Lansdale Borough Votes to Reopen Pools July 1 With COVID-19 Restrictions

Bruce Schwartz•

Fourth Street Pool

(UPDATE June 18, 3:47 pm, to reflect that registration starts June 22, and adding link to official regulations.)

A divided borough council voted Wednesday to reopen Lansdale’s two swimming areas to the public starting July 1.

Following CDC and state safety restrictions designed to reduce the transmission of the COVID-19 virus in the wake of the pandemic, borough council voted 6-2 to restart summer swimming at Fourth Street and Whites Road pools.

Specific operational details and rules — which include requirements for wearing masks when not swimming or seated, observing social distancing and limiting the number of people in the pool area — were released Thursday and are available here.

According to Parks and Recreation Director Karl Lukens, they also include:

Admission will be by membership only, for Lansdale residents and previous non-resident members.
Membership fees will be prorated from the discounted rate for 2020.
Members must bring their own chairs or pool toys; no shared items provided.
Maximum capacity is 400 members per pool at any one time.
Registration opens Monday, June 22.

Council members in favor cited a desire to return to some semblance of normalcy and an outpouring of emails and calls from the community in support of reopening. Those opposed emphasized the difficulty of enforcing safety restrictions, as well as budgetary concerns from opening mid-season with increased costs and decreased income, in an uncertain fiscal environment.

"I’m a parent and the father of a competitive swimmer who is struggling to train,” said Admin and Finance Committee Chairman Leon Angelichio, one of the two opposing votes. "I empathize with each and every family impacted by COVID-19 and the efforts put forth to mitigate. And I’ve read every email and received many more phone calls than I thought I’d ever had time for.”

Nonetheless, he said, "I struggle with the justification for opening pools late, cutting the revenue associated with it, and adding what could be considered a significant amount to the disparity between what we bring in and what we put out.” Citing anticipated severe reductions in revenues including income and transfer taxes, he said, "Frankly, we don’t know what the future implications are financially for the borough.”

He also noted the difficulty in enforcing such rules as mask-wearing in public situations. "We’re asking some young folks to shoulder a huge burden,” Angelichio said, "to deal with people who may not want to be following certain rules. That’s a lot to be asking of 14- and 15-year-old kids. Pool managers can’t be there every minute. We need to increase the staff.”

The pools generally operate at an annual deficit of about $70,000. Reopening in mid-season with increased expenses would be estimated to double the loss, although Parks and Recreation Committee Chairwoman Mary Fuller, who voted in favor of reopening, said that Lukens reallocated the parks budget to reduce the added projected deficit to closer to $13,000.

"I think Karl has done a great job in closing the gap for the additional loss we anticipate having,” said Fuller. "I think this is an absorbable loss for this year, given the importance of what the outcome is, for families to be able to participate and join the pool and be part of pool activity this year.”

She added that she believes people are becoming more used to wearing masks and social distancing as a matter of daily life. "So I don’t foresee that as being as big a problem at the pools as we were more fearful of a couple weeks ago,” she said.

"I also want to be clear that we do not expect our teens to be the police at the pools. I think this is a family setting, I think parents will be on top of what their kids are doing, and I have confidence as a whole we can open the pools safely and adjust as we need to.”

In response to a question from Councilman Rich DiGregorio, Lukens noted that membership and waiver forms are being reworked to reflect COVID-19 and all additional regulations.

Councilwoman Meg Currie Teoh, the other opposing vote, pointed out (as did Councilman B.J. Breish and Mayor Garry Herbert) that many borough residents are struggling to survive on drastically reduced incomes, and scarce borough resources might be better allocated to programs that help with overdue utility bills and the like.

"I am just very uncomfortable spending more money than we already would be on this,” said Currie Teoh. She acknowledged that, to help the unemployed and struggling, the borough has allowed unpaid utility bills to accrue. "But eventually the pandemic will be over, and folks will have an enormous number of back bills to deal with. And that’s something I can’t just move past and vote to spend more money on the pools.”

She added that she was looking forward to getting her family back to Fourth Street this summer, "and I appreciate everyone’s comments, particularly on the mental health value the pools have, but I personally cannot vote this way.”