Mass. lawmakers weigh ban on new publicly funded artificial turf amid health, heat and disposal concerns

Lawmakers and a range of experts and municipal officials debated bills that would prohibit state or municipal funding for new artificial turf fields that contain zinc, plastics or intentionally added PFAS. Supporters urged a statewide ban to protect children and water resources, and to avoid creating large volumes of non‑recyclable waste; opponents urged the committee to preserve local decision‑making and highlighted turf’s role in providing durable, high‑use play surfaces.

Representative Paul Donato and Senator Michael Moore testified in favor of measures (House 3,339 and Senate 2,187) that would prevent state and local governments from installing or subsidizing new artificial turf fields with specified hazardous components. Supporters cited three central risks: chemical contamination (PFAS, heavy metals, volatile organic compounds), higher surface temperatures that raise heat‑stress risk for athletes, and increased injury risk from harder, more abrasive surfaces. Senator Moore cited a California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) multiagency study that detected PFAS in synthetic grass blades even though crumb‑rubber infill did not show elevated exposure in that study.

Proponents also highlighted end‑of‑life disposal and recycling problems: multiple witnesses described removed fields being trucked out of state, long storage of used turf rolls, and limited verified recycling capacity. Witnesses gave concrete examples: Tracy Stewart (Medway) said on‑field surface readings reached 140–155°F at peak conditions; Janet Kern (Lexington 0 Waste Collaborative) reported a recent removed field documented at 87,500 sq ft weighing about 262 tons.

Opponents — including municipal recreation professionals, landscape architects, engineers and the Synthetic Turf Council — argued that synthetic turf creates year‑round access in space‑constrained cities, reduces water and chemical use, and can be specified without intentionally added PFAS; some manufacturers and associations pointed to recent studies (California OEHHA and multiagency assessments) that found no clear or consistent evidence of higher exposure from crumb rubber infill compared with natural grass. Municipal officials said choices about surfaces involve local tradeoffs among access, maintenance budgets, athletic schedules and climate conditions.

Committee members asked for written studies and for jurisdictions’ inventory data; several witnesses asked the committee to advance the bills to establish statewide standards rather than leave regulation to local authorities. No committee vote occurred at the hearing.