Kiski Area board approves middle‑school assistant baseball hire after heated public comments

Kiski Area School District board members approved item 14.5(d) — the middle‑school assistant baseball coaching hire — following several community speakers who urged the board to reconsider rejecting the athletic director’s recommendation.

During the public‑comment portion, Zachary Jankowski, a 25‑year Kiski Area teacher and coach, said the board “clearly overstepped, overreached, and abused its power” by failing to accept the athletic director’s recommendation to rehire Mark Flynn. Jankowski cited the collective bargaining agreement and argued that placement of assistant coaching positions “shall be the decision of the head coach in agreement with the athletic director.” He told the board the decision deprived middle‑school players “of the opportunity to experience the positive influence of a coach that is historically well respected and admired.”

Several other speakers voiced support for Flynn. Claudia Hutchison of Vandergriff Borough called it “disappointing” that the original candidate was replaced and described Flynn’s decade of volunteer service across sports as evidence of his commitment to students. Cindy Dunmire, also of Vandergriff Borough, said Flynn “invests in their growth, not only as athletes, but as young individuals developing character.” A student speaker urged the board to consider the ripple effect the decision would have on players’ lives.

The board opted to take item 14.5(d) by roll‑call vote. The transcript records individual votes: Mr. Liberta (yes); Mr. Jankowski (no); Ms. Crony (yes); Ms. Kamer (no); Ms. Kornkowski (yes); Ms. Millinger (yes); Dr. Halter (yes); Ms. Rau (yes); Dr. Meese (yes). The motion was announced as passing; the transcript later records the shorthand “Motion passes. 7 1.” The roll‑call entries in the record above list seven recorded yes votes and two recorded no votes.

At the directors’‑comments portion of the meeting, a board member who used the surname Jankowski explained that his no vote was not an objection to the candidate. “I voted no, not because I don't have faith in Mr. Glendening … I just don't agree with the manner in which he was hired,” he said, emphasizing concerns about adherence to district policy and the importance of following the athletic director’s recommendation process.

The public comments repeatedly urged the board to defer to professional recommendations from the district athletic director and to consider the impact on student athletes; speakers cited a salary figure for the athletic director ($105,000 per year) when noting the district’s investment in that role’s recommendations. The board took other routine consent votes during the meeting and adjourned after director remarks.

The board did not announce any immediate reversal of the hire during the meeting; the action on 14.5(d) stands as approved in the meeting record. The board is expected to post minutes and the official vote tally in its public records.