Milone & MacBroom's turf study
From the AP:
Cheshire-based Milone & MacBroom Inc., an engineering, environmental and landscape architecture firm, studied synthetic turf so it could inform clients about any safety issues, said Vincent McDermott, a senior vice president of the firm.
Milone & MacBroom's clients have included Yale University and other schools that installed artificial turf fields, as well as schools that have opted for natural grass fields. The firm release the study's findings last month, and it found no health risks.
"At this point, based on the data we have before us, we are not going to say to stop using this product because of health problems," McDermott said. "What we published is really totally unbiased, in my opinion."
Nancy Alderman of North Haven-based Environment and Human Health, questions Milone & MacBroom's conclusions and the firm's objectivity. The nonprofit group, which includes doctors, has concerns about artificial turf's impact on children's health and says more studies are needed.
"I think it's important to know that they are installers of those fields," she told the New Haven Register.
The M&M report can be found here. And since several of you mentioned it to me today, I quote the press release:
the cost of the testing was totally paid by Milone & MacBroom, Inc. and that the synthetic turf industry has had no involvement whatsoever in our testing program.
Tim White
17 comments:
"It's important to know that they are installers of those (turf) fields." Of course the polluters are going to find no negative impacts from their products.
Questions of the health impacts of artificial turf are not resolved. I recently saw that a federal agency (EPA?) is beginning a study.
Health?
We (town, state, fed) don't have money to pay for it. Our credit card got maxed out... and our banker (China) just told us they're concerned.
Oh wait, I forgot... Councilman Turf says our spending habits are sustainable... and it doesn't matter what the voters think... we can spend the money anyway!
Milone & McBroom may have paid for the study, but considering that they're likely to get the job of the design/installation plan for Cheshire's unwanted turf field that's being shoved down the taxpayers' throats, don't worry, they'll make plenty of money back on the deal.
They claim they're unbiased?? Yeah, right.
unbiased?? Yeah, right.
I chuckled when I read that.
That's like me saying "I'm fair-minded."
I can say it all I want. But that judgment must be made by others.
M&M--WHO do they think they are fooling---now they are distributing the Kool-Aid...
Don't count Florio out of this puzzle. You haven't heard him say that we don't need it.
I'm sure he is playing games with the budget and will be able to come up with the cash from one of the secret or contingency funds.
And, the Dems on the TC haven't said anything about not needing it. No fiscal responsibility with this group of spenders.
M&M in charge of the turf study is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house -- or Altieri in charge of town spending.
One of the M&M owners is related to Milone the Town manager. They have one person on the executive board of the Cheshire Chamber of Commerce. They make money by designing and installing artificial turf fields. They are one of the Town's favorite vendors. And now we are asked to believe their study in totally objective? This is a conflict of interest if there ever was one.
It appears that the study was undertaken to substantiate a predetermined result that will lead to additional business of designing and more.
Special interest groups like to fund studies or support studies that substantiate their arguments, and I'm sure the Dems on the TC will embrace this study as the answer to their prayers.
It is interesting that M&M's senior vice president Vincent Dermott told the NHR that "As a practical matter, the fields aren't played on in the middle of summer". Aren't the proponents claiming a chief benefit is that the fields can be used so much more than grass. Some other comments of Mr McDermott's were carefully worded as if to be thinking of some later law suit, take for example, " We are not going to say stop using this product because of health problems". Why didn't he just say the study shows this product is safe and you should not be afraid to use it?
How can anyone believe in a study performed by such a self interested party?
Can this firm still bid on a town contract if one of its co-owners is related to the Town manager, Mike Milone? And if it is legal, this whole thing still stinks.
Is the town manager in favor of this unnecessary expenditure.
Isn't it his job to manage the towns finances and advise against frivolous expenditures?
It's the superintendent's job too to avoid frivolous expenditures, but do you see him doing that? Or do you see him saying we don't want to install the turf?
How is TURF going to improve our EDUCATIONAL system????
How dare you question the turf. Don't you know it's for the children?! End of discussion.
Can this firm still bid on a town contract if one of its co-owners is related to the Town manager, Mike Milone? And if it is legal, this whole thing still stinks.
Yes they can.
As for the conflict, by Charter the TM annually discloses conflicts, including this one. And the TM is required to get Council approval for any contract that results in the town doing business in excess of $12,000 (goods??) or $24,000 (services??)
Furthermore, I think the TMs rule (since I joined five years ago) has been to specifically ask the Council to vote on any business done with M&M. So if there's a problem, please direct your concerns at the nine of us... not the TM or M&M.
Is the town manager in favor of this unnecessary expenditure.
Isn't it his job to manage the towns finances and advise against frivolous expenditures?
I've mentioned here before... Councilman Turf owns this one. The TM has had nothing to do with this.
Are you people kidding me or what -
just because someone is related does not mean anything - as a personal friend of one of M&M oweners I can tell you that these "relatives" are just that -"relatives". As far as M&M making a living on intallaing Turf - do your homework.
Bottom line the Town of Cheshire needs to get back to it's roots - real people - real issues. Let the kids play in the dirt like the rest of us did. Besides if turf were installed what would the outside building maintainers at the High School do - not cut grass
Which raises another point - why do we have custodians when we hire
outside cleaning companies to empty trash etc - thought that was janitors did?????
Post a Comment