Nyack School District Artificial Turf Fields

Quoted post

G.R.

#3 Not Necessary

2013-10-30 18:10

Those against the bond didn't want to see taxes increase, but now it is okay to pay more for GeoTurf?! Unnecessary. Other schools that have been researched have the crumb rubber fill and both parents and students say that they will never look back. They see no opposition to it. I think that crumb rubber is good enough. There is no need to waste more money on GeoTurf.

Replies


Guest

#4 Re: Not Necessary

2013-10-30 18:40:53

#3: G.R. - Not Necessary

Thanks.  I can only speak for myself and the few people I personally spoke with, and for us it was never about the money.  Ever, and I honestly think that was the feeling for a lot of people.  Maybe mispladed priorities for some as well, but not the money.  For some, sure, they don't want to spend any money on anything. Can't help them and I don't care about them.  For many of us, it was about a couple of things - the scale of the turf etc. and the crumb rubber.  Everything else should absolutely get done.  Regarding Geoturf, it retains moisture and is 10's of degrees cooler in the heat. Some amount of it will end up in the garbage as it sticks to socks and uniforms, in landfills, down storm drains, into the Hudson etc.  It's just better if you include environmental concerns in your definition, and yes it comes at a cost. If the additional cost of Geoturf is $600k, (an amount told to me by someone who would know), it works out to an additional $5/year for the average tax payer when bonded at 4.5% over 15 years.  I just think it's worth it.

Regards,

Glen


Guest

#5 Re: Not Necessary

2013-10-30 20:24:20

#3: G.R. - Not Necessary

People who were against the bond were against it for a host of reasons. Not specifying the type of turf in the project proposal was one such reason for being against it. Now this is what we have, and as a community we have a duty to influence this for the common good.