Greensburg Salem School Board weighs restricting livestream service to monthly voting meetings

Greensburg Salem School Board could reduce its live­streaming capacity for public meetings following a vote by the school board this week.

Because of low livestream meeting attendance and difficulties finding staff to operate equipment, the board will decide Wednesday whether to restrict livestreaming to its monthly voting meeting. The motion was tabled during the Feb. 12 voting meeting.

Similar to local governing bodies across the country, the school board began livestreaming its meetings during the covid-19 pandemic.

Superintendent Ken Bissell said during a board meeting Wednesday the livestream service was initially provided for those who did not feel comfortable attending the board’s socially distanced in-person meetings when the school reopened classrooms.

“We don’t have board policy that says anything about how we’ll stream,” Bissell said.

Though the district would eventually like to assemble a team of high school students to run the livestream for both monthly meetings, Bissell said it could take time to identify interested and qualified students for the job.

James Baker, the district’s coordinator of technology integration and student information, typically has to stay late to operate the livestream, said board Vice President Robin Savage.

“He still has to stay here and get this set up, then tear down and then the next day, he takes time away to upload this (video) for four people that have watched the meeting consistently for the last year and a half,” she said. “I think we’re tasking and putting too much out on admin to do more than that for just four people.”

Bissell confirmed the same group of four or five people typically watch the livestreamed meetings. He said the administration has gotten complaints in the past when staff is unavailable to operate the livestream.

“What happens is on the website, it will be posted that we’re unavailable to stream tonight,” he said. “When we’ve done that in the past, we’ve gotten hit a lot — ‘What are they doing? Are they trying to hide things? Is there something going on?’

“The reality is we just don’t have the people right now to do that. They’re busy working with other students.”

Virtual practices vary across state

Greensburg Salem isn’t alone in its revisiting its livestream meeting practices.

In Armstrong County, Gilpin supervisors fielded complaints in February after voting to stop the township’s livestreaming service.

Melissa Melewsky, attorney for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, told TribLive livestreaming practices vary across the state.

“I’ve seen a couple of agencies walk back livestreaming,” she said, “because they claim it’s either too expensive generally or not enough people use it to justify the cost.”

The Sunshine Act allows for public meetings to be livestreamed, she said, but it does not provide any guidelines on how livestreaming should be done.

“The law is silent on these issues,” she said, “but agencies can enact reasonable rules and regulations to govern the conduct of meetings.

“If the agency establishes a course of conduct, and the public comes to rely on it, it should continue until the public is provided adequate notice to adjust attendance practices.”

Greensburg board weighs in on livestreaming

Veteran school board member Frank Gazze said he does not believe livestreaming is necessary anymore.

“As far as transparency goes, we’ve always been transparent,” said Gazze, who has served nearly two decades on the board. “It’s a public meeting. We advertise so that people know it’s here.

“At some point, there has to be an effort if someone cares enough about what’s going on at the school. The meeting’s tonight. Try and get here.”

Board member Heather Shearer agreed.

“We put out the schedule of when our meetings are,” she said. “I would be OK with not streaming at all. … Four or five people — that’s not enough.”

Board member Tyler Courtney added the board and administration make themselves available to answer questions and talk through concerns with community members.

“I don’t think anybody in the public or anybody in this room couldn’t just pick up the phone,” he said.

But board member Kacey Byrne-Houser said she would like to see livestreaming of both monthly meetings continue.

“It’s about transparency for me,” she said. “That’s what it really comes down to.”

Melewsky said livestreaming has become the expectation among some communities.

“(The Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association’s) position has been that virtual meetings should augment in-person public meetings, not take their place,” she said, “because government needs to be as accessible as possible to the public it serves.

“Eliminating a means of access runs counter to that goal.”

Board President Jeff Metrosky believes voting on a livestream policy is a step in the right direction.

“If anything, I think this is being transparent,” he said, “because we never voted on it. We don’t have a policy.”

Board member Brian Conway proposed notifying the public in advance if they will not have the staff to operate a livestream.

Board weighs eliminating discussion meeting

The board also briefly debated hosting only one meeting per month to discuss and vote on school actions.

Emily Miller, who is serving her second term on the board, opposed the suggestion.

“I think we need to have two, because sometimes there’s just a lot to discuss,” she said, “and I think it’s a good idea to be able to think something over in a span of time before we vote on it.”

Metrosky said he attended a few meetings last year for local school boards that meet only once a month.

“I didn’t think that was a good fit for Greensburg Salem,” he said.

The board will vote on its livestreaming policy at 7 p.m. Wednesday, March 12, in the middle school’s John N. Scales Legislative Meeting Room. A livestream will not be offered as district staff will be preoccupied with student events that evening, Bissell said.