Burrillville Planning Board approves installation of synthetic turf field

BURRILLVILLE – With two new members in their ranks and two more reconsidering previous votes to deny the project, the Burrillville Planning Board approved installation of synthetic turf at Gledhill Field in a 6-3 vote Monday night.

The special meeting for reconsideration of the project followed a Superior Court order remanding the issue back before the board following an appeal of their April decision to deny the application.

Monday’s vote to approve the plan came despite objections from an attorney representing the Burrillville Grassroots Coalition, who contended that the project should not have been up for reconsideration.

“Judge Lanphear did not vacate the decision,” said Attorney Kerin Browning. “You cannot exceed the scope of remand. You’ve already decided this application.”

Browning was among few in attendance not on stage in the auditorium at Burrillville High School on Monday, Oct. 27 allowed to briefly weigh in. Associate Justice Jeffrey Lanphear specified in a ruling in September that the Planning Board must decide the matter based on the existing record from April, with no new evidence to be presented.

Members had cast a 5-2 vote against the application – submitted jointly by the town of Burrillville and the Burrillville School Department – at that April meeting. But their actions came to an abrupt end following the previous vote, with board members missing the procedurally required step of stating “findings of fact” to accompany the decision.

It was on that basis that Lanphear granted the town’s appeal of the decision, remanding the project back to Monday’s special meeting.

The board itself had changed since the April vote with Leo Felice resigning soon after and two new members; Joshua Tessier and Nicholas Woods, securing seats.

With a mixed crowd of more than 100 people both for and against the project in attendance, Attorney William Conley instructed board members to rely solely on the existing record in their new vote Monday night. Conley, who had represented the Planning Board in Superior Court, asked Tessier and Woods to confirm that they had reviewed the record from April. 

Browning was initially given three minutes to state her case on behalf of opponents, but was allowed to finish her statement when she exceeded the time limit. She pointed, in part, to a public notice issued last week by Town Manager Michael Wood urging the board to “approve the Burrillville all sports artificial field without further delay.”

“This is improper and is evidence of bias,” Browning said.

She also noted that board member Razee had publicly expressed favor of the project.

“We object to any effort by the town to now reconsider and revote,” said Browning. “We assert that voting members must all have been present on the night of the hearing.”

Representing the town in the matter, Attorney Anthony DeSisto read Lanphear’s order, which stated “The Burrillville Planning Board shall conduct publicly noticed remand hearing to make findings of fact and decide the matter based on the existing record…” emphasizing the word “decide.”

“I’m going to ask you to disregard the arguments that you just heard,” said DeSisto. “I know for a fact that the opponents in this project have sent out mailings to the entire town. Do not consider that. Decide this on the record.” 

Conley again noted that the board must base their decision on previous facts and evidence, asking Razee if he was able to do so.

“Of course I am,” Razee replied. 

This time, Chairman Stephen Foy came with prepared Findings of Fact to back his motion for approval, citing as evidence sections of the town’s Comprehensive Plan.

Those facts would be disputed by three opponents who had also come prepared.

“I didn’t hear any information on the artificial turf field showing that is was appropriate for Burrilliville,” said board member Bruce Ferriera, adding he felt an effort to install the field was “wrong and not in the town’s best interest.”

Ferriera cited opponents’ concerns about safety of the synthetic field and potential presence of PFAS, or or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

“I don’t believe it is in the town’s best interest especially on the health, safety and welfare issue,” he said.

Planning Board member Dov Pick said that while testing had found that the field materials presented no significant leaching or risk to health, the scientists had not replicated actual conditions – where the surface would be pounded for hours by athletes for years on end.

“We never actually got to speak to experts about this,” Pick said, noting that PFAS are not among the materials expressly prohibited for use by town law.

“I think that’s an oversight in that the materials are going to be banned,” said Pick. “PFAS are considered industrial waste.”

Following his points Foy replied, “We can agree to disagree on many of those – not all.”

Woods took the chance at counterpoint a bit further, stating the purpose of scientific testing is to “try to cross the line.”

“To think that a scientific test did not go far enough, I think, is a little intellectually dishonest,” Woods said. “That’s not an opinion. That’s just the way science works.”

Member John Bonin, who was not present at the April meeting, cast his dissenting vote based partly on lack of mitigation measures.

“The applicant is required to submit proposed mitigation,” Bonin said.

Board members Ken Raspallo and Michael Lupis, who were among those to originally deny the project, joined the majority in granting approval this time.

“I’ve had the chance to just go over it again and have a better understanding,” said Lupis. “The extensive environmental testing has been conducted and has proven no environmental risk.”

The pair was joined by Foy, Razee, Tessier and Woods, with Bonin, Pick and Ferriera dissenting.

Browning gave early indication that opponents will appeal the latest decision.

Editor’s note: An original version of this article stated that John Bonin was a new member of the board. We apologize for the error, which has been corrected above.