Copy
View this email in your browser
SOMA Action Climate

 

SOMA Action Climate Committee urges all members to Vote NO on the artificial turf referendum (question 3) on the ballot in the November election


While the question is worded as being about capital improvement, that is a financial term, and we do not believe this would be an improvement.

We cannot support artificial turf and also be climate change activists! We support reducing plastics, decreasing our carbon footprint, protecting natural environments, and ensuring that vulnerable populations are no made more vulnerable by our actions.

Our position is based upon the heat island effect, the destruction of the natural biome, the inability to recycle, the increased flood risk, the increased run off, the chemical shed and impact on the water system, the health risks from increased heat, the glaring environmental justice issues, the costs, and the failure of the town to commit to the organic grass field and making it resilient to meet the needs of both the athletes and the community. 

The Climate Crisis is real, serious, and upon us right now. We want children to have a livable earth. We have also witnessed a lack of commitment to this organic field and believe that it can be improved, while being naturally maintained, in order to better meet the needs of all who use it.
 

Vote NO on the artificial turf referendum (question 3)
 

Heat

Artificial turf fields create heat islands. Heat maps show Maplewood, the Lightning Brook and Hilton neighborhoods being obviously warmer that other parts of Maplewood, Underhill’s turf and the blocks surround it being warmer than other sections of Maplewood, the turf field in Union being red, and the lower income towns nearby being a much different hue than those towns with higher per capita incomes who also surround us. (Click here to see the heat maps showing these neighborhoods)

These heat islands are a result of artificial turf getting hotter than grass, a lot hotter. There is no denying that. Not even with the addition of proprietary applications such as “CoolTurf” (i.e. more chemicals) can artificial turf be brought anywhere near the temperature of grass. That heat causes burns.

The medical community agrees that these burns, as well as other heat-related injuries, are an issue that needs to be considered especially with respect to children. Read this Mount Sinai letter to Maplewood Township.

While water is needed to maintain an organic field, even more water would be necessary to keep an artificial turf field at a temperature anywhere near that of grass. Read this study on synthetic surface heat.
 

Flooding

Artificial turf results in increased water run off. We know that our storm water drainage system already cannot handle large storms. Township Committeeperson Nancy Adams asked about this during the discussion of the plan and was told the upgraded system would cost more than was proposed; then the TC went on to bond for the proposal amount, leaving no money for upgrades, and increasing the flood risks to our community.
 

Injury Risk

Injuries increase on artificial turf. Burns and heat stroke risks increase on artificial turf. Experts have urged that Maplewood not install artificial turf, citing the health of our children. See also: https://dontturfdehart.com/health-concerns.
 

Socio-economic Injustice

We have also considered the environmental injustice of placing plastic turf in the most densely populated section of town, in the only green space in the Lightning Brook and Hilton neighborhoods, and the census tract with the most BIPOC persons (more than 70%), lowest per capita incomes, and greatest percentage of the population of Maplewood (by census tract). This well-sourced article is written by three Hilton residents, including a scientist.
 

Financial Cost

This one-sheet breaks down the financial concerns. See also: https://dontturfdehart.com/costs. In this year’s budget, Maplewood agreed to upgrade the drainage at a field in Maplecrest park. The cost? $150,000. Upgrading grass field drainage is possible.
 

Environmental Irresponsibility

Nothing lives on plastic. No worms, no butterflies, no birds. Some argue artificial turf reduces pesticide usage but DeHart is the organic field. Pesticides aren’t being used. Claims that artificial turf can be recycled are simply incorrect. No place in the United States is presently recycling artificial turf. There are also concerns about the chemicals in the artificial turf. Experts have urged that Maplewood not install artificial turf, citing the health of our children.
 

Destruction of the only organic field in Maplewood

DeHart is the only organic field. We know some are talking about artificial turf as reducing pesticide use, but that does not apply at DeHart.

We know that organic grass can be resilient. We are aware that the town failed to fix early issues with the field, failed to commit to it, and intermittently abandoned professional maintenance. We are aware that some believed that investing twenty thousand dollars per year into an organic field was excessive, but that is far less than one-hundred-twenty thousand dollars per year plus interest. It is also much more fiscally sound to maintain an organic field than to bond for fifteen years on an artificial field that is only guaranteed for 8 years and is expected to have to be replaced in 10 years, to the tune of another $150,000 to $200,000.

That creates a reliance on more artificial products, products that are not recyclable. Imagine all that waste!

Don't Turf DeHart
Twitter
Facebook
Website
Instagram

info@somaaction.org


Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list