This commentary is by Rebecca Foster, a former Champlain Valley Union High School parent who lives in Hinesburg.
For an hour at the Champlain Valley School District board meeting on June 30, district residents took the microphone, one after another, to deliver reasoned, well-researched arguments against the contentious artificial turf proposal for Champlain Valley Union High School. In aggregate, it was a damning financial, legal, environmental, ethical and health verdict.
After public comments, the school board heard a presentation from the hydrogeology consulting firm it retained. The public, including public health and PFAS experts, came prepared with sharp questions for the hydrogeologist, but the school board forbade all questions and critiques from the public.
Instead, the board chair moved to disappear into executive session for an hour and a half while the public waited. Upon its return, the board heard another 40 minutes of public comments, after which it voted to proceed with a memorandum of understanding with the group pushing artificial turf. Just like that. No explanations, no justifications. The merits of the proposal had been discussed by board members literally behind closed doors. It hid its reasoning, and it hid the document it approved.
The contempt for the public was jaw-dropping. After almost 1,000 people in the district signed petitions and hundreds took time and effort to send in comments, the board did not answer one question. Here’s a simple one: Why do you support artificial turf when athletes at the highest levels are rejecting it in favor of natural grass? I honestly want to know why my district is rushing to embrace obsolete technology.
Here are a few of the many questions they did not answer:
Hundreds of people in the district requested an analysis of natural grass fields, which they prefer. Why have you eliminated consideration of natural grass?
Why have you not presented a long-range financial accounting of this proposal, including all aspects — installation, removal, replacement, maintenance, utilities and the costs incurred by rentals — to demonstrate there will be no additional tax burden?
Why do you welcome working with a proposed vendor, FieldTurf that has a long record of litigation from angry customers?
Nobody disputes that artificial turf contains microplastics and toxins; there’s only a question of which ones. Why won’t you require an independent lab test of the proposed artificial turf product so everyone knows the facts? If the company had nothing to fear, it would celebrate proper testing.
When studies consistently show player injury and safety is worse with artificial turf than grass — FIFA’s reason for requiring natural grass for World Cup matches — and parents are telling you they won’t let their kids play on it, why do you still support it?
Why are you willingly exposing the town of Hinesburg and the school district to litigation?
What do you say to the respected state and local organizations that have opposed this proposal, including the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, Sierra Club Vermont, Hinesburg Conservation Commission, Hinesburg Planning Commission, Hinesburg Selectboard, Hinesburg Energy and Climate Action Committee, Charlotte Conservation Commission and Sustainable Charlotte?
Do you understand that by answering none of these questions from the public, it looks as if you only engage with people who promise you money?
The school board has heard all of these questions and more. Its response has been to ignore them.
Campaigners for real grass have questions. They will continue to fight for answers, for transparency and to defeat this proposal.
