Having already made the decision to go with artificial turf at the high school stadium, school district officials faced a different but equally tricky decision last week as they further honed their field plans.

Tires or tennis shoes?

Both are ground up for use as infill in modern turf fields. School officials are convinced neither option poses health or environmental risks, but wondered whether tennis shoes, though more expensive, might allay some of the fears of opponents.

“If a group is not comfortable with a synthetic surface, my assumption is that they’re not going to be comfortable with any synthetic surface,” said School Board Member Patty Fielding at last week’s board meeting. “(For opponents) it’s going to be natural turf or nothing.”

Fielding’s colleagues ultimately agreed, unanimously awarding a $1.9 million bid to Precision Earthworks Inc. to install artificial turf and tire infill. The decision saved the district – which earlier in the evening declared a fiscal emergency – $115,000. 

But artificial turf opponents say natural grass is still a safer option.

Both sides in what has become both a national and local debate say science supports their claim. Opponents say studies show the infill is dangerous to players and the environment. Supporters cite different studies that say there are no ill effects.

Between the two surfaces being considered by the district, Nike Grind – which uses recycled tennis shoes instead of tires – has been studied less extensively. But the compounds within the infill have lower levels of toxicity, and thus could be perceived by some as safer.   

Leading the charge against the plan is islander Chris Van Dyk, who’s vowed to sue the district if it moves ahead with any synthetic surface. He says he’s collected more than 800 signatures for a ballot measure that would ban artificial turf on the island and raise money for new natural surfaces.

He’s pushing for a surface – consisting of an artificial subsurface that reinforces natural grass – that’s used on some horse tracks in Australia.

“It becomes a question of focus,” Van Dyk said. “We’ve had these blinders on. As a citizen, I don’t know what to do. We haven’t been able to get fair consideration of alternatives.”

Van Dyk was the lone dissenter at Thursday’s school board meeting. School officials took exception to his claims that they haven’t listened to opponents or considered other options.

Superintendent Ken Crawford said the issue has been studied thoroughly by staff and board members for the past three years, and that they have no reason to believe artificial turf is unsafe.

Several citizen members of the district’s Capital Projects Advisory Committee – of which Van Dyk is a part – also voiced their support of the process, and for moving ahead with artificial turf.

“To say this action undermines safety is really a gross misrepresentation,” said CPAC member Linda Smith Walsh. “I can’t think of a group with more integrity who’s worked harder to study an issue.”

Officials said the system touted by Van Dyk hasn’t been tested in climates like the Northwest, where abundant rains are especially hard on grass.

The board unanimously approved the use of artificial turf earlier this year. Construction on the new field will begin this summer. In addition to offering year-round playability for high school teams, officials say it will take stress off of other overused fields around the district.

Though he and board members are comfortable with the decision, Crawford said he expects questions about safety will continue.

“There’s nothing I know of that will make those issues go away,” he said.