Board considering installing turf fields
A free feasibility study will help answer some questions
The Boyertown Area School Board moved forward with its consideration of installing turf athletic fields Tuesday night by hiring a consulting firm to undertake a feasibility study of the matter.
Luckily for taxpayers, it won’t cost anything for the study.
Scott Schiel, head of the district’s facilities and operations department, presented three quotes to the school board at the board meeting. One was for $1,500, the second was for $8,580 and the last was for free.
The free offer came from KCBA Architects.
The firm was involved in the construction of the new stadium in 2019 and
Schiel said the firm’s familiarity with Boyertown’s athletic facilities allowed them to undertake the project at no charge because of how much background information they already have.
When the engineering was done for the new stadium, one of the possibilities considered, but ultimately rejected, was for a turf field, according to Athletic Director Nick Palladino.
No decision has been
made about whether to move forward and the feasibility study will look at Memorial Stadium and fields one and two, Schiel told the board.
Discussion of installing turf fields began several meetings ago when board member Jeffrey Zawada raised the issue.
At the Aug. 22 meeting, Jeremy Spacek, president of the Boyertown Soccer Club, gave the idea another push.
He said his club serves 600 children between 5 and 17 and that many of the club’s older travel teams play on turf fields in other locations.
To get his players used to that surface, the club rents existing turf fields to practice. “In the last three years, the club has spent $35,000 in rental fees; fees we would much rather spend in our own district.”
Spacek said many state grants are available to help fund such a project and named several school districts that had received them.
Student McKenna Smith is a field hockey player and noted that all the school team’s games are away games because Boyertown does not have a field for them. This meant more traveling and it also meant she would be unable to take an advanced placement class during the day’s final period if she wanted to play field hockey.
It was during the Aug. 22 meeting that the board directed the administration to look into hiring a firm to conduct a feasibility study but it would be inaccurate to describe the board’s support as unanimous.
During that meeting, board member Christine Neiman said previous discussions had shown the demand for turf fields would be so high that “there’s no way we could rent it because there would be no time left over.”
She said the district looked at the matter seven years ago “and the cost is phenomenal. With the way our budget is now, it would have to go into the capital projects budget. We have buildings that need to be addressed.”
Added Neiman, “I am not opposed to it, but financially I don’t even know if we have the money in the budget.”
Board member James Brophy pointed out that the district is still paying off two $30 million bonds for capital projects, including the new football stadium. “This year we spent $1,.5 million on roofs and they are still not all done, so the question is where would this fit in the five-year plan and what are we not going to do if we do this?”
Brophy also pointed out that recently, turf fields have come under fire because of the materials from which they are made which could pose health risks to students and to the environment.
Board member Ruth Dierolf said when the community wanted a turf track in 2006 it raised “half the money themselves. We would have to come together and work it out not have the little old lady down the street not buying her medicine because her taxes are too high.”
“The community comes here and tells us what they want, but I don’t see anyone asking why we are not a blue ribbon school,” Dierolf said. “All anyone ever asks for is sports and music. I understand we want to have wellrounded graduates, but I’d like to see our test scores a little higher.”