Planning board files to drop turf appeal

1. Sad. This is a good example of the apathy of the American people who slumber while everyday their freedoms are being stripped from them because they didn’t stand up and say something when they saw something; if they even saw it at all

2. “The close of the legal challenge would remove a major impediment to the MVRHS school committee to pursue the field, which has been a contentious issue across the Island for years.” Reall? Can we just say that it was contentious to a very vocal minority and a member who overstepped his position of authority?

   Based on the voters decision, the majority wanted this for our student athletes.

   1. What voters??

   2. Todd- congratulations– you have mastered
      the art of taking reality and turning it on it’s
      head with a straight face.
      I must have also been asleep when that
      dream about the “voters” happened in your
      head while you were sleeping.
      But in the world of those of us who are
      “awake” , it has been obviously clear that the
      opinions of the majority of “voters” have been against
      this abomination from the start. . Look at the comment
      section here. My guess is that
      among individual commenters it has run about
      3 to one against. Just look at the comments on this thread
      Also, the overwhelming majority of voters at town meetings
      took the radical step to completely
      defund the high school over this issue.
      And believe me, it wasn’t because they were objecting
      to woke agenda items like teaching accurate American
      history, or trying to help LGBTQ kids, minorities
      and disabled children feel comfortable and safe in our school.
      Revisionist history may be believed by some.

      “You can fool all the people some of the time,
      and some of the people all the time, but you
      cannot fool all the people all the time.”
      Abraham Lincoln

      1. Aha, I didn’t realize the comment section of the MV Times was the new ballot box. I should pay closer attention to social media, especially The FaceBook.

      2. Don, what majority of voters are you talking about? Are you using the commenter here as your barometer? That is a stretch, even by your standards, you are better than that. The up-island voters, which was less than 200, voted to do the absurd, defund the school budget. I strongly believe that there are more that 200 registered voters on this island, and no down island towns voted for that ridiculous motion. BTW, the vote was officially made because of the litigation costs, not the field project itself, that is if you want to be technical. To remain technical, only 2 towns opposed the funding of the design and development of the project, again, less than your majority you mention.

         Lastly, when it comes to the PFAS, the only issue at hand that the town of OB planning board listed as their reason for denial, supporters are following the science and the laws of the town and are waiting for the project to be passed. In most cases, it is those who oppose an idea or a project that are the most vocal, but that in no way means it’s a majority.

   3. To be clear, all island voters have never had the opportunity to weigh in on artificial turf versus natural grass. There were two occasions that were related:

      In the spring of 2019 the High School Committee needed towns’ permission to expend $350,000 to “… design an athletic track and synthetic infield…”. West Tisbury, Chilmark and Aquinnah put it on Special Town Meeting Warrants. A quirk in state law allowed the three down island towns’ select boards to not do so, thereby approving the request by default – no voter input at all. Only one up-island town voted it down. The resulting design was the entire Sports Complex we have become familiar with, not just one track and field.

      The second occasion was last year’s round of protest votes against the budget due to the Committee’s statement that they would not limit their legal expense on this issue. In this case 3 of the six towns voted the budget down. Tisbury had a separate, non-binding vote of the same sentiment, though they approved the budget. Neither Oak Bluffs nor Edgartown town meetings raised the issue.

      All of that was about money. In neither case was “artificial turf versus natural grass” the specific issue voted upon, and Oak bluffs and Edgartown voters have never been given the chance to weigh in.

      It will be instructive to see if such a referendum actually occurs. Until then, any statement as to what “a majority” wants is pure speculation.

3. Funny how this didn’t make it on the agenda but is a headline. Really funny. Let’s see if they actually pull their appeal. Does anyone see the trend here?

4. Love the use of the word Likely in the title of this article. The planning board will likely drop turf appeal. Interesting the topic wasn’t on their agenda and this is the same man who said he would abide by the judges decision. We shall see. Likely does not sound like a for sure thing. The Planning Board Chair “I don’t plan on going back and fighting with them” aka OB BOS. Operative word Plan. Once and for all put it on your planning board agenda and let’s be done with litigation.

5. Say it ain’t so with Beach Road not going on we are running out of things to complain about. Can you please keep this going or help to find the next issue to complain about.

6. What a shame to give up those very established long, growing deep grass roots that filter our aquifer. how many years has the grass been growing there? I’m guessing the roots are deep. It’s sad that when they put a picture in the paper of a distressed field, they give you the picture where they have the yearly bonfire.
   I’m guessing those that made big contributions cannot be told sorry” we’ve changed our mind. “They owe those who gave $$$ not those who drink the water here.

