Council Rejects Motion To Withdraw From Swimming Pool Grant

By Greg Ritchie

Messenger Reporter

CROCKETT — The Crockett City Council rejected a motion Monday, Aug. 3 to withdraw the city from a $1.5 million Texas Parks and Wildlife swimming-pool grant application, leaving the project alive while council members continued debating its long-term cost, operating demands and value to local children.

The vote did not approve construction of a pool or commit the city to future operating expenses. It simply kept the grant application active while the city waits for a decision expected in spring 2027.

City Administrator John Angerstein told the council the city applied for the grant this spring at the council’s direction. The city expects to learn whether it received the grant in approximately six to eight months.

The city has $725,000 set aside for the pool, Angerstein said. Council members discussed whether those funds should remain dedicated to the project or be redirected to other park improvements.

Mayor Dr. Ianthia Fisher said a recent article in The Messenger about problems with the swimming pool in Lufkin had reminded her that a public pool would be a significant responsibility.

“The pool itself is expensive,” Fisher said. “I want a pool. I love a pool, and I think it’s something we need.”

Fisher said the grant process gave the city time to determine whether outside funding would make the project more feasible.

“If we can get funding for it, because it was never a cheap proposition, I think it would be worth the cost if we were going to get something out of it,” she said.

Councilwoman NaTrenia Hicks questioned how many times the city had applied for grants related to the pool and what would happen if the application was unsuccessful.

Angerstein said this was the second time the city had applied for a grant for the project. He said the council had previously directed him to wait until the grant decision before returning to the question of how the pool would be funded.

The council had designated $725,000 for the pool, Angerstein said, but it could change that decision.

“Council can make decisions on that money,” he said. “They can choose not to set it aside any longer, but that was what council at our last discussion said to do — to set those funds aside for the pool.”

Hicks also asked about the city’s remaining American Rescue Plan Act funds and whether any of that money had been used for the animal shelter.

Angerstein said the city used ARPA funds to purchase the building it currently uses as an animal shelter. The city also used the federal funds for police vehicles, street equipment and other purchases approved by the council.

Hicks questioned those priorities in relation to the pool.

“We value our animals more than we value our children,” Hicks said.

She said the city already had money available for the pool and would need only to add funds to complete what she described as a relatively small project for local children.

The debate then shifted toward whether the city could use the $725,000 for other recreational projects that might serve children while also generating economic activity.

Councilman Hudson Duren said the city should invest heavily in children, but questioned whether a swimming pool was the best use of the money.

“Instead of investing in a pool that’s not going to do anything except be a drain on our budget, why don’t we reinvest that in the baseball fields or the soccer fields and start hosting travel ball tournaments?” Duren asked.

Duren said improved baseball, softball and soccer facilities could attract traveling teams and their families to Crockett. He estimated that the city could bring in $15,000 to $20,000 during a weekend tournament.

“We’re investing in the kids here because those fields will be around and available 365 days out of the year,” Duren said.

He also suggested improvements such as new lighting, artificial turf in the infields and matching funds for groups that wanted to improve the facilities.

The council did not take a vote Monday on a different recreational-facilities funding plan. Instead, members continued discussing whether they should wait for the grant decision before making a final determination about the pool.

The long-term costs remained a concern.

Precinct 1 Councilman Dennis Ivey said the city would have to maintain and operate a pool throughout the year, not only during the months when residents were swimming.

“If we got the money to do it, then we’ve got to operate it,” Ivey said. “It’s got to be maintained year-round, not just three months while people are swimming.”

Ivey said he had owned several swimming pools and enjoyed using them, but not paying for their upkeep.

Hicks responded that the pool represented more than a recreational amenity.

“It’s for our children. It’s for our communities,” she said. “It was a commitment that was made to the youth of this community. It was also a commitment that was made to the community.”

Hicks said the city should honor commitments made to residents.

“If we give our word and say that we’re going to do something, we need to keep our word and make sure we do it,” she said.

Ivey said he was thinking beyond the initial construction costs.

“I’m thinking ahead three or four years down the road,” he said. “What would we do if we run into the same problem that Palestine, Rusk and Lufkin have? Would we raise taxes to maintain it?”

The discussion also included concerns about whether Crockett could recruit and retain enough lifeguards to operate a public pool safely.

After the discussion reached a standstill, Duren made a motion to withdraw from the grant application and redirect the $725,000 to existing parks and athletic facilities.

“I make a motion we don’t go forward with the grant,” Duren said. “We pull from it. We take the remaining $725,000 that we have and utilize it for our parks that we already have — improving baseball fields, softball fields, tracks, soccer fields, whatever the case may be.”

Duren said the motion was based on the future cost of operating a pool and the city’s ability to sustain it.

Ivey seconded the motion.

Only Duren and Ivey voted in favor. The other three members voted against it, and the motion failed.

The city’s grant application therefore remains active. The council is expected to revisit the project after learning whether the city will receive the Texas Parks and Wildlife funding.

Greg Ritchie can be reached at [email protected]