Richland County CUSD 1 board directs superintendent to negotiate with GeoSurfaces for athletic-complex work

The Richland County CUSD 1 board on Monday gave the superintendent direction to negotiate contracts with GeoSurfaces — the vendor proposing a pivot turf system — and to return a demolition and site-work contract for a formal vote at the district’s next regular meeting.

District Superintendent Jason Fox summarized visits to multiple schools and reviewed warranty and installation terms offered by three bidders: GeoSurfaces (pivot turf), ATG (black-rubber infill turf), and a Vernon Jones bid that included AstroTurf or a woven-back infill system. Fox recommended ATG based on long-term proven performance, but the board ultimately directed staff to move forward with GeoSurfaces by consensus.

“We will get with Geo tomorrow and ask them to create two contracts,” Fox said. “One contract will be for demolition and site work so that they can — we can approve that quicker.” He said staff would continue to negotiate warranty language and other scope items before the board votes on a final contract.

Board members and staff described differences they observed in site visits: fields built on a concrete subsurface felt uniformly firm, while several pivot (rock-subbase) installations felt inconsistent underfoot. The district’s athletic director and coaches said they preferred a pivot turf when it was installed over a concrete base rather than over a crushed-rock subbase.

Key contract and warranty points presented to the board included:

- GeoSurfaces pivot option: vendor materials in the meeting packet described a turf warranty of 12 years (subject to maintenance) and a GeoBase concrete subsurface warranty of up to 25 years; Geo’s bid included a demo line item that the board asked staff to clarify because it was substantially larger than the other vendors’ demo costs.

- ATG option: ATG’s warranty covers turf and subsurface together and can be extended to 12 years for an additional charge (Fox cited $20,000 per field, $60,000 total to extend balance to 12 years). ATG guaranteed GMAX performance levels and drainage rates in writing.

- Vernon Jones/other products: Vernon Jones supplied lower pricing on some line items but would require separate warranty processes between the subcontractor and the turf manufacturer; its turf warranty was described as 10 years.

Board members expressed mixed views. Several said they leaned toward Geo because its pivot turf runs cooler on hot days and requires less ongoing grooming than black-rubber infill fields, while others expressed concern about Geo’s relatively short U.S. track record and installation inconsistencies reported at some sites.

A board member with medical training cautioned that a shock pad beneath turf affects measured GMAX values (the laboratory test used in liability assessments) but does not, in medical literature, demonstrably reduce concussion rates; the board said this distinction matters mainly for warranty testing and liability, not for a conclusion that a pad prevents all injuries.

After discussion, the board provided direction to the superintendent to develop contracts with GeoSurfaces and to return a demolition/site-work contract for formal approval at the board’s next meeting (the superintendent said staff would bring final contract terms, grandstand sizing, scoreboard options and warranty clarifications back to the board before a vote).

Procedural votes recorded at the special meeting included a roll-call motion to enter executive session at the start of the meeting (motion by Mister Wilson, second by Missus Bailey; roll-call: unanimous yes) and a motion to adjourn at the end of the meeting (motion by Mister Jake Anderson, second by Mister Coker; all those in favor said “aye”).

Fox said staff will seek clarifications from GeoSurfaces about demo costs, warranty details and what the pivot product’s performance data show for high-impact American football use; the superintendent also said the district will confirm bleacher design and seat spacing before finalizing that line item in any contract.

The board did not take a formal vote tonight to award a contract; it gave staff direction to negotiate and return for a future formal contract vote.