South Whitehall commissioners have voted 5-0 to approve wording of a referendum regarding Wehr’s Dam for placement on the ballot in the Nov. 8 general election.

The question to be submitted to voters is: “Shall debt in the cumulative sum of $600,000 be borrowed over a period of five years for the purpose of financing the restoration and maintenance of Wehr’s Dam be authorized to be incurred as debt approved by the electors? Yes or No”

The action took place July 20 after a heated presentation by dam supporter Michael Molovinsky which elicited defensive remarks from Commissioner David Bond.

Molovinsky shared with The Press a copy of the July 2012 inspection report of Wehr’s Dam conducted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

The inspector recommended the township monitor seepage on the dam’s face, replace material beneath the right abatement and repair cracking on the dam’s face.

The inspector noted on the report, “The dam is overall in good condition.”

On the other hand, an April 2016 report from Michael Baker International, an engineering firm hired by the township to assess the dam, indicated seepage, large cracks, concrete deterioration and an inoperable spillway gate on the structure.

Baker recommended partial replacement of the dam at a cost of $588,000. Full replacement would cost $1.9 million.

Molovinsky said the board was influenced by the Wildlands Conservancy and its proposal to remove the dam.

“You’re determined to allow the Wildlands Conservancy to destroy this dam and park,” Molovinsky told the board. “You are forsaking constituents and the beautiful area of the township.”

Bond responded with annoyance at Molovinsky’s talk of conspiracy between the board and the Wildlands Conservancy.

“There is no conspiracy here,” Bond said. “I don’t even know a person from the Wildlands Conservancy.”

Board President Christina “Tori” Morgan reacted to the raised voices coming from the Molovinsky-Bond exchange.

“We are done,” Morgan said. The board has spoken.”

But the discussion was not ended.

Resident Dave Torrey said the referendum is a dangerous precedent.

“You’re jeopardizing a piece of history and the culture of this area,” Torrey told the board.

On the other side, Sandy Panella stepped forward to thank the board for looking out for her welfare.

“Don’t have taxpayers foot the bill for something extreme,” Panella said.

If the referendum is defeated, the township would not be allowed to incur the stated amount of debt for restoration and maintenance of Wehr’s Dam.