The deluded people on the school board and the board of supervisors are going to spend 3 million dollars on artificial turf for the schools. Half of the money is coming out of the county's general funds, despite the fact that the county already gave the schools more than they should have.

A key component of the delusion is the belief that artificial turf requires no maintenance. A close look at contracts might show otherwise, and might lead to some uncomfortable places for certain individuals.

This alone should result in Karen Garza's resignation, the foolish cow thinks this is Texas football country. Let her go back.

Actually this is one of the few wise decisions. Its going to save $ over the long run, and I rarely support any of their actions, but in this case, its a good one.

Since the current level of Fairfax athletics is not sustainable, this was a foolish decision. Let the dust settle, when the real situation is known, that's the time to see if artificial turf makes sense.

For all we know, Governor McDonnell owns part of a turf repair company.

Tough One Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually this is one of the few wise decisions.
> Its going to save $ over the long run, and I
> rarely support any of their actions, but in this
> case, its a good one.


I agree. Not a lot of good decisions made by these bozos, but this one is a winner. Turf fields are safer for the kids, better for the environment, and most of all a cost saver in maintenance.

Please prove that artificial turf has lower maintenance costs. I'm sure Sharon Bulova and Jack Dale commissioned a study or two on the topic.

proof please Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Please prove that artificial turf has lower
> maintenance costs. I'm sure Sharon Bulova and Jack
> Dale commissioned a study or two on the topic.


On the climate zone. In the mid atlantic we have lower irrigation costs so that helps the case for natural, but we also have less heat than the deep south so that helps the case for synthetic (synthetic fields in very hot climates require irrigation for temperature control).

In the mid atlantic the truth is direct costs are the same between the two. What you might save money on is ground keeping crews needed on a salary basis (every week) vs synthetic maintenance crews needed once per year on contract.

Its not a huge cost saving either way, no idea what the Return period would be in this area, but I'd imagine you'd have to go past atleast a couple life cycles.

Fairfax to convert more sports fields to synthetic turf
http://www.wtop.com/149/3403027/Fairfax-to-convert-more-sports-fields-to-synthetic-turf

WASHINGTON - There's a big demand for sports fields in Fairfax County and the school board thinks it has the solution.

Fairfax County already has more than 40 sports fields covered with turf. Now county officials are adding eight more at public schools. Annandale, Edison, Mount Vernon, South County, Stuart and West Potomac high schools plus Hayfield Secondary and Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology will all be converted.

"We approved $1.5 million to help fund additional turf fields at those remaining schools," says Fairfax School Board member Ryan McElveen. "In addition, the county board of supervisors is expected to contribute $1.5 million to the same project."

McElveen sees turf as a positive for kids who want to play even if it has just rained.

"You know it's been also said that they are safer and result in less injuries," he says.

The fields, he says, have to be replaced about once a decade. But the county generates some income from the fields.

"The county has been able to fund the fields over the past decade by adding a user fee when they sign up to play football or soccer or a sport that would use those fields," McElveen says.

The new batch of fields brings the number of turf fields in Fairfax County to 67.

The county says synthetic fields can be used 62 percent more often because they can be played on year-round and in any weather. Plus there's no need to water and no fertilizers or pesticides are needed to maintain the fields.

McElveen pulls these facts out of his butt.

The guy was class president at high school and he's only been out for 10 years. He was the mouthpiece of Dale, he's now the mouthpiece of Garza.

What's needed is cost on maintaining the turf. Next year, they'll want another million for repairs.

No, you go find proof that natural fields are less expensive that turf. Any idiot knows they're not. Yes, turf fields have maintenance. But its an order of magnitude lower than grass.

I agree that FCPS makes zillions of terrible decisions, but the turf fields isn't one of them.

Emeritus Q. Beaker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, you go find proof that natural fields are less
> expensive that turf. Any idiot knows they're not.
> Yes, turf fields have maintenance. But its an
> order of magnitude lower than grass.
>
> I agree that FCPS makes zillions of terrible
> decisions, but the turf fields isn't one of them.


OK,. WELL ARE WE GOING TO FIRE ALL THE maintenance PEOPLE NOW? WE SPEND 3 MILLIONS DOLLARS. HOW ARE WE SAVING MONEY? I GUESS FCPS FAILED IN MATH TOO

FCPS does not care about cost. They beg money from the Board of Supervisors.

Maybe that will change.

This is a stupid decision. These are high schools, not famous stadiums or anything.

Whatever happened to playing in a vacant lot?

Two fields at each school - a stadium field and a practice field. Except for game nights, used only until 5:30 pm, then turned over to community sports clubs and leagues. And rarely used by schools during the 7 off-season months.

Surprisingly, this idea is being pushed by football booster clubs, who only play in the fall.

These projects should be funded by gate fees and user fees. Not money that could go to academics or taking kids out of trailers.

Played high school soccer 4 years for West Springfield back in the 80s. I wish the fields were astro turf than some of the shitty grass fields. It is a better game to play on turf where ball control is easier due to true bounce rather than bumpy grass fields. I sprained my ankle probly 3
times due to the shitty natural fields. Robinson used to be one of the worst.

grass guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The deluded people on the school board and the
> board of supervisors are going to spend 3 million
> dollars on artificial turf for the schools. Half
> of the money is coming out of the county's general
> funds, despite the fact that the county already
> gave the schools more than they should have.
>
> A key component of the delusion is the belief that
> artificial turf requires no maintenance. A close
> look at contracts might show otherwise, and might
> lead to some uncomfortable places for certain
> individuals.
>
> This alone should result in Karen Garza's
> resignation, the foolish cow thinks this is Texas
> football country. Let her go back.


