Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves Crown High School contract amendment that adds artificial turf; residents push for grass pilot
Summary
The board approved a contract amendment for the Crown High School project that consolidates later phases and adds an artificial turf stadium field to phase 2. Community speakers urged MCPS to pilot natural grass fields and cited health, disposal and cost concerns associated with synthetic turf.
The Montgomery County Board of Education voted to approve an amended contract for the Crown High School construction project that folds a later phase into the current phase and adds an artificial turf stadium field to the phase‑2 scope. Board members discussed the change after pulling consent item 8.9 for questions about cost and process.
Why it matters: board member Rita Montoya sought clarity on whether the turf had been part of the originally approved design; staff and the superintendent said synthetic turf was included in the project's full scope from the start but had been scheduled for a later contract phase. Staff said consolidation of phases allowed fewer contracts and may reduce administrative duplication. The administration said the turf portion would add approximately $1.0–$1.2 million for the turf element itself and that higher totals in the CIP reflect additional site and track work; an electrical subcontractor error increased the contract amendment cost by roughly $3 million, which the general contractor agreed to absorb in part.
Community testimony: Diana Conway, president of Safe Healthy Playing Fields Inc., urged the board to commit to a pilot program for high‑quality natural grass fields rather than plastic turf, citing heat, PFAS and microplastic concerns and long‑term disposal costs. "Plastic fields are losers," Conway said, summarizing five epidemiologic and lifecycle concerns.
Board questions and outcome: board members asked about synthetic turf lifespan (staff said roughly 8–12 years depending on use), lifecycle costs, and whether the district could revisit grass versus synthetic choices for future projects. After discussion the board voted to approve the contract amendment. The motion carried with the recorded tally of five in favor and three abstentions; those who abstained cited a desire for more time to review field‑material tradeoffs and community input.
What’s next: staff said the Crown project remains scheduled per the CIP and that field surfacing is built into the school's comprehensive design. Board members asked staff to include turf/grass tradeoffs in future CIP hearings and to provide more detailed cost comparisons.
