The Keystone Central School District board debated whether the personnel agenda should list individual salaries and ultimately voted to maintain the current personnel‑report structure.

Board member Tracy voiced concern that listing salaries publicly would ‘‘create division and cast staff in a negative light’’ and said compensation conversations belong in contract negotiations. Board member Chris countered that public employees are subject to scrutiny and argued board members should have direct access to compensation information without relying on Right‑to‑Know requests. Multiple board members noted that salary information is already publicly accessible via state websites such as OpenPA/openpagov and that the more important oversight number for the board is the total salary expenditure shown in the annual budget.

A motion to keep the personnel report unchanged passed by roll call (motion passed; 6 yes, 2 no). The administration explained that excessive Right‑to‑Know requests impose processing costs and staff time, and the board discussed a compromise of linking a publicly available salary database rather than republishing line‑item salaries on the agenda. One board member said they were uncomfortable attaching an outside website link to the personnel agenda.

Why it matters: the format of personnel reporting affects perceived transparency, potential staff morale, and the administrative burden of processing public records requests. Board members emphasized both fiscal oversight responsibilities and the need to avoid unjustified public shaming of employees.

Key details: discussion covered (1) the public availability of salaries on third‑party sites, (2) the board’s responsibility for total salary figures at budget time, (3) Right‑to‑Know cost and workload impacts, and (4) the possibility of adding a link to the public database as a compromise. The motion to keep the existing personnel report structure passed by roll call (6 yes, 2 no). Administration said the district posts salary data through public channels and that budget totals are presented annually.

Ending: The board directed no immediate change to the personnel agenda format; members asked administration to provide clearer budget‑level numbers and to consider ways to meet transparency goals without increasing administrative burden.