CVSD School Board Begins Debate on Turf Field
School board members, after hearing from the public and reviewing videos of last week's public meetings on the issue, outlined questions they need to answer.
(Editor’s notes: To see the discussion of the proposed artificial turf field in the Media Factory video above, go to the 47.13 minute mark on the video. For other stories and letters regarding the artificial turf field, click here.)
By Geoffrey Gevalt
The Record Staff
Tuesday night the Champlain Valley School District school board formally took up the issue of the restricted gift of a $5.5 million privately financed turf field for CVU High School.
After hearing an half-hour’s worth of two-minute appeals from students, parents and citizens, the board outlined questions it must answer before it makes a decision which will come no sooner than its June meeting.
The questions are daunting. The three major ones, as outlined by CVSD Supt. Adam Bunting, are these: “Are artificial turf fields safe? … Are there future risks that could jeopardize community resources? … If we determine the field is safe, will our community be able to move forward together?”
The last question was emphasized by Meghan Metzler, chair of the CVSD school board: “How can we move forward together?” Several school board members, noting the current climate around education funding, have said they do not want to polarize the district’s community around “this generous gift.”
The board had many other questions:
What information does it need to determine whether the field is safe?
Should an independent outside expert help the board sift through the seemingly contradictory scientific evidence and studies?
Should a hydrogeologist be hired to determine the path of the runoff from CVU? If so, who would pay for it?
Are there alternatives to the rubber “infill” under the field’s top layer such as cork or some other natural substance?
What are there concerns to students’ health from heat and/or exposure to plastics?
What has been the experience of other Vermont high schools – and their communities – with their turf fields?
Why are Maine and New York considering moratoriums on turf fields?
The most frequent question from board members and many of the citizens making statements was: Will the donors consider a grass field? And will the donors consider another turf company or is the gift bound with a partnership with the company FieldTurf.
The simple answer? No.
Metzler and The Record have confirmed with the Community Field Project’s organizer, Eli Lesser-Goldsmith, that the gift is for a turf field only. “It’s a restricted gift,” Metzler said.
While Metzler discussed some of the legal process, it was Bunting who later clarified with The Record the next steps and possible timeline. He said that he and District Chief Operating Officer Gary Marckres will do their best to track down as many answers as they can, including discussing with the gift’s organizers whether they will pay for the costs of hiring independent experts to advise the board.
“On May 19, the board will continue its discussion” of the Community Field Project, Bunting wrote in an email to The Record. “That conversation will build on Tuesday night’s discussion and will be guided by responses to the questions raised that evening to the extent that Gary and I are able to provide them.
“After the discussion in May, the board may choose either to continue the conversation or to take action in a subsequent meeting on whether to authorize me to execute a memorandum of understanding with the Community Field Project regarding the proposed gifted turf field at CVU.”
The complexity of the gift was clear to the board. Several noted that the size of the gift and type of gift was unusual and presented them with a choice over which they didn’t have much control. Several worried about the long permitting and legal process and whether the donors would pay for and follow that through.
Lesser-Goldsmith has told The Record that everyone in the organizing group has been through the permitting maze many times on other projects and they were prepared to pay for and follow the process to “the finish.”
The board – and those giving statements earlier in the meeting – agreed that the need was there: all of the schools’ fields are often unsuitable for play or practice and that the field in question, Field B (just above the track), is in the roughest shape.
Several board reactions highlighted
Keith Roberts, one of Hinesburg’s representatives on the board, said he is an unabashed proponent of the artificial turf field. “I’ve been talking about it for two years … even talking about another bond issue.” Roberts praised the opponents of the project “who have legitimately raised three concerns:”
Maintenance and replacement costs. Roberts said he was confident that between the reduced costs of maintenance of and potential revenue from the new field “I’m confident we’ll come up with enough money.” The district and the donor group are creating a “pro forma” analysis of whether the numbers will match Roberts’ statement.
Health concerns over PFAS (“forever chemicals”) and micro- and nano-plastics. Roberts noted that “we are not a legislative body,” noting that it was the state legislature who debated this safety issue and passed a law designed to ensure the safety of artificial fields. The obligation of the donors, he said, and indirectly the district, is to ensure the company making the product complies with Vermont’s law.
