More News

Respectful oversight on turf

In "Grass-roots gripes about artificial turf in Montgomery County gain traction," July 7, The Gazette reports that a County Council committee has directed three agencies to work together to weigh costs, benefits and risks and report back before a decision is made. Such news deserved the front page coverage it received.

Despite the impediments, this committee asserted its authority and responsibility to do oversight. Congratulations to all involved. Council Member Roger Berliner asked: "Is it prudent to build artificial turf fields?" When the answer was: "We do not know and do not now collect the data to answer that question," he forged an agreement among the three agencies to work together to get the data before another artificial field contract is signed by any of the agencies.

Council President Nancy Floreen's committee also obtained an immediate commitment. The agencies agreed to include a requirement in all contracts for new fields that contractors guarantee all materials can be 100 percent recycled when an artificial turf field needs to be replaced after eight to 10 years. I hope the council is vigilant and turns these words into action. The goodwill among agencies and respectful oversight by council were great.

Sheldon Fishman, Silver Spring

Turf more expensive than thought

In response to ["Grass-roots gripes about artificial turf in Montgomery County gain traction," July 7], a few clarifications.

Montgomery County Public Schools has been spending more than $1 million per school field on their artificial turf fields — not the $865,000 estimate.

Replacement and disposal costs, every eight or so years for plastic fields, are not figured into the cost calculations and are around $750,000 just for the artificial turf rug and tire crumb replacement (and are zero or minimal for grass, which changes life-cycle cost calculations to favor natural turf).

The county park and planning department is assuming high use and rental costs to make up the huge cost differential for the initial installation. But any such revenue is different and less for schools. The cost calculations also do not take into account that the more the plastic fields are used the more maintenance they need for cleanliness and safety and the earlier they need to be replaced.

Kathleen Michels, Silver Spring

Is it wise to subject children

to a carcinogen?

I find the editor's position in "Turf wars," July 14, that "the safety of the county's children is not a matter for debate" very puzzling. Indeed, I agree that our children's safety should not be up for grabs, that their safety must be ensured, if this is what is meant.

But as for the artificial turf fields and tire crumb playgrounds being safe for children, that matter is clearly worthy of debate. The American Cancer Society and three federal agencies have just named 19 chemicals as potential causes of cancer that need further investigation.

Among these is the main component of tires, carbon black — that stuff children are covered with after hitting the turf on the soccer field or falling on the playground. As cancer takes the No. 2 killer spot behind heart disease, is it really wise to subject our children to yet another carcinogen while they are rapidly growing and absorbing the elements of their environment?

Anne Ambler, Silver Spring