Act 93 Administrator Compensation Plan Rejected at School Board Meeting

By Christopher Miller

BALD EAGLE TOWNSHIP – The Keystone Central School District board met Thursday evening to discuss a key topic that was discussed at last week’s work session: Act 93.

The school board spoke at length regarding the act, which is a compensation plan for non-instructional school administrators, such as principals for example.

Those individuals working for the district under Act 93 would receive a 3.0% annual salary increase on their base salary, and upon retirement as long as they are employed on or before June 30, 2026, would receive individual health insurance coverage for calendar eight years after retirement. Those employed on or after July 1, 2026 would only be privy to five years of additional health insurance coverage under the district’s plan, among other benefits.

Board member Chris Scaff opened the discussion by sticking to what he said during last week’s work session: doing this now and not waiting until when the new board is installed is “tying the hands of the board” before the new members are sworn in.”

“Why do we need to vote on this now? What is the rush,” he asked.

Board member Dr. William Baldino mentioned that he spoke with a former administrator, adding that “pay increases should be tied to academic performance,” urging the board to vote no, saying that they can “start over with a new board.”

Tracy Smith spoke up and said that eight years ago the district was facing a $10 million dollar deficit, had no curriculum director and no up-to-date curriculum policies, and no clear plan for facilities maintenance, adding that the number of administrators “needs to be reduced.”

“The current climate of this board and what the new board is going to be will be detrimental to our administrators morally. We will lose a lot of good administrators and I feel bad for this district,” she said.

Member Jeff Johnston, a former school administrator, commented on his expertise in the area, saying that administrators carry the greatest amount of responsibility in the district.

“They chase down the ridiculous stuff that this board makes them do through the micromanagement of this district, they are charged with making sure that the children are safe every day, and the buck stops with them in an emergency,” he said.

“They oversee the daily activities that happen in the buildings and with the people in non-instructional positions. They work longer (school) years than teachers and are the most disrespected group among all of the public school employees.”

“They are the only group, because of the way the act is written, that can be manipulated and pushed around by a school board if they choose to do so. I am in favor of doing this now because you get the kind of district you deserve,” he added.

“I am offended when you say it is because of a lack of leadership. It is a slap in the face of everyone on the administration team. It is wrong and not appropriate. My advice to every administrator in the district is to get your resume ready and start looking because there will be a place out there that respects what you do.”

Board member Tom Cannon chimed in saying that it is very inappropriate to be making accusations about the people (the new board members) that we do not know who they are yet.

“Making that statement about getting resumes ready is sabotage of the board and it is very inappropriate. That is completely unprofessional.”

Board President Roger Elling read a lengthy prepared statement detailing the conversations and meetings of the past year since the 2025-2026 tax increase was introduced.

“Without a tax increase we would have been staring down a budget shortfall with cuts to staffing, programs, and services,” he started. “We were presented with a 3.55% increase but approved a 1.78% increase instead. While the former would have brought in an additional $980,000 in revenue, the latter generated around $490,000, meaning we lost $490,000 we could have had if we went with the original recommendation.”

He then went on to explain the health insurance stop loss and spec share funds which details how much the district pays in health insurance for each employee’s health bills.

“Some members on our insurance plan had bills amounting to over $1 million in claims. Medicine is more expensive, there are fewer doctors, and UPMC and Geisinger are not giving many discounts in coverage. Many of our employees are between 50 and 65 years old which means more doctor visits and possible health complications. When people have large bills it pushes the costs up for the entire district.”

He then went on to state how the meetings on Act 93 started in April 2025 and continued through October, many times with a meeting quorum not being present, turning it into an information meeting rather than an executive session.

“Lynch, Baldino, and Scaff were either not present or left early during several of the meetings including in October and we could not move forward as official meetings. Contract discussions are held in executive sessions and not open public meetings so we do not violate personnel confidentiality,” he added.

“A 3% increase is modest as compared to teacher increases averaging 6% to 8% per year. Increasing the healthcare contributions from 3.99% to 7.99% would save us $93,000 over five years. Reducing post-retirement benefits from eight to five years would be saving the district $3.3 million. Eight years is less than most districts who provide this as a benefit for up to 10 years past retirement. I want to do what is good for the district. Leadership means making difficult decisions with the long-term health of the district in mind.”

The motion to pass Act 93 failed with board member Elisabeth Lynch, Chris Scaff, Dr. William Baldino, Tom Cannon, and Polly Donahay voting against.