Two Barrington residents recently spoke out against the school district’s plan to renovate the Barrington High School athletic complex with a synthetic turf field.
Jessica Allen and …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
Register to post eventsIf you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here. Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content. |
Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.
Two Barrington residents recently spoke out against the school district’s plan to renovate the Barrington High School athletic complex with a synthetic turf field.
Jessica Allen and Eileen Small attended the Barrington School Committee meeting on Thursday, Dec. 5, and shared their opinions on the project during the public comment period.
The Victory Field athletic complex renovation, which was not included on the meeting agenda, was approved months ago by the previous school committee. The project includes the construction of a new eight-lane track and two relocated light poles.
The previous school committee already voted 5-0 to hire the firm Nesra Engineering, out of Plainville, Mass. to design the new athletic complex. The district paid Nesra $227,650.
Allen spoke first during the public comment portion of the meeting. She said the school committee’s decision to install a synthetic turf field at the high school ignores the will of residents. She referenced the two synthetic turf questions on the November ballot — the first question asked residents if they supported installing synthetic turf fields at Barrington Middle School, while the second asked if they supported installing synthetic turf at a separate town-owned, non-school property. Both questions were defeated, each by a 60-to-40 margin.
Allen also said the decision to install synthetic turf at Victory Field ignores science. She shared concerns about the possible environmental impact of the project. (At an earlier school committee meeting, TJ Peck said the synthetic turf field would be entirely recyclable and feature the most environmentally-friendly infill.)
At the Dec. 5 meeting, Allen said she wants to see the town upgrade and improve all the natural grass fields in Barrington and she wants the district to commit to organic grass fields.
“It’s the wrong thing to do,” Allen said, of synthetic turf.
Small, a member of the town’s conservation commission, said she believes residents would have voted down synthetic turf at Victory Field had they been given an opportunity to do so.
Small, who acknowledged that the playing surface at Victory Field is in terrible condition, questioned the use of the school department’s capital reserve account to pay for the athletic complex renovation. (School officials have said that the $250 million school construction project will cover all facility needs for school buildings.)
Small also said Barrington taxpayers will need to eventually pay for synthetic turf field replacement. She also asked for information about where the artificial turf is being recycled, and requested that it be shared with taxpayers.
The town has been studying the condition of athletic fields in Barrington for decades. In 2021, the Barrington Ad Hoc Fields Advisory Committee released a 44-page report regarding fields. The report, which recommended eight-acres of synthetic turf be installed at the high school, referenced possible environmental impacts for installing turf versus maintaining regular grass.
“… It is important to note that the proposed location of the artificial turf surface — eight acres near the Barrington River — is currently treated with fertilizers and weed preventers on a regular basis and is watered to maintain grass,” the report stated.
“While some means of irrigation would still be advisable to maintain an artificial turf field, watering would be significantly reduced and no fertilizers or herbicides would need to be used.”
Start time change?
Barrington resident Tom Rimoshytus took advantage of the public comment period to request more information about the district’s change in school start times.
Rimoshytus wanted to know if the shift to later start times at the middle school and high school a few years ago had resulted in improved test scores or fewer accidents or any other tangible evidence of a positive effect.
Rimoshytus suggested that if the data had not improved then school committee members should consider returning the middle school and high school to their previous earlier start times.
Offer applies to annual, local, home-delivery new subscriptions only, regular price $66, available through this offer to you at $16.50. Offer available through Dec. 31, 2024.