ENTERED AND FILED

PROTHONOTARYS OFFICE
LANCASTER, PA
***Electronically Filed*****
Feb 21 2017 03:00PM
Nathan Renkes

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

CIVIL DIVISION

WILLIAM MURRY, No. CI-17-00692

Plaintiff, Judge David L. Ashworth

v.

LNP MEDIA GROUP, INC., BARBARA

HOUGH RODA; SUSAN BALDRIGE,
KARA NEWHOUSE, and JOHN DOE(S),

Defendants.

NOTICE

You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following
pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served,
by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court
your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to
do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court
without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief
requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you.

YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT
HAVE A LAWYER, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS
OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER.

IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO

PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL
SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE.

Lancaster Bar Association

Lawyer Referral Service
28 East Orange Street
Lancaster, PA 17602
Telephone: 717-393-0737
Matthew H. Haverstick (No. 85072)
Zachary C. Glaser (No. 85979)
Joshua J. Voss (No. 306853)
KLEINBARD LLC
One Liberty Place, 46th Floor
1650 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Ph: (215) 568-2000
Fax: (215) 568-0140
Eml: mhaverstick@kleinbard.com
zglaser@kleinbard.com
jvoss@kleinbard.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff William Murry

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

CIVIL DIVISION

WILLIAM MURRY, No. CI-17-00692

Plaintiff, Judge David L. Ashworth

v.

LNP MEDIA GROUP, INC., BARBARA

HOUGH RODA; SUSAN BALDRIGE,
KARA NEWHOUSE, and JOHN DOE(S),

Defendants.

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, William Murry (Murry), by his attorneys, brings this Complaint against LNP

Media Group, Inc., Barbara Hough Roda, Susan Baldridge, Kara Newhouse, and John Doe(s),

and in support thereof avers as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. In an editorial just this past Sunday, February 19, 2017, Defendant LNP decried

fake news and confirmation bias. A copy of the February 19, 2017 editorial is attached here

to as Exhibit A.
 CI-17-00692

2. LNPs editors declared [w]ere not exempting ourselves from scrutiny over

pursuing false narratives.

3. This lawsuit provides the scrutiny LNP invited in its editorial.

4. This is a cautionary story of what happens when a newspaper irresponsibly

fictionalizes news to generate readership, and how easy it is for the press to abuse its power

pursuing a commercial agenda, and in the process ruin a persons name and reputation.

5. In the digital age, newspapers have expanded their presence to include digital

online editions in addition to their traditional daily print editions. Competition for readership is

fierce, given the proliferation of media outlets.

6. In this hyper-competitive environment, newspapers have discovered a new

revenue stream in the form of payment from advertisers based on the number of times a story

and its accompanying advertisements are accessed via the internet.

7. This clicks for cash revenue model has incentivized newspapers to adopt a

strong social media presence to drive readers to their stories and has resulted in the perpetuation

of inaccurate reporting and the phenomenon now known as fake news that is, sensational,

eye-attracting content long on salacity but often short on accuracy or objectivity.

8. In the first half of 2016, upon information and belief, Defendant LNP and its

editors and reporters made a commercial and editorial decision to drive the sale of newspapers

and digital revenue by attacking the Board of Directors of the Manheim Township School

District and its President, Plaintiff William Murry. The weapon was a false narrative that the

Board had conspired to violate the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act in connection with the termination

of the Districts Superintendent and search for a new Superintendent as pretext.

2
 CI-17-00692

9. School board service is a critical but thankless job. It is a position that requires

significant time commitments without any financial compensation and school boards are

routinely criticized by various constituencies within their districts.

10. Murry was prepared to accept such criticism when he decided to use his business

skills for the benefit of the community by serving on the Manheim Township School Board

fourteen years ago.

11. Murrys family has attended the Manheim Township schools for three generations

and Murry was drawn to service by an immense sense of gratitude for the extraordinary care and

support received by Murrys profoundly disabled son during his time as a student in the District.

12. Murry and his fellow Board members understand that they are not immune from

public criticism. But what Murry and the Board never anticipated was a prolonged series of

unfair, one-sided and at times flatly untrue series of articles about the School Board by LNP. Nor

did anyone expect that the newspaper would use a criminally-obtained audio recording to

facilitate its attack on Murry and his colleagues.

13. In a shameful pursuit of ad dollars, LNP has misled the public and has knowingly

violated the Pennsylvania Wiretap Act in its effort to destroy the reputation of Murry and the

School Board.

14. This abuse of the public trust and Pennsylvania law was wanton, reckless and

undertaken in complete disregard of the rights of Murry and others targeted by LNP and an

award of punitive damages is appropriate.

15. This is a civil action seeking injunctive relief and damages for violation of the

Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, 18 Pa.C.S. 5701 et seq.,

for Defamation, and for Invasion of Privacy/False Light.

3
 CI-17-00692

16. Specifically, while Murry was a member and President of the Board of the

Manheim Township School District, Defendants irresponsibly, and for the purpose of

embarrassing and harming Plaintiff, published information from an criminally-obtained audio

recording of a School Board meeting, and falsely accused Plaintiff of a criminal violation of law,

namely, the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act.

17. Defendants use and publication of illegally-obtained information and of

defamatory statements were intentional, wanton and malicious, and have caused significant

embarrassment and humiliation to Plaintiff and injury to his reputation and to his private

business.

PARTIES AND VENUE

18. Plaintiff William Murry is an individual with principal place of business at 1899

Lititz Pike, Lancaster, PA 17601.

19. Defendant LNP Media Group, Inc. (LNP) is a Pennsylvania corporation with its

principal place of business at 8 King Street, Lancaster, PA 17603.

20. Defendant Barbara Hough Roda (Roda) is an individual who, upon information

and belief, resides at 25 Creekside Drive, Millersville PA 17551.

21. Defendant Susan Baldridge (Baldridge) is an individual who, upon information

and belief, resides at 325 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, PA 17516.

22. Defendant Kara Newhouse (Newhouse) is an individual who, upon information

and belief, resides at 64 Kendes Road, Millersville, PA 17551.

23. Defendants LNP, Roda, Baldridge and Newhouse are referred to collectively

herein as the Media Defendants.

24. Defendant(s) John Doe(s) are one or more unidentified individuals who upon

information and belief are Pennsylvania residents.

4
 CI-17-00692

25. Venue exists in this Court pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure

1006 and 2179 because a transaction or occurrence took place in this county out of which the

cause of action asserted in this complaint arose and because some or all of the Defendants reside

and/or regularly conduct business in this county.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Defendants Violate The Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control

Act and Defame Murry

26. Prior to and on January 21, 2016, Murry served as member and President of the

Board (School Board) of the Manheim Township School District.

27. Defendant LNP is the publisher of the daily newspaper LNP, and weekly

newspapers Lancaster Farming, Lititz Record, and Ephrata Review. LNP also publishes

LancasterOnline, an Internet-based news site located at www.lancasteronline.com.

28. Defendant Roda is an Executive Editor employed by Defendant LNP.

29. Defendants Baldridge and Newhouse are reporters employed by Defendant LNP.

30. The genesis of Defendants wrongful conduct stems from the Media Defendants

need to drive readership (and clicks on their new website) by promoting a false narrative about

Manheim Township School Board.

31. On January 21, 2016, the School Board conducted a meeting to discuss, inter alia,

the resignation of School Superintendent John Nodecker (Nodecker) and Nodeckers

severance agreement.

32. The members of the School Board, including Murry, believed and understood that

personnel matters, including the financial terms of Nodeckers severance agreement and the

search for his successor, were not required by law to be discussed in open public session.