Where would it have been better put to use? Schools? lol. We astroturf now

If anyone of you guys watch soccer you might know that FIFA HATES Astro turf. When they played in M&T bank they had to add real grass. Back in Parstatin we played soccer in the mug and it was fun no one ever complaint. no sure why they need astro turf. Real grass is better than astro turf. the saving will be looked at in 2080

Turf fields DO NOT SAVE MONEY. Period. It is a lie to say otherwise.

ONE BENEFIT--kids can play in rain--that's it.

Let's also note, quite ironically, that our School Board denied funding for science textbooks-but voted in favor of turf fields.

Screwy priorities indeed.

ALLEN, Texas -- Call it the palace of high school football: A gleaming $60 million facility with seats for 18,000 roaring fans, a 38-foot wide high-definition video screen, corporate sponsors and a towering upper deck.

Welcome to the new home of Eagles football.

As school districts across the country struggle to retain teachers, replace outdated textbooks and keep class sizes from ballooning, the wealthy, burgeoning Dallas suburb of Allen christened its new stadium in front of a sellout crowd Friday night with a 24-0 victory against defending state champion Southlake Carroll.

Thousands of fans on Friday night were set to enter the new, $60 million Eagle Stadium at Allen High School in Texas. The state-of-the-art facility includes a 38-foot wide high-definition video screen, corporate sponsors and a towering upper deck.
It's not the biggest high school stadium in football-mad Texas, but Eagle Stadium is the grandest, with a spacious weight room for the players and practice areas for Allen High School's wrestling and golf teams. The school district decided to build it in a down economy, knowing full well it never will recoup the costs.

It's a decision that local officials and team supporters defend, saying the stadium will serve as a community centerpiece and source of pride for years to come and will more than pay the costs of operating it.

icehole Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Turf fields are safer for the kids, better for the environment,
> and most of all a cost saver in maintenance.

Execpt for their joints.

Arguing turf is better than grass for the environment is hysterical.

Its an okay idea to rent the fields out more and allow them to get more money from outside sports using the fields especially in season and inclement weather, nothing more.

Brad Fresenburg, an MU Extension turfgrass specialist, recently completed a cost analysis of installing and maintaining natural and synthetic fields. He will present the analysis that includes yearly cost averages on Nov. 30 at the Heartland Green Industry Expo in Overland Park, Kan.

Fresenburg calculated the costs of four field options: a regular native soil-based grass field; a six-inch sand-capped natural grass field; a basic infill synthetic grass field; and a premium infill synthetic grass field.

In a 16-year scenario, Fresenburg came up with an annual average cost for each field type as follows: the natural soil-based field, $33,522; the sand-cap grass field, $49,318; the basic synthetic field, $65,846; and the premium synthetic field, $109,013.

I took a kitchen thermometer to my son's soccer practice at Spring Hill rec center in McLean recently to measure the surface of one of the artificial turf fields since my had seemed ill after several events there. The field temp was over 140 degrees and it wasn't even the hottest part of the day. His coach was clueless.

One factor is that turf fields can be used more than grass. This allows the County to rent them out to organizations such as sport leagues. That is why they have been installed at certain rec centers and parks.

Now whether it would be better to invest the $3M in astroturf on existing fields or on acquiring new fields is another question.

Here is the deal:
Turf fields allow teams to play competitively in all area schools. If one school has turf and another does not then it puts one team at a disadvantage, this is taking place now in Fx County.

Secondly when teams go to states, in some cases such as soccer, girls field hockey or even Lacrosse, FX county teams are playing against teams with turf and find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. The ball is faster on turf vs natural grass. Every HS in Arlington has turf, TC Williams has turf.

Turf fields in the long run are less expensive to maintain for FCPS, there is no mowing, no fertilizing, minimal man hours. Not all turf fields consist of the rubber that heats up to high temps. There are several different types FCPS can choose from.

Turf fields will allow more use for club sports helping to ease the current shortage of rectangular fields. (More use per field will take place.)

Turf fields average about $600,000+ grand, however FCPS is seeking to partner expenses. These turf fields, if prepared properly, can last between 11- 15 years. An average Booster club will spend about $40,000 or more to prepare fields for the season.

About 38% of a high school population plays a sport and of these kids more than 60% have a GPA above 3.0.

You mean in the $ 4 billion the school system gets every year they don't have a spare $3 million so they have the balls to ask the county to pay for it from the general fund.

Meanwhile, the parks and libraries, in one of the wealthiest counties in the country, are on life support.

I've been out of school for a long time. They still have kids learning from those trailers with the noisy ac?

Uncle Jack (Dale) always got his way, Garza may have a tougher time.

The whole idea is stupid anyway. Many issues with turf, none of them addressed.

Knowing Fairfax, most of the fields would be unusable in a few years anyway.

Which board member owns the contractor installing the fields?

well cases of MRSA are going to increase

Why do the fields cost so much in Fairfax County?

According to this story:
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20130717/NEWS/130719118/0/fairfaxTimes&template=fairfaxTimes

Turf fields are estimated to cost between $600,000 and $800,000 depending on the location of construction.

