This Tuesday, September 10, the Board of Supervisors will vote to spend as follows:


"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."

The Supervisors have received very few comments on the Task Force report, which recommends increasing the $5.50 seasonal player fee to $8.00 or more, and will be used to create policies on the building and permitted use of these fields.

If you are concerned about the secrecy behind the adoption of the report, or what it contains, now is the time to tell your Supervisor.

Project Number: PR-000096
Project Name: Joint County and School Turf Field Program
Funding Increase: $1,500,000

Description: Increase necessary to support a Joint County School initiative to develop new synthetic turf fields throughout the County. It is estimated
that $12.0 million will be required to fund synthetic turf fields at the 8 remaining high schools in the County that do not currently have such surfaces.
Several community funding options exist to reduce that amount to approximately $9.0 million, and assuming the adoption of those options, an implementation
period of 3 years, and joint support of this project by both the County and the Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS), an amount of $1.5 million is included to fund the County’s FY 2014 contribution.

This funding will be held in reserve pending the identification by FCPS of a matching amount in FY 2014.

Synthetic turf fields enhance the capacity and availability of existing athletic fields and address the identified rectangular field shortage within the County. Synthetic turf fields offer a cost effective way of increasing field use opportunities at existing parks and schools.

This recommendation is based on the findings of the Synthetic Turf Field Task Force in its July 2013 report. It should be noted there is no inclusion of funding support for synthetic turf field replacement needs that were identified in that report, which concluded the need for an additional annual funding contribution of approximately $2.2 million. This funding requirement is necessary to support the investments already made in the synthetic turf field effort, and future budget processes will need to address that issue.

It should be noted there is no inclusion of funding support for synthetic turf field replacement needs that were identified in that report, which concluded the need for an additional annual funding contribution of approximately $2.2 million. This funding requirement is necessary to support the investments already made in the synthetic turf field effort, and future budget processes will need to address that issue.


No bigee...they should find $2.2 mill sitting around somewhere.

And who is paying to REPLACE these fields as they wear out in 8 years?

My supervisor will hear, as will supervisor at large Bulova.

Of course, the joke is on Ryan McElveen and Tammy Kaufax if it passes, and then the time comes when upkeep is needed-and they can't get money. They WILL have to cancel sports, as there will be no place to play them!!!!

Football Fanatic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This Tuesday, September 10, the Board of
> Supervisors will vote to spend as follows:
>
>
> "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."
>
> The Supervisors have received very few comments on
> the Task Force report, which recommends increasing
> the $5.50 seasonal player fee to $8.00 or more,
> and will be used to create policies on the
> building and permitted use of these fields.
>
> If you are concerned about the secrecy behind the
> adoption of the report, or what it contains, now
> is the time to tell your Supervisor.

Not many comments have been received (until recently). Sharon Bulova's office said they were well aware of the concerns-many people had contacted them.

It seems that if this had not been on WTOP it would have squeaked through.

Nice try, Ryan and Tammy.

Football Fanatic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Project Number: PR-000096
> Project Name: Joint County and School Turf Field
> Program
> Funding Increase: $1,500,000
>
> Description: Increase necessary to support a Joint
> County School initiative to develop new synthetic
> turf fields throughout the County. It is estimated
>
> that $12.0 million will be required to fund
> synthetic turf fields at the 8 remaining high
> schools in the County that do not currently have
> such surfaces.
> Several community funding options exist to reduce
> that amount to approximately $9.0 million, and
> assuming the adoption of those options, an
> implementation
> period of 3 years, and joint support of this
> project by both the County and the Fairfax County
> Public Schools (FCPS), an amount of $1.5 million
> is included to fund the County’s FY 2014
> contribution.
>
> This funding will be held in reserve pending the
> identification by FCPS of a matching amount in FY
> 2014.
>
> Synthetic turf fields enhance the capacity and
> availability of existing athletic fields and
> address the identified rectangular field shortage
> within the County. Synthetic turf fields offer a
> cost effective way of increasing field use
> opportunities at existing parks and schools.
>
> This recommendation is based on the findings of
> the Synthetic Turf Field Task Force in its July
> 2013 report. It should be noted there is no
> inclusion of funding support for synthetic turf
> field replacement needs that were identified in
> that report, which concluded the need for an
> additional annual funding contribution of
> approximately $2.2 million. This funding
> requirement is necessary to support the
> investments already made in the synthetic turf
> field effort, and future budget processes will
> need to address that issue.

