To the editor:

I am a Barrington resident who has voted “Yes” on every measure that supports our schools, except for the ballot initiative to install toxic artificial turf.

Despite rejection through majority vote, opting to install turf fields prioritizes aesthetics and athletic time on the field over the health of students, community members, and the environment. We should protect these funds at a time when wholesale federal cuts are coming that threaten other equally compelling programs we now take for granted including support for diverse learners, marginalized students, arts, and music. The use of reserve funds to serve sports kids, while noble, is exclusive and therefore highly irresponsible.

PFAS or “forever chemicals” in turf don’t break down. They bio-accumulate in the food chain, and they can be ingested, inhaled and absorbed through the skin causing serious health problems, especially to more vulnerable children through even modest contact. They can cause liver problems, thyroid issues, birth defects, kidney disease, decreased immunity, and other serious health problems. They contain hormone-disruptors that exacerbate attention-deficit proclivities, early puberty, obesity, and asthma. At a recent town hall meeting, parents’ sense of “shame” over embarrassing field conditions were outweighed, in my opinion, by the only student there who favored improving the current grass situation rather than opting for wholesale disqualification and replacement. 

According to Diana Zuckerman, Ph.D., president of the National Center for Health Research, PFAS are still contained in the blades and crumb, and miniscule rubber bits migrate into our homes on sneakers and socks, causing harm to children who crawl on the floor and our beloved pets. In 14 independent lab tests for lead in turf (including virgin rubber), all contained lead. At the very least we should insist on an independent chemical analysis to the base material, blade, and crumb to ensure safety. 

Synthetic field temperatures can register at 160-180 degrees (hotter than asphalt) on days when grass would register in the 80s-90s, causing the toxins to volatilize. Turf fields also get dangerously hard over time, risking injury. Recyclability is not cost-effective and there is no safe disposal as turf waste goes into landfills, is buried, or burned after its short 8–10-year lifespan. Frequent claims that there is no conclusive evidence of artificial turf’s danger to health and safety is no longer the case according to both The Environmental Protection Agency and Consumer Product Safety Commission. 

Barrington is prone to flooding. Natural field grass absorbs most normal rainfall, but artificial surfaces allow over 50 percent of rainwater to remain on the surface causing rumpling and buckling, a tripping hazard and an expensive repair. Fecal matter from geese will require ongoing disinfection, and that reality will be a further endangerment to our beautiful waterways and fragile ecosystems. 

Why move forward on something so divisive that voters already said “No” to, especially when we may risk federal cuts to programs just as important as sports, and also worthy of support at a time when funding is not limitless.  

Sincerely,

Nancy Hill

Barrington