But other school districts are doing it for a lot less:

http://northhills.patch.com/groups/sports/p/martorelli-stadium-turf-gets-makeover-after-saturdays748d6323cf

The project, approved 6-1 by school board members May 23, will cost $387,500...

newgatedenizen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why do the fields cost so much in Fairfax County?
>
> According to this story:
> http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20130717/NEWS/
> 130719118/0/fairfaxTimes&template=fairfaxTimes
>
> Turf fields are estimated to cost between
> $600,000 and $800,000 depending on the location of
> construction.
>
> But other school districts are doing it for a lot
> less:
>
> http://northhills.patch.com/groups/sports/p/martor
> elli-stadium-turf-gets-makeover-after-saturdays748
> d6323cf
>
> The project, approved 6-1 by school board
> members May 23, will cost $387,500...

Because the 2nd article references just replacing an existing synthetic turf surface so all of the site work (grading, concrete base and gravel drainage, etc) has already been done.

Thucydides Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Because the 2nd article references just replacing
> an existing synthetic turf surface so all of the
> site work (grading, concrete base and gravel
> drainage, etc) has already been done.

It's still the cheaper way to go, afterwards the maintenance costs will be much lower.

We already have fields at these schools. Changing to astroturf is going to cost money and LOTS OF IT.

The schools should figure out how to do it on their own. They can charge the athletic associations extra. But no, they are too spineless to do that, so they suck up to the Board of Supervisors, who are equally spineless.

So we'll have schools with wonderful playing fields and kids who can't read. That will be the legacy of Jack Dale and the challenge to Karen Garza, who ought to take her football fetish back to Texas where she came from.

Liberal Logic 95 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Execpt for their joints.

The kids can still smoke all the joints they want.

> Arguing turf is better than grass for the
> environment is hysterical.

Right, hysterical. I'm still laughing about that one.

> Its an okay idea to rent the fields out more and
> allow them to get more money from outside sports
> using the fields especially in season and
> inclement weather, nothing more.

Nothing more? Nothing at all? We should put you in charge since you seem to know everything there is to know about the subject. What are your credentials again?

Turf fields DO NOT SAVE MONEY. Period.

Prove it. You're the one making the assertion.

Numbnutz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Turf fields DO NOT SAVE MONEY. Period.
>
> Prove it. You're the one making the assertion.

All the sports booster jackasses are on here saying how much money they save---YOU PROVE IT.

Shoe JUST ONE high school that had grass and what they spent annually and compare it to the $800K UP FRONT COSTS of TURF. Not the ongoing maintenance---$50K per year.

Funniest comment so far:

These turf fields, if prepared properly, can last between 11- 15 years.

Look at West Springfield's field---looks like CRAP.

Another ignorant statement:


An average Booster club will spend about $40,000 or more to prepare fields for the season.

Ok, pal, maybe SOCO and Westfield have that kind of dough--but go ask Falls Church, Stuart, Lee, Mt Vernon how much their Boosters raise annually.

These fields are nice to have--that's all.

Thomas S. Wootton HS

Installation of artificial turf on stadium field
Bethesda Soccer Club/Thomas S. Wootton HS Booster Club
$1,100,000



This was just approved in Montgomery County.

No it is not cheap at all. I think every one of the Board of Supervisors who votes for this excess should be voted out of office, the same applies to the members of the school board. Fairfax wants to be Texas, some kind of high tax football center or something. They get that from Karen Garza who should be sent back to Texas on the next cow train.

Build the new fields with a 50 meter pool underneath. During summer, roll up the turf, wala, instant competition pool to satisfy the guy who wants it in Reston.

The trick is the swim team has to kick in money. If there's not enough, make some of it a driving range or putting center for the golf fans out there. Eventually if you pull enough of these sports clubs in, tax money will not be needed.

How much is THAT pig costing the taxpayers?

"All the sports booster jackasses are on here saying how much money they save---YOU PROVE IT"

Another proud FCPS graduate... Here's a free clue: when you make an assertion, back it up. It's not our job to prove otherwise. Now get your shinebox.

. It's not our job to prove otherwise

50 something still ranting in Dad's basement, demanding that they're right, and it's up to the rest of the world to prove them wrong...

The new Language Arts standards emphasize nonfiction reading in much greater depth than in the past. In order to support both the science curriculum and these new Language Arts standards, nonfiction, printed, leveled readers that match the science standards have been selected for grades K-5. Using one-time funding of $1.9 million, FCPS will purchase short, nonfiction books that reinforce science topics and are also appropriate for reading instruction for all elementary schools. These readers will supplement the hands-on science curriculum while providing nonfiction materials for instruction in guided reading.

So, science books for elementary kids are voted down.....and we spend the money on turf fields....

And nobody thinks this is a bit odd?

Funding of $1.5 million will be transferred from the School Operating Fund to the School Construction Fund for a joint County-Schools initiative to fund synthetic high school turf fields, contingent upon the Board of Supervisors taking similar action with their FY 2013 Carryover Package in September. At the July 15th School Board Work Session, the Synthetic Turf Task Force (STTF) presented a report with recommendations regarding developing, maintaining, and replacing turf field, including the construction of additional synthetic turf fields at the remaining high/secondary schools to resolve existing turf field inequities at FCPS schools.

Synthetic Turf Task Force Report – July 2013

Primary benefits of synthetic turf fields:

Allows for year-round use in most weather, both during and immediately after rain events, thus increasing the playable hours on existing fields (Park Authority estimates an increase of 62 percent)

Provides even playing surfaces and conditions that are similar to natural grass fields

Eliminates the need for watering, mowing, fertilizing, and applying of pesticides

That so-called study was written by a room full of football boosters. Ryan McElveen is still stuck in high school, that's why he wants this. He must have his nose so far up Garza's ass that it is poking her heart.

