Is Artificial Turf Right for Sherborn?
At Town Meeting on Saturday, May 15, Sherborn residents will vote on Article 9, a proposal to install artificial turf at Laurel Farm.
Every resident in the town of Sherborn is dependent on well water that is fed by groundwater and aquifers. Water is necessary for everyday living... for life itself. The purity of our groundwater keeps our families healthy and protects our property values.
An artificial turf field is not right for the fields at Laurel Farm or for Sherborn. Here are the facts:
What’s wrong with artificial turf?
The proposed artificial turf fields will add 100 tons of synthetic material to the site, continuously exposed to sun and rain. Toxic chemicals in the field can wash into the underlying groundwater and nearby wetlands.
Artificial turf is made up of plastic blades (to look like grass), synthetic backing and infill, a synthetic soil-like material. The infill is typically “crumb rubber” from tires that contains multiple hazardous materials and must be replenished every few years because it enters the environment through wind, water and players’ shoes.
The manufacture of plastic blades uses PFAS as a lubricant. PFAS and related chemicals are called “forever” chemicals because they bioaccumulate and persist in the environment, posing human health risks even at very low levels.
Any kind of plastic can break down into microplastics that end up in groundwater.
Conservation Commission, Board of Health and Open Space Committee have made statements about the risks associated with artificial turf.
What are the environmental impacts? The proposal doesn’t address them and was not reviewed with Board of Health, Groundwater Committee, Open Space Committee or Conservation Commission before being put on the warrant for Town Meeting.
Wetlands and water resources at Laurel Fields
Because of its soil and geology, Sherborn has lots of surface water but only a few aquifers. Laurel Farm sits on a groundwater aquifer for the Rockwood Street neighborhood's drinking water. The wetlands and a stream on Laurel Farm connect with Indian Brook and the large wetland bordering Everett Street, Broadmoor, and Little Farm Pond. The proposal has not taken into consideration the potential impacts on wetlands, groundwater and wells from migration of chemicals into the water.
The problem with PFAS
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a family of thousands of chemicals referred to as “forever chemicals” due to their all but indestructible and persistent nature. They have been linked to cancer, developmental effects, and other severe health issues by organizations including the U.S. EPA.
Scientists have documented negative impacts of PFAS on amphibians, toads and frogs.
PFAS are already showing up at above acceptable levels in nearby towns such as Wayland and have been found in monitoring wells near Coolidge Street in Sherborn. Testing there has been tracking a plume of chemicals from General Chemical in Framingham. In fact, Mass DEP is currently testing for this toxin in Sherborn.
Scientists say that the solubility, mobility, and persistence of PFAS in the ground will yield contaminated footprints and plume volumes that dwarf those caused by more common contaminants.
Is it prudent to bring in material that may put more PFAS chemicals into our groundwater? Into our bodies? Into the bodies of our children? These “forever” chemicals never break down and cannot be recalled once they enter the ground.
Long-term financial impacts
The Town’s experience with Sherborn Library reminds us that projects can have unexpected and expensive consequences. To install and maintain artificial turf, Sherborn residents will be expected to pay $1 million and bear additional costs in the years ahead.
When the artificial field comes to the end of its 10-year expected life, the town will need to dispose of 100 tons of toxic plastics. It will need to pay for replacement of the entire field. If downstream residents’ wells are contaminated, they may expect compensation from the town. Who will pay these costs? You know the answer: the Sherborn taxpayer.
The artificial turf field at Dover Sherborn High School is nearing the end of its 10-year life. Before committing to a new field at Laurel Fields, the Town can study the environmental impacts of the high school field and assess the costs and options for disposal and replacement. Isn’t this a more prudent approach fiscally and environmentally?
What message are we sending our children?
We encourage our kids to recycle, avoid plastic straws, participate in Earth Day events, and pick up litter around town. Now we’re telling them that putting over 100 tons (over 200,000 pounds) of plastic and ground-up crumb rubber into the ground is acceptable.
Are we saying that we care about the environment but only to a point? That it’s okay to contaminate the water as long as it’s not on our street? What do we say to our children if a friend who lives near Laurel Fields has a problem with contaminated well water?
The best plastic and rubber is never purchased in the first place. We avoid the impact of extracting the petrochemicals needed, the toxic processes in their manufacture, the transportation and the eventual disposal of 100 tons of waste.
Let’s give our children the right message: we care about the environment and our neighbors. We care deeply about their future on this planet.
Vote NO on Article 9.
