Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracting Suspension topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Orland Park board upholds suspension of Dale Incorporated but reduces term to two years
Summary
After an administrative hearing over an allegedly falsified LiUNA apprenticeship letter, the Orland Park village board upheld a three-year suspension imposed on Dale Incorporated but reduced it to two years following deliberation in executive session.
Orland Park — The Village of Orland Park village board on the evening of the hearing considered an appeal from Dale Incorporated of New Lenox after the village manager suspended the company for three years for submitting allegedly falsified documentation related to apprenticeship compliance.
Donna Norton, identified in the record as the village prosecutor, told the board the village received a bid from Dale Incorporated for invitation to bid No. 26-018 (2026 asphalt pavement patching) and later reviewed Dale’s apprenticeship-certification paperwork. Norton said the company submitted a letter purporting to be from LiUNA that contained a questionable date (03/15/2026) and lacked updated 2025 participation data; Assistant Public Works Director Brian Fay contacted LiUNA, Norton said, and the union confirmed the letter was not issued by their office. Norton told the board the village concluded Dale had engaged in misrepresentation and submitted falsified documentation, and that village code allows the manager to suspend a vendor for up to three years.
"Dale Incorporated chose to intentionally falsify a certification document," Norton said, summarizing the village's finding and the basis for the April 17 suspension.
Sergio Cepeda, speaking as Dale Incorporated's representative, acknowledged a paperwork error and said the company had previously performed work for the village. Cepeda described the issue as a clerical timestamp error caused in part by a change in the village's responsible-bidder requirements and by delays obtaining union paperwork. "We're a small company ... all we're asking for is a little bit of grace on this one," Cepeda said, urging the board to reduce or remove the suspension.
Trustees questioned both the authenticity of the letter and whether the village had suffered financial harm; Norton said the date on the letter had been altered and that Dale was not in good standing at the time the letter purported to have been issued, while Cepeda said the village had not incurred direct financial loss from Dale not getting the contract.
After hearing from the parties, the board recessed for an executive session citing 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(4) to consider evidence presented to a quasi-adjudicative body. When the board returned, a trustee moved to uphold the suspension but reduce the length from three years to two years. The motion passed with all recorded members voting "aye."
The board then moved to adjourn the public hearing. The written notice of suspension and the village code sections cited in the hearing remain part of the administrative record.
What’s next: The board’s action modifies the suspension length to two years; the record indicates the board retains the authority to alter suspension length under village code, and the administrative record will reflect the board’s decision and its rationale.