5
 CI-17-00692

33. On January 29, 2016, Defendant LNP, in an article authored by Defendants

Baldridge and Newhouse, published details of the School Boards discussions concerning

Nodecker and details of the terms of his severance agreement.

34. On February 2, 2016, LNP published an article (the Feb. 2 Article), authored by

Defendant Newhouse, in which was it stated that the School Board, including Murry, had on

eleven occasions conducted deliberations in private session contrary to the terms of the

Pennsylvania Sunshine Act requiring transparency in government agencies, in particular with

respect to personnel matters. A copy of the Feb. 2 Article is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

35. As reported in the Feb. 2 Article, the Lancaster County District Attorneys Office

had reviewed the School Boards alleged improper deliberations and determined that it would

not prosecute the matter because it found that there was no indication of an intent to violate the

Sunshine Act. Nevertheless, the Feb. 2 Article implied that the School Board had violated the

Sunshine Act on multiple occasions.

36. The Feb. 2 Article also implied that the School Board had illegally met in closed

session concerning the Nodecker matter.

37. Violation of the Sunshine Act is a summary criminal offense.

38. The Media Defendants, upon information and belief acting in concert with John

Doe(s), then upped the ante by creating more scandal where none existed, by releasing content

from an illegally recorded tape of the School Boards deliberations.

39. At a January 28, 2016 School Board Meeting, the Board discussed the process for

selecting a firm to search for a new superintendent. Unbeknownst to Murry, John Doe(s)

(without the knowledge and consent of anyone in the room) apparently made a secret audio

6
 CI-17-00692

recording of some or all of the Boards Meeting on that day. The taping of the meeting in that

fashion was criminal a fact ignored by Media Defendants.

40. On February 4, 2016, Defendant LNP published an article (the Feb. 4 Article),

authored by Defendants Newhouse and Baldridge, that reported on an illegally created and

leaked audio recording of the School Boards January 28, 2016 deliberations concerning the

search for Nodeckers successor. The Feb. 4 Article did not identify the source of the criminally-

obtained audio recording but stated that the recording was delivered to LNP on Wednesday

morning by an undisclosed source. A copy of the Feb. 4 Article is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

41. Despite disclaiming knowledge of the source of the audio recording, Media

Defendants published news articles identifying various speakers on the illegally-made tape -

something the Media Defendants presumably could have done only if they were certain they had

identified each voice on the tape.

42. Inasmuch as the School Board, including Murry, did not authorize their session

concerning the process of selecting a search firm to be audio taped and were unaware that their

private meeting was being taped, the audio taping was illegal.

43. Inasmuch as the person who provided the audio recording to Media Defendants

could not have demonstrated to Media Defendants that it was an authorized recording, Media

Defendants had to have known that they were in possession of a criminally-made recording.

44. The Feb. 4 Article stated that the illegally-created audio recording showed that the

School Board, including its President, Murry, conspired to deliberate privately on the search

for a new Superintendent. The Feb. 4 Article stated that Murry arranged a series of one-on-one

telephone conversations with members late last week in a deliberate attempt to avoid public

7
 CI-17-00692

scrutiny and circumvent the open-meetings law, the audio recording of a closed-door meeting

held Thursday night, Jan. 28, reveals.

45. The Feb. 4 Article, based solely on the illegally-procured and distributed audio

recording, accused Murry falsely of a criminal violation of the law, namely, the Sunshine Act.

46. On February 4, 2016, Defendant LNP published a second article (the Feb. 4

Audio Article), authored by Defendants Newhouse and Baldridge, purporting to set forth

excerpts from the criminally-procured audio recording. A copy of the Feb. 4 Audio Article is

attached hereto as Exhibit D.

47. By their use and procurement of the illegally-made electronic recording, Media

Defendants acted as judge and jury, declaring and communicating to the public that Murry was

guilty of wrongdoing based solely on the recording, without waiting for a proper legal

investigation into the matter. By so doing, Media Defendants intentionally, or at the least,

recklessly, defamed and embarrassed Murry.

B. The Media Defendants Further Defame Murry

48. On February 5, 2016, Defendant LNP published an article (the Feb. 5 Article),

authored by Defendant Newhouse, reporting again on the School Boards alleged illegal

deliberations concerning the process for the search for Nodeckers successor and stating that

the alleged illegal deliberations came at the same time the board promised greater transparency

in the wake of earlier violations of the Sunshine Act. A copy of the Feb. 5 Article is attached

hereto as Exhibit E.

49. Media Defendants knew that the statement in the Feb. 5 Article that there had

been earlier violations of the Sunshine Act was false or acted with reckless disregard as to its

falsity, inasmuch as Media Defendants had previously reported that the District Attorneys

Office had found no violation of the Sunshine Act by the School Board.

8
 CI-17-00692

50. On February 7, 2016, Defendant LNP published an editorial (the Feb. 7

Editorial), authored by unidentified persons, in which it contended that Murry should resign

from the School Board because he had arranged for the School Board to violate the Sunshine Act

in its deliberations concerning Nodecker. The editorial falsely accused Murry, among other

allegedly wrongful acts, of [b]razenly plotting to get around a law of the Commonwealth. The

Feb. 7 Editorial is attached hereto as Exhibit F.

51. On February 11, 2016, Defendant LNP published an article (the Feb. 11

Article), authored by Defendants Newhouse and Baldridge, reporting on a public School Board

meeting at which residents, spurred on by the illegally obtained and published audio recording,

sought Murrys resignation from the School Board. The Feb. 11 Article identified one of Murrys

personal businesses, Murry Communities, Ltd., of which Murry is sole proprietor. The Feb. 11

Article is attached hereto as Exhibit G.

52. Murrys personal business dealings are not related to his status on the School

Board and are not newsworthy. Since the Media Defendants publication of the name of Murrys

personal business had no news value or purpose, it can only have been done for the purpose of

embarrassing Murry and causing harm to Murrys reputation and business.

53. In addition to publishing defamatory statements concerning Murry, Defendant

LNP used references to the stories resulting from the criminal recording, including its allegations

of the School Boards alleged violation of the Sunshine Act, in paid advertisements designed to

increase LNPs newspaper subscriptions in Murrys home area.

54. Upon information and belief, the Media Defendants defamatory statements

concerning Murry were made not for the purposes of news reporting but for the commercial

purpose of increasing Defendant LNPs newspaper subscriptions.

9
 CI-17-00692

55. Murry has never been charged with a violation of the Sunshine Act.

56. In fact, the Lancaster District Attorneys Office began an investigation of the

Sunshine Act allegations.

57. In turn, the District Attorneys Office referred the investigation to the

Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General.

58. On December 15, 2016, the Office of Attorney General concluded its

investigation without bringing charges, determining that the Boards conduct does not support

the premise that the Board intentionally conspired to act outside the boundaries of the law.

C. Damage to Murry

59. As a result of Defendants conduct as set forth herein, Murry, an individual who

has devoted countless hours of public service to his community and to the School Board, has

suffered humiliation and embarrassment, as well as verbal and written personal attacks from

members of the public.

60. As a result of Defendants conduct as set forth herein, Murrys personal business

has suffered irreparable harm.

61. As a result of Media Defendants publication of the illegal audio recording and

false and defamatory statements, Murry has suffered significant and irreparable reputational,

emotional and economic harm.

62. Defendants acts have cast Murry in a false light, injuring his reputation and

causing him emotional and economic harm.

63. Defendants conduct was intentional, willful, reckless and malicious.

10
 CI-17-00692

COUNT I

Violation of the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act,

18 Pa.C.S. 5701 et seq. All Defendants

64. Murry incorporates by reference the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of

this Complaint as if set forth at length herein.