Fairfax County, VA
67 (41 parks and non-HS, 26 HS)


Montgomery County, MD
4 (2 schools, 2 parks)


Loudoun County, VA
5 schools

So Fairfax has 67 fields and MOCO has 4.

The $3 million for these new fields is chump change compared with the ongoing maintenance and replacement costs for these puppies.

Currently 67 fields plus the additions takes us to 82 fields.

82 fields that have an average life of say--8 years.

So what will it cost to replace these 82 fields on a rotating basis as they EXPIRE.

The Task Force is estimating replacement cost at a cool $450k per field-of course that is in TODAYS DOLLARS-assume 4% increase for inflation and we are talking about $700k 10 years from now.


Sooooooo, the Fairfax County taxpayers, who can't afford to renovate their schools but every 40-50 years will be stuck with about $3-4 million EACH YEAR to replace these fields.

All so Johnny and Bobby Sue can play in the rain.

priorities screwy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The new Language Arts standards emphasize
> nonfiction reading in much greater depth than in
> the past. In order to support both the science
> curriculum and these new Language Arts standards,
> nonfiction, printed, leveled readers that match
> the science standards have been selected for
> grades K-5. Using one-time funding of $1.9
> million, FCPS will purchase short, nonfiction
> books that reinforce science topics and are also
> appropriate for reading instruction for all
> elementary schools. These readers will supplement
> the hands-on science curriculum while providing
> nonfiction materials for instruction in guided
> reading.
>
> So, science books for elementary kids are voted
> down.....and we spend the money on turf
> fields....
>
> And nobody thinks this is a bit odd?

Sports are always a priority for many schools and school systems. Education not so much.

_____________
We are all Eesh.

Well when all of the kids flunk their tests, they can polish their trophies on days off from Wal-Mart.

Maybe band geeks can put their sucking and blowing skills to work in those funny places you see in Annandale.

Fairfax Times article
Friday, November 11, 2011
High schools say private funding necessary to pay for expensive fields


“No one really knows what the life span is,” Curran said, adding the range could be seven to 20 years.

6.25%
$100,000
Stuart HS (55.2%)
Mount Vernon HS (54.1%)
Annandale HS (44.7%)
West Potomac HS (38.1%)
Edison HS (34.3%)

12.50%
$200,000
Hayfield Secondary (27.4%)


$400,000
South County HS (15.9%)
Thomas Jefferson HS (2.2%)

The numbers above are what the task force came up with to determine how much of the funding should come from the school/boosters, etc.

So, a school like Mt vernon HS, with a FRM population of 54%, need only fund 6.25% of the costs--or $100k.

Okie dokey, no problem with Mt Vernon boosters stroking a check for $100k--I'm sure it is just sitting around in their bank account somewhere.

Now, you folks at TJ. Sucks for you guys. Since you have very few poor kids in your school, we are going to stick it to you guys and you need to pay us $400k.

This sounds like a great plan to me.

Did Jack Dale open up a turf company or something?

FWIW, Wellesley study claims Turf is lower cost than grass:

http://www.ci.wellesley.ma.us/pages/WellesleyMA_SpragueResources/Turf%20vs.%20Natural%20Grass-Cost%20Analysis.pdf

By "study" do you mean the advertising piece FieldTurf produced when they were trying to get the contract to build a synthetic turf field for the town of Wellesley?

School Board approves turf field fund, awaits county decision
Eight of county’s 24 high schools remain without turf fields
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20130730/NEWS/130739921/1117/school-board-approves-turf-field-fund-awaits-county-decision&template=fairfaxTimes

Pending matching funding by the county, the School Board voted last Thursday to transfer $1.5 million from its operating fund to help pay for synthetic turf fields at several area high schools lacking the facilities.

Sixteen high schools currently have turf fields, while eight do not. Turf is seen as a visible demonstration of inequity across the county. Schools without turf fields are all located in Lee, Mount Vernon and Mason districts, areas with higher low-income students.

“These schools have some of our neediest students and it’s important for all of our students to have a healthy lifestyle,” said School Board member Sandy Evans (Mason District), who represents JEB Stuart, Annandale, Thomas Jefferson and Falls Church high schools. None of these schools currently have turf. Falls Church’s facilities are adding turf this fall.

The cost of resurfacing existing square athletic fields with synthetic turf is estimated between $600,000 and $800,000 depending on the location of construction. Community groups and school-based booster clubs have contributed nearly half of the funding for existing turf fields at schools. A majority of additional funds come from park bonds. Other funding includes user fees and development proffers. No FCPS bond funds have been used to pay for synthetic turf.

Shifting $1.5 million represents very little investment, but could have a big impact, said School Board member Megan McLaughlin (Braddock District).

“The research demonstrated that synthetic turf fields increased playability for our residents by 62 percent, “ she said. “[The $1.5 million] is a stepping forward for addressing the inequity… We have a $12 million need to help fund the turf fields in these final eight schools and based on the analysis, if the Board of Supervisors and our school system can each come forward with approximately $4.5 million over the next three years we will be able to remove the inequity.”

School Board member Tamara Derenak Kaufax (Lee District) said the partnership between individual schools with community support, the county and the school system is a fair and logical solution.

“This is an issue of fairness and one of equity. Certain school populations have not been able to amass the funding through the process that we are currently using,” she said. Derenak- Kaufax represents Edison, Hayfield, West Potomac and Mount Vernon high schools, which do not have turf.

“This is a small amount to set aside to provide equity and to literally put our remaining schools on a level playing field,” she said.

Some School Board members voiced concerns about diverting money from operational funding.

