Attorney says report focuses on Nick DeRosa

June 24, 2006

By Pat Litowitz
New Castle News

An independent review of a state audit turned into an investigation of a school district employee, its solicitor said yesterday.

“The Harper Report focuses on one thing and one thing only — the assistant superintendent (Nicholas DeRosa),” attorney Charles Sapienza said.

The document’s original purpose was to review findings against the New Castle Area School District following a state Auditor General’s report released in July 2003. The school board hired attorney Richard A. Harper during its March 4, 2004, meeting.

The News learned of Harper’s hiring through a school board agenda.

The report was never officially presented to the school board nor was action taken on it. Invoking the state’s Right to Know Law, The News requested the report on Jan. 28.

Sapienza, representing the district, and New Castle News attorney James Manolis appeared before visiting Judge Michael J. Wherry in Lawrence County common pleas court. Wherry is being asked to review the report.

A preliminary agreement between the two parties proposed that Manolis and Sapienza examine Harper’s work and remove portions dealing with personnel matters. The meeting was canceled when DeRosa’s attorney, Louis Perrotta, objected to the arrangement.

In an executive session that followed, school board members voted against releasing the report.

In early April, The News asked the court to rule if the Harper Report constitutes a public record subject to public access.

“It is our opinion (the Harper Report) is a review of the Auditor General’s report,” Manolis said. “The public’s entitled to look at the Harper Report and make its own conclusions.

“Although one person appears to be the target of the Harper Report, it deals with the expenditure and disbursement of public funds.”

Sapienza countered that releasing the report could “impair and prejudice the person’s reputation.” He added that the report was the result an official investigation. Both reasons are exceptions to the state’s Right-to-Know Law, he said.

Neither DeRosa nor his attorney attended the hearing.

The Auditor General’s report outlined several items, including:

•A 2002 conference in which DeRosa’s gambling activities allowed him to obtain complimentary hotel rooms for three school board members

DeRosa’s failure to disclose personal financial interests

•DeRosa’s purchase of food supplies from the district without authorization or approval from the school board

•DeRosa’s prior conduct in regards to travel while representing the district

“The audit findings were the result of the district’s assistant superintendent,” Sapienza said.

No disciplinary action was ever taken against DeRosa, and the report was placed in his personnel file.

Wherry urged the parties to “work something out. It makes more sense.

“People get the impression there’s more to it than there is. Sometimes, sitting on these records creates more headaches.”

The judge granted Manolis access to the Harper Report with the understanding he could not disclose its contents to The News or a third party. The district produced six exhibits, including the report, that Wherry placed under a confidentiality agreement.

Wherry said he would not look at the materials until after the sentencing of county Treasurer Gary F. Felasco. DeRosa testified on Felasco’s behalf during his trial on state theft charges.

“That’s not fair to Mr. Felasco,” the judge said.

If neither The News nor the district reach an agreement, Wherry said he would look at the report and additional exhibits the week of Aug. 7.