Widow of Former Mayor Ordered to Pay €14,000 in Wenzenbach Financial Scandal Settlement

The widow of the former mayor of Wenzenbach has to pay 14,000 euros to the municipality. This was agreed upon at the Regensburg Administrative Court.

Regensburg/Wenzenbach – Reluctantly, after tough negotiations and two phone calls, a settlement was reached on Wednesday before the Regensburg Administrative Court. It took seven hours. And in the end, hardly anyone seems really satisfied.

Financial scandal in Wenzenbach: performance bonuses, vacation compensation and private tax debts

It is the final chapter in the Wenzenbach financial scandal, which began almost ten years ago. The focus at that time was the long-time managing director of the community, Hans E., and mayor Josef Schmid (Free Voters).

It was about illegal performance bonuses and vacation pay for civil servants, a lavish travel allowance for Mayor Josef Schmid and private tax debts that were paid with municipal funds.

Wenzenbach financial scandal: Legal processing took time

The damage was estimated at the time at up to 170,000 euros. After an audit by the Bavarian Municipal Audit Association, the whole thing was discovered. This was followed by public prosecutor’s investigations and disciplinary proceedings. A claim for damages brought by the municipality remained dormant for so long.

Now, almost ten years later, the main protagonist, Mayor Josef Schmid, is dead, suffering from a serious illness. And his widow inherited not only a corresponding pension but also the said lawsuit, which has now been heard.

Wenzenbach financial scandal: Mayor was acquitted

The long-time community manager Hans E. was sentenced to a suspended sentence as a result of the affair and lost his pension rights. Mayor Schmid was acquitted in the second instance by the Regensburg regional court in 2017.

Although the offense of infidelity was fulfilled from an objective point of view, that alone was not enough for criminal liability, the court said at the time. Although he violated his duty of care, he did not violate it intentionally – therefore: acquittal.

Despite the acquittal of the mayor: different standards at the administrative court

However, different standards apply before the administrative court. “It is no longer about criminal liability, but about culpable breaches of duty,” said Judge Georg Geißelbrecht, chairman of the first chamber. And the court expressly sees such breaches of duty not only by the municipal manager, but also by the former mayor, who died in 2021.

Of the 170,000 euros originally claimed, just over 100,000 euros remained on the day of the hearing. Two civil servants have already paid back their illegally received bonuses in advance, and Hans E. has so far received around 54,000 euros back into the municipal treasury.

The family of the late mayor does not want an admission of guilt

Schmid and his widow have not yet paid anything back. As the trial progresses, the family of the deceased would see this as a late admission of guilt. And in the Schmid household this is not seen as justified, let alone fair.

The reading of the family and the lawyers appointed: Schmid blindly trusted the managing director. He intentionally deceived him and presented him with documents to sign without properly informing him. Therefore, the deceased is not responsible for any possible financial damage to the community.

(By the way: Our brand new Regensburg newsletter regularly informs you about all the important stories from the world heritage city and the Upper Palatinate. Sign up here.)

Travel allowance for mayor: Far too high, but the local council is responsible

In fact, the Chamber at the Administrative Court sees little chance of success for the municipality with the largest chunk of lawsuits filed. It’s about the travel allowance that Schmid received for twelve years. 480 euros per month – a total of almost 70,000 euros.

The mayor would have had to drive around 1,300 kilometers per month to justify such a height, calculate Schmid’s successor Sebastian Koch and Klaus-R. Luckow, lawyer for the community, presented.

The court also considers the amount of the flat rate to be excessive. But Schmid cannot be held responsible for this, according to the chamber. Ultimately, the local council approved this flat rate. This means that the members of this committee are responsible. The reporting judge Ulrike Dettenhofer makes this clear. “The local councilors should have checked this.” Compensation for damages is only possible to a very limited extent, if at all.

Private tax debts paid from the municipal treasury: “A mayor also has to read something.”

The situation is different when it comes to subsequent taxation of this travel allowance. This was initially paid out to Schmid tax-free. At some point the tax office noticed this. This required around 11,000 euros in wage tax to be borne by Schmid. And they were paid for by the community – approved with his signature.

The Chamber does not follow the argument of Schmid’s lawyers, Andreas Brey and Reinhard Mühlbauer, according to which managing director Hans E. had fraudulently foisted the document on him – it was also about subsequent taxation of vacation compensation. A mayor must be expected to at least read through such a document – ​​one page and “understandable even for laypeople”. Not doing this would be grossly negligent.

Criticism of the late mayor: “I can’t get elected and then blindly rely on everything.”

The court is also not convinced by lawyer Mühlbauer’s (unexplained) objection, according to which Schmid himself taxes the travel allowance anyway, i.e. the tax office made a mistake with the subsequent taxation. According to Judge Geißelbrecht, it is unjustifiable for a mayor to let the municipality give him his taxes.

The Chamber at the Administrative Court also assigns clear shared responsibility to the late mayor with regard to the vacation compensation and performance bonuses, most of which have already been refunded. “I cannot be elected to such an office, paid with A16, and then blindly rely on everything – with all due respect,” says Geißelbrecht. That is also grossly negligent.

Mayor’s widow’s lawyer: “Anyone would have signed that.”

In retrospect, that’s easy to say, replies lawyer Mühlbauer. “But back then, everyone here would have signed it.” But the chamber is not getting involved in this debate – because they are already in the agreement talks.

You then spend several hours working on a comparison. Two phone calls have to be made to Schmid’s widow, who is not present. Finally, it was agreed that she would have to pay 14,000 euros and ex-managing director E. would have to pay another around 10,000 euros. 56 percent of the procedural costs are borne by the municipality.

Everyone involved now has until October 6th to think through this painstakingly reached agreement. Wenzenbach’s mayor Koch needs the approval of the local council. Schmid’s family simply wants the payment to be seen as a concession to end the case. A corresponding passage is dictated specifically in the comparison. The next few months will show whether it will last in the end.

You can always read all the news from Regensburg and the surrounding area as well as from all over Bavaria with us. News and stories from Bavaria are now also on ours Facebook page Merkur Bayern to find.