65. The Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, 18

Pa.C.S. 5701 et seq., provides that a person is guilty of a felony if he (i) intentionally

intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures another person to intercept, any wire, electronic or

oral communications; (ii) intentionally discloses the contents of any wire, electronic or oral

communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know that the

information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication;

or (iii) uses the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, knowing or having

reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or

oral communication.

66. 18 Pa.C.S. 5725 provides for a civil cause of action for unlawful interception,

disclosure or use of wire, electronic or oral communications.

67. Defendant(s) John Doe(s) illegally intercepted and recorded all or part of the

School Boards January 28, 2016 meeting.

68. Media Defendants knew or had reason to know that the audio recording, of the

January 28, 2016 Manheim Township School Board meeting was intercepted unlawfully.

69. Defendants procurement and use of the illegally-obtained audio recording and of

information derived from the audio recording, of the January 28, 2016 Manheim Township

School Board meeting was unlawful, in violation of the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance

11
 CI-17-00692

Control Act. The January 28 School Board meeting was an executive session, which under law is

a non-public session in which the School Board members had an expectation of privacy.

70. As a proximate result of Defendants violation of the Wiretapping and Electronic

Surveillance Control Act, Murry has suffered actual damages.

71. Defendants conduct as set forth herein was wanton, willful and outrageous.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment (i) enjoining Media

Defendants from continuing to publish, use and disseminate excerpts and quotes from the

illegally-obtained recording on the January 28, 2016 Manheim Township School Board meeting;

(ii) requiring the Media Defendants to remove the offending articles from their website;

(iii) awarding Plaintiff damages for the reputational, emotional and economic harm suffered as a

result of Defendants conduct; (iv) awarding Plaintiff punitive damages; (v) awarding Plaintiff

attorneys fees and costs; and (vi) granting such additional relief as the Court deems just and

equitable.

COUNT II

Defamation Against Media Defendants

72. Murry incorporates by reference the allegations in foregoing paragraphs of this

Complaint as if set forth at length herein.

73. Media Defendants made defamatory statements in the Feb. 2 Article, the Feb. 5

Article, and the Feb. 7 Editorial when they falsely accused Murry of violating, and conspiring to

violate, the Sunshine Act.

74. Media Defendants statements in the Feb. 2 Article, the Feb. 5 Article and the

Feb. 7 Editorial were defamatory per se in that they either directly accused Murry of the

commission of a crime or implied that he committed such a crime, specifically, violations of the

Sunshine Act.

12
 CI-17-00692

75. Media Defendants defamatory statements were not privileged because they were

made, at least in part, for the commercial purpose of increasing Defendant LNPs subscriptions.

76. Media Defendants defamatory statements impugned Murrys honesty, integrity

and reputation and exposed him to public humiliation and ridicule.

77. Media Defendants statements in the Feb. 2 Article, the Feb. 5 Article and the

Feb. 7 Editorial were made with knowledge of the falsity thereof or with reckless disregard as to

their truth or falsity.

78. Media Defendants defamatory statements were made intentionally, willfully,

recklessly and maliciously, and in conscious disregard of Murrys reputation and rights.

79. Media Defendants published their defamatory statements to a worldwide audience

online through their website www.lancasteronline.com.

80. Media Defendants defamatory statements were reasonably understood by their

recipients to be statements of fact about and concerning Murry.

81. As a proximate result of Media Defendants false and defamatory statements,

Murry has suffered significant and irreparable reputational, emotional and economic harm.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment (i) requiring Media

Defendants to publish a retraction of the false and misleading statements made concerning

Plaintiffs alleged violations of the Sunshine Act; (ii) requiring the Media Defendants to remove

the offending articles from their website; (iii) awarding Plaintiff damages for the reputational,

emotional and economic harm suffered as a result of Media Defendants conduct; (iv) awarding

Plaintiff punitive damages; and (v) granting such additional relief as the Court deems just and

equitable.

13
 CI-17-00692

COUNT III

Invasion of Privacy/False Light Against Media Defendants

82. Murry incorporates by reference the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs of

this Complaint as if set forth at length herein.

83. Media Defendants statements in the Feb. 2 Article, the Feb. 5 Article and the

Feb. 7 Editorial placed Murry in a false light by either directly accusing Murry of the

commission of a crime or by implying that he committed such a crime, specifically, violation of

the Sunshine Act.

84. Media Defendants publication of information concerning Murrys personal

business, a matter unconnected to his participation on the Manheim Township School District

Board and therefore of no news value, constituted an invasion of Murrys privacy.

85. Media Defendants statements in the Feb. 2 Article, Feb. 5 Article and Feb. 7

Editorial were made with knowledge of the falsity thereof or with reckless disregard as to their

truth or falsity.

86. Media Defendants conduct was intentional, willful, reckless and malicious.

87. As a proximate result of Media Defendants publication of information invading

Murrys privacy and placing him in a false light, Murry has suffered significant and irreparable

reputational, emotional and economic harm.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment (i) requiring Media

Defendants to publish a retraction of the false and misleading statements made concerning

Plaintiffs alleged violations of the Sunshine Act; (ii) requiring the Media Defendants to remove

the offending articles from their website; (iii) awarding Plaintiff damages for the reputational,

emotional and economic harm suffered as a result of Media Defendants conduct; (iv) awarding

14
EXHIBIT A
2/20/2017 Separatingfakenewsfromfactrequireseffortandanopenmind|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/separating-fake-news-from-fact-requires-effort-and-an-open/article_932bfabc-f551-11e6-b448-
7b104efe8869.html

In our words
Separating fake news from fact requires effort and an open mind
The LNP Editorial Board Feb 19, 2017

Paul Sakuma Buy Now

THE ISSUE

According to a study by the Pew Research Center, about 2 in 3 U.S. adults (64 percent) say fabricated news stories cause a
great deal of confusion about the basic facts of current issues and events. Librarians at Franklin & Marshall College held
a workshop last month on media literacy. One of the purposes was to help students identify credible sources of news and
information. Its really about being an engaged and informed citizen, said Meghan Kelly, research and emerging
technologies librarian at F&M. Democracy doesnt function without informed citizens.

This just in, as we sometimes say in the news business. Or, in this case, trending on Twitter:

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, who resigned Monday, tweets that he has been made a scapegoat by
the Trump administration.

While I accept full responsibility for my actions, I feel it is unfair that I have been made the sole scapegoat for what
happened, Flynn tweeted.

The New York Times ran with the tweet. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, both
Democrats, went public with it.

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/separatingfakenewsfromfactrequireseffortandanopen/article_932bfabcf55111e6b4487b104efe8869.html 1/3
2/20/2017 Separatingfakenewsfromfactrequireseffortandanopenmind|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

I have a tweet Im going to make. Im telling my staff right now its not scapegoat, its stonewall, Pelosi told reporters.

But there was a problem with this story it wasnt true. Not a little bit. Flynn never tweeted any such thing. The Twitter
account was a fraud. It was fake news.

Lest this develop into yet another political debate, neither Republicans nor Democrats, conservatives and liberals, can
accuse the other side of being the primary provocateurs of fake news. Its everywhere.

Hillary Clinton is running a child sex ring out of a pizza shop.

Pope Francis endorses Trump.

Thousands of people at a Donald Trump rally in Manhattan chanted, We hate Muslims, we hate blacks, we want our
great country back.

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch founded a Fascism Forever Club in high school.

Fake, fake, fake and fake.

