A turf war is raging in Edina.
Edina school administrators want to change over four grass sports fields to crumb rubber and replace a fifth that already has that type of synthetic turf, which is filled with tiny black pellets shredded from ground tires. Outcry is coming from hundreds of parents afraid of the potential health risks linked to recycled rubber.
It's spiraled into a debate about what's best for kids in the Edina district: giving them chances to kick soccer balls through fresh turf fields, or holding off on a decision until the government can better examine health risks. The decision comes Monday, when the school board votes on a purchase agreement with vendor FieldTurf.
"I know that people around the country are ripping this out and replacing it, so I don't see why we're going forward with it if there's such a level of concern with so many people," said Clover Hackett, an Edina parent who started the campaign to delay a decision.
Murmurings that carcinogens may be hidden in the black crumb rubber pellets have surfaced nationally since NBC News and ESPN reports last year documented that a number of soccer players in Washington state developed cancer after playing on crumb rubber fields. Some studies have shown the presence of toxins in crumb rubber, and one from Environment and Human Health Inc. in 2015 found carcinogens in crumb rubber fill.
The Environmental Protection Agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other federal agencies started a study on crumb rubber in February in response to the concerns, and they will release a draft report this year. More than 400 supporters have signed a Change.org petition asking the Edina school board to wait to make a decision until then.
Edina schools Superintendent Ric Dressen and his staff maintain that crumb rubber is durable and safe. It's half as costly as some of the alternatives. Dressen and board members have said that studies examining the health risks so far have been inconclusive.
"In terms of exposure and risk to kids, crumb rubber is not a risk that I view as significant, or public health studies view as being a significant risk," said board member David Goldstein, who dismissed the concern as a nonissue.