Residents press Pennsbury board on facility maintenance, turf safety and project costs
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Multiple public commenters criticized uneven maintenance across the district, urged transparency on new‑school costs (cameras, sanitary line moves) and warned about artificial turf and chemical exposure; district officials said some work is underway and invited further review.
Several residents used the board’s public‑comment period Dec. 18 to press district leaders on facilities upkeep, project costs and turf safety.
A community member said some schools in certain neighborhoods show long‑standing maintenance issues (tarps on windows, leaning trees) while others appear better maintained, and questioned whether the district can sustain new construction costs without neglecting existing buildings. Another speaker pressed for detail on whether rough‑in wiring for security cameras and the price to relocate a sanitary line were included in current estimates.
A separate speaker signed as 'Bell' urged the district to avoid artificial turf, asserting chemical risks and referencing a California policy recommending natural grass; that speaker used strongly worded language linking turf to long‑term health harms. The district did not accept those scientific claims at the meeting; board members noted that policies and practices around turf, testing and vendor specifications would be discussed through facilities channels.
District staff and board members responded that Bristol Township approved the new high school planning step and that some infrastructure decisions (wiring, camera scope) are still being finalized as part of the design and procurement process. The board encouraged residents to continue engaging at committee meetings and noted strands of follow‑up on cost estimates and site utilities.