7. It’s very perplexing that we want to put a layer of plastic grass over the soil over the aquifer. Are we going to have another fiasco over the school budget this spring? Speaking of the environment, where does this stuff go when it wears out in a few years? Off-island to someone else’s dump, or shipped to a third world country? No matter, let the next generation worry about it. That would be the kids who are playing sports on it. Your kids, oh, do they care about the environment? I’d love to hear from them. Every one of us will pay the price for this. Plant grass.

   1. Thank you Marie. You’re words reflect the concerns of so many community members .
      Until our state and federal policy/law makers update the Dover Amendment, the turf industry will continue to use this outdated law to make record profits from schools and recreational projects regardless of the damage the have done to the environment in the past and currently. Sustainability defined by the UN in 1987 as, “ meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet there own needs”. This social goal for people to co-exist on Earth over along period of time has been over run by doomsday capitalism. Without improved federal mandates , Town politics will continue to divide us unless we can agree on the basic tenets to respect and protect our irreplaceable natural resources. The needs of our island students are great but this plastic field does not align with the environmental and plastic crisis we are attempting to mitigate. The island towns Boards of Health have guidelines to protect our drinking water and the MVC will have an opportunity to revisit a vote that should align with their mission.

      1. Please look in the mirror and assure yourself that the products you sell and will eventually end up in landfills are 100% sustainably sourced and recyclable. Are you continuing to rail against this but remain a contributor to the greater problem that you complain so hard against. Do as I say, not as I do. We see this everywhere in this debate. Pictures with heat guns at off island fields and complaints but we never hear about those adults protecting the kids and refusing to play. So sad all around.

   2. Marie, Making statements like you have this late in the game shows that you aren’t well informed on this issue. One of the conditions put on by the MVC is that it will be recycled. The turf is designed to be recycled. There is a $50k rider on any RFP that goes out requiring the turf to go to a recycling facility, with a chain of custody. It’ll likely be turned into beach chairs for your enjoyment (sarcasm noted, but could possibly be accurate) or for the plastic used in your hospitals. The soil currently at the school is already contaminated with PFAS, proven by testing, removing it and putting in the turf field would be better for the environment and the water, decreasing the risk of PFAS contamination. All of this is on record at the MVC, and the planning board for that matter, you can look it up. Lastly, the grass you wish for will need nitrogen, again proven in expert testimony at the MVC hearings. In last week’s MV Times this article was written https://www.mvtimes.com/2024/01/18/poor-water-quality-behind-shellfish-regs/. Your grass fields will make this situation worse not better. Decreasing the amount of nitrogen will have a better affect on the Lagoon and Sengekontacket ponds, thus making this field a better option than the grass you suggest.

      1. Re “One of the conditions put on by the MVC is that it will be recycled. The turf is designed to be recycled. ”

         As far as I can see there is just one facility in the US that is actually recycling turf fields—or actually planning to recycle them: TenCate-ExxonMobile in Baytown, Texas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psIhotx4oUI).

         Recycling is very chemical- and energy-intensive, involving both mechanical shredding, chemical breakdown, and moving the stuff around two or three times to get it to Baytown. No information is provided in the video on the costs of such recycling, nor on the proven success of the whole plan.

         Any contract signed by the school for artificial turf installation should contain a very clear clause that the provider of the turf pays *all* removal, recycling, and transport costs at the end of the material’s life.

         Hooray! Then we are free to install a whole new filed and start a whole new unsustainable cycle.

         Meanwhile, back in TenCate’s home country, the Netherlands, the Ministry of Sports has announced that it will “Phase Out Artificial Turf over Health and Environmental Concerns” (https://ministryofsport.com/the-netherlands-to-phase-out-artificial-turf-over-health-and-environmental-concerns/). From 2030 onwards, finito. The Ministry cites “increased cancer risks associated with artificial turf. . . . The proliferation of synthetic turf not only raises serious health concerns but also has adverse environmental consequences, particularly the potential for microplastics from rubber infill to contaminate waterways.” Not just the aquifer but also the Lagoon is at risk from artificial turf.

         Not wasting time nor taking unnecessary risks, “All 18 Eredivisie [soccer] clubs voted on Monday [early June 2023] to officially ban artificial grass from the league, beginning from the 2025/26 season” (http://www.football-oranje.com/eredivisie-clubs-vote-to-ban-artificial-turf/).

         The writing is on the wall, and it should be on the blackboard. Let’s face reality and get going with planning for topnotch grass fields, and start enjoying the long-term benefits sooner. Grass looks like where we are ultimately headed anyhow.

