As members of Grass Fields for Safe Sports (GFSS), a citizen’s group in the town of Concord, we would like to share the experience we had with a public/private partnership, CC@Play. This was set up to make major renovations to the athletic facilities at Concord-Carlisle Regional High School and included the installation of an artificial turf football field. As with MV@Play, CC@Play hired Gale Associates to design and construct the facilities. While CC@Play was lauded for their public-spirited goals and efforts to improve the facilities, the project became controversial for a number of reasons.

The project was voted on at the town meeting in 2012, before most people became aware of the potential dangers of artificial turf, as well as its disadvantages. The artificial turf field was built in 2015 as part of CC@Play’s phase two plans, despite growing objections to its installation.

Following the installation of the field, one of the neighbors experienced flooding on his property. He repeatedly appealed to the natural resources commission to resolve the issue and finally a new engineering firm was hired to correct the errors of the faulty installation. With the severe drought this year, the new system has not yet been tested.

Phase three was supposed to include a concession stand and locker rooms, with solar panels on the roof to make the project more environmentally friendly. However, CC@Play has not been able to raise sufficient funds to build it and it is uncertain whether CC@Play will ever raise the funds to build it. We understand that MV@Play is proposing to use plant-based fill instead of crumb rubber but there are still many questions to answer. Plant-based fill will decay and additives, such as antifungal agents, are used to prevent that. The patent for plant-based fill allows for unspecified flame-retardants and anti-fungals as well as rubber particles and a long list of other additives that ends with the word “etcetera.” What are these chemicals and what is their toxicity? Many chemicals in artificial turf fields have never been tested for safety. Unlike natural grass surfaces, artificial turf contains no natural mechanisms to break down contaminants such as food, sugary drinks, feces of birds, dogs and other animals or human contaminants such as blood and vomit. To minimize such contamination, artificial turf fields are often fenced off, and all food and drinks (except water) banned. As a result, they are not a community resource, as you can see from the photograph of the signage at our artificial turf fields.

In response to the concerns about the safety of artificial turf, both on a state and a national level, GFSS brought an article to this year’s town meeting asking for a moratorium on the installation of any artificial turf and infill in the town of Concord for a period of three years. It passed unanimously.

Please take these thoughts into consideration before deciding on whether to approve the plan to build artificial turf fields on Martha’s Vineyard. We think you may agree that the risks could well outweigh the benefits.

Beverley Bryant and Janet Miller
Concord