By Scott Brinton
He wrote a second letter to the editor, published in this week's issue, to that effect.
In recent columns, I reviewed 32-year spreadsheets that I created to show how artificial-turf fields, at the least, would cost Bellmore-Merrick $1.96 million to $5.8 million more than sod, and if the price of plastic grass continued to rise at 12 percent annually, as it has in recent years, they could cost four times that much.
That wasn't enough for Rosenblum. So let's break our economic analysis of plastic versus real grass down further.
Before I get to that, let me get a few things straight. I fully support Bellmore-Merrick athletics. I come from an athletic family. I played Little League baseball as a kid, and ran cross-country and track through high school and college. So did my brother, who went to a Division I college on a track scholarship, and coached soccer at Merrick Avenue Middle School when he taught there. In a former life, I coached track at Westbury High School. My team won a county championship in 1991. My children, who will someday graduate from Kennedy, both play soccer.
I believe in the power of athletics to help transform our young people into model adults. I believe our athletes need top-notch facilities that are well-maintained. And I believe that sod, not plastic, is the answer to refurbishing our high-school football fields.
But Rosenblum says he doesn't believe a sod field would last long. He appears to place a great deal of faith in the district's architect, Kevin Smith of BBS Architecture, however. At the least, Smith said during a recent Board of Education meeting, a sod field would last two years.
I believe it would stand up to wear and tear considerably longer, based on the condition of Baldwin's sod field, which I visited last week. It was installed last July and played on during the fall season, including after at least one torrential downpour. Baldwin's facilities director, Mike Sheehan, says the sod field will last "for a good long while" with proper maintenance.
But let's assume a sod field only lasted two years. The initial price of sod, Smith said, is $150,000, including the grass carpet and drainage work. In a worst case scenario -- a life of two years -- sod would cost Bellmore-Merrick $75,000 per year.
Now, let's say artificial turf field would last 10 years. Doubtful, considering that its warranty would run out after eight, and Giants Stadium, played on only 16 times a year, has had its artificial-turf field replaced every five years over the past three decades. But let's assume that it lasted 10 years.
The initial price of a plastic-grass field is $990,000, plus fees and contingencies. Smith's fee alone, by the way, would be 6 percent of the purchase price of an artificial field, or nearly $60,000. But let's say the field were $990,000. That would break down to $99,000 a year.
What about maintenance? Rosenblum says? Smith said that maintenance would be $7,500 on an artificial field and $8,500 on a grass field.
So, no matter how you look at it, sod would be less expensive -- a lot less expensive, especially if the Central District could get three to five years out of a sod field. And no, I would not like to pay, as Rosenblum suggests, to watch my children play on "professional-grade" fields. I want them to have safe, playable fields that are free for all in the community to use.
Baldwin has just such a football field at its high school. Baldwin athletic teams use it only for games, and it's currently played on three to four times a week. Among the Baldwin teams that use the new sod field are football, girls' and boys' soccer, and girls' and boys' lacrosse. Same as Bellmore-Merrick. (Baldwin has one more team, a ninth-grade lacrosse squad.)
The Bellmore-Merrick Board of Education should act quickly, before the budget vote, and add enough funds for a new sod field at Calhoun, whose field, parents universally agree, is in the worst condition of the Central District's three high schools. Then take it from there.
Comments? SBrinton@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 203.
