Erosenko: Internal report might have been leaked
A confidential report about a potential privacy violation was referenced on a Facebook page as the result of a leak in Monroeville government, the mayor and an municipal council candidate said Tuesday at a council meeting.
Mayor Gregory Erosenko promised to launch an investigation of the reported leak, and said it would not be the first time confidential information had been improperly made public.
“I do plan to get to the bottom of this…because I'm very upset about that,” he said.
Councilman Bernhard Erb, however, said the Facebook page could have been referencing an incident unrelated to the confidential report.
Last week, law firm Dickie McCamey & Chilcote presented the results of its investigation of the potential violation of federal and state privacy laws through the Monroeville dispatch center's computer database.
Monroeville officials had hired the Pittsburgh firm to conduct an internal investigation in response to an inquiry by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Linda Gaydos, a Democratic candidate who will be running unopposed for the 1st Ward seat in the November election, said the Facebook page Monroeville Government Watch referenced the confidential report with terms such as “error in judgment, but no violation” and that the page said people in authority were told about the privacy violations.
It was not immediately clear who operates the Facebook account.
“There was a leak somewhere, and I'm asking if anyone would like to stand up and say, ‘This was me,'” Gaydos told the council.
Also at Tuesday's meeting, Erosenko said that a projected, additional $400,000 deficit for 2014 that was the result of property tax assessment appeals was revealed last week.
Erosenko said the $400,000 shortage was part of what could be a $6.5 million total deficit that must be closed in the 2014 budget.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.