The board, which had pondered issuing a moratorium on artificial playing surfaces for nearly two years, said its decision was done to protect water quality from harmful and long-lasting chemicals known as PFAS.
When the Martha’s Vineyard Regional High School looks to overhaul its campus in Oak Bluffs, it will have one less option when it comes to athletic fields.
The Oak Bluffs board of health Tuesday banned the installation of artificial turf playing surfaces in town, quietly shutting the door on one of the Island’s most divisive issues. The board, which had pondered issuing a moratorium on artificial playing surfaces for nearly two years, said its decision was done to protect water quality from harmful and long-lasting chemicals known as PFAS.
“It was basically all about water quality,” said board member Tom Zinno.
The ban extends to all artificial turf fields of any size in town, though it could be lifted if a reasonable alternative to products with PFAS was approved by the board of health.
Going back to 2016, the regional high school has talked about re-doing its athletic facilities, including a new track and an artificial turf field. Plans for the field were approved by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission in 2021, but later rejected by the Oak Bluffs planning board.
The planning board cited concerns that chemicals from the plastic field could contaminate the Island’s main aquifer.
The regional high school committee fought the planning board’s denial in state Land Court, and a judge late last year overruled the board, saying it overstepped its authority.
The ruling seemed poised to allow the field to be built and the district at one point even started to request permits to get the work started. But the school committee eventually decided to put the field on hold as it considers new high school plans.
Board of health chair William White emphasized that the decision was made with public health in mind, not politics.
“The board of health’s main doctrine is public health,” said board chair William White. “It’s our responsibility as three separate commissioners to make those kinds of calls… Politics have nothing to do with my decision.”
Health agent Garrett Albiston said the board changed course from the previously proposed moratorium, which would have stopped artificial fields for a certain time period, because the board felt natural grass was an available alternative to turf.
The board decided to not outlaw running tracks with PFAS because there are no PFAS-free tracks available, Mr. Albiston said.
“There is no reasonable alternative to the tracks right now,” he said. “The technology, with how they make things, it’s just not there. If there was a reasonable alternative to the other tracks, then that would be banned as well.”
As contentious as the topic as the turf field has been, Tuesday’s 10 a.m. meeting was sparsely attended and it lasted less than 20 minutes. Only Oak Bluffs resident Maura McGroarty was in attendance.
She felt that instituting a ban over one project was misguided.
“That doesn’t seem right,” she said. “It seems to be less on the science of PFAS and more on the politics of grass versus plastic.”
Martha’s Vineyard Regional High School committee member Michael Watts said he was unaware of the meeting, but said the school would continue to make plans for a renewed campus.
“I think it gives the building project and the school committee direction on where we can go next,” he said. “I’m glad to see it in writing.”
School officials Tuesday morning were meeting with potential designers who would work with the district’s owner’s project manager to study options for the school moving forward.
During Tuesday’s discussion, the board of health raised the new federal limits on PFAS contamination in drinking water and said that more work would be needed to protect the Island.
“There’s a whole lot of aspects to the PFAS problem with contamination of the aquifer beyond just the turf field,” said board member James Butterick. “All of it deserves attention.”
Comments
Finally.
Tom Engley West TisburyFinally.
I ran track in high school.
Kathleen Michels Silver SpringI ran track in high school. We didn't run on rubber . I didn't pay much attention to what it was but surely there are still as always alternatives to rubber?!
I ran track in high school
Kathleen Michels Silver SpringI ran track in high school before these hotter rubber surfaces. What about going back to what we ran on in the 60s-80s?
DIRT
No name EverywhereDIRT
Rubberized running tracks are
Laurence EdgartownRubberized running tracks are faster and safer.
Thank you Garrett and Board
Susan Desmarais Oak BluffsThank you Garrett and Board of Health members. You are protecting our water thereby the health of everyone, now and in the future.
I played football in high
Clarence Otis EdgartownI played football in high school in the 70’s, in Southern California, and they wouldn’t give us water breaks. Just because we did something “back in the day” doesn’t make it right or better.
Does this mean more lawsuits?
Tom OBDoes this mean more lawsuits? And litigation?
Really? Why now? All the time
Gil NYC, ChilmarkReally? Why now? All the time and money wasted??? You could have said this a couple years ago???
I really don’t see the issue. With our roads filled with Asphalt and chemicals what’s the difference?
I guess we ought to fire up
tom BostonI guess we ought to fire up the coal plants as well.
This ain't NYC Gil!
OB Resident Oak BluffsThis ain't NYC Gil!
Well said Gil. Nobody talks
Sam OBWell said Gil. Nobody talks about all the asphalt in the parking lot, that’s ok I guess… as long as there is no turf?
Ban asphalt parking lots and
John BannerBan asphalt parking lots and roads! And plane tarmacs. And planes. And motor boats. And cars. And golf courses. And ferries. Ferries should actually be first on the list.
