PH School District fires back against state rep’s letter on tax increase
This letter is sent as a reply to state Rep. Tony DeLuca’s July 15 letter, in which he expresses his displeasure at the Penn Hills School District’s raising taxes by 0.4 (mills).
As you are aware, the district was designated by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as a school district in financial recovery status in accordance with Act 141. Chief Recovery Officer Daniel Matsook was then appointed to oversee the district.
As you are further aware, Act 141 carries grave consequences for school districts that do not comply with the directives of the chief recovery officer. Specifically, Act 141 dictates that a school district’s failure “to comply with directives issued by the chief recover officer” can result in the offending school district being placed into receivership. Once in receivership, local Penn Hills elected officials would lose almost all control of the district, and the newly appointed receiver could implement tax increases ad nauseum.
In the most recent budget process, the chief financial recovery officer did present a proposed amendment to the district’s financial recovery plan with a 0.75 (mill) tax increase, which was a decrease from the first amended recovery plan which required the district to raise taxes to the maximum amount possible.
The district’s school board, however, did refuse to enact even the 0.75 (mill) increase. Instead, the school board of the district did demand a lesser tax increase, due to the effects of covid-19 and the expectation of receiving federal and state monies.
The signatories to this letter are therefore perturbed at your insinuation that the school board is raising taxes of its own accord, with no regard for the people of Penn Hills. To the contrary, the school board was only following the mandated directives of the chief recovery officer, as required by Act 141.
Further, as you actively supported and encouraged the placement of the district into recovery status, you are in part responsible for the actions of the chief recovery officer, including his proposed tax increases. If it is your position that the district’s local elected officials should retain all decision making authority, then you have the ability to lobby for the removal of the chief recovery officer.
In conclusion, be advised that the Penn Hills school board of directors remains ready and able to effectuate the financial recovery plan, work collaboratively with the chief recovery officer and take whatever steps may be necessary for the good of the Penn Hills School District and the people of Penn Hills.
Erin Vecchio
Board President
Jackie Blakey-Tate
Board Vice President
