Nyack Schools Bond Referendum Debate Continues

The Nyack Public School District's proposed $26.4 million bond referendum will go to the voters Oct. 29.

The district held the first of three public information sessions Tuesday at the Nyack Center, a meeting that included a vote by the board of education to amend the referendum.

There will be further information sessions Oct. 2 and Oct. 16 at Nyack High School. The primary source of debate continues to be the proposed upgrades to the athletic facilities at Nyack High School, including the installation of artificial surfaces to allow for heavier use of the fields.

The power point from Tuesday's presentation can be found on the district website here. Nyack Superintendent Dr. James Montesan said the future presentations would be similar, but they will be refined to address questions raised by residents along the way. The information focuses on the reasons for putting the bond forward at this time and details of the work that would be included. 

One reason raised is the district's budget projections, which show costs exceeding revenues by a considerable margin in the coming years, especially if capital improvements remain as a part of those costs.

The work would includes updating emergency lighting and replacing fire alarms in the district's buildings, with roofs being repaired or replaced. Boilers would also be replaced at Liberty Elementary, Upper Nyack Elementary, Valley Cottage Elementary, Nyack Middle School and Nyack High School. The district will also be making security and technology upgrades. 

Nyack Athletic Director Joe Sigillo led the part of the presentation regarding the athletic fields. They would include a new primary stadium where the current track is. There would be a new eight-lane track with a synthetic turf infield lined for football, soccer, lacrosse and field hockey. There would also be lighting, 200-seat bleachers including a press box and a concession building.

The plan also includes two upper fields, one for soccer and lacrosse and the other for baseball and field hockey and a separate softball field. The total cost of the fields would be $7,665,884, with approximately $3.3 million going to artificial surfaces. 

"This is more than just a project to benefit the high school kids," Sigillo said. "We are very challenged with space in Nyack. We all know that. We don't have the recreation parks that some neighboring districts do. These fields are not just for interscholastic, but for youth programs to use. There is a constant abuse of the existing fields."

Most of Nyack's athletic programs play off campus now, including softball at Upper Nyack Elementary and many others including football and lacrosse at MacCalman Field. Among other issues, this leaves Nyack's trainer trying to cover three sites at a time on many occasions. The current proposal would keep all games at the high school. 

Poor field conditions due to overuse is one of the main reasons cited for the need for artificial surfaces. Sigillo used the example of the 2013 spring sports season. During the three weeks of preseason practice, Nyack fields teams were forced indoors all but three days, Other Rockland County schools with grass fields were outside an average of 11 days, with teams with artificial surfaces outside an average of 16 days. 

"Often game sites are changed, for regular season or playoff games," Sigillo said. "It is hard to tell a team that earned a home playoff game that sorry, we have to go play on a neutral site. That has happened to the field hockey team three years in a row."

Scott Hughes spoke about the synthetic surface itself, stressing that it is not AstroTurf, which first came into use in the late 1960s and was comparable to a carpet laid on concrete in some places. 

"This is third generation, much softer on athletes, with fibers two or two and a half inches tall," Hughes said. "It is a much more forgiving surface."

The hard surfaces and "turf burns" have been one of the safety concerns cited by opponents of the use of artificial surfaces, though potential toxicity of the materials in the artificial surfaces has been the larger point. That point continues to be one of contention between supporters of the bond and opponents.

Resident Rick Tannenbaum continued to lead the argument for separating out the athletic fields from the rest of the referendum, saying that otherwise it will fail as the 2007 referendum did. The district has provided studies pointing to the safety of artificial surfaces, which are widely used at the high school, college and professional levels, but there are Nyack residents who claim those studies are inconclusive regarding the long-term issue. Others simply state that it is an expense that is not needed. 

"Tonight you changed the bond, so we know you can," Tannenbaum said. "All you are going to get is nothing."

'He pointed to the $5 million in capital reserve funds that would be included in the project along with the $21.4 million that would be bonded.

"About $5 million is being held hostage to this bond," Tannenbaum said. "The last time you tied improvements to turf,we got nothing. What these people are saying is we can't have that money unless we agree to artificial turf. That was not the intention of the resolution to save that money. It was to make improvements."

Proponents of the referendum have said that the current condition of Nyack's athletic fields are deplorable and called for the district to provide something comparable to other facilities in the area. The also pointed out how common artificial surfaces are in Rockland County and beyond. 

"Obviously there are so many parents who are taxpayers who do not support the bond because of the turf issue," said Nyack resident Lynnette Marshall. "I think some of those parents have children who play sports and some do not. A lot of the conclusions made that Nyack should not install turf. Those parents should not have their children play sports because of the preponderance of turf and the number of fields in our county and outside of our county that have turf fields."

Another part of the presentation that drew criticism was the long-term replacement costs for the artificial surfaces, which are projected to last eight-to-10 years, with an eight-year guarantee. Replacing the fields would require approximately half of the initial cost.

For more information and to read more of the ongoing debate, see this report on Patch.