A proposed $8,500 engineering study of Palmerton Area School District’s 32-acre parcel along Fireline Road never made it to a vote Wednesday, as board members pumped the brakes and questioned why the district should spend money when free information might already exist.

The motion, which would have authorized Keystone Consulting Engineers to conduct a sketch layout and feasibility study of the largely unused district-owned property, was tabled indefinitely.

Before debate began, Assistant Superintendent Ryan Kish was careful to frame what the study would and would not mean.

“I did my best to summarize the discussion at our workshop and send that to the engineers, and this is the result of what they can do for us,” Kish said. “I just want to make everybody know that there’s no plans for construction on this district property.”

The parcel off Dusty Lane, north of Fireline Road, currently hosts a Verizon cell tower, the only active use of the land, which generates $15,000 in annual revenue for the district.

The proposed study would have produced existing base maps, conceptual layout sketches and a client meeting — a scope Kish described as substantially more comprehensive than simply determining whether the land can be built upon. Board Vice President Brandon Mazepa raised an alternative that stopped the conversation cold: a geological study conducted by Penn State at no cost to the district.

“One of our residents had brought up geological testing done by Penn State over there — is this free of charge, something we could do instead, so we’re not putting money into something but we’re still possibly getting the same results?” Mazepa asked.

Kish acknowledged uncertainty about whether the Penn State option would produce equivalent information.

“I don’t know if it’s the same thing,” Kish said, “but I can look at different options.”

Board President Sherry Haas pressed for that exploration before any dollars are committed, recalling that a study of the same parcel was conducted in the early 2000s when the board was evaluating it as a potential site for a new middle school building.

“We’re going back many, many years, and unfortunately we can’t find the paperwork — this was done, and I remember because that was one of the places we were contemplating putting the new middle school at that time,” Haas said.

Sixth-grade teacher William Acierno, who also sits on Towamensing Township’s zoning hearing board, said records might exist at Lower Towamensing Township.

“If something was done with that property in the past, it’ll be in a record at the township building,” he said. “All you need to do is take the tax number and ask them to see the file.”

Kish added that he had already reached out to the county for information on the property as well.

Director Erin Snyder questioned the urgency of placing the item on the agenda before those avenues had been exhausted.

“I just don’t know what the rush is, and why this has to be on the agenda now, when we could do some research and maybe save ourselves some dollars,” she said.

Mazepa framed the pause as a sequenced strategy rather than an abandonment of the project.

“If we would go the Penn State route and they come back and say the land is worth something, maybe then you go the engineering route where you’re getting a lot of information for the $8,500,” he said. “But if we approve it and (Keystone) comes back and says you can’t do anything with it, we spent $8,500 for nothing.”