Concern Growing Over Artificial Turf Field
Private group proposing artificial turf field at CVU says it's safe; opponents worry about water contamination and safety. For first time, two public meetings will be held this week about the issue.
UPDATE: We updated that CVSD school board will take this issue up on April 14.
By Geoffrey Gevalt
The Record Managing Editor
At Wednesday’s Hinesburg selectboard meeting, first Andrea Morgante and then Rep. Phil Pouech urged the board to get involved with a proposal for a $5.5 million, privately funded artificial turf field at CVU.
They told the board that there are many questions – and concerns – surrounding artificial turf including potential contamination of Hinesburg’s water supply, adverse impacts on student health and safety and long-term costs of maintenance. They both asked the selectboard to get involved, meet with the school board and take a stand.
“As of today, there has not been one public meeting to talk about this project by private funders,” Pouech said. “The concerns of people are real. We need to open up the process for everyone to have input, to understand what the real risks are and to protect our town.” He then reminded the board of past problems the town has had with contaminated wells.
This week there finally will be a public meeting about the proposal; in fact, there will be two, each representing the respective sides of the issue:
At 6 p.m. on Wednesday, April 8, at the CVU library, representatives of The Community Field Project, as it calls itself, along with consultants and a representative of a turf field company the group is working with will present information about the project and the safety of the field. There has been no formal posting of the meeting – other than emails coming from CVSD – but the meeting is open to the public.
At 7 p.m. on Friday, April 10, at Carpenter-Carse Library, a panel will discuss the potential harm of turf fields. The panelists are: Marguerite Adelman, Vermont PFAS Coalition Coordinator; Kyla Bennett, former EPA Wetlands Enforcement Coordinator; David Bond, professor at Bennington College; Irene Wrenner, Vermont State Senator for Chittenden North in 2023-24 and a co-sponsor of what became Act 131 – the ban on manufacturing and installing artificial turf containing PFAS in Vermont.
Leading the turf field effort is Eli Lesser-Goldsmith, a resident of Charlotte. In a press release last fall, Lesser-Goldsmith said the plan also includes bleacher seating, lights and a new parking lot.
“In addition to athletics, the new field would serve as the school’s only space large enough for all students to gather outdoors for events, performances, and school-wide activities,” Lesser-Goldsmith said in the release. “This project will bring people together for years to come.”
The artificial turf would replace Field B at CVU, which hosts soccer and field hockey teams and has long had drainage issues, sometimes causing cancelled or moved games due to muddy conditions. This fall, CVU had to play some of its “home” playoff games at South Burlington High School’s artificial turf field because CVU’s fields were not up to playoff standards.
In past district school board meetings, several key school officials have informally voiced their support for the artificial turf idea because of the condition of some of the fields, particularly in the spring. They also argue that it would not cost the district any money, though questions have been raised about the cost of upkeep and eventual disposal.
CVSD officials said the district is not sponsoring or organizing Wednesday’s presentation. However, an official said it will be the subject of discussion at the district board’s regular meeting on April 14. (The Record will let you know when agendas are set.) The board meets on the third Tuesday of the month.
The Concerns
The idea of installing a turf field has been around for a while.
District voters turned down bond proposals for an artificial turf field at CVU in 2013 and 2015. The 2015 bond issue called for $700,000 in public money – down from the $1.5 million proposed in 2013 – and $1.8 million in private funding.
This proposal was first floated last fall. Opposition in Hinesburg is building. Front Porch Forum has been flooded with opposition. A petition has begun. A group has formed to oppose it.
The biggest concern being voiced by opponents is the town’s water supply. The Hinesburg Conservation Commission has registered its opposition over concerns that the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS or “forever chemicals” contained in artificial turf, will leach into the town’s groundwater. PFAS have been linked to negative health effects including cancer.
Lesser-Goldsmith said in his fall press release that his group is working with FieldTurf, one of the largest artificial turf companies in the world. The company proudly proclaims that its fields are environmentally safe and says “testing of two new FieldTurf systems in Northern California found one field with no detectable PFAS and the other below screening limits.” It also contends that it tested for over 40 different types of PFAS.