“We are projecting a deficit of $193.3 million. That is huge. We have not been able to refund many of the cuts that we took during the recession. So in many ways, for example our increase in class size, still stands…,” said School Board member Jane Strauss (Dranesville District), adding that she was voting for the funding, but with reservations. The School Board has made increasing teacher pay a priority, which means some $43 million for step increases. This could make finding that funding more difficult.

“The structural deficit that we have is large and it is very serious and I am not exactly sure how we’re going to find a way forward,” Strauss said. “This is really a capital project and I’m not sure taking it out of the operating budget is the best thing,” when it competes with teacher pay and classroom funding.

Earlier this month, School Board members and county officials heard a task force recommendation on funding options for expanding turf. One option includes creating an ability-to-pay model for high schools based on the number of students eligible for the free and reduced meal program, which is used as a gauge of poverty within schools.

Fairfax County currently has 47 turf fields in use and another 20 pending construction, according to a report by the Synthetic Turf Task Force. Most are rectangular fields, but there are three turfed diamonds.

Most of the synthetic turf fields in the county are school-based. The estimated cost of expanding turf to all schools is $12 million for 15 fields ($800,000 each). JEB Stuart would potentially be the only school to add only one turf field due to limited space on its campus.

The county Board of Supervisors is anticipated to vote on the turf issue in September.

Too bad for Karen Garza. This so-called Task Force is a joke, the project is the wet dream of a bunch of football addicts.

This is a dead issue, along with Sharon Bulova's idea of funding the Columbia Pike Trolley.

Fairfax County government is too big and does too little. Ed Long should be terminated immediately for showing continual disrespect to County residents.

"FieldTurf produced"

So do you have any countering information or are just ranting?

School Board member Tamara Derenak Kaufax (Lee District) said the partnership between individual schools with community support, the county and the school system is a fair and logical solution.

“This is an issue of fairness and one of equity. Certain school populations have not been able to amass the funding through the process that we are currently using,” she said. Derenak- Kaufax represents Edison, Hayfield, West Potomac and Mount Vernon high schools, which do not have turf.

**

It is fair and logical because she thinks she will have trouble getting re-elected if her schools aren't as fancy as the others. Sorry Tamara, go back to working at Wendy's.

This is a dead issue. The BoS will not approve it, as they all want to stay in office. Of course, that may not happen anyway.

Fairfax needs to move to a referendum system to prevent these epic abuses of spending authority.

Instead of "do more with less" the County motto, penned by County Executive Ed Long is "do less with more" and David Velkoff (school board member and frustrated ballet dancer) is setting it to music.

That's a rant? Seemed rather mild to me...

That's a rant?

Yeah. You've been on a roll, but still don't have any hard data to back up your assertions.

Now get your shinebox.

She must have majored in cheerleading, as serious journalistic efforts reveal the flaws in her logic:

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2013/jan/02/column-examining-artificial-turfs-environmental-is/

Wonderful, schools have kids in trailers and no books but now they are getting artificial turf. I'm so convinced playing on turf will get good test scores. NOT.

School Board member Tamara Derenak Kaufax (Lee District) said the partnership between individual schools with community support, the county and the school system is a fair and logical solution.

“This is an issue of fairness and one of equity. Certain school populations have not been able to amass the funding through the process that we are currently using,” she said. Derenak- Kaufax represents Edison, Hayfield, West Potomac and Mount Vernon high schools, which do not have turf.

“This is a small amount to set aside to provide equity and to literally put our remaining schools on a level playing field,” she said.
________________________________________________________________
SMALL AMOUNT???

Tamara or Tammy--honestly, you are the dumbest thing to sit on the School Board in the LONG history of Fairfax County.

LEE HIGH SCHOOL GOT A FIELD WITHOUT PAYING ONE DAMN PENNY. It came from proffers-which, given how stupid you are, you probably don't understand that proffers are really tax money. FC extors homebuilders and instead of throwing the money into the general fund-they give it to the schools as a slush fund.

Ask West Springfield Boosters and SYC about how happy they are that Lee got their field for free.

So this is about E-Q-U-I-T-Y. Damn, where have I heard that before?

Let's create equity everywhere----throughout the schools.

Where to begin.....

I want that fabulous SCIENCE lab at TJ in EVERY HIGH SCHOOL...that's equity.

I want Robinson's gym in EVERY high school.

I want WestFields ball fields at EVERY HIFG SCHOOL--ok, now we're even.

The new STEM program at Chantilly--that should be in ALL OUR HIGH SCHOOLS-otherwise it's not really fair.

I want the class sizes at the elementary schools in Mt Vernon--over in Mclean, Vienna and Langley elementary schools. You know, 12 kids in a class instead of 30.

I'm just warming up on this whole EQUITY issue.

WHERE CAN I GO TO SPEAK AGAINST IT?

Tax Payer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WHERE CAN I GO TO SPEAK AGAINST IT?

I believe the agreement involves The BOS having to approve their portion of costs sometime in September???

There is probably something on the website with a schedule.

Send an email to your BOS member expressing your disgust.

What is bloody hysterical is who sat on the task foce.

Meagan McLaughlin--School Board member from Braddock district.

Why her?

Braddock district didn't benefit at all--no new fields for the,

Lee, Mt Vernon and Mason districts.

What is odd is that there are field going in at Woodson HS now and yet they are not on the list.

Huh????????????????????????

Anyone know how Woodson is getting these fields?

Maybe that is why McLaughlin is willing to fight for other districts--she gets her field under the table.

To speak against the WASTE OF MONEY for artificial turf:

Contact your Board of Supervisors member.