The source for the Gorsuch story was a joke written in his high school yearbook. Still, we had this:

Neil Gorsuch, Donald Trumps nomination to replace the late Antonin Scalia in the U.S. Supreme Court, was the leader
of a student group called the Fascism Forever Club during his high school days, according to reports, wrote the
International Business Times in a fabricated story that appeared, among many other places, on yahoo.com.

Theres nothing new about fake news.

Robert Spicer, assistant professor of digital journalism at Millersville University, reminded LNP that Colonial-era
newspapers falsely reported Thomas Jeffersons death, and a political consultant in the early 20th century printed mock
newspapers filled with untrue stories attacking his candidates opponents.

What is new is social media, which can spread a fake news story like a plague within seconds.

So, how do you separate fiction from reality?

Its important to realize what fake news is and is not.

Fake news is not a story with which you dont agree or dont like.

Fake news is not opinion. (Nor should opinion be part of straight news reporting.)

Fake news can be a synonym for alternative facts, the term infamously coined by Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway
when referring to press secretary Sean Spicers claim that the Trump inauguration featured the largest audience ever
to witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.

President Trumps default seems to be declaring news he does not like as fake. Heres his tweet Wednesday regarding
the Flynn resignation:

The fake news media is going crazy with their conspiracy theories and blind hatred.

Fox News media analyst Howard Kurtz wrote that The New York Times and The Washington Post got the Flynn story
right.

Leakers often have nefarious motives, and ex-Obama aides seem to be involved (hence the former officials
description). But the two papers nailed down the details, and Flynn had to apologize for misleading Mike Pence and
others.

As LNP reported last week, the librarians at F&M felt compelled to address the fake news issue after a presidential
campaign during which bogus news stories were making the rounds with regularity on Facebook and other social media
outlets. We applaud F&M for taking the initiative.

At the F&M session, students were taught to look for red flags on news websites. For example, one website was last
updated in September. Another had an odd web address; anothers headlines were in all capital letters.

Relying on social media as your only news source almost guarantees that youll be fed a relatively steady diet of half-
truths or outright lies.

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/separatingfakenewsfromfactrequireseffortandanopen/article_932bfabcf55111e6b4487b104efe8869.html 2/3
2/20/2017 Separatingfakenewsfromfactrequireseffortandanopenmind|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

If you are wondering how you can ensure that youre getting reliable information, we suggest, as do the librarians at
F&M, that you check a story with multiple sources, not just with the sources with which you share a particular ideology.

Subscribe to a local newspaper. Newspapers have codes of ethics and journalistic standards of operation, unlike a lone
wolf on Facebook or Twitter. And if a newspaper makes a mistake, it will issue a correction, as The New York Times did
after the bogus Flynn tweet.

Approach news with an open mind. As the folks at F&M point out, be aware of confirmation bias, or the tendency to
interpret new evidence as confirmation of ones existing beliefs or theories.

Were not lecturing, just suggesting. And were not exempting ourselves.

We do indeed function better as a society when we are well-informed. But in an age when we are bombarded with
information, separating truth from falsehood requires effort a lot more effort than automatically accepting anything
we read as fact, or instantly declaring something we dont like to be fake.

More Headlines
Listen: Jeff Reinhart talks District Three playoffs in Full Court Press podcast
Man who police say shot himself to death Sunday linked to Route 283 shooting minutes earlier
Middle Creek and beyond: 4 ways to birdwatch this week
5 things to know about Lancaster Roots and Blues 2017
Faith in America begins new project to serve American LGBT teenagers
PennDOT to replace 20 Lancaster County bridges at an average cost of $1.59 million per span
Behind the scenes of the main stage at Lancaster Roots and Blues
Here's how Kings trading DeMarcus Cousins to Pelicans affects Sixers
Lancaster County community calendar: Feb. 20, 2017
Developer ends ght for affordable, multifamily housing in Gap, plans to sell 105 acres for industry
What the latest school immunization reports say about Lancaster County

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/separatingfakenewsfromfactrequireseffortandanopen/article_932bfabcf55111e6b4487b104efe8869.html 3/3
EXHIBIT B
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipschoolboardadmitsviolatingstateSunshineActwithcloseddoormeetings|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheim-township-school-board-admits-violating-state-sunshine-act-with/article_e30af6c6-c999-11e5-94c8-
9b7f94adab0f.html

Manheim Township school board admits violating state Sunshine Act with closed-door
meetings
KARA NEWHOUSE | Staff Writer Feb 2, 2016

Suzette Wenger Buy Now

Manheim Township School District board members are pictured during a meeting on Thursday, January 21, 2016. SUZETTE WENGER | Staff Photographer

The Manheim Township school board acknowledgedMondayit violated a Pennsylvania law requiring transparency in
government agencies, but called it a "clear oversight" and "not intentional."

In a written statement, board president Bill Murry also vowed that from this point going forward, we will make sure to
provide the public more information about the board's closed-door meetings.

The Lancaster County District Attorney's office, which initiated a review of the board's use of executive sessions based
on LNP's reporting, said it would not prosecute the board because it found "no indication of an intent" to violate the
Sunshine Act.

Ancestry Ofcial
ancestry.com

Build your family tree today. Visit Site

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipschoolboardadmitsviolatingstatesunshineactwith/article_e30af6c6c99911e594c89b7f94adab0... 1/3
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipschoolboardadmitsviolatingstateSunshineActwithcloseddoormeetings|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

But in a letter to the board, the district attorney's office put Manheim Township on notice that it would launch an
investigation and potentially charge the school board if it found evidence of such a violation in future.

"Now that you have been notified of the potentially unlawful nature of the failure to give a reason for holding an
executive session/failure to give an adequate reason for holding an executive session," the office wrote, "upon the
complaint of a subsequent failure(s) in this matter we will initiate an investigation of the alleged Sunshine Act violation
as such action would have been taken with full knowledge that the action was potentially unlawful."

Closed-door meetings

The board's acknowledgment followed LNPs reporting last month that its members met in closed-door sessions 11 times
between May and December with little or no explanation provided to the public.

The state Sunshine Act requires government bodies, including school boards, to meet openly unless they are discussing
specific topics such as employment agreements. Closed-door sessions must be announced either at a public meeting
beforehand or at the next public meeting.

The announcement must include the date and topic of the executive session, beyond merely a one-word explanation.

For most of the executive sessions LNP reviewed, Manheim Township school directors stated "personnel" as the only
explanation. For two, no explanation was given.

In a statement posted to the district website, Murry said that pattern was "a clear oversight, not intentional."

The board believed a one-word explanation was "sufficient and customary," but going forward, directors will provide
more information, he said.

"We have consulted with the district attorney and our own school district solicitor, and have come to the conclusion that
we need to provide more information as to the nature of the personnel executive session," Murry said in the statement.

Murry, reached by phone, said advice from the boards solicitor, contact from the district attorneys office and repeated
requests for information from LNP forced the board to change the policy.

"I've been on the board 12 years and that's all we ever had to say," Murry said, referring to the one-word descriptions the
board has been giving to explain executive sessions called in 2015.

Not intentional

Following LNP's initial reporting about the meetings, Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman assigned a
prosecutor to look into the issue. Stedman's office concluded the violations were not intentional and won't initiate
prosecution, a spokesman saidMonday.

"We're hopeful (the board) will act in accordance with their public statement," said Brett Hambright. "If they are in
compliance with the act, from here out, we would have no reason for further correspondence."

Violating the Sunshine Act is a summary offense punishable by a fine of at least $100 and up to $1,000 for a first offense,
plus court costs, and up to $2,000 plus court costs for subsequent violations.

