building and no full time road
crew to maintain approximately 8 miles of roads and bridges. The
Township employs only one part -time roadworker. The Township has
utilized outside contractors for road maintenance, repairs and snow
removal for the past thirty years because it would not be cost
effective to purchase equipment and hire employees to maintain 8
miles of road.
At the annual Township reorganizational meetings, the Board of
Supervisors set rates for the rental of equipment including snow
plows, dump trucks, payloaders, backhoes and pick -up trucks. The
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 14
rates for such equipment for the years 1990 through 1995 are set
forth in Fact Finding 13. Although the minutes do not reflect the
votes of individual Supervisors, Lenig participated at the 1991
through 1995 meetings in the setting of rates which was done by a
consensus of the Board.
No quotes were solicited from other companies for road
maintenance and snow removal because the nearest companies were
approximately 20 miles away. Even prior to his appointment as
Township Supervisor, Lenig performed snow plowing services for
approximately 30 years, being authorized to begin plowing at his
discretion as weather conditions dictated. Snow plowing services
were performed by Lenig without direction from the Board of
Supervisors. Road maintenance /repairs were done by Lenig after
consultation with Roadmaster Walter Klock. Lenig billed Little
Mahanoy Township for services and received payment as detailed in
Fact Finding 18. The total amounts received by Lenig in each of
the years 1990 through 1995 are set forth in Fact Finding 19.
Although the votes to approve payments were always unanimous by the
Board, Lenig did co -sign all of the checks (Fact Finding 21) which
were issued to himself.
Lenig was unaware that business transactions with the Township
had to be done by bid while he served as a Township Supervisor.
Supervisor Klock advised Lenig that he could continue doing
business with the Township after he was appointed Township
Supervisor. The rates that Lenig charged the Township were those
set by the Board of Supervisors at the reorganizational meetings.
As noted above, Lenig has the only contracting business in the
Township in that the nearest contractor is over 20 miles away. The
Board utilized Lenig's services because of his close proximity and
low prices. Lastly, since Lenig could not estimate his profit, the
record only sets forth the gross amounts that Lenig received for
his services.
In applying the provisions of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 to
the instant matter, we find a technical violation. Lenig used the
authority of office by co- signing checks in payment to himself for
the services he provided to the Township. See, Perino, Order 980.
In addition, there was a private pecuniary benefit in this case
consisting of the payment that Lenig received for his services to
the Township. Lastly, the private pecuniary benefit enured to
Lenig directly or to the business with which he was associated.
However, we will not impose restitution in this case for two
reasons. First, we cannot determine from this record what profit
Lenig received in providing these services. Second, we do not
believe that restitution is warranted under the facts and
circumstances.
Regarding Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989, we find violations of
the contracting provision for certain services provided by Lenig to
the Township. Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 does allow a public
Lenig, 95- 024 -C2
Page 15
official /employee to contract with his governmental ,body but
contracts of $500 or more must be awarded through an open and
public process including prior public notice and subsequent public
disclosure. The following are the instances where contracts were
in excess of $500 but were not awarded through an open and public
process: snow plowing services for the years 1992 -1995;
payloader /truck services on July 7, 1992 and on May 18, 1993 and
various services on December 6, 1993. In each of those enumerated
instances, we find violations of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989.
Based upon the totality of facts and circumstances as noted
above, we will take no further action in this case.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Dale Lenig as a Little Mahanoy Township Supervisor is a public
official subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989.
2. A technical violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989
occurred when Lenig co- signed Township checks made in payment
to himself for various services he provided to the Township.
3. Lenig violated Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 as to contracts
that were in excess of $500 and were not awarded through an
open and public process for snow plowing services for the
years 1992 -1995 and for services performed on July 7, 1992,
May 18, 1993 and December 6, 1993.
In Re: Dale Lenig
ORDER NO. 989
File Docket: 95- 024 -C2
Date Decided: 12/7/95
Date Mailed: 12/13/95
1. A technical violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989
occurred when Dale Lenig, as Little Mahanoy Township
Supervisor, co- signed Township checks made in payment to
himself for various services he provided to the Township.
2. Lenig violated Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 as to contracts
that were in excess of $500 and were not awarded through an
open and public process for snow plowing services for the
years 1992 -1995 and for services performed on July 7, 1992,
May 18, 1993 and December 6, 1993.
3. Based upon the totality of facts and circumstances, we will
take no further action in this case.
BY THE COMMISSION,
i o A t .) e t
DANEEN E. REESE, CHAIR