Norwin residents press board over removed meeting videos; superintendent vows review

Residents and an accountability group told the Norwin School District Board of Education on Monday that videos of past public meetings have been removed from the district’s YouTube channel and urged the board to restore them or explain why they were taken down.

Nicholas Carroza, who identified himself as the founder of the local group Accountability Now Norwin, said deleted or private recordings undermine public trust and compared Norwin’s finances to Penn Hills, a district that later required state intervention. “Deleting videos of public meetings, especially on topics involving tens of millions of dollars in public money, is not just poor practice,” Carroza said. “It’s…not right.”

Why it matters: Video recordings can show tone, exchanges and remarks not always captured in minutes or attachments. Several speakers said the district’s minutes do not fully reflect deliberations and asked the board to retain recordings as part of a transparent records-retention policy.

District Superintendent Dr. McCracken told the board she did not have a definitive explanation at the meeting but said staff will look into whether the deleted videos can be restored. “We are looking into to see if the ones that were deleted can be recovered,” she said, and asked that the issue be included in the district’s regular records-retention policy review so board members can vote on a proposed approach.

Russell Lucas, the district solicitor, told the board there is a difference between a public record’s classification and a legal obligation to preserve every type of record indefinitely. “Unless we are under a litigation hold, there is no legal obligation to keep those,” Lucas said at the meeting, adding that agencies must show bad faith if records are deleted after a right-to-know request is filed.

Two residents who had filed or referenced right-to-know requests said the district had responded with a statutory extension. Alex Ditcho read portions of an advisory opinion from the Office of Open Records and described the office’s guidance that a recording will often qualify as a record under the commonwealth’s right-to-know law, shifting the burden to agencies to justify exemptions when disclosure is appealed.

Board members agreed to place the topic on the upcoming policy review cycle and to review the district’s records-retention schedule; Dr. McCracken said she would investigate whether any recordings can be restored and report back to the board. No formal vote was taken.

Carroza and other speakers urged the district to adopt a retention practice that preserves recordings that document significant financial or policy decisions. The board’s policy review, the superintendent said, will give members a chance to consider retention length, exceptions for personnel or student records, and whether to keep audiovisual files beyond the minimum required timelines.