Personnel issue

The board had been meeting behind closed doors amid a six-month-long investigation of an undisclosed personnel
issue in the district that has cost taxpayers at least $71,000.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipschoolboardadmitsviolatingstatesunshineactwith/article_e30af6c6c99911e594c89b7f94adab0... 2/3
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipschoolboardadmitsviolatingstateSunshineActwithcloseddoormeetings|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Board members have not publicly disclosed the nature of the investigation, but an electronic copy of a district
contractwith the investigating law firm was titled 6-10-2015 Signed Engagement ltr FROM Mike Levin Re.
Superintendent Harassment.

The superintendent, John Nodecker, resigned his position on Jan. 21. His resignation was effectiveFriday.

The district will pay Nodecker $160,000, plus one year of medical and retirement benefits, according to a separation
agreement obtained by LNP through a Right-to-Know request.

The board will hire an outside firm to conduct the new superintendent search, Murry said. The process likely will take
three or four months.

"Once we have a plan in place, we will discuss our timeline, the search process, and how we will move forward with the
process of recruiting," he said.

The board has scheduled a special meeting for6 p.m.Thursdayin the district office board room, at 450A Candlewyck
Road. The board has interviewed search firms and will vote on hiring one.

Murry said the board will then go into executive session to interview interim superintendent candidates.

Staff writer Susan Baldrige contributed to this report.

User commenting for this article has been disabled due to violations of our Comments Guidelines. Comments for this
article can be posted here.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipschoolboardadmitsviolatingstatesunshineactwith/article_e30af6c6c99911e594c89b7f94adab0... 3/3
EXHIBIT C
2/21/2017 Leakedaudio:ManheimTownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivatelyonsuperintendentsearch|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/leaked-audio-manheim-township-school-board-conspired-to-deliberate-privately/article_ddef2994-cb44-11e5-9464-
374c3bc1dc7d.html

Leaked audio: Manheim Township school board conspired to deliberate privately on

superintendent search
By KARA NEWHOUSE and SUSAN BALDRIGE Feb 4, 2016

Suzette Wenger/LNP Staff Photographer

Manheim Township school board members, clockwise from upper left: Bill Murry, Mark Anderson, Todd Heckman, Tony DeLeo, Lynn Miller, Stephen Grosh, Nathan
Geesey and Michael Lynch and, center, Grace Strittmatter.

The Manheim Township school board conspired to deliberate privately on its search for a new superintendent even as it
promised greater transparency in the wake of earlier violations of the Sunshine Act, an audio recording obtained by LNP
reveals.

Board President Bill Murry arranged a series of one-on-one telephone conversations with members late last week in a
deliberate attempt to avoid public scrutiny and circumvent the open-meetings law, the audio recording of a closed-door
meeting held Thursday night, Jan. 28, reveals.

Tonight we are not going to deliberate the search firms. I want you to go home and think about it. I will discuss your
particular feelings or which one you want on an individual basis. One by one. Part of this is to keep our butts out of a
wringer, Murry is heard on the recording telling board members.

Aggressive Injury Lawyer

Pisanchyn Law Firm
No Win No Fee. We'll come to
you. Visit Site

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/leakedaudiomanheimtownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivately/article_ddef2994cb4411e59464374c3... 1/5
2/21/2017 Leakedaudio:ManheimTownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivatelyonsuperintendentsearch|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Half a minute later, he said: If we dont deliberate, the meeting isnt subject to Sunshine. OK? Thats the point.

The private discussions, Murry is heard to have said on the recording, were designed to achieve a consensus among
board members on the hiring of a superintendent search firm without having to deliberate at a special public meeting of
the board tonight.

He said the board would ratify its choice tonight.

The boards actions suggest a clear intention to bypass open meeting requirements, a Sunshine Act expert said.

Youre not supposed to make decisions outside a public meeting. Its that simple, said Melissa Melewsky, who serves as
media law counsel for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association.

The board members actions came at the same time they were preparing a statement acknowledging earlier violations of
the Sunshine Act. That statement, made public Monday, called the earlier violations a clear oversight and not
intentional.

Related Story:Manheim Township school board's pattern of meeting behind closed doors raises Sunshine Law concerns

Contacted by LNP on Wednesday, Murry refused to answer questions about last weeks executive session or his one-on-
one deliberations.

I dont owe you an explanation. I dont owe you anything, he said.

Board Vice President Mark Anderson said Wednesday that the board was following instructions from district solicitor
Bob Frankhouser, of Lancaster firm Barley Snyder. Frankhouser was not present at the executive session.

What I heard Bill say is (that) Bob told him not to discuss it in the room, Anderson said. We talked about (the search
firm) over the weekend on the phone. We talked about a lot of things. I dont know that his intention was to avoid
anything.

Frankhouser did not return a phone call seeking comment Wednesday.

Recording of meeting
The conversation between Murry and seven other school board members was captured on an audio recording of the
executive session held one week ago. The recording was delivered to LNP on Wednesday morning by an undisclosed
source.

It is unclear who made the roughly two-hour recording, or if the board was aware of it. But LNP is publishing key
portions of the discussion because they are relevant to what should be a public deliberation of how taxpayer money is
being spent.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/leakedaudiomanheimtownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivately/article_ddef2994cb4411e59464374c3... 2/5
2/21/2017 Leakedaudio:ManheimTownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivatelyonsuperintendentsearch|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

The board plans to vote on a contract with a superintendent search firm at a special meeting at 6 p.m. tonight, according
to an agenda made public Monday.

The firm will find and vet candidates to replace Superintendent John Nodecker, who resigned last month under
circumstances that were never publicly disclosed. The agenda does not name which search firm will be hired or the cost
of the contract.

Related Story:Manheim Township School District will pay Superintendent John Nodecker $160,000 after resignation

The 2014 search that resulted in Nodeckers hiring cost $13,750.

Avoiding a quorum
During last weeks executive session, board members heard presentations from at least two superintendent search
firms. Murry is heard on the audio recording telling board members he would call each of them the next day to ask
which firm they wanted to hire.

Thats a good idea, said board member Todd Heckman.

If a majority of board members preferred one firm, Murry said, he would call back those in the minority to see if they
would be OK with becoming part of the majority.

The Sunshine Act requires school boards to deliberate in public when a quorum of board members is involved.

Making individual phone calls to avoid having a quorum is contrary to the letter and the intention of the law, said
Melewsky, the Sunshine Act expert.

Thats obviously a big problem not only from a legal perspective, but from a public policy perspective as well. The
Sunshine Act recognizes the fact that government functions better and more appropriately when the public is actively
involved, she said.

Also during the executive meeting last week, Murry is heard on the audio recording telling members that if a consensus
was reached in his phone calls, I can call up whichever firm and say OK, go ahead and get started with your processes,
and then well ratify [their contract] at a public meeting.

No board members objected to the plan. In addition to Murry, Anderson and Heckman, board members Tony DeLeo,
Mike Lynch, Lynn Miller, Nathan Geesey and Grace Strittmatter were present at the meeting.

Board member Stephen Grosh was not present at the meeting.

Board responses
Anderson, Geesey, Heckman and Lynch confirmed Wednesday that Murry contacted them individually after the
Thursday night executive session to see which search firm they preferred.

Asked about the apparent efforts to avoid the Sunshine Act, Geesey said: We are trying to be more transparent but
obviously we need more transparency. Thats one of the reasons I moved to have the discussion of the interim
superintendent in public at the last meeting.

Said Lynch: I would like to see this situation come to an end, the problems with the whole school board and Sunshine
Act. I want to see things are on a better footing with the community than they are now.

