BURRILLVILLE – Parties in a lawsuit against more than a dozen town officials as well as the town itself are set to appear before Associate Justice Joseph McBurney on Thursday, Oct. 10 for a conference regarding merits of a case challenging the effort to install a synthetic turf field at Burrillville High School.
The suit, filed by resident Roberta Lacey, lists as defendants members of the Burrillville Town Council and Zoning Board, Town Manager Michael Wood, Finance Director Leslie McGovern, Zoning Official Stephen Detonnancourt and contractor Field Turf USA, Inc.
The litigation is based on the assertion that the materials in the field the contractor plans to install contain PFAS or or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The substances are known to pose health risks to humans and animals, and opponents, including Lacey, have questioned if the chemicals could contaminate the town water supply.
Town officials, however, have defended the initiative, noting the project marks an upgrade to facilities at BHS. They have pointed to the ubiquitous nature of the substances, found in many household products, and have noted potentially greater concerns for contamination in the area, including the former Mobil gas station site and the Clear River and Whipple Avenue landfills. Recent testing found only trace amounts of the chemicals and a chart recently added to the town website notes that PFAS are found in cosmetics, for example, at a rate of 58,200 parts per billion, while the artificial turf contains an estimated 4.1 parts per billion.
The suit questions the adequacy of that testing and states that the firm hired by the town, TRC Consulting, “misrepresents and misreports previous sampling and testing data and uses various testing methodologies that are not approved by the EPA.” Further, the suit states that, “the testing undertaken to date by TRC does not include actual material to be used at the high school. TRC instead relies upon previous testing and testing undertaken by other consultants.”
It was unclear this week, however, if the language was crafted before or after the latest round of testing performed by Eurofins, which was presented by the town at a public meeting on Thursday, Sept. 5, the day after the lawsuit was filed. The tests screened for dozens of chemicals in the same products reportedly planned for the Burrillville field, on track to be installed in the near future.
NRI NOW was not immediately able to reach Attorney Marisa Desautel of Desautel Browing Law, who is representing Lacey in the suit, for clarification on if language in the lawsuit addresses the latest data.
The litigation also notes that the Town Council did not seek approval from the Zoning Board for the installation of the artificial turf, and that town officials have indicated that they will not seek such approval. It states that installation will result in expected detrimental impacts from chemicals contained in the Field Turf materials, which interferes with the interests of the community at large, namely the right to safe drinking water. It also states that installation of the turf violates the town’s prohibition on the uses of hazardous substances in an aquifer zone.
“If the defendants are allowed to proceed pursuant to the contract for the installation of FieldTurf artificial turf, PFAS contamination of the drinking water and aquifer are certain to result,” the suit states. “Such PFAS contamination would substantially damage the quality of the drinking water and create a substantial harm.”
Town officials have publicly denounced many of the legal assertions, and stated that Eurofins is among the top independent testing firms in the world. The town, represented Attorney William Dimitri, has yet to submit a legal response in the relatively new litigation.
Similar battles between artificial turf opponents and proponents of the fields have played out – for varying reasons and with varying results – in communities across the country. In Bristol, the School Committee and Planning Board are currently at odds over whether to install a natural grass or artificial field, and discussion at a recent meeting focused on the improvements made to the artificial materials over the past decade, pointing to the possibility of organic infill, and a decreased risk of injuries.
In Burrillville, at least for now, it seems the conflict will focus on whether or not the trace amounts of chemicals in the materials constitute a legitimate health risk, and if testing performed to date was adequate. Lacey’s attorney initially sought emergency injunctive relief in the form of a restraining order against Field Turf to halt the installation. That request was denied, but Justice McBurney did opt to move forward with a hearing on the merits of the case to allow both sides to present their arguments.
For both sides in Burrillville, emotions have run high. Parents who believe the field could pose a risk to their children have testified against the project, while councilors, who have worked for years on what they believe will be an asset for students, are now facing personal litigation by what some have described as a vocal minority.
Lacey and others concerned have launched a website with information related to the project and have been raising money to fund the litigation with private donations, raffles and a GoFundMe campaign. Field opponent Adam Schatz said that many of the donors have asked to remain anonymous.
Another source asking to remain anonymous contacted NRI NOW this week to point out that according to state law, the proceeds from raffles are not to be used for litigation. The Rhode Island State Police division governing raffles states that, “Any organization that is otherwise eligible for authorization and licensed to operate a game of chance shall not be authorized nor issued a license if the proceeds, after legally cognizable expenses are deducted, are not used exclusively for charitable purposes.”
Schatz said Friday that to his knowledge, no one had been contacted regarding the issue and noted that the raffle was just one of many ways opponents have been raising funds.
A status conference on the matter, which was originally set for Tuesday, Oct. 1, was reset by the court to Thursday, Oct. 10. The plaintiff has requested a legal ruling that requires the town to, “adequately test the actual product,” as well as the baseline of the existing PFAS content in the water supply, and submit a plan for the project to the Zoning Board.
Editor’s note: The above article has been edited to reflect the new court date.
Tried sharing on FB and was slapped by FB police.
Clicked on your FB link. They deleted it twice
Five days & counting with no explanation as to why this has been marked as spam. Many have tried to share it & been rejected.
It must be frustrating. It’s an excellent article to share!!
The material tested and results presented at the special town council meeting in September is from the material specifically made for Burrillville. Ms Lacey can believe and say what she wants, but making that claim is a lie.