It is the job of the school system to provide academic and physical education. Including organized sports and band, teaches discipline, teamwork, etc. It is not the duty of the school system to make championship teams, produce professional athletes or college scholarship candidates. The grass football field is more than adequate for all field sports and unused after the school year.

Physical education is given sometimes outdoors on the fields below the gridiron. That is also where all teams do their practicing and play some games. And I suspect they will continue to do so if only to keep the turf in good shape for important events. Those fields are good enough and safe enough for practice sessions now; is that going to change?

Apparently, turf would draw teams and bands from outside Auburn. I could be wrong about that. Of course the more people using the field would mean more repair and/or replacement of turf at what cost?

There are medical issues and the presence of carcinogens is only part of the problem. Latex in the rubber-based turf is another issue. Even if carcinogens can be removed, latex cannot. Coming into contact with the latex in the turf's rubber can cause allergic reactions to those unsuspecting students who have allergies and the CDC to explore the prevalence of latex allergy and the development of latex allergy after continuous exposure to the stuff. The medical community has been dealing with this problem for years.

Safety of turf over grass fields is also of questionable significance.

I think the turf issue should be voted on separately and not pull the political maneuver of combining it with the total school budget just to get it passed. Installing turf will not improve anyone's education. If the board really wants turf, check with those who are willing to donate privately and add that to the few thousand recently donated (a drop in the bucket for this project).

Richard Hunter

Auburn