A different meeting. A different board. The same debate. 

A vocal group of Barrington residents attended the town council meeting on Monday night, Feb. 3 and took turns arguing about the already-approved Victory Field renovation project. 

A similar debate took place at a school committee meeting last month, where residents — including some of the same folks who showed up for the council meeting — exchanged their opinions about the project which will bring a new track and synthetic turf field to the high school. 

The council meeting did not include any specific vote, but there was plenty of opinion.

Barrington resident Devon Smith spoke first. He said he did not care about the synthetic turf field debate before his own child began playing sports at the high school. He said Victory Field is in terrible condition and it is an embarrassment to the town. He said visiting teams’ parents are horrified by the poor condition of the field. 

Smith said he takes steps to be environmentally-friendly and questioned those residents who are speaking out against the synthetic turf field project, but regularly treat their own lawns with fertilizer. 

There were a few residents who shared similar comments — asking how others in town could be so outspoken against a synthetic turf field at the high school, but fail to address other environmental concerns. 

Tom Rimoshytus asked councilors if they wore Apple watches. He said those devices have some of the highest PFAS levels anywhere. 

Neile Hartman said she considers herself an environmentalist and a proud Democrat. She said she tries to minimize her impact on the planet. Then Hartman spoke about iPhones and EV cars and lithium batteries and their impacts on the environment. She asked councilors if they were using plastic pens that evening, and whether everyone should return to using quill and ink. 

Hartman said people make tough decisions every day that impact the environment. She also pointed out that natural grass fields require fertilizer and water and must be cut by gas-powered mowers. All of that is bad, she said. 

But other residents stood firm in their opposition to a synthetic turf field in town. 

Blaise Rein said he attended the school committee in January and listened to Barrington High School students plead about the poor playing surface at Victory Field. Rein said it is clear that they need a better field at the high school. But, he added, he does not endorse a synthetic turf field. Rein then repeated an earlier call for the council to ban artificial turf in town. 

Mark Tatar pointed to the problems swirling around PFAS — a chemical compound that is used in the production of plastic products and has been found to be dangerous to humans and cause health issues. He said the PFAS used on the field will break down over time. He said regular play on synthetic turf is a health hazard. (Other residents said the school committee plans to install, if possible, PFAS-free turf.)

Tatar said that while the school committee was acting on behalf of the athletes, parents and coaches, he did not believe there was any support for synthetic turf outside that group. 

Andy Reich, Nancy Hill, Hans Scholl and others also opposed the synthetic turf field over concerns for health and the environment. Scholl suggested the town council put guardrails on the project, requiring that the material used in the construction of the field be tested for PFAS by an independent group. He said that would ensure claims by manufacturers of PFAS-free products hold true. Hill said she was passionate about the environment and the health of the children who will use the field. Hill said she was very concerned about the field’s impact on the environment. 

Ballot vote

Pete McCalmont told the council that it was dishonest for the school committee to circumvent the November ballot turf votes. 

One ballot question had asked if voters approved the construction of a turf field at the middle school. The other question asked if they approved the construction of a turf field at a municipally-controlled property. Voters rejected both questions by 60 percent to 40 percent margins. 

McCalmont asked the town council to whatever it could to restore the community’s trust. 

Devon Smith questioned those who believed that all residents who voted against a synthetic turf field at the middle school must also oppose an artificial turf surface at the high school. He also criticized the council for the wording of the November ballot questions that dealt with synthetic turf fields. 

Shelli Edgar said she should could appreciate a difference of opinion, but had no patience for people who have not been paying attention to the synthetic turf field discussion. Edgar said many people attended the meeting in July when the school committee approved the Victory Field project, 5-0. She said many residents knew the high school was getting a synthetic turf field, so they voted against the ballot questions. 

We thought one turf field was enough, Edgar said. 

Former town councilor Kate Weymouth referenced the petition she started that opposes the construction of a turf field at the high school. The petition threatens a class action lawsuit against the school committee. 

Weymouth said more than 200 outraged citizens have signed the petition, which reads: “Please sign below if you are interested in joining a class action suit against the Barrington School Committee for their decision to spend $4.5 million of surplus taxpayer dollars to replace Victory Field at BHS with artificial turf, which is in direct conflict with the voters’ overwhelming rejection of artificial turf anywhere in the Town of Barrington.”

Weymouth, who also spoke about the plastic shopping bag ban which she was a part of when she served on the council, told current councilors that they could pass an ordinance banning artificial turf in Barrington. She also said the council could put in writing that the town will not spend a dime for the maintenance of the new synthetic turf field, and not spend a dime for the removal of the field, and not spend a dime on anything else related to the field. 

Great grass field

Barrington High School lacrosse coach Bill Horn said he has been involved in the turf field discussion since 2015. 

He was part of the community group that offered to pay for a new synthetic turf field at the high school. He was also a member of the ad hoc committee that studied the issue. He said there are a lot of people who coming “late to the game.” Horn said a lot of work has been done and people need to play catch-up.

In the meantime, Victory Field is an embarrassment and is mocked by opposing teams and visiting referees, Horn said. He added that in 2020, during the pandemic, no one used the fields. The natural grass surfaces rested, as officials have suggested all grass fields need to do in order to stay in good playing condition. But shortly after sports were allowed to resume, the town’s athletic fields, including Victory Field, were again unplayable, Horn said. 

“They’re terrible,” he said. 

Horn said he and others would not oppose playing on a grass field if it was in great condition, but that is not an option. 

Tom Tanous agreed. The Barrington resident and New York Mets executive said it would require a tremendous effort — strict rules about usage and dozens of groundskeepers — to keep Victory Field in good playing shape. Tanous said the Mets have 25 groundskeepers working full-time to keep their field in good shape. He said people are not allowed on the field except for the games. 

Tanous said he has been to ball fields all over the U.S. and in other countries, and “Barrington Rhode Island has the worst fields.”

He said the DPW does not maintain our local fields, and the poor playing conditions have led to local kids getting injured. 

We are endangering these kids, Tanous said.