No way to make everyone happy with decision on SEBCO Pool work
Supervisors in Jefferson Township are facing a decision that is bound to leave some residents unhappy regardless of what they choose.
The future of SEBCO Pool is on the table, but the price tag to ensure it has a future is steep — about $2.7 million.
Plans for work on the pool have been discussed for years. The facility’s base infrastructure is about 60 years old. Today, it requires a new heater, liner and filtration system, among other work.
A public meeting Tuesday drew quite a crowd. Enough members of the community attended to force the meeting to be moved to the municipal storage garage where there was more space.
While the meeting drew a crowd, those gathered didn’t necessarily see eye to eye on a potential investment in the pool.
Many of those in attendance voiced support for doing the work necessary to rehabilitate the pool, so it can be enjoyed for years to come. However, significant numbers of attendees also questioned expending such a large sum on a resource only usable for a portion of each year.
Those in support of refurbishing the pool cited the many individuals who had their first jobs at the pool or learned to swim there in support of why the facility is a valuable community resource. They also stated the obvious — the pool’s value as a family-friendly recreational facility.
On the other side of the debate stood those who questioned the cost of the project versus the value it brings.
The township has accumulated a sizable amount of grant funding to put toward renovations at SEBCO — just shy of $1 million. But that grant money is a double-edged sword for the township. While the total doesn’t come close to covering the work needed at the pool, not using it risks the possibility of funds having to be returned should a project within the scope of the grant not be found before the grants lapse. A lapse also runs the risk of endangering the township’s ability to secure future grant funding for projects.
While supervisors assured the public no tax increase would be needed to fund the project — funds would be transferred from the Act 13 impact fee and capital reserve funds — some at the meeting still questioned the practicality of making an investment of millions of dollars on something only usable for “90 days a year,” especially with the knowledge yearly maintenance costs would be required to keep the facility running once restored.
While giving the taxpayers the opportunity to weigh in on the project is commendable, we don’t envy the decision before them: spend a significant amount of money to preserve a popular community resource, or lose that resource — likely for good — to save funding for other unforeseen needs. Either way, some portion of the public is going to be unhappy with the decision.
— JP