I have no children so matters
Paul J Rickard Oak BluffsI have no children so matters little to me in regards to athletics but it shows a lack of credibility of the board. This is a political statement. There is no science involved. Moving forward any decision by the Board of Health will be looked at politically and not in the interest of health and safety. Just too bad.
Excellent. About time.
Carol formerly ChilmarkExcellent. About time.
Sadly many of these comments
Susan Desmarais Oak BluffsSadly many of these comments illustrate that many people don’t stay current with scientific facts. The data on the dangers of PFAS is clear.
Paul writes..."there is no
Ken Rusczyk OBPaul writes..."there is no science involved". What hole does he live in?? Every day there is another article about the danger of PFAS and how we yet know the dangers we have already released. WOW!
100% political decision. You
Islander61 OB100% political decision. You haven't targeted the KNOWN sources of PFAS in your ban, have you? So I don't buy what you are selling. The PFAS in this turf field was so low that it was rated "de minimus". It took a test so caustic to even elicit an indication that PFAS may be present, it would need to be raining "Drano" release any PFAS if it were present. So no, this isn't about the science associated with this project, it is totally political. After 100's of thousands of dollars spent and 2 years of debate does the BOH chime in, only after the planning board's decision got overturned, something smells fishy in the town of OB government. Once again, our students are just run over by adults who have their own agendas. What will the next argument be when a non-grass alternative becomes available? You will then see it is again, 100% political. Meanwhile nothing is done to address those things that have contributed PFAS to our water, ie septic systems and housing materials.
Might be time to mention the
Marty Milner TALLAHASSEEMight be time to mention the student runners who have been disrupted by the community issue. What do they deserve? Can it be done expeditiously so their efforts, records and competitions might continue? How many of them are shaking their heads? Let the issue rest now. Focus on the runners.
Tracks I ran on were all
Ken Edg.Tracks I ran on were all asphalt. Same material used on all our roads and highways. I dont know why that is being brought up.
Case closed. Time to move on
Mark VHCase closed. Time to move on.
Hurray, less chemicals….
Hannah West TisburyHurray, less chemicals….
Wow, this topic has been
Glen Field Oak BluffsWow, this topic has been beaten to death. Natural grass fields are wonderful. That is, if they are abundant and properly maintained.
It is virtually impossible to maintain a single playing surface for football, boys’ and girls’ soccer, and boys’ and girls’ soccer. Thus, at least a couple additional quality playing fields are necessary. And, of course, there needs to be a major upgrade for the sport of field hockey as well. Proper maintenance of these playing surfaces will be incredibly expensive as turf management, irrigation, and lining of fields for the different sports will require a huge increase in cost and thus the school budget. Additional manpower, equipment, and oversight will absolutely be necessary to provide our student-athletes with the opportunities that their off island peers enjoy.
So, I sincerely hope that all of the opponents of artificial turf are willing to support the financial challenges of natural grass playing surfaces. These financial challenges will be twofold. They are the initial expansion of available playing surfaces as well as the forever annual maintenance of these fields.
Or, will the next issue be budgetary? Will the next debate be about cutting some or all sports because the cost to adequately fund a quality interscholastic athletic program is financially prohibitive? God forbid that scenario! If you think the natural vs. artificial turf controversary has been divisive, it will pale in comparison to that course of action. As well it should,
So, Martha’s Vineyard, it is time to do the right thing for the hundreds of wonderful student-athletes of MVRHS. Both now and in the future. They deserve to be on the same level playing fields as their off island counterparts.
I continue to be appauled
Patsy McCornack VHI continue to be appauled that no one has addressed the issue of safety on turf for our students! The NFL has banned all artificial surfaces because of the injuries to their players when playing on these fields! Isn’t that reason enough to ban thr surface and protect our students? I aoolaud the decision and hope it holds true in the future!!
Sorry, my original post
Glen Field Oak BluffsSorry, my original post should have said boys’ and girls’ lacrosse instead of soccer twice. Thus, one field for all would be in use September through November and March through June, with only the hot scorching July and August for recovery. Unsustainable.
What a complete waste of time
Katama Bill KatamaWhat a complete waste of time. We now have a grass field that will be treated with fertilizer.
I’m happy to say as a retired
John Aldeborgh KatamaI’m happy to say as a retired grandfather I have no dog in this fight. But it just seems over the top. It’s a recreation field at a small high school on a tiny island. What matters is preparing our young people for life and whether the playing field is grass or plastic makes zero difference to that responsibility.
As for the folks saying this is political, yes, it’s political. So is every other decision a politician makes. The sooner this issue is put to bed the faster we can focus on other issues that actually improve our community.
Great move and It’s better
Robbie OBGreat move and It’s better for the students to have real grass. Less injuries.
Add new comment