I fully support building a much-needed track and improving the field in Freeport, but I will vote against the current version of the project.

I’ve researched the costs and health and safety concerns. I’ve met with some of the track and turf project members, and a member of the high school renovation advisory committee. I hope that Regional School Unit 5 is able to vote on an option to build the track and field with a natural grass infield, rather than synthetic turf. The result will be an excellent track, a healthy and safer field and significant short- and long-term cost savings.

Synthetic turf companies promote the costs on a “per-use” basis as a way to hide the true costs. Installing natural grass instead of synthetic turf could save at least $350,000.

Maintenance costs of synthetic turf are also often understated. Nike Grind will be excellent for the running track around the infield, but it is expensive when used as field infill.

The replacement cost of synthetic turf after 10 years is at least $600,000. The need to dispose of 40,000 pounds of old polypropylene turf and 400,000 pounds of infill every 10 years is environmentally irresponsible.

Concussions, torn anterior cruciate ligaments, turf burns and infections are a problem with synthetic turf. Mainly because of player concerns over injuries, the Baltimore Ravens pro football team recently ripped up their synthetic turf field and replaced it with natural grass.

Fireworks and sparklers burn at 2,000 degrees and could easily damage synthetic turf.

The high school renovation money is not really “extra” money; it’s a contingency fund for the school renovation, and may be needed for furniture.

Recommendation: Immediately consult sports field design engineers to change to natural grass, and vote on the change before the end of January.

Bill Schmidt

Freeport

Copy the Story Link