SECTION SPONSORS

List of Lewiston problems grows
By Amber Dulek | Winona Daily News

LEWISTON, Minn. — When the Lewiston City Council fired Police Chief Mark Dungy almost two weeks ago at a controversial meeting, the end of a year-long squabble appeared to be over.

But like Yogi Berra said, “It ain’t over til it’s over.”
And Lewiston’s problems don’t appear to be ending. Last week, embattled city administrator Barb Hampel took out a restraining order against one Lewiston resident, a sign that not all has settled.

Still, the controversy that came to head at the last city meeting — when both the sheriff’s office and state troopers were called to maintain order — started more than a year ago. And it appears to be more than a momentary misunderstanding or a one-issue argument. It goes deeper than that. Beyond the police chief, beyond the current city administrator all the way to alleged clandestine meetings and forged state documents.

About a year ago, the city faced a mounting budget deficit of nearly $1 million. The southeastern community of about 1,500 looked to a city council, largely comprised of inexperienced members, for answers and relief.

The council responded by making tough financial cuts with police staff and training, and increasing water and sewer rates. The council members have said repeatedly they want to “fix things.”

Meanwhile, residents protested when the council cut police staff; they say city council members haven’t listened to their concerns. Residents demanded the council investigate city administrator Barb Hampel and presented the elected body a petition with 550 signatures.

The council largely dismissed the complaints and petition, insisting the decisions were made to put the city back in the black.

Residents meanwhile saw red as events outside the council chambers overshadowed city business.

Hampel was charged with breaking into another city employee’s vehicle. Police Chief Mark Dungy accused the city of targeting him after he’d brought some of Lewiston’s problems to light.

Keeping city staff has also been a problem. Since 2006, the city has seen two city administrators, five clerks, three police officers, one water plant worker. And, most recently, the police chief was fired.

Peace, in this small town, has been about as hard to come by as middle ground. Employees blame Hampel. The council blames “vigilante residents,” and a recent citizen on an online forum asked, “What happened to my hometown?”

But documents obtained by the Daily News show that Lewiston’s problems began before the city council even took office.

The letter

Lewiston resident and former police chief Dave Sanow said he witnessed the newly-elected city council members meeting before they were officially sworn into office in 2006. Sanow said he took pictures of their vehicles outside a local feed store.

At the same time, unbeknownst to Sanow, another Lewiston resident Dan Bjork said the “secret” meetings prompted him to send an unsigned letter on Dec. 22, 2006, to then-city administrator Deb Spitzer, city attorney Wayne Schauble, the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, the Lewiston Journal and Winona County Attorney Chuck MacLean.

Bjork accused the incoming council — Councilmen Rich Ahrens, Bruce Boynton, Jack Kanz and Gary Sauers and Mayor Lee Rain — of breaking open meeting laws, and he requested their actions be reviewed for fines or resignations.

The next day, Schauble left a message on Sanow’s answering machine saying someone told him he might be behind the unsigned complaint and demanded that Sanow show up in his office Tuesday.

“I don’t want to hear from you at my home or see you at my home,” said Schauble, on an answering-machine recording of the message provided to the Daily News. “Just show up at my office on Tuesday.”

Sanow said the message “completely blindsided” him when he first listened to it, because he didn’t know about Bjork’s complaint. Schauble’s message “seemed threatening,” so Sanow turned to the Lewiston Police Department for advice.

Schauble said he left a message on Sanow’s machine, but only wanted to understand the concerns of the residents.

According a police report, Dungy told Sanow he couldn’t do anything because it wasn’t criminal activity and it was a conflict of interest for Dungy to investigate the city’s attorney.

On Dec. 28, a couple of days after the message was left on his machine, Sanow came to the Lewiston police with a letter “written on plain paper with a black and white copy” of the state auditor’s seal, according to the police report. It was in response to Bjork’s unsigned complaint.

The letter stated the state auditor’s office will “get to the bottom of this,” that “much of what your City Council has done over the last few years is being reviewed by a legal compliance department here at the state level,” and that the incoming council “will be able to rectify these matters and put to rest some of the complaints that have been coming in.”

Dungy said the letter — “just from looking at it” — appeared to be a forgery because of grammatical mistakes, improper formatting, a phony contact number, an incorrect middle initial for the state auditor and the postmark from Rochester, Minn. Also, the number of the auditor’s office spelled out an obscene message.

Mark Kerr, a legal advisor with the Minnesota Auditor’s Office, confirmed within a half hour the letter was fraudulent and said they wanted the matter prosecuted, according to the police report. The state handed the case to Dungy for an initial investigation.

A state data compliance officer was not aware of any other instances of forgery dealing with the state auditor’s office, said Minnesota State Auditor Rebecca Otto.

Otto said not only did the forged letter use the office’s seal, it claimed to be from former state auditor Patricia Anderson.

“There’s two layers there … it’s pretty serious,” she said. “We care very much about our seal because it’s an official symbol and it represents the work we do.”