Contact Sharon Bulova.

Contact your school board member, and all of the "at large" school board members.

Make it very clear: you disapprove, think it is a waste of money, you think the study is one sided and self serving. You feel so strongly about this that if the person (board member, whatever) votes for it, you will vote against them no matter what.

Then, right after Labor Day, remind them of what you think.

It's not Astroturf. It's synthetic turf and is a cost effective alternative to grass fields and much better than the old artificial turf (often called Astroturf).

Like anything it costs money and not everyone can have theirs at once. Get over it.

If you want, why not start up a fund drive to help things along? Oops...almost forgot...it's easier to complain than get off your butt to do something. Lots of that on the Underground.

What a bunch of whiners....

Football boosters are the worst kind of helicopter parents, all they care about is activities. Most of them barely graduated themselves, they were cheerleaders or jocks in high school. Now they work at places like Cutco and Vector Marketing. The lucky ones work at the DMV.

If the sports fans want the turf, they can pay for it. Turf won't help the kids get into college.

You get over it, Jockboy, and if you want to help, take a day off from the car wash to go door to door just like you did when you worked at Vector Marketing.

The same loser analysis applies to marching band and cheerleading too. Don't even start me on parents who think they can coach. PUKE.

Listen up morons--I am only going to say this one more time.

This is NOT about a teeny tiney $3 million expenditure-now.

They want 15 fields to bring the county total to 82.

Montgomery County has 4 and Loudoun County has 5. Why?

Because they know that it is a LONG TERM VERY BIG financial committment.

This is an asset that lasts maybe 6-10 years.If they are used A LOT-as the supporters say, guess what? They wear out much faster.

So we start rotating the replacement costs of these fields every year.

This is BIG MONEY, guys not nickels and dimes.

The damage is done already-we now have 67 fields to take care of FOREVER.

DO THE MATH. And don't complain that the library is closed on Monday because they can't afford to staff it. And don't complain that our brand new firehouse we just buily can't open because we can't afford to staff it.

Jesus, who are these idiots running the place?

www.synturf.org - lots of info

http://www.synturf.org/maintenancereplacement.html

item 75 Fairfax

item 58 Arlington

Ryan McElveen, the person on the school board supporting this is, a weird guy.

He acts like he is still back in high school, where he was the class president. Does he still wear his letter jacket?

All of these people want Texas Stadium or that place where the Packer Backers hang out. Ain't happenin' on today's budget. Let the backers pay.

Many schools and parks in Fairfax County have installed artificial turf fields in the past decade. Unfortunately Woodson and the surrounding area have lagged behind. Now, after years of effort by the school, parents and community groups, Woodson is on track to have turf fields installed as early as this summer. These fields will be used by Woodson students (PE classes, athletic teams, band & more), youth and adult recreational leagues (Braddock Road Youth Club & Fairfax Women's Soccer Association) and other activities.

Survey and engineering work already is underway and we are getting close to being able funding the project. We have secured commitments of assistance from the above noted community partners and the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors as well as a grant from Neighborhood Community Services, but we need to raise substantial funds to meet our goals. As such we have launched the "Twenty for Turf" campaign and are asking all current, past and soon-to-be Woodson students, parents, alumni, friends and community members to contribute $20 or more.

•We also recently received a $175,000 grant from the Fairfax County Department of Neighborhood and Community Services.


Gee, I wonder where this nice group gets their funding from???

Fairfax County Board of Supervisors has been asked to contribute 1.5 million based on a resolution by Tammy Koufax and Ryan McIlveen. Both are losers, both need to be voted out.

I for one can think of a way Tammy could raise funds for this if it is so damned important to her.

These are the groups that are contributing to Woodson's turf field:

Why should the basketball and golf teams spend money on a turf field?


$2,500 or more
Transaction Network Systems

The Greer Family

Football and Gridiron Club

Boys’ Lacrosse

Girls’ Lacrosse

W.T. Woodson PTSO

Anonymous

$1,000–2,499
Rifle

Cheer

Girls’ Basketball

Boys’ and Girls’ Golf

Field Hockey

The Schnoebelen Family

www.synturf.org - lots of info

A website run by a "plaintiffs" lawyer from Boston. Yeah. Good info there.

NOT.

Board action on the Carryover Review has been scheduled
at the same time as the public hearing on September 10, 2013.


Balance after FY 2013 Commitments $55.99

^^^^This is the amount remaining from the count'y 2013 FY budget---YOUR TAX DOLLARS. You were taxed more and they didn't spend it all.

Now, what will they do with it??????

As a result of Board actions in adopting the FY 2014 budget, the FY 2015 projected budget shortfall
decreased from a projected $40 million level to a shortfall of approximately $32 million.

^^^You get that? $56 million balance and expected shortfall of $40 million.

Should we save it?

Naaaaa, let's do this instead....

A reserve of $1.50 million to be used for installing turf on high school rectangular fields with the
stipulation that the funding be matched by the Fairfax County Public Schools consistent with
recommendations from the County/Schools Turf Field Task Force;

I have also accelerated the opening of the Wolf Trap Fire Station from January 2015 to July 2014 with a two-part strategy which will allow for the location of a tanker truck at the station by October
2013 and the full operation of the station by July 2014. This station opening recommendation is driven
by a review of fire and rescue response times. Because the station was assumed to be operational in the
FY 2015 budget for a full year, this acceleration does not negatively impact the FY 2015 budget but does
provide some much needed coverage in the operational area on a more timely basis.

The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors will consider giving employees a one-time bonus when the board considers spending its surplus funds from fiscal 2013 in September.

