You Can’t Have It Both Ways

To the editor: On Nantucket, we all care deeply about protecting our environment and doing right by our students. But when it comes to the debate over the school athletic fields, we’re hearing arguments that simply don’t add up.

The Nantucket Land & Water Council is advocating for natural grass fields—while also opposing the very inputs required to maintain them. Grass fields do not sustain themselves, especially not under the level of use our school facilities experience. They require nutrients, soil management, and yes, fertilizer. Without those tools, fields quickly deteriorate, becoming compacted, uneven, and unsafe for student-athletes. In fact, this is exactly what happened at Nantucket’s Vito Capizzo Stadium field today.

You cannot call for grass and reject what makes it viable.

This contradiction extends even further. There are calls for the Land Bank to add more grass fields across the island, which on its face may sound like a solution. But more grass fields mean more maintenance, more fertilizer, more water, and more chemicalinputs to keep those fields playable and safe. Expanding grass fields while opposing the very practices required to sustain them is not a workable path forward. It simply scales the same problem.

At the same time, the Council continues to call for “more testing” of synthetic turf, while overlooking the most widely recognized and authoritative method available: EPA Method 1633. This method was developed specifically to detect PFAS across complexmaterials and is now the standard used by environmental professionals.

Testing of a full synthetic turf system using Method 1633 showed no PFAS detected above extremely low reporting limits, and no total fluorine at levels indicating intentionally added PFAS. These are not vague assurances—they are results grounded in rigorous,science-based analysis. Yet the response has been to dismiss those findings and call for more testing, without defining what standard would ever be sufficient.

Meanwhile, the soil at the existing grass fields at Nantucket High School tested positive for PFAS in 2021. That is not a hypothetical risk—it is a documented condition. PFAS is already present in our environment, including in soils and groundwater, and across many common construction materials.

Which leads to a broader reality: PFAS is not unique to one type of playing surface. Whether the field is grass or synthetic, PFASwill exist somewhere within the project—whether in soils, piping, coatings, or other materials. The question is not whether PFAS exists, but how we responsibly manage and minimize exposure.

In that context, it’s worth noting that the proposed synthetic turf system includes a capture and containment layer designed to manage stormwater—something traditional grass fields do not provide. That distinction matters.

This project is about far more than a playing surface. It addresses long-standing issues: overuse of fields, unsafe conditions, ADAnon-compliance, lack of restrooms, and a track that can no longer host home meets. Delaying solutions based on inconsistentstandards only prolongs these problems—and increases costs.

Nantucket deserves a consistent, fact-based approach. If we are going to debate PFAS, we should rely on established methods likeMethod 1633. If we are going to advocate for grass, we must acknowledge what it takes to maintain it. And if we are going to prioritize student health and safety, we need to look at the full picture—not just the parts that support a preferred outcome.

Because in the end, we can’t have it both ways. Please vote in support of article 12 and if you have questions, reach out as I am happy to share information.

J. Brent Tartamella
Parent & Community Member