IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM LAHN, DELSEA BOARD OF EDUCATION, GLOUCESTER COUNTY1/23/06, (#25-06SEC)

#25-06SEC (SEC Decision http://www.nj.gov/njded/legal/ethics/2005/c25-05.pdf)
IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM LAHN, 	:
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
DELSEA BOARD OF EDUCATION, 	:
DECISION
GLOUCESTER COUNTY. 	:
SYNOPSIS
The School Ethics Commission (Commission) determined that Delsea Board of Education member
William Lahn violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(d) of the Code of Ethics for School Board Members
when he, inter alia, requested copies of the 2004 and 2005 SAT reports from the guidance
secretary, and when he inspected the boys’ locker room and instructed district employees regarding
supervision of students. After considering the nature of the charge, the Commission recommended
that the Commissioner of Education impose a penalty of censure.
Upon a thorough review of the record, the Commissioner, whose decision was restricted solely to a
review 	of 	the 	Commission’s 	recommended 	penalty 	pursuant 	to 	N.J.S.A. 	18A:12-29(c) 	and
N.J.A.C. 6A:3-9.1, concurred with the Commission’s recommendation. The Commissioner thus
ordered that William Lahn be censured as a school official found to have violated the School Ethics
Act.
This synopsis is not part of the Commissioner’s decision. It has been prepared for the convenience of the
reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Commissioner.

AGENCY DKT. NO. 383-12/05
IN THE MATTER OF WILLIAM LAHN, 	:
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
DELSEA BOARD OF EDUCATION, 	:
DECISION
GLOUCESTER COUNTY. 	:
The record of this matter and the decision of the School Ethics Commission
(“Commission”), including the recommended penalty of censure, have been reviewed.
This matter comes before the Commissioner to impose a sanction upon Respondent
William Lahn, member of the Delsea Board of Education, based upon findings of fact and
conclusions of law by the Commission that he violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(d) of the School
Ethics Act when he went directly to a guidance secretary and requested a copy of the 2004 and 2005
SAT reports, and when he went into the boys’ locker room, inspected the lockers and instructed
district employees regarding the supervision of students. 	The Commission further found that
Mr. Lahn violated N.J.S.A. 18A:12-24.1(j) when he took a complaint from a parent to the Principal
rather than the Superintendent.
Upon issuance of the decision of the Commission, respondent was provided 13 days
from the mailing of such decision to file written comments on the recommended penalty for the
Commissioner’s consideration. 	Mr. Lahn’s submitted comments argue that the violations that the
Commission found were “clearly unintentional,” will not be repeated in the future, and were
“minor” compared to other issues which have come before the Commission. 	He, therefore, urges
that the Commissioner impose no sanction or, if a sanction is absolutely necessary, that the absolute
minimum is appropriate.

Initially, 	it 	must 	be 	emphasized 	that 	pursuant 	to 	N.J.S.A. 	18A:12-29(c) 	and
N.J.A.C. 6A:3-9.1, the determination of the Commission as to violation of the School Ethics Act is
not reviewable by the Commissioner herein. 	Only the Commission may determine whether a
violation of the School Ethics Act occurred. 	The Commissioner’s jurisdiction is limited to
reviewing the sanction to be imposed following a finding of a violation by the Commission.
Therefore, this decision is restricted solely to a review of the Commission’s recommended penalty.
Upon a thorough review of the record, the Commissioner notes that having found
violations of the School Ethics Act, the Commission was statutorily obligated to recommend a
sanction for these infractions (See N.J.S.A. 18A:12-29c.). 	As evidenced in its decision, the
Commission -- in making its penalty determination -- recommended the more stringent penalty of
censure because “Mr. Lahn’s conduct violated the Act on more than one occasion and because his
conduct put the guidance secretary in a difficult situation that ultimately resulted in her being
reprimanded.” 	(Commission Decision at 4). 	The Commissioner finds no cause to disturb the
Commission’s recommended penalty in this matter.
Accordingly, IT IS hereby ORDERED that William Lahn be censured as a school
official found to have violated the School Ethics Act.
IT IS SO ORDERED.*
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: January 23, 2006
Date of Mailing: 	January 23, 2006
* This decision, as the Commissioner’s final determination regarding penalty in the instant matter, may be appealed to
the State Board of Education pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:6-27 et seq. and N.J.A.C. 6A:4-1.1 et seq., within 30 days of its
filing. Commissioner decisions are deemed filed three days after the date of mailing to the parties.
3