Strittmatter, DeLeo and Grosh could not be reached by phone Wednesday.

Miller hung up on an LNP reporter.

District attorneys response

Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman, who assigned a prosecutor to look into the boards use of executive
sessions but did not file charges, said he would look into the possible new Sunshine Act violations.

This is the first we are hearing of this particular incident. Well gather all the information we can on it, and go from
there, he said Wednesday.

A spokesman for Stedman said earlier in the week the office would not prosecute the boards previous violations
because it found no indication of an intent to violate the Sunshine Act.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/leakedaudiomanheimtownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivately/article_ddef2994cb4411e59464374c3... 3/5
2/21/2017 Leakedaudio:ManheimTownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivatelyonsuperintendentsearch|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

But in a letter to the board, the office put Manheim Township on notice that it would launch an investigation and
potentially charge the school board if it found evidence of such a violation in the future.

Violating the Sunshine Act is a summary offense punishable by a fine of at least $100 and up to $1,000 for a first offense,
plus court costs, and up to $2,000 plus court costs for subsequent violations.

Tonights agenda
Tonights meeting agenda, posted on the district website, includes an announcement that the board met Jan. 21 to review
search firm information and again Jan. 28 to interview search firms.

The board did not engage in any deliberations and took no action, the agenda says.

It also notes that the board last week discussed candidates for the role of interim superintendent. Personnel discussions
do not have to be held in public under the Sunshine Act.

Due to comments that violate our Comments Guidelines, we have disabled the comments section for this article.
Comments about this story can be posted here.

Manheim Township school board admits violating state Sunshine Act with closed-door meetings

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/leakedaudiomanheimtownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivately/article_ddef2994cb4411e59464374c3... 4/5
2/21/2017 Leakedaudio:ManheimTownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivatelyonsuperintendentsearch|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Manheim Township School Board's 'separation' from former superintendent was a costly and excessively secret affair

Manheim Township school board won't say how much money Superintendent John Nodecker will get in buyout

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/leakedaudiomanheimtownshipschoolboardconspiredtodeliberateprivately/article_ddef2994cb4411e59464374c3... 5/5
EXHIBIT D
2/21/2017 KeyquotesfromtheaudiorecordingofaManheimTownshipschoolboardexecutivesession|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/key-quotes-from-the-audio-recording-of-a-manheim-township/article_3a04b896-cb4c-11e5-a64c-73d12b446a40.html

Key quotes from the audio recording of a Manheim Township school board executive
session
By KARA NEWHOUSE and SUSAN BALDRIGE Feb 4, 2016

Suzette Wenger Buy Now

Manheim Township School District board members are pictured during a meeting on Thursday, January 21, 2016. SUZETTE WENGER | Staff Photographer

Here are key excerpts of an audio recording of a Manheim Township school board executive session held Jan. 28.

FULL STORY-Leaked audio: Manheim Township school board conspired to deliberate privately on superintendent
search

Board President Bill Murry:

One thing before we get, we start talking, all right? I talked to Mr. Frankhouser and given the current set of
circumstances that we are faced with, Im going to read you a few things, just so that we are all on the same page.

Tonight we are not going to deliberate the search firms. I want you to go home and think about it. I will discuss your
particular feelings or which one you want on an individual basis. One by one. Part of this is to keep our butts out of a
wringer.

Board member Nathan Geesey:

Thank you.

Murry:

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/keyquotesfromtheaudiorecordingofamanheimtownship/article_3a04b896cb4c11e5a64c73d12b446a40.html 1/3
2/21/2017 KeyquotesfromtheaudiorecordingofaManheimTownshipschoolboardexecutivesession|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Yeah. You got it.

Tonight we are receiving information only. I will be happy to explain that to you. The December 10th meeting when we
had budget meetings, if you recall we did not deliberate. We received information about the budget. And the
administration put forth the fact that we may need to consider, ah, asking for the exceptions. If we dont deliberate, the
meeting isnt subject to Sunshine.

OK? Thats the point.

If you want to deliberate with me on a one-on-one basis tomorrow, I will be happy [laughs] to have deliberations. My
guess is that we will all have a pretty good feeling of which way we would like to go once this meeting is over. But I
would like you to go sleep on it. Go home and sleep on it.

***

Murry:

After I get the sense of the board tomorrow, if it seems to be fairly unanimous, uh, we can enter in, I can, we can enter
in, I can call up whichever firm and say OK, go ahead and get started with your processes and then well ratify it at a
public meeting ... their contract.

***

Murry:

So were all set up to meet next Thursday. If theres a good consensus when I call everybody tomorrow about which way
we want to go, it will be great. If not, if we want to deliberate, were going to have to take next Thursdays meeting and
make it public.

Geesey:

Thats fine.

Murry:

Which is fine. But I need to have notice, which is 24 hours.

... My point being, with the consensus when I call everybody tomorrow, if the same firm comes up, you know, eight out
of nine voices, then I think we probably have a pretty big feeling of which way were going to go. But then I would turn
next Thursday into a special meeting of the board to ratify the contract ...

... Its going to be a very brief meeting. Theres going to be one motion on there, to ratify.

... I would rather, if we know which way were going to go, then lets just make up our mind and get moving. And for
whoever would choose otherwise, I will let them know what the consensus of the board is, or the majority is, and see
whether or not they would give that some consideration.

***

Murry:

The special meeting will be lets just say theres a consensus on who the search (firm) should be. Ill go back to the
naysayers depending upon who picks which one, Ill say it that way as another way of saying it and say, Heres the
vote. We got eight people sitting around this table. It might be 5-3 for one or the other. So Ill call the three who are in
the minority ... and see whether they would be OK with becoming part of the majority.

I dont know until we make any of these phone calls tomorrow and have an 8-0, and if I do, Im gonna send you all an
email and say Im gonna call them [the firm] up and say Time to get going, and then we are gonna ratify it next
Thursday.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/keyquotesfromtheaudiorecordingofamanheimtownship/article_3a04b896cb4c11e5a64c73d12b446a40.html 2/3
2/21/2017 KeyquotesfromtheaudiorecordingofaManheimTownshipschoolboardexecutivesession|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Manheim Township school board coverage

MORE INFORMATION

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/keyquotesfromtheaudiorecordingofamanheimtownship/article_3a04b896cb4c11e5a64c73d12b446a40.html 3/3
EXHIBIT E
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipresidentslaunchpetitioncallingforschoolboardpresidentBillMurry'sresignation|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheim-township-residents-launch-petition-calling-for-school-board-president/article_a22eb962-cc0a-11e5-8c87-
436e37869d74.html

Manheim Township residents launch petition calling for school board president Bill Murry's
resignation
KARA NEWHOUSE | Staff Writer Feb 5, 2016

Suzette Wenger Buy Now

William Murry listens to the public comment during the Manheim Township School Board meeting on Thursday, February 4, 2016. SUZETTE WENGER | Staff
Photographer

Manheim Township residents are mounting an online campaign calling for school board president Bill Murry to resign.

At a board meeting on Thursday, more than 20 residents blasted Murry and other school board members for keeping the
public in the dark about major decisions in the district.

After the meeting, a group of residents launched an online petition that calls for Murry to resign or be recalled.

"We live in Manheim Township, and we pay the taxes that this school board utilizes. We expect our public officials to be
honorable and obey the law. These individuals have not lived up to this standard," says the petition, whichhad more
than 900 supporters as of 9 a.m. Tuesday.

A leaked audio recording, made public by LNP on Thursday morning, revealed that board members had conspired to
deliberate privately on its search for a new superintendent.

