At the Feb. 20 Catasauqua Borough Council meeting, the municipal pool discussion was reopened.

The future of the pool was originally set to be decided at the Feb. 6 special meeting. After a spirited discussion from council members and residents, it had been agreed to table the final decision.

Council Vice President Howard Cunningham moved to reopen the discussion during the business meeting Feb. 20.

Borough Engineer Vanessa Nedrick, of Remington and Vernick Engineers, addressed council and the audience with an overview of the work her firm had done in analyzing the pool issue. She was not at the Feb. 6 meeting to share her report.

According to Nedrick, she and her colleagues were asked to evaluate the municipal pool in May 2020. They started with a look at costs to replace the pool and an estimate to repair the pool structure, which reportedly turned out to be fairly costly.

After working to get grant funding for years, the borough received $30,000 for a financial feasibility study. Nedrick noted this was only to look at the financial side of things and did not include any geotechnical work.

Nedrick added this study was intended as a preliminary tool to help lead further conversations.

After inconclusive dye testing and at the request of council, a geotechnical study was completed by Chuck Weston.

Weston said the concern was the loss of water and not knowing where it was going. After his investigation, there was worry about solution cavities in the limestone beneath the pool. Weston said he used a 1987 sinkhole map as a baseline, as well as information from the state geological study website.

There was concern about new sinkholes or solution cavities forming, which could result in cracks in the pool or a potential collapse. This led to the recommendation, discussed Feb. 6, that the pool not be reopened at that site.

Councilwoman Jill Smerdon expressed her discontent with the work done by Remington and Vernick. She said the original grant application called for information on potential other uses for the site. Nedrick responded, saying the draft document released after the initial study detailed costs for other options, such as refilling the pool, creating a splash pad and other options.

Smerdon said she was unhappy with the amount of work done in the financial feasibility study. She said the amount of work and options shared with the borough are not reflective of the $19,000 put into it.

Smerdon requested the remaining $11,000 be used to employ another engineer, who specializes in pools, to investigate the matter. Borough Manager Glenn Eckhart said he would look into what the costs would be to get a second opinion.

Council President Brian Bartholomew mentioned the original borough pool was built by the Work Progress Administration. He questioned if it was possible to get details or more information about any engineering work or studies performed at the time.

Weston said, in his experience, any documentation on WPA projects was left with the municipality. It was noted it could be hard to find.

Bartholomew followed up, mentioning the current pool was built in 1999. He wondered if there was any information available from that time. At the Feb. 6 meeting, Jeff MacHose, former public works director, commented a lot of corners were cut during that project and there was some “cheating” during the pool’s installation.

It was noted the pool couldn’t simply just be refilled. To do it properly, the pool structure would need to be removed before filling the area with dirt.

Councilman David Bernini noted he was unhappy with the work done during the geotechnical study. He expressed his desire for more detailed investigation into what the ground below the pool actually looks like, instead of speculation based on maps of the area. He questioned the efficacy or process of different tests, such as seismic testing, with Weston.

Weston was concerned further investigation and drilling into the structure for seismic testing would compromise the pool structure. He also noted there are risks with the seismic testing that could result in creating cracks or gaps in the stone beneath the ground.

Cunningham said the pool is a hazard in its current state if someone was to get into the closed pool area and hurt themselves. It could be a liability to the borough to leave it as it is.

Cunningham also spoke passionately about the financial concern. He noted the borough is in no financial position to be spending money on the pool.

“It’s a want, not a need,” Cunningham said, emphasizing he doesn’t believe borough residents want their taxes raised any more.

Bernini, on the other hand, wanted to explore other investigative options from the “point of view of someone who wants to keep the pool open.”

Conversations between Bernini and Cunningham got heated, with Cunningham raising his voice more than once in frustration. Cunningham kept returning to the cost issue, calling it a financial risk.

“We’re trying to manage the bloody budget,” he said, adding they always have the option to rebuild the pool at a different site in the future. “We don’t want to raise taxes again.”

“Stop using taxes as a scare tactic,” Bernini replied.

He said the cost issue isn’t as simple as his colleagues are making it. He noted municipal budgets aren’t built to “save, then spend, save, then spend.”

Bernini added municipalities need to borrow for capital projects and pay them back over time.

Cunningham and Smerdon blamed that train of thought as the reason for the borough’s current financial troubles and tax increase.

“We are not going to make a rash decision tonight based on heated emotions,” Bartholomew said.

Cunningham commented the pool, in its current state, is not operational, and it would cost more than $1 million to get it up and running again. He said only 10-15% of Catasauqua residents use the municipal pool. The pool has been costing more money than it brought it in for years, he said, adding stalling on a decision will compound costs as it continues to deteriorate.

Councilman Gene Schlegel noted residents who have questions about the pool are welcome to reach out to him for more information. He said he would be happy to take a trip to the pool site with anyone interested in looking at the current state of the pool.

At the end of the discussion, Cunningham made a motion to investigate the costs of removing the pool and refilling the area properly. The vote passed 4-1, with two councilmen absent. Bernini was the opposing vote.