Other independent tests of FieldTurf’s products have found “no detectable PFAS,” with the caveat “above any EPA or state soil screening levels.” And for thousands of these chemicals there are no EPA or state guidelines for what is safe.
And that’s where the rub is – what is safe? And this is a question that has led to controversy in other communities around the country.
A National Issue
Last December, in a letter to school and town officials in Colchester, Connecticut, Diana Zuckerman, president of the nonprofit National Center for Health Research (NCHR), wrote this:
“Despite claims by the companies that manufacture, sell, and install artificial turf fields, these fields contain harmful chemicals that will ‘off-gas’ into the air while children and adults play. The likely harm is even greater when the fields are installed in wetlands or in an area where they can leach into the water table of the surrounding community.
“These chemicals include PFAS, plasticizers, heavy metals and other additives used to stabilize, soften or preserve the turf. Preliminary research has found that playing on these fields increases PFAS exposure of athletes and students. [1]
“These substances can also migrate from the turf through stormwater runoff, leachate and degradation over time.[2] Companies rarely disclose the specific chemicals that they use to create their products, but there are many examples of independent testing that found PFAS in turf across the country.[3] PFAS are of particular concern because they enter the body and the environment as ‘forever chemicals,’ which means that they are not metabolized and do not deteriorate, accumulating in the environment and in our bodies over the years.[3]
“Although many companies claim that their products do not contain PFAS, that is inevitably based on very limited testing. There are nearly 15,000 PFAS chemicals, and most tests are only capable of identifying a few. In fact, many companies that claim their fields are ‘PFAS-free’ have tested for fewer than a couple dozen PFAS chemicals. Even when companies claim that the turf fields have PFAS concentrations below threshold levels for some testing, there are some types of PFAS that the EPA has determined have no safe level. …
“Artificial turf can also harm the health of your community in other ways. The extreme heat of artificial turf surfaces in warm or hot weather poses a health risk. When the air above natural grass is 80°F, artificial turf can reach 150°F or higher, causing burns and ‘heat poisoning.’[4] Another concern is the hardness of the artificial turf. Artificial turf fields become dangerously hard as they age.”
NCHR is a respected nonprofit think tank that studies issues around health safety.
FieldTurf has had its own controversies. In 2020, for instance, it was contracted to install an artificial field in Portsmouth, N.H. According to an article by Politico, FieldTurf promised that “our supplier has confirmed that their products are free of PFAS, PFOS and fluorine.”
However, a local environmental advocacy group obtained a sample of the turf as it was being installed in 2021 and “those samples were sent to a lab in Michigan, which found high levels of organic fluorine.”
Eventually, the city did its own tests and found PVDF-HFP, a type of polymeric PFAS, that was used in the manufacturing process. However, the city attorney and consultants maintained the field was still "safe" and met the contract's "PFAS-free" definition, arguing the specific chemicals found were inert and non-toxic.
The Questions
Marie Eddy of Hinesburg recently posted on Front Porch Forum that she had a chance to watch the video below “and now I have serious concerns about the dangers the proposed installation at CVU might have on Hinesburg’s water system.”
“I would like to know,” she added, “who will be liable if lawsuits are filed because people’s water has been contaminated? But more importantly, what is the alternative for clean water if Hinesburg’s wells get polluted by PFAS?
“Also, what about the costs to the children playing on the artificial turf? When professional football and soccer teams are refusing to play on it (https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/), why would we think it’s safe for the children in our district?”
Emphasizing her point, the ESPN article to which she links has this quote from Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes: “It's pretty simple: The numbers say that grass is healthier for the players. I want to play on the best surface that will keep me healthy.”
Zuckerman, the NCHR executive, citied the following stories and studies in her letter:
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/15/athletes-higher-pfas-levels-artificial-turf
[2] Gomes, F. O., Rocha, M. R., Alves, A., & Ratola, N. (2021). A review of potentially harmful chemicals in crumb rubber used in synthetic football pitches. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 409, 124998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124998
[3] https://www.eenews.net/articles/our-community-has-been-deceived-turf-wars-mount-over-pfas/
[4] https://www.safehealthyplayingfields.org/heat-levels-synthetic-turf
Thanks so much for this in-depth look at an important issue for our town. So useful and timely.