OCEAN CITY – Ocean City Council unanimously approved a $10.945 million bond ordinance Thursday night without change after a pair of coaches and other community members debated the inclusion in the bond of $2.275 million, the bulk of which will go toward installing an artificial turf field at the Tennessee Avenue complex in place of one of the two grass fields.
The opposing camps were those who believe a turf field will benefit the city and its athletes versus those who believe it will prove potentially harmful to the athletes and to the environment.
The Pros
The first two who spoke in favor of artificial turf were Ocean City residents Kevin Smith and Leslie Graham, who coach football and girls lacrosse, respectively, at Ocean City High School.
Smith said there were practical and economic reasons to install the turf.
He said having artificial turf at Carey Stadium has been “phenomenal” for the athletic programs at OCHS. He cited being able to use the turf even when it rains, allowing play and practice in a safer manner. “The old (grass) field would get slopping and be unstable and we would deal with kids’ knee injuries, hamstring injuries, things like that, because of field conditions,” Smith said. He said that would be an advantage at Tennessee Avenue because it is marshy and poses similar field conditions that could be dangerous to players.
He also cited the impact for a range of athletic programs, many that want to use the turf but are limited by availability of only one field. “Turfing the field there would alleviate the overcrowding problem on the existing turf,” he said.
The other benefit is economic, Smith asserted.
“Practical benefit that we would not have to cram lots of kids onto that field all at once as we have to do,” he said. “We share the field as much as we can with other programs. We would not have to do that. We share it with the youth camps.”
“Turfing Tennessee Avenue would give Ocean City another venue where they could host summer camps or bigger camps or tournaments – soccer or lacrosse. Those are big money-makers for the city,” Smith said. “The cost of turfing fields would be quickly offset by the use and money generated through that.”
Smith acknowledged there are some environmental concerns, but said the type of field the city would install would be safer than others.
“It would be disingenuous to say there is no environmental impact of a turf field, but the turf field put in at Fifth and Atlantic uses cork pellets as a fill. They are much safer than the rubberized pellets made out of old tires. They contain far less toxins and they don’t heat up as much,” he said. “I’m on the field every day and a major concern when that field went in from the public was that when that field heats up it would lead to heat exhaustion among players … but the cork does not do that.
“If the city is willing to make the investment, that would be the right way to go,” Smith said.
“We live on an island with limited square miles to provide top-notch facilities to residents and guests alike,” Graham said. “We have used the complex at Tennessee Avenue. The facility is great with limited distractions for teams to work out every day. It’s why I love Tennessee Avenue. But players miss playing on turf.”
“The playing surface lends itself to a faster game, consistent play and preparation for collegiate athletics as a majority of collegiate lacrosse teams play on turf,” she said.
Adding artificial turf would allow more year-round use not limited by weather. She said when it rains, she has to scramble to find indoor practice space for her players or the headache of rescheduling games.
The grass fields are in “excellent condition” at Tennessee Avenue, where boys and girls lacrosse play some of their spring schedule, she said, but rescheduling games is difficult and playing on Carey Stadium’s turf often means later start times, adding to transportation problems for players and their parents.
Graham said there would be less environmental impact from line painting.
“As a coach I’m a firm believer in giving kids more opportunity to get active is better than not,” she said. And as a parent, she appreciates recreational facilities and the potential revenue streams that they can bring.
The Cons
Rick Bernardini, chairman of Ocean City’s Environmental Commission, said the issue should be decided by referendum. He pointed out how resident Donna Moore sent information about artificial turf to all the council members and had made a presentation before the commission. (She also presented her reasons in a guest column in the Sentinel’s Aug. 10 edition.)
Bernardini said the commission made a motion to remove the artificial turf from the ordinance resolution.
The community, parents and athletic users of the field should be consulted by a referendum or some polling after pros and cons of artificial turf fields are presented by the administration, he said, noting due to the short amount of time before the enactment of the ordinance there wasn’t time for a detailed analysis.
Artificial turf fields are controversial and some communities have rallied to deny their installation, he said. The commission’s primary concerns are focused on micro-plastics, runoff and the health impact on athletes.
He pointed out the state enacted a plastic bag ban to reduce litter and introduction of micro-plastics into the environment.
He said the compaction of underlying soils for the installation will render the field mostly impervious, leading to more runoff, and that replacing the turf fields will end up requiring remediation to remove toxins from the soil.
Bernardini asked members of council to attend a Rutgers seminar at the end of August on the topic.
Moore said artificial turf requires chemical maintenance with algicides and biocides (cleaners and disinfectants) that can build bacteria resistant to antibiotics, causing problems for athletes who get scratches and scrapes on the surface.
Resident Suzanne Hornick said, “Many of you are new and weren’t here four years ago when I was explaining how bad this is.” “The American women’s soccer league is now suing turf manufacturers and the league for using turf because it is linked to uterine cancer. We can’t have all these kids doing this.
“Yes, the crumb rubber is bad. Yes, the cork is a little bit better, but without anything it’s still toxic,” she said. “It’s still a carcinogen. And the cork gets into our waterways with the rain. That’s clogging things up. It messes up the environment. There is no reason to do that when you could redo the entire field every year for 10 to 12 years, according to Tuckahoe Farms, for the price of one turf field will cost us.”
Fellow resident Bill O’Neill suggested if the city wanted to put in a turf field, it should do it at the field between 15th and 16th streets, which is higher ground, rather than near the wetlands at Tennessee Avenue.
“If you want to put in artificial turf, put it there, not in the wetlands. I can’t see why you want to spend money in an area that’s ecologically sensitive. It’s going to run off,” he said. “Once you put artificial turf in there, once you pound the ground down to make sure it’s stable, you will never be able to bring it back to regular natural grass,” he said.
He asked council to delay action on that part of the bond.
Council in favor of turf fields
Before the vote, members of council acknowledged the concerns but voiced support for the artificial turf.
Councilman Bob Barr said he respected the views of people on both sides of the issue and that when he tried to do research, he was overwhelmed by the extensive amount he found that could support either side. He also said he heard from many people – parents, teachers, coaches and kids – who all were in favor of the turf. He noted the economic benefits of added tournaments bringing people to the city, helping local businesses.
He said he would support the inclusion.
Council members Tom Rotondi, John “Tony” Polcini and Terry Crowley agreed with him.
Crowley said the school district is a big draw for people who want to move to the community and although much of that is because of academics, athletics also plays role and the turf field will be a benefit to students.
Council voted 6-0 for the bond ordinance, which also includes $2.5 million for lagoon and back-bay dredging, $2.81 million for roofing and building repairs, $1.464 million for vehicles, $1.039 million for other equipment for various departments and $610,000 for work on transportation and parking areas and electric vehicle (EV) charging stations.
Council Vice President Karen Bergman was absent from the meeting.
By DAVID NAHAN/Sentinel staff
Sure this makes perfectly good sense make, every homeowner put in a small strip of grass around their house that they have to maintain weekly and pay landscapers, then decide to replace municipal grass with plastic! Wait until the first homeowner decides to ,”make their lawns safer”, by ripping up their grass. With all the cons out there this should’ve been put to a referendum. Putting this in wetlands goes against everything Ocean City stands for. More runoff into the wetlands!