School Board Member, Tammy Kaufax, is refusing to comment on maintenance costs, deferring all such discussion to the appropriate County offices.

Kaufax also had no comment when asked about the risk of MRSA or the ridiculous vulnerability of turf fields to birdseed and common chemicals.

A pointed question about science books was deflected towards Karen Garza.

At least the School Board has a joint email address that you can use when you want to send an email to all members.

Not so, with the BOS.

If you go to the website, THEY DON"T EVEN LIST EMAIL ADDRESSES FOR THEM.

Nothing like govt for the people and all that crap.

They tell you to send an email to the clerk and ask the clerk to forward the email to all members.

No wonder that they haven't heard from many folks on this issue.

good luck reaching them Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At least the School Board has a joint email
> address that you can use when you want to send an
> email to all members.
>
> Not so, with the BOS.
>
> If you go to the website, THEY DON"T EVEN LIST
> EMAIL ADDRESSES FOR THEM.
>
> Nothing like govt for the people and all that
> crap.
>
> They tell you to send an email to the clerk and
> ask the clerk to forward the email to all
> members.
>
> No wonder that they haven't heard from many folks
> on this issue.

Here's Bulova's email:

Chairman Sharon Bulova

The others have email reply set up on the website for each supervisor/magisterial district in the County.

But-the real reason they have not heard much is that the report was not widely publicized.

It all comes down to politics and which voters are more organized. FCPS and especially FCPA, at the behest of the BOS, have purposely ignored and even hidden health, safety, environmental and financial concerns about these fields for years. They have gone to great lengths to avoid public hearings and comment.These groups love petitions and know how to lobby and when they want something for their kids the rest of us be damned.

They need to wait at a minimum for the results of the study due next month See below) before moving forward in any way with more of these fields.


FIFA studies the effectiveness of football turf pitch maintenance

(FIFA.com) Friday 30 August 2013












Share







FIFA studies the effectiveness of football turf pitch maintenance
© FIFA.com

In the various inspections carried out by FIFA in recent years, it has been noted that many football turf installations no longer display the same playing characteristics after a short period of time that they did in the beginning. This phenomenon can generally be attributed to a lack of maintenance, and flies in the face of the prevailing view in the football world that a football turf pitch does not need to be looked after. The result is pitches whose fibres already lie flat on the ground after a few months and whose filling material is unevenly distributed. This impairs not only the surface’s playing characteristics but also its appearance, which is also crucial for the pitch to perform at its best.

To demonstrate how important and sustainable the appropriate maintenance can be, a team led by Prof. Dr. Eric Harrison conducted a study on seven football turf pitches in northern France in conjunction with three providers of maintenance machines (SMG of Germany, Sisis/Dennis from the UK and Redexim of the Netherlands). The pitches were all three or six years old, as the biggest change in quality can be seen after such periods and the effect of regular maintenance was therefore most in evidence.

To identify the effectiveness of the maintenance, performance criteria such as the roll and bounce of the ball and the energy recovery of the pitch were tested before and after application by FIFA-accredited test institute Sports Labs. The resulting data is currently being evaluated and will be presented by Prof. Harrison and the FIFA Quality Programme team at the IAKS Congress in Cologne on Tuesday, 22 October from 14.00 to 16.00. However, it is already apparent that the results will be a clear pointer for all clubs, local communities and municipal authorities.

The FIFA Quality Programme team will also be presenting the findings of a study on heat generation on the surfaces of football turf pitches, which will likewise deliver new insights that will be key to the further development of such pitches.

In addition to the IAKS Congress, the FIFA Quality Programme will have its own stand at the FSB in Cologne, where members of the team will be available for discussion.

Garza, Kaufax, McElveen and Reed pushed this bogus report through and the vote is on Tuesday.

Let Sharon Bulova, Ed Long (ed.long@fairfaxcounty.gov) and your local supervisor know what you think.

If they pass it, wait a few years. Lack of maintenance will render the fields unusable, and that will mean no football until they are fixed. Oh well.

Turf fields are happening. Nothing you can do about it.

OK, let them happen, but I'll be there to laugh when sports shut down when the fields aren't maintained or repaired due to lack of funds!!!

I have not been following this story with any sort of interest. As I am reading these comments, and other about this situation it smells like someone is getting a kick back Chicago Style.