Those actions came at the same time the boardpromised greater transparencyin the wake of earlier violations of the
Sunshine Act.
http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipresidentslaunchpetitioncallingforschoolboardpresident/article_a22eb962cc0a11e58c87436e3 1/3
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipresidentslaunchpetitioncallingforschoolboardpresidentBillMurry'sresignation|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Residents at Thursday night's meeting called the board's latest actions "reprehensible" and "deeply troubling." Some also
voiced dissent for the board's plan to pay an outside firm to find a new superintendent.

RELATED:Manheim Township School District will pay Superintendent John Nodecker $160,000 after resignation

RELATED:How much have Lancaster County schools spent on superintendent searches in recent years?

Three of seven board members present at Thursday's meeting Todd Heckman, Mike Lynch and Grace
Strittmatterapologized for "embarrassing" the district. The board voted unanimously to table the approval of a
superintendent search firm at a cost of up to $17,000.

Murry, who is heard in the audio recording arranging a series of telephone conversations to avoid public discussion on
the search firm, did not apologize for his actions.He said after the meeting that he had not given "much consideration"
to residents' calls for his resignation.

The online petition calls for Murry to be recalled if he doesn't resign.

School board members in Pennsylvania cannot be recalled through a ballot initiative, but a section of the school
codeoutlines a process for the removal of members who refuse or neglect to perform their duties.

Examples of such failure could include refusal to open schools or adopt a budget, according to Stuart Knade, an attorney
for the Pennsylvania School Board Association. He said the removal process doesn't apply to issues outside the school
code.

Duties and powers of school boards arelisted in Article V of the school code. To initiate a removal, at least 10 taxpayers
must petition their county court of common pleas and make their case to a judge.

The Manheim Township residents' online petition also calls on district solicitor Bob Frankhouser, of Lancaster law firm
Barley Snyder, to resign.

Board Vice President Mark Anderson said Wednesday that the board was following instructions from Frankhouser
regarding the Sunshine Act.

Contacted Friday, Frankhouser said he had not seen the online petition. He declined comment on the calls for his
resignation or on his advice to the district.

Due to a technical issue that prevents LancasterOnline from removing comments that violate its Comments Guidelines,
the comments section for this article has been disabled. Comments about this article can be posted here.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipresidentslaunchpetitioncallingforschoolboardpresident/article_a22eb962cc0a11e58c87436e3 2/3
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipresidentslaunchpetitioncallingforschoolboardpresidentBillMurry'sresignation|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Former Manheim Township Superintendent John Nodecker: I was forced to quit

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipresidentslaunchpetitioncallingforschoolboardpresident/article_a22eb962cc0a11e58c87436e3 3/3
EXHIBIT F
2/21/2017 LNPEditorial:ManheimTownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitormustresign|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/lnp-editorial-manheim-township-school-board-president-and-district-solicitor/article_71ca3f56-cc57-11e5-
b7d2-47caab7ef1eb.html

In our words
LNP Editorial: Manheim Township school board president and district solicitor must resign
The LNP Editorial Board Feb 7, 2016

Suzette Wenger Buy Now

Manheim Township school board President William Murry listens tocomments from upset district residentsduring a special school board meeting on Thursday,
Feb. 4.

THE ISSUE

A leaked audio recording of a Manheim Township school board closed-door meeting held Jan. 28 revealed the board
was conspiring to circumvent the Sunshine Act as it embarked on a search for a new superintendent. During that
meeting, board President Bill Murry arranged a series of one-on-one conversations with board members to discuss
which search firm they would engage to seek a superintendent to replace John Nodecker, who officially resigned Jan. 29,
just 18 months into his four-year contract. Murry intended for the board to choose a search firm in advance of a special
public meeting Thursday evening, at which time the board members would ratify their choice without discussion. After
LNP reported Thursday on the leaked audio recording, Manheim Township residents turned up in droves to the boards
meeting that evening.

Thursday evening, the Manheim Township school board got the dressing down it deserved.

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/lnpeditorialmanheimtownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitor/article_71ca3f56cc5711e5b7d247c 1/4
2/21/2017 LNPEditorial:ManheimTownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitormustresign|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

Free Birth Records Search

Discover the story of you.

Residents, many of them parents with children in district schools, called the boards clandestine efforts to bypass the
Sunshine Act deplorable, reprehensible, deeply troubling, embarrassing.

The board members transgressions were all of the above, but well give them this: They took their punishment. And
several admitted to being embarrassed and apologized.

Notably, board President Bill Murry neither apologized nor acknowledged feeling any regret.

At one point, he even chided a woman for speaking out of turn, telling her, That was uncalled for.

He was roundly booed. As he should have been.

Heres whats uncalled for, Mr. Murry:

Brazenly plotting to get around a law of the commonwealth.

Seeking advice from district solicitor Robert Frankhouser on how to bypass the law.

Directing your fellow board members to secretly discuss matters that ought to be discussed in public.

Arrogantly laughing as you tell board members, in a closed-door meeting, that if they want to deliberate on the search
firm, youd deliberate with them one-on-one on the phone all to avoid the Sunshine Acts requirement that school
boards deliberate in public when theres a quorum.

Tonight we are not going to deliberate the search firms. I want you to go home and think about it, Murry is heard
saying on the audio recording. I will discuss your particular feelings or which one you want on an individual basis. One
by one. Part of this is to keep our butts out of a wringer.

Thirty or so seconds later, he said: If we dont deliberate, the meeting isnt subject to Sunshine. OK? Thats the point.

And this is what he told his fellow board members about his agenda for Thursday evenings meeting: I have the special
meeting first, cause I dont think its gonna last long. For goodness sake, well call it to order, well pledge allegiance to
the flag, well make two announcements, have a motion to ratify approve the contract with whomever to start the
superintendent search, is there any more business, no, OK, is there a motion to adjourn, yep, bang, done.

Yep, bang, done. Sunshine Act subverted.

Regaining trust

What a disgrace. We wholeheartedly agree with the township residents who are calling via online and in printed
petitions for Murry to resign and for Frankhouser to be removed as the district solicitor.

If the school board is to regain the trust of district residents, staff and students, Murry should resign and Frankhousers
role with the district should end. And if the other school board members are to remain, they should pledge to work
ethically and openly going forward.

No more secrecy. No more staying silent when someone directs you to dodge the law.

The Sunshine Act

The Sunshine Act is intended to ensure that government conducts the peoples business openly. When taxpayer money is
being spent, taxpayers deserve to know not just how its being spent but why. Arranging secret phone calls to reach a
consensus on which firm should be paid $15,000 or more to find a superintendent is not meeting the spirit or the letter
of the law.

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/lnpeditorialmanheimtownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitor/article_71ca3f56cc5711e5b7d247c 2/4
2/21/2017 LNPEditorial:ManheimTownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitormustresign|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

The board only last week escaped being charged with Sunshine Act violations by Lancaster County District Attorney
Craig Stedman, who assigned a prosecutor to investigate the boards practice of holding executive sessions without
providing adequate explanation.

On Monday, Murry issued a prepared statement acknowledging the board had violated the Sunshine Act but claiming it
was an oversight, and not intentional.

The prosecutors office declined to prosecute because it found no indication of an intent to violate the law.

It has evidence of such intent now, and we hope the DA acts accordingly.

The circus

Because heres the thing: The district residents who crowded into the boards meeting room Thursday expressed deep
sadness about the circus as parent Christophe Salembier put it now engulfing their school district.

Many were deeply perturbed about the money that had been spent on investigating what the district called a personnel
issue at least $71,000 and then paying the former superintendent $160,000 in salary, plus a year of medical and
retirement benefits, to resign. And then planning to spend more money to hire a search firm to find his replacement.

