Thursday, March 19, 2009

Legislative bill to place a moratorium on turf

The Stamford Advocate's Brian Lockhart reports on a legislative moratorium on artificial turf:

Rep. Kim Fawcett, D-Fairfield, rushed around the capitol Wednesday urging colleagues on the environment committee to support her bill placing a temporary moratorium on construction of state-funded artificial turf athletic fields.

The committee passed the legislation, in a 21-to-11 vote.

Fawcett afterward acknowledged the proposal, which now heads to the public health committee, is a mostly symbolic statement of lawmakers' concerns the crumbled tires that cushion the fields are harmful to human health and the environment.


Cheshire's newest state Representative, Elizabeth Esty, is a member of the Public Health Committee. It'll be interesting to see her vote in Hartford and compare it to her vote in Cheshire. (For the video of that July 2008 vote, see here, here and here.)

Of course, being a political body there's always the possibility that the turf moratorium bill is being sent to Public Health to "die in committee." I'm sure many of you have heard of such tactics in Washington, but the same happens in Hartford and in Cheshire.

Or were you unaware that such tactics are used in Cheshire?

Considering that I first suggested videostreaming in August 2007, and nothing happened for 19 months - until Sheldon Dill returned to the Council - I think it's fair to say that videostreaming was sent to the Ordinance Review Committee to die there. Unless the timing is just "a coincidence?" Ha!

Regardless... I thought some of you may find the Public Health Committee's agenda of interest.

Tim White

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is remarkable is Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy asked for millions of dollars in the "economic recovery bill" to put turf field all over Stamford. And was called on it by Steve Doocy of Fox News.

Anonymous said...

This lady obviously has no clue about the effects of crumb rubber on the environment because there are none. every study done has proved inconclusive. the tree huggers need to get a life.

Anonymous said...

I know that it doesn't matter to tree huggers because they would have us running around in unmowed, cow pastures but the bottom line is artificial turf eliminates millions of gallons/ pounds of fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide. The information they are using is 10 years old, has been addressed by the industry and solved. Your children are not dying because they may play on artificial turf.

Robert DeVylder JR. said...

"Your children are not dying because they may play on artificial turf."

Maybe not, but they are suffering from torn ligaments and broken ankles because artificial turf does not have the give that real grass does. These injuries can be the make or break of a young persons future.

Anonymous said...

The turf heads need to give it up. Hopefully this bill passes. Cheshire should return the turf money to the State especially since the State could use it for much more important budget items that will likely be cut otherwise. Or are the dems on the council & boe just going to be greedy and keep the money?? A turf field is the last thing we need. Science lab classrooms are more important as far as looking for donations to help cover the costs. When will the council & boe get their priorities straight?

Bill said...

The educrats of Cheshire and their support of everything the school system wants needs to stop. The parents are using and abusing their kids by thinking they need to have the kids participate in sports from such an early age. Today I heard a conversation by parents with sons in the youth baseball program saying the kids are burned out, by the admission of the kids themselves by age 12. They play too much and no longer want to play. Some parents push the kids hoping to get a collage scholarship and maybe a pro contract. Stop taking advantage of your kids. There is no reason for a turf field.

Anonymous said...

"the bottom line is artificial turf eliminates millions of gallons/ pounds of fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide."
You may not be aware of this, but their are safe, natural fertilizerss and pesticides.
Tell me, what do they use on artificial turf to keep it clean and healthy, especially when I see the numbe of geeseflying over the football field?
Is there a special machine that is needed to clean the turf? What does that cost?
The bottom line right now is, we can't afford it even if they prove (which I doubt)that it is a healthy alternative to natural grass!

Anonymous said...

Supposedly we already use organic fertilizers on all of our school fields. An artificial turf field heats up to dangerous temps, needs disinfecting regularly, and needs a machine to be used regularly to fluff up the turf.

We don't need artificial turf and just as we're asking our unions to make concessions, the TC needs to make a concession and return the $525,000 to the State so they can use it to save some important program.

Anonymous said...

If all you need is a car to travel to and from work why buy a $50,000 car when a $18,00 car will do the same thing.

Anonymous said...

If you look at the condition of the football field in recent years it appears that they stopped using fertilizer all together, there is barely any grass left.

In response to

"Maybe not, but they are suffering from torn ligaments and broken ankles because artificial turf does not have the give that real grass does. These injuries can be the make or break of a young persons future."

This is not the early 90's RBJ this isnt the old sand turf or wet turf. As someone who played four years of college on field turf I can say there is no comparison. Field turf doesnt freeze, it doesnt get muddy, and it doesnt get dryed out and hard. Field turf compared to grass is like walking from hardwood floors on to a padded carpet. Its night and day better on your ankles, knees, hips and back

Anonymous said...

In addition to the previous post, in a recession that we are in now I do not directly agree with spending money on turf, however, we need to look at the efficiency of all town departments including the department that takes care of our fields. It is my opinion that people that work for this town in many cases do there jobs to a mediocre level in order to keep there jobs. If the grounds department fixed the problem of grass not growing on the fields then what would be left for them to do. If the public works actual took some time to fix the pot holes correctly the first time and not leave them an inch above grade then they wouldnt be able to come by the next day and rip them up with a snow plow on purpose so that they can go out and repair them again.

Anonymous said...

Then you also have to wonder why the parents of CYB & CYS players have to volunteer to get the fields ready to play on this year as well as "adopt" them during the season so they stay in good condition. Many of these fields are at schools, but they are in such horrendous shape they aren't even used by the school children until the CYB/CYS clean them up.
And the "turf heads" in this town think the town will take care of artificial turf?What proof do they have? DO they plan on adding an additional $50,000 per year of the life of the turf (they say 10 years, but I have my doubts) in order to hire a groundskeeping crew?
You keep hearing how much cheaper it will be, but if the football fiels is in such bad shape now, that means the manpower isn't there to take care of it. If there is someone who is suppose to take care of it, they are doing a poor job and should be fired.

Anonymous said...

Maybe they're doing a poor job on purpose in an effort to try to get turf.

Tim posted a picture of the field taken at the end of the school year last year - after a years worth of sports and a graduation held in a light drizzle. The field looked fine so 11:15 is wrong.