Letters

As a Sag Harbor resident for over 35 years, with two soccer-playing grandkids, 6 and 9, I have been reading with great interest the many articles and letters about the Sag Harbor School District’s proposed purchase of the Marsden Street properties.

I understand that this plan can’t come to fruition without funds from the Community Preservation Fund. I also understand that many parents and student athletes are advocating for an artificial turf playing field to be constructed should the purchase occur.

Even though I have never had children in the Sag Harbor school system, I am a proud taxpayer who thinks our schools are doing a terrific job for our young people. And I strongly support (almost) anything reasonable that we can do for these kids.

But here are three reasons the school district should not (and perhaps cannot) install an artificial turf field:

I cannot comprehend how the CPF could authorize funds intended for the “preservation” of our natural environment to be used to destroy the natural environment in order to install a man-made, and likely hazardous and dangerous, surface in its place.

There have been significant health concerns associated with the various materials used to fabricate artificial turf fields: recycled tire rubber containing chemicals that are carcinogens; the use of so-called “forever” chemicals, the dangerous chemicals needed to maintain these fields; the fact that tiny particles from the turf can get into wounds and also get airborne, to be inhaled by the players; and, according to physicians and players, an increased likelihood of injuries.

Prominent pro football players associate their ever more frequent and serious injuries to artificial turf and are asking their union to advocate for a return to natural grass fields.

Carcinogens, health hazards, increased risk of injury. These words not only generate concerns for all the obvious reasons — we don’t want our kids sick or injured — but they also raise the increased risk of litigation should the parent of some future student athlete conclude that their child’s illness or injury could have been prevented had they been playing on a natural grass playing field.

It’s not fair to any of these constituencies — children, parents or taxpayers — to increase our collective “exposure” to the risks and costs of such foreseeable litigation and liability.

I would therefore urge the CPF, the Town of Southampton and the Sag Harbor School Board to make clear their intentions with regard to the type of playing field(s) to be constructed on the Marsden Street properties. I believe it is well within the purview of the CPF and the Town of Southampton to withhold CPF money unless the school agrees that no artificial turf fields ever will be constructed on these parcels.

Sara R. Throne

Sag Harbor