The Great Neck Park District has found no government reports that have studied whether artificial turf is harmful, and all the independent reports they have studied have concluded that the hazardous materials in the turf were below the safety standard.
District Board of Commissioners Chairman Bob Lincoln said at a work session Tuesday that most of the stories about the turf causing health concerns have been anecdotal, and that as far as the district has seen there have been no governmental reports that have studied whether the turf is harmful.
Lincoln said that even though none of the commissioners are scientists, they know that there are carcinogens everywhere.
“There are carcinogens all around this room,” Lincoln said. “But they’re at a level low enough that it’s not dangerous.”
The commissioners received a compilation of months of research into whether the synthetic material is harmful on Tuesday from Deputy Superintendent Lisa Goldberg.
Goldberg said she contacted each agency which did a study to confirm their results.
Most, she said, concluded that the hazardous materials in the turf were less than the safety standard, deeming the turf safe.
The purchase of artificial turf at Memorial Field, located at 1 West Park Place, was part of a $6.5 million bond approved by the Town of North Hempstead in March. Residents at the time questioned the use of artificial turf rather than grass.
Further concerns were raised in October when NBC reported that 38 soccer players who had played on artificial turf were diagnosed with rare forms of cancer, including lymphoma and leukemia.
The commissioners said in October they would re-examine what surface to use at Memorial Field.
“We would never ever do anything that we thought would be harmful to any of our residents, especially our children,” Lincoln said. “There was a series of questions raised, we have done our due diligence.”
Commissioner Dan Nachmanoff said that artificial turf is very practical, and will allow park district residents to use the field year-round.
Lincoln said artificial turf is not more cost effective from a maintenance standpoint, but the positive comes from getting more use out of the field.
“We’re not going to be able to reduce staffing at park, the staff still has to be there – it’s maintenance,” Lincoln said. “And the fact that you don’t have to cut it once or twice a week – yeah that saves money, but it’s mostly about providing more service.”
The commissioners did not vote on anything, but did ask district Superintendent Peter Renick to include a discussion of the turf at a regularly scheduled business meeting.