         1. I bet Lagoon Pond and Sengekontacket ponds can’t wait to receive all that nitrogen that will be headed their way with your grass fields, but you want to ignore that don’t you. You argument loses footing with your rubber infill statement, rubber infill is not being used in this project. Maybe educate yourself on this project. Wow, you are against recycling, not a popular notion with the environmentalists. The ponds are at greater risk with increased nitrogen needed. Say goodbye to the shellfishing industry in our ponds with your plan. That is common knowledge, not speculation that you bring to the table. Maybe you should have followed the testimony provided to the MVC by the expert they brought in who said the grass can’t hold up and has 2 turf fields at his disposal. The Baltimore Ravens have replaced their entire grass field 3 times this year alone. They play 11 games on their field. Hmmmm, what does that tell you about the ability of grass fields holding up under heavy usage.

            1. Mr. Cleary:
               One “expert” does not an “expert opinion” make.
               I suggest you consult the MVC website yourself and check out the extensive documents submitted by the public.
               Not to mention the letter archives of the MV Times and Vineyard Gazette.
               Please provide a link to any comments you submitted to the MVC about the relative impacts of artificial turf and the natural turf program proposed by the Field Project and its experts.
               Thanks!

            2. Katherine, since when did letters from the public become expert opinions? I have read from cover to cover the documents and hearings at both the MVC and the PB and not one document, not one, stated that turf fields have created a PFAS problem in any aquifer. The opposition gave opinions, period, no facts about turf fields harming aquifers with PFAS. They talked about plastic in the oceans, PFAS contamination from fire fighting foam, not the same as the “de minimus” PFAS that it took tests equalling the causticity of Drano to reproduce from the field products, and rubber infill (not being used here). My opinion isn’t fact, so it really doesn’t apply, but my siting the testing that was done, and the testimony of yes, the experts that were hired, and who do this kind of testing for a living, does matter and is all on record. BTW it wasn’t one “expert” it was three different companies, several experts (who your tax dollars paid for) who all testified to the same thing, that this field isn’t a risk to the aquifer. In addition, the MVC went out on their own to find someone, the gentlemen from Weston, to testify. His testimony, as an individual who has spent his career maintaining grass fields stated that you can’t maintain grass without nitrogen, and more than what our restrictions allow us to use. He stated that his grass fields couldn’t survive without his turf fields doing the heavy lifting of usage, and he has 11 grass fields at his disposal. So, that is all on record. I don’t feel that public testimony stating opinions are relevant when it comes to the science around the field, that I leave to the experts and that, I am not one.

               Lastly, the public comments posted here in the Times is not “expert’ opinion.

         2. Thank you for your well informed intelligence. Never ceases to amaze me how easily people more and more allow themselves to be manipulated by the corporate greed driven propaganda they are spoonfed on a daily basis. To the point where when you present the truth to them they find it distasteful and will argue to defend the lie they have been programmed to believe is okay.
            Common sense isn’t so common anymore, is it?

   3. THANK YOU.

   4. Thank you, Marie. Hear, Hear!

8. Very sad for the kids and environment. Too bad more people didn’t watch the Bryan Gumbel show on the effects of the plastic field on the athletes that get hurt by falling on this stuff, guess they were too busy mowing their lawns.

9. Enough of the fake plastic grass.
   What is wrong with those people who want to place this over our drinking water aquifer?
   Isn’t it enough that Oak Bluffs has been putting poisonous fluoride (known to be harmful to females bone density)
   How much of these chemicals are the cause for cancer and so much more health related problems we are having?
   You want it you should be able to eat and or drink as much as you want but I don’t believe that it should be legal to make the rest of us to ingest it.
   Yes we are paying for it and being led to believe that it is safe.
   Follow the $$$

   1. Truth. Thank You.

10. Bad plastic!! Says the people wearing plastic clothes and driving plastic cars and doing yoga on a plastic mat

11. Does anyone realize that the water you use in your homes is delivered through PLASTIC PIPING?Be it 1” or 8” main its all PLASTIC PIPE!

12. It’s really quite stunning that, here, on the Vineyard, there is still talk about putting in a plastic playing field – inspite of all the new damning evidence that keeps being reported. About how the PFAS are affecting the health of people playing on these fields.
    Please google it – all of us must get informed, otherwise we don’t know how reality is unfolding.

    They’re talking about hormone disruptors in the PFAS nanoparticles that inevitably slough off the plastic turf under any form of stress – like pelting rain and wind, and most of all, of course, by people walking, running, and playing rough on the field.
    Just imagine it please, our youngsters huffing and puffing and crashing down and sliding, and totally breathing in, deep into their lungs, how many of those billions of nano particle sloughed off into the air, caused by the immense stress they exert on the plastic as they play their games.