“Potential and speculative” concerns about Hinesburg’s water being contaminated by the field’s runoff. “We are responsible as stewards of the property. … I have no idea whether runoff will pollute the wells. … No one does. … I personally feel it’s a small risk, but it’s a small risk with a huge consequence.” For that reason, he said, he wanted an independent hydrogeologist to determine where runoff from CVU likely ends up.
“Life is full of risks,” Roberts said. “We have to balance those risks. Nothing is without risk. But I feel the risk of not doing it far outweighs the risk of doing it.”
Sarah Showalter-Feuillette, one of the Williston representatives on the board began by saying: “I am very appreciative of the generous gift that is being offered. … Over the last months and certainly in the last week, I’ve heard from the students and parents and coaches about the case for needing a new field. It’s very clear. I think everybody on all sides sees the need for a new field.
“I would love a new field, and I want it to be done in the right way and with the right materials. … That is what we are working on right now. But what I keep landing on is that when science is complex enough that reasonable individuals come to differing opinions when looking at the same data, which is the scenario that we’re in right now, we almost can’t keep going to science to look for a discernible, definitive stance and we have to instead go off of our values.
“And I know that one of the things that we talk about all the time here is to take care of ourselves, take care of each other and take care of this place. … Let me just say I think that you can use that to defend getting a new turf field.
“But this space goes way beyond this school and the students who are here and the needs of those who choose an extracurricular activity of a sport on a field. It’s broader to the earth under that, the water that runs under that field and over it, and the Hinesburg residents themselves.
“There are five towns that this district serves, but the water here is undeniably Hinesburg’s alone, and I think that that’s an important consideration. It’s more than an important consideration; I think it’s the crux of what we’re talking about right here.
“The Hinesburg residents … are as important as those who spend four years walking these halls at CVU. I can’t imagine us feeling good as a board … without the community of Hinesburg’s buy-in into that decision.
“I’m not sure exactly what to propose other than what I would ideally love to see is Responsible Growth Hinesburg and the Community Field Project to sit down together and come up with the best solution to take care of this place.
“I want us to be moving forward together.”
How that will happen, as she said, is another matter. Lesser-Goldsmith has made it clear that he will not consider a grass field as an alternative and that’s what opponents speaking Tuesday and in the meetings last week have been seeking.
Audience statements
Metzler had asked the large crowd in attendance to limit their remarks to two minutes and said they would listen for 30 minutes. She reminded them that she and other board members had viewed the videos of the recent public meetings and urged the speakers to say something new, something that hasn’t been said before. She also echoed Bunting’s praise of the civility of the public meetings and the emails and phone calls the district and board have received.
A coach pointed out that the students already play on artificial turf fields – elsewhere – and said the problems with Field B restrict what CVU athletes in lacrosse, soccer and field hockey can do.
Several Hinesburg residents said that if nothing else the gift has raised people’s awareness of the conditions of the fields and urged a grass field option. Several outlined the concerns for student health and environmental safety because of the plastics and “forever chemicals” in the field.
Several parents urged the board to accept the gift that would align CVU with other high schools in the state.
Several athletes explained the difficulties they have with the existing field and urged the board to accept the gift. They, and student representatives on the school board, also asked the board to give greater weight to the student voices, particularly given that there would be no public money involved.
Alex Jovell, a junior just elected as co-president of the class and a wide receiver on the football team, said this:
“My dad has knee problems and struggles with mobility. Our field sits at the top of a steep hill with no railings, uneven footing, and no safe way for someone with limited mobility to get up or down. On rainy days, the hill turns into mud, making it difficult for anyone to climb. For my dad, and for many other parents, grandparents, and community members, it becomes nearly impossible.
“It’s heartbreaking to think that he might miss watching me play – not because he doesn’t want to be there, but because the field simply isn’t accessible. And he’s not the only one. Every season, I see families who want to support their kids but struggle to reach the field or find safe seating once they get there.
“A new turf field with ADA‑approved accessibility and seating isn’t just an upgrade for athletes. It’s an investment in our entire community.”