County budget staff are estimating that the county has about $27 million left over from the last fiscal year, which closed June 30.

Board Chairwoman Sharon Bulova (D-At large) is proposing to spend about $6 million of that to give all full-time county employees a one-time $500 bonus. Employees did not receive any pay increase in the fiscal 2014 budget year.

During a meeting Tuesday, the majority of board members indicated support for an employee bonus of some kind.

“I think we need to show our employees that they are our most valuable asset,” said Supervisor Pat Herrity (R-Springfield).

Supervisor Gerry Hyland (D-Mount Vernon) proposed doing even more, spending about $12 million. The board will consider a range of options, Bulova said.

More info Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eight of county’s 24 high schools remain without
> turf fields

What?

Numbnutz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> www.synturf.org - lots of info
>
> A website run by a "plaintiffs" lawyer from
> Boston. Yeah. Good info there.
>
> NOT.


This is a legitimate question, so please treat it as such. I followed the link to this site and found links to many national and local publications throughout the country that offered interesting, if not hugely valuable information. Clearly the site is biased, and I would not treat it as my only source of information, but I'm not sure why that would discredit all of its sources.

So can you please explain exactly what you mean by "run by a "plaintiffs" lawyer from
> Boston." Is the site run by someone who is suing the synthetic turf industry?

Football boosters want the turf.

Swim team wants a 50 meter pool.

Band geeks want instruments and uniforms.

No money left for teachers or textbooks.

I try to follow the budget discussion every year but I am baffled by how they say they are broke sometimes and other times spend money on stupid things.

Which is it?

Is the county broke or not?

"Is the site run by someone who is suing the synthetic turf industry?"

Google is your friend. Scumbag lawyer who makes coin by suing a range of industries...

Maintenance of fields is a function of utility, not time - and synth/hybrid fields allow for far greater frequence of use over "grass" fields, which, if exposed to the same usage rates, do cost far more for repair/maintenance.

Claiming that anyone is pitching "no maintenance whatsoever" is a strawman, worthy of no comment.

As to budget issues - whoever makes the most noise gets the $$$$. If that's a surprise, well...

I followed the advice and complained to my supervisor about this. She said she had never seen this report. She is calling the school board on the carpet about this.

I told her it is "make or break" decision for me and I get the impression she's more interested in staying in office than satisfying the football addicts.

I've played on turf, it is like playing on concrete because the turf is put over concrete.

I wonder if Kaufax, McElveen, Bulova, have ever taken a fall on turf? They should give it a try as then they'd know it is bad for the kids. But, since it is good for their egos, they don't care.

I understand the pros, but didn't know about some concerns. Found this compendium of cons at http://www.momsteam.com/health-safety/turf-wars-pros-and-cons-of-artificial-turf#ixzz2ak0jsS7p:

Cons

Heat hazard. The heat-absorbing properties of an artificial field make it too hot to play on in extremely warm weather. On a 98-degree day, the temperature on the turf could rise to more than 120 degrees. A Brigham Young University study found that the surface temperature of synthetic turf at its football practice field was 37 degrees higher than the air temperature. Proponents point out that use of the fields can be managed to ensure that athletes aren't playing at the hottest times of the day and are adequately hydrated; as a result, they argue, the higher temperature is more of a comfort issue than safety issue.

Lead. Excessive exposure to lead has been linked to severe mental retardation, stunted growth and death. As Don Mays, senior director of product safety at the Consumer's Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, says, "There is no safe level of lead; let's be clear on that." The American Academy of Pediatrics agrees, saying that there is no safe level of lead exposure and suggesting that levels in soil be no higher than trace amounts (40 parts per million).
Older turf fields made from nylon or nylon/polyethylene blend fibers may contain levels of lead that pose a potential public health concern. Tests of artificial turf fields made with only polyethylene fibers showed that these fields contained very low levels of lead.
Field Turf, the largest artificial turf manufacturer in North America, sells a lead-free artificial turf, but only if the community asks for the custom-made field. The fields that most communities purchase use lead to brighten the field's colors and for a sport team logo.
Says Jackie Lombardo, a member of the Sierra Club National Toxics Committee, "We know older turf products contain toxic chemicals associated with asthma, learning disabilities, and cancer. Saying they are safe because they don't contain lead is like saying cigarettes are safe because they don't contain lead. There are so many chemicals in this synthetic grass and we don't know what the effects are going to be not only on children's health, but also what the effects are on the ground water as well."
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has consistently recommended "the elimination of all non-essential uses of lead" because of the potential health hazards they pose and has long considered lead dust one of the biggest known health hazards to children; it notes that the combination of age, weathering, exposure to sunlight and wear and tear can cause dust containing lead to be released from older or well-used fields.

Zinc hazard: A Connecticut-based environmental advocacy group, Environment and Human Health Inc. (EHHI), has been sounding warnings about artificial turf fields for a number of years and found support for its contentions in a preliminary study in 2007 by researchers at the Connecticut agricultural experiment station which examined the contents of "crumb rubber" and concluded that several potentially dangerous chemical compounds could escape into the air or leach into water under certain conditions. Levels of zinc found leaching into water were inordinately high. A study by University of North Carolina found a possible link between continued exposure to zinc and cardiovascular damage.

Other harmful chemicals: according to EHHI, shredded rubber could contain other toxic metals like arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and selenium.
Toxic run-off. When an artificial field drains after a heavy rain, the run-off (which may contain lead and infill material) could leach into and contaminate a community's ground and drinking water.

