×

Patton pool fund questioned

Borough Council acknowledges audit of donations

PATTON — Patton Borough Council this week was asked again by a resident about her request for information on the use of funds associated with the now-defunct Park Commission.

Before it was disbanded in 2014, the commission was allegedly in possession of funds donated by the community intended for improvements and construction of a new bathhouse at the Patton Public Pool, which is now closed.

Resident Jill Brown has previously mentioned concern that the council might have failed to properly account for the donations, and that she is seeking to learn how much money was raised, where it came from and how it was spent.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Brown led public comment with a request for the minutes from August’s council meeting.

During that meeting, Brown requested budgetary information in relation to the donations and associated funds. Brown also provided a copy of a formal letter to Mayor Jonathan Welchko stating the same request, as well as copies of four Right-to-Know requests on the matter.

“At the meeting in August, I requested the expenditures from the year 2000 to present day. I received some of the information, up to 2014, but I wanted the budget up until now,” she said.

Council Vice Chairman Fred Shilling noted that the request was still in process and would likely be ready in about two weeks.

“Once the auditor is finished, we are going to release the report to the public and on the website,” he said. “There is a process, and we have to follow it.”

Brown again reiterated concerns that the whereabouts of the money were still unknown, but she acknowledged the importance of the process. She also thanked the council for working with her on the issue.

“We all put our best foot forward,” she said. “Let me or the town know how much of that money is left.”

She also mentioned a request for Park Commission documents detailing its monthly financial actions, including detailed information on specific spending. Shilling stated that the council was not in possession of those documents.

COMMENTS