ShareThis Page
Testimony: West Mifflin school chief helped man with murder charge get security job |

Testimony: West Mifflin school chief helped man with murder charge get security job

| Thursday, August 30, 2018 6:00 p.m
Daniel Castagna

Embattled West Mifflin Area School District Superintendent Daniel Castagna came under more fire Wednesday night when testimony during a removal hearing revealed he helped a man with a murder charge get a job in school security.

The law allows for superintendents and assistant superintendents to have their contracts terminated by a vote of the school board for “neglect of duty, incompetency, intemperance or immorality.”

Witness testimony can be heard during the hearing, known as an Act 1080 hearing, according to attorney Steven Toprani, who is representing the school district.

He said the school board “basically sits as a court” and can consider evidence.

During the hearing, several district employees testified that Castagna in 2014 asked the district’s contracted security company to hire his friend.

He was fired days later when a background check showed that he’d previously been charged with murder, according to Tribune-Review news partner WPXI-TV.

Castagna has worked for the district since 2007 and served as superintendent since 2011. He was charged in September in Beaver County with driving under the influence and traffic violations. He began a two-week medical leave Jan. 10, and the school board voted Jan. 19 to place him on paid leave.

On July 2, the board voted to place him on unpaid leave. Castagna has since filed a federal lawsuit alleging retaliation and discrimination. The suit names the district and six board members, and it claims the decision to place him on unpaid leave was politically motivated.

Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Megan at 412-380-8519, or via Twitter @meganguzaTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.