Rather than focusing on a search firm, the boards bigger concern should have been this: What qualified candidate
would want to work for a board that shows so much disrespect for the law and the rules of good governance?

Painful cuts

At Thursdays meeting, both parents and students lamented the cuts that had been made to the districts art and music
programs, and wondered how many art and music positions could have been restored with the money that had been
squandered in recent months.

One student mentioned that her brother, now in the sixth grade, never learned how to play the recorder. And that might
not seem like a big deal, but the reason for this is likely because the districts elementary schools offer only a half a year
of music. Which is a big deal. A big, rotten deal.

Among those at the meeting were students who attended as part of a government class assignment. One student stood
up to note that what her fellow students were observing that evening was not a good example of how government
should work.

We couldnt agree more. Its not how a school board should function.

We leave the final word to district resident Dianne Mousley, who told the board: We want accountability from the
people who we elected to listen to us and heed our voices. And you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/lnpeditorialmanheimtownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitor/article_71ca3f56cc5711e5b7d247c 3/4
2/21/2017 LNPEditorial:ManheimTownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitormustresign|Editorials|lancasteronline.com

Manheim Township school board coverage

More Headlines
Wilco, Conor Oberst and Hop Along to play 2017 XPoNential Music Festival
Reservation deadline is Friday for North Museum's annual Cosmic Bash fundraiser
Steelers coach Joey Porter to plead guilty to disorderly conduct
Check out Penn State product Jared Odrick's reaction to being released by Jaguars
Lancaster County Animal Coalition elds cruelty ofcer to assist in local investigations
Lancaster County re chiefs to battle volunteer crunch with $376,000 media blitz
Tragic end for Lancaster city brothers described as kind, thoughtful and generous
Lancaster County community calendar: Feb. 21, 2017
Porter Furniture building in Lancaster city gets new life as 24-unit apartment conversion
Lampeter-Strasburg boys hoops overcomes 11-point second-half decit to beat Ephrata in district opener
McCaskey gets defensive, drops Hempeld to set up rematch against Cedar Crest in district quarternals

http://lancasteronline.com/opinion/editorials/lnpeditorialmanheimtownshipschoolboardpresidentanddistrictsolicitor/article_71ca3f56cc5711e5b7d247c 4/4
EXHIBIT G
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipschoolboardfacesmostlyhostilecrowdofmorethan320|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheim-township-school-board-faces-mostly-hostile-crowd-of-more/article_3abc5e4e-d135-11e5-be64-
b7ed4bce5a56.html

Manheim Township school board faces mostly hostile crowd of more than 320
By KARA NEWHOUSE and SUSAN BALDRIGE Feb 11, 2016

Suzette Wenger Buy Now

Solicitor for Manheim Township school board, Bob Frankhouser is pictured during a work session on Thursday, February 11, 2016. SUZETTE WENGER | Staff
Photographer

Manheim Township school board faced a mostly hostile crowd of more than 320 people Thursday night as they debated
a series of contentious issues.

Board members received a petition calling for president Bill Murry's resignation, tabled a motion to seek a new solicitor,
approved advertising the superintendent job and appointed an acting superintendent.

LNP staff tell story of 3.5-hour school board meeting on Twitter

Free Birth Records Search

Discover the story of you.

Petition

Residents at the meeting delivered a petition of 638 signatures calling for Murry's resignation.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipschoolboardfacesmostlyhostilecrowdofmore/article_3abc5e4ed13511e5be64b7ed4bce5a56.h 1/3
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipschoolboardfacesmostlyhostilecrowdofmorethan320|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

"We want a school board and a board president who not only respects but upholds the law. ... Trust has been broken,
and it's too far gone to be restored as long as you remain on the board," said Renee Heller, a mom of four Manheim
Township students.

Residents launched the petition last week after LNP reported on the board's efforts to keep the public out of its plans for
seeking a new superintendent.

In a leaked audio recording of a closed-door session held by the board on Jan. 28, Murry is heard arranging a series of
one-on-one telephone conversations with board members to avoid public scrutiny in the selection of a superintendent
search firm.

The board members' actions came at the same time they were preparing a statement acknowledging earlier violations of
the Sunshine Act, the state open-meetings law. Murry had called those violations a "clear oversight."

Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman said last week he would look into the possible new Sunshine Act
violations.

The board's plan to hire a superintendent search firm last week was tabled, and several members apologized for their
actions. Murry did not.

An online petition calling for Murry's resignation has garnered more than 1,000 signatures since last week.

Murry, who is a real estate developer and owner of Murry Communities, was reelected to a four-year seat on the board
last November.

Responding to the petition during the meeting, Murry said: "Unfortunately Renee, you're not going to get what you came
for."

He continued: "I don't appreciate people just assuming that I don't care about this school district." He also called on
audience members to communicate with him directly.

Search firm

At Thursday's meeting, the board debated whether to hire a superintendent search firm at a cost of up to $17,000.

Board member Nathan Geesey advocated skipping a firm.

"Every time you save $15,000, that can go to art classes, music classes to make a well-rounded student," he said, drawing
applause from the crowd.

RELATED:How much have Lancaster County schools spent on superintendent searches in recent years?

In 2011-12 and 2012-13, the school board reduced elementary library, music and art instruction, citing budget issues.

The cuts have continued to draw parent complaints since then.

Murry said the benefit of a search firm is its reach. "Does this school district want to settle for a reach at the borders of
Pennsylvania?" he asked.

At one point, he told the audience that he didn't need to sell the search firm to the public. "Quite frankly, the board
makes that decision."

The board ultimately voted to post the superintendent vacancy but continue to consider a search firm.

Murry was the only member who voted against advertising the job.

Solicitor

Geesey made a motion during the meeting to seek a new solicitor, saying the public had "lost confidence" in the current
solicitor, Bob Frankhouser, of Lancaster law firm Barley Snyder.

The residents' petition also called on the board to remove Frankhouser.

In the audio recording of the closed meeting, Murry indicated that he had consulted Frankhouser on how to deliberate
on hiring a search firm.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipschoolboardfacesmostlyhostilecrowdofmore/article_3abc5e4ed13511e5be64b7ed4bce5a56.h 2/3
2/21/2017 ManheimTownshipschoolboardfacesmostlyhostilecrowdofmorethan320|LocalNews|lancasteronline.com

Thursday night, Murry said: "I don't believe at any time (in his career), Mr. Frankhouser provided any advice to this
school district that was contrary to its best interest."

The board voted 7-2 to table discussion of a new solicitor. Geesey and Michael Lynch were in the minority.

Acting superintendent

The board last night also appointed retired Solanco superintendent Martin Hudacs as acting superintendent for the
district. Board members did not announce what they would pay for the job.

Superintendent John Nodecker resigned last month 18 months into a four-year contract under circumstances that
were never publicly disclosed.

Hudacs, 62, retired in 2014 from Solanco School District, where he had served for seven years. He earned a bachelor's
degree in education with a concentration in English from the University of Scranton in 1975 and a master's in English at
the same school in 1981.

An English teacher, Hudacs first came to Quarryville in 1990 when he was hired as assistant principal of Solanco High
School. He also worked at Avon Grove High School in Chester County. In 1996, he earned a doctorate in educational
leadership from the University of Delaware.

Editor's note: this story has been updated with the correct age of Martin Hudacs.

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/manheimtownshipschoolboardfacesmostlyhostilecrowdofmore/article_3abc5e4ed13511e5be64b7ed4bce5a56.h 3/3