    Then please imagine the thousands of these PFAS nano particles that then get lodged in your son’s or daughter’s lungs, where they will quickly be absorbed by their blood, and then proceed to do harm to every hormone it encounters. This harm affects not only your son and daughter, and their genes, but also their sons and daughters … and theirs … and theirs…

    The harm manifests as cancer, genital malformation, reduced fertility, sterility, miscarriages etc, etc. Please get informed!
    Knowing these facts, how in God’s name could anyone deliberately choose to expose their children for how many hundreds of hours a year for four years, at their most vulnerable hormone-stormy age, when everything is roaring into gear, preparing to reproduce.

    This is a very grave decision, far too serious to leave to just a few individuals to decide.
    In the name of all that is moral and right, let’s finally have a chance to vote on it!!

    Here’s what I propose:

    1. First, “Grass” and “Plastic” each gets a full page in both papers, each page pre-formatted to be filled in, with the pages facing each other, for easy comparison – in order for each to present their cases, each doing their best to persuade us Vineyard taxpayers and residents to vote for grass or for plastic.

    2. All claims will be fact checked and edited before publication, and there must be links to sources of information.

    3. After publication, let there be a month of open community discussions, with numerous meetings at different venues, with refreshments. And numerous articles and publicity for the whole month.

    4. Let voting be available for that whole month – online or email, with verification of being Vineyard resident and taxpayer. Or whatever method would work the best and could easily verified.

    With open access to well organized, easily comparable information from both sides, Vineyarders will finally be able to compare pros and cons of each option, apples to apples, and will therefore be able to make an informed choice between plastic or organic grass.
    There is an immense difference between these two options.
    Which option seems likely to pose the least risk for our youth, our waters and our economy?

    Let’s behave like the democracy we believe we are – let Us the People decide.

    1. All the information you need is located on the MVC’s website. The public months of discussion on this project. Sorry you missed it.

    2. Anna, An island wide vote was taken. Each town elects commissioners to the MVC to represent them. The commission was formed to do exactly what they did, review DRIs and vote on them. The commission had 16 people representing each town and the Dukes County Commission vote on the field after hours of testimony, 1000s of pages of documents including the results of the $50k of testing, expert analysis of said testing, and people providing comments pro and against. After the hours long meetings a vote was held and 10 voted for and 6 against. Voting against were 2 from Chilmark, 1 from Tisbury, 1 from Edgartown, 1 from Aquinnah, and the 1 Dukes County rep, The balance voted for the plan. Including 3 reps from up-island, 2 from WT and 1 from Aquinnah, the Governors Rep couldn’t vote for lack of attendance at meetings. Now you call for another island wide vote, why? Because your cause lost the first island wide vote and now you want another shot, well that isn’t how democracy works, sorry. So yes, to quote from you “Let’s behave like the democracy we believe we are” – and the people did decide.

13. The NFL is phasing out turf; you’re installing it. Encapsulates the island perfectly.

14. I HAVE TWICE POSTED THE FACT THAT THE NFL HAS BANNED ANY ARTIFICAL TURF TO PROTECT THEIR PLAYERS FROM DOCUMENTED INJURIES. NOW THE MINISTRY OF SPORTS IN THE NETHERLANDS HAS DONE THE SAME THING! THEY SEEM TO CARE ABOUT THEIR ATHLETES MORE THAN WE CARE ABOUT OUR KIDS. JUST SAYING…….

15. What is final cost per square foot?
    Will the legal costs be 80+%

16. Here’s a thought. When I see certain, specific people who are loudly, fervently, passionately, urgently, and utterly anti artificial turf, some certain other people, let’s call them, “Others”, might be willing to bet that the right thing, the correct thing, the best thing would be to support it. Plastics, baby. The same goes for when these loud Certain People are pro any one of their darling issues du jour; if they’re fer it, may be best if Others are agin’ it. This thought has proven itself enough times now to make me think it’s a possible real thing. Think: Pro censorship at the Chilmark Library, pro solar panels (remember them?), anti roundabouts, anti telephone/electric poles, pro EVs, pro Housing Bank, pro Palestine/Hamas. It seems these Certain People have dug a deep hole for themselves, as far as I can tell, because in reality their supposed concern for others (as long it’s not Others they routinely dehumanize, like MAGA folks, Israel supporters, or Jews), is merely a know-it-all arrogance that happens to be largely untrue, partially untrue, or at best, largely unproven, but for sure, biased beyond belief. They don’t actually care about anyone, especially the Others. Time will tell, of course, as it always does. Do be careful, though, when questioning or contradicting any of these self-important arbiters and self-appointed gatekeepers of all things that make the world go round. These Certain People are prone to public hissy fits, which, if I’m being honest, I’m starting to enjoy.

    Just a thought.

Comments are closed.