A conflict of interest

Dungy completed an initial police report that names Schauble and Ahrens as suspects in the forgery case. The report also mentions Jack Kanz, Rain, Sauers and Boynton could be involved.

Mayor Lee Rain and council members Ahrens, Kanz and Boynton told the Daily News they did not know anything about the matter and have never seen Dungy’s police report. They also said they have not been contacted by the Houston County Sheriff’s Office, which is now handling the case because of the conflict of interest posed by the Lewiston police department investigating the city which it serves.

“I haven’t heard anything about it,” Boynton said. “I have no comment for you on anything.”

Rain said Dungy’s criminal report wouldn’t have any merit because it came from the recently terminated Dungy. Sauers couldn’t be reached for comment.

Schauble said he wouldn’t comment on an open investigation. He wondered “what normal person” would send a forged response to a citizen’s complaint from the state auditor, of all state departments.

Schauble said he was interviewed about leaving Sanow a message “four months later,” but said he wasn’t asked about who may have been in the city office around the time of the forgery, or who had access to computer files, the copy machine or other records.

Dungy investigated the initial complaint to see if there was any merit to it. When the investigation took him down the path of investigating the city council, he turned it over to Winona County Sheriff Dave Brand, who also had a conflict of interest. The case is being investigated by the Houston County Sheriff’s Office and, if there is enough evidence to substantiate charges, Olmsted County will prosecute.

Timing

Because of limited mailing days during the holidays, Dungy said it didn’t seem possible any other recipients of Bjork’s complaint besides Schauble had the opportunity to respond.

“Wayne was the only one to correlate (Bjork’s) letter to Dave Sanow, but there’s nothing tying the letter to Dave,” Dungy said. “If you listen to Wayne’s message (to Sanow) he said, ‘Somebody told me you sent this.”

Dungy deduced that whoever sent the forged letter was upset about Bjork exploiting an open-meeting law violation to the state, Dungy said, and Bjork’s complaint “obviously ruffled some feathers” because of the phony letter given in response.

He said he used information from the complainant to pinpoint “likely suspects” based on current circumstances and the timeline of letters.

It’s unknown if the suspects in Dungy’s initial complaint are still suspects today.

Houston County Deputy Chief Scott Yeiter said he talked to “several” people, but could not give specifics because the case is still open.

Yeiter said warrants are needed to prove it was done on a particular computer at the time in question. He hoped someone would come forward with more information before the statute of limitations runs out.

“It kind of sits there in limbo,” Yeiter said. “I still hope at some point I maybe get to charge somebody. More than likely it’s a long shot, but I don’t like cases I can’t solve.”

Yeiter said aggravated forgery is felony offense with fines up to $20,000 and/or 10 years in prison.

From bad to worse

This past week, Hampel took out a harassment restraining order against Sanow after a yelling match in the parking lot of city hall Jan. 10.

According to Hampel’s explanation in the order, Sanow stopped his truck in the parking lot when he saw Hampel drive in, got out and started yelling, shaking his finger and coming after her as she was trying to enter city hall.

Sanow said he asked Hampel how to file a complaint because he felt the city has no policy on how to handle resident complaints. He admitted to telling Hampel the community was better off without her and one-third of the residents signed a petition saying so.

He said Hampel told him citizens were lied to in order to get them to sign the petition, and then called him a liar.

“I elevated my voice a little bit,” Sanow said. “I never came after her at all… I do talk with my hands and I guess if that’s threatening I’m in trouble.”

Hampel did not wish to comment, but did say residents were taking things personally and she shouldn’t be expected to encounter issues like this at work.

Sanow has 45 days to respond to the order, but until then he cannot make contact with Hampel.

A connection?

Dungy was placed on suspension and fired by the council Jan. 9 for not giving enough notice to his superiors about training. The council instituted that policy in a November hearing with Dungy.

Dungy claimed the city council began “scrutinizing” the police department after he forwarded the police report about the forged letter to Houston County.

Dungy’s attorney, Trevor Oliver of Kelly & Fawcett, said nothing indicates the two issues are connected. He said it’s a matter of figuring out why the council fired Dungy without performance-based reasons.

“It’s getting into trying to connect the many dots without anything solid,” Oliver said. “If there turns out to be a connection between this auditor forgery and hounding Mark Dungy out of town, that’s going to be a big issue and I guarantee we’ll act on that.”

Contact reporter Amber Dulek at amber.dulek@lee.net or (507) 453-3513.

.

More News: Survey of business owners finds new bridge should connect to downtown Homicide suspect challenges assault case evidence Flooding: One year later: Many communities are still rebuilding Pool hall plan gets council OK Man arrested on suspicion of possession of and evading taxes on illegal drugs Council: No building at Wilkie site New class of WSU students arrive on campus Galesville man accused of touching teen Rocco's Pizza celebrates golden anniversary 2 charged for beating man with a hammer

Advertisement