Increased MRSA risk. Open skin lesions (so-called "turf burns") put athletes at increased risk of MRSA. Studies have shown that athletes who use synthetic turf are seven times more likely to receive turf burns than those who play on natural grass. These open lesions are often the source of contracting and vehicle for spreading dangerous infections. In fact, a 2003 study of MRSA infections among St. Louis Rams football players found that all eight MRSA infections began at turf burn sites.

Bacterial breeding ground. Medical experts have found that staphylococci and other bacteria can survive on polyethylene plastic, the compound used to make synthetic turf blades, for more than 90 days. Blood, sweat, skin cells and other materials can remain on the synthetic turf because the fields are not washed or cleaned.
Adverse affect on asthmatics. Breathing in dust of ground-up tires could exacerbate breathing problems for asthmatics.

Once artificial, always artificial. Once a community goes with artificial turf, it has no choice but to install another artificial turf field when the first one needs to be replaced because once plastic replaces natural grass, it kills any living organism in the subsoil making it impossible without years of soil remediation to grow anything on that surface.

Would love to know how Woodson's TWO fields are being paid for.

$1.6 million cost--they claim they ahve raised $1.3 so far.

From where???????

$180k from county and a handful of $5k and $2500 donations.

NO WAY that community has rasied the funds

BRYC contributing how much?

“The research demonstrated that synthetic turf fields increased playability for our residents by 62 percent, “ she said.


Sure would like to see how this number makes sense. Really? 62% more?

Gee. maybe because you guys put FRIGGIN LIGHTS in where the turf fields are. Could that have something to do with it?

I bet if the grass fields had lights we would see a big jump in usage too.

Do they think we are idiots?

prove it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> “The research demonstrated that synthetic turf
> fields increased playability for our residents by
> 62 percent, “ she said.
>
>
> Sure would like to see how this number makes
> sense. Really? 62% more?
>
> Gee. maybe because you guys put FRIGGIN LIGHTS in
> where the turf fields are. Could that have
> something to do with it?
>
> I bet if the grass fields had lights we would see
> a big jump in usage too.
>
> Do they think we are idiots?


I think you are. You are able to play during rain because these fields drain so well. Grass fields will get torn up if you play on them during rain and usually they need time to dry out. Grass fields are closed more often than turf fields.

Turf is nice to look at and does give the community more opportunities to play...

However, getting tackled on turf sucks. 99.99% of moms and 65% of dads never played football to experience this repeated beating by the ground. Add in the extreme heat to practice on it and the diseases and increase to environmental concerns and staying with grass is a no brainer decision. Gee, how many NFL teams went back to grass after the devastating injuries? Every team with an outdoor stadium who could get grass to grow again did. They know to protect their million dollar investment - the players.

I welcome parents to stand on the turf during practice. Heck, you're not even wearing a helmet to lock in all that additional heat.

Too bad the image of being a well off school with turf has taken priority over the health and safety of kids.

Oh and all the field maintenance costs that are being saved....whatever, now the lazy athletic directors don't have to mow everyday. Too bad it shows that they don't even maintain the turf with the combing machine. Take a look at West Springfield. The condition of that turf nears criminal negligence.

The folks who want these damn fields are so dishonest. If you want to stick with the facts, ok, then let's discuss.

Fields are used Saturday/Sunday and weekdays after5pm. In the Fall, it gets dark, when 7pm?

Sp, yes, oh wise one, you are sooooo right. The lights have absolutely nothing to do with field usage.

Drive by South Run at noon in September when school is in session and let me know how many people are using the fields. Then go by at 7pm.

Sure it rains sometimes--not enough to account for 62%.

prove it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> “The research demonstrated that synthetic turf
> fields increased playability for our residents by
> 62 percent, “ she said.
>
>
> Sure would like to see how this number makes
> sense. Really? 62% more?
>
> Gee. maybe because you guys put FRIGGIN LIGHTS in
> where the turf fields are. Could that have
> something to do with it?
>
> I bet if the grass fields had lights we would see
> a big jump in usage too.
>
> Do they think we are idiots?

Why should anyone bother. If someone shows you the facts then you say they are wrong or not valid
You want to believe what you want to believe

Have you ever seen soccer practice at South Run in the evening?

They split the field up 3 ways for different teams.

So sure "usage" is up--when you put 3 teams on one field.

recently fairfax city gave a contract to mow a school field: $45k a year

way too much dough. yet $3M. and you know the damn things needs maintenance: vacuuming, special coatings, duh. you know it ends up in someone else's field at some point.

can you beleive that?

and they (not fx city) voted to use $150,000 to take down opponents election signs recently.

it's unbeleiveable how much time and money they spend on non-city projects (ie, landscaping issues) while ignoring the elephants in the room

ok. i need aid and work or at least to get in a position to do so. all jobs are given to gov kids: the ones i applied for and am way more qualified for. the gov gets me fired in my private workplaces.

so i need them spending on real things. not the looks of the bushes. but they have no intention of doing so

AND they hire the REAL work out to Ohio and DC. jerks.

Lay off the booze.

Most of the synthetic turf fields in the county are school-based. The estimated cost of expanding turf to all schools is $12 million for 15 fields ($800,000 each). JEB Stuart would potentially be the only school to add only one turf field due to limited space on its campus.

12 million bucks.

County pays $1.5 mill and so does FCPS.

Where does $9 million come from?

Just because Garza is from Texas these football people think the county is going to be like Texas. Football to the exclusion of all else. Just look at what came out of Texas, George Bush.

Just look at what comes out of football. Jerry Sandusky and George Allen.