WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 624

Authorizes the village of Greenwood Lake, county of Orange to allow golf carts on certain streets

2025 Regular Session Introduced by James Skoufis

Imposes at least 36-month moratorium on outdoor artificial turf installations in MA; directs EEA to study PFAS/health risks with experts and issue a public report before lifting.

REFERRED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 624

Summary — S.624 (Senate No. 624)

An Act to Consider the Safety of Artificial Grass and Turf Surfaces

What the bill would do (plain language)

S.624 would impose a temporary moratorium on the installation of artificial grass and similar turf materials on outdoor sites (explicitly including athletic fields and parks) in Massachusetts for at least 36 months. During that moratorium the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) would conduct a public evaluation of the environmental and health safety of such surfaces — including consultation with experts (specifically naming the PFAS Lab at Northeastern University). A Commission (a “Comprehensive Athletic Surface Performance Commission” if established by separate legislation, or a comparable body created by the EEA Secretary) would carry out or oversee the analysis and prepare a public report before any moratorium lift.

The bill is framed with an “emergency” preamble claiming possible PFAS contamination and other environmental risks from artificial turf and directs immediate implementation by the Governor, Department of Public Health (DPH), and other agencies upon enactment.

Key provisions

  • Creates a new statutory chapter titled (informally) “The Artificial Grass & Turf Surfaces — Installation Moratorium Act.”
  • Declares a public emergency related to artificial grass/turf installation and possible PFAS contamination.
  • Establishes a mandatory moratorium of at least 36 months on installing artificial grass or similar turf on outdoor athletic fields, parks, and related outdoor surfaces.
  • Directs EEA to conduct an evaluation during the moratorium, drawing on outside experts (explicitly referencing Northeastern University’s PFAS lab).
  • Requires formation of a Comprehensive Athletic Surface Performance Commission (CASPC) by statute or, if no statute, by the EEA Secretary to perform/oversee the analysis.
  • Requires a publicly reported analysis and forbids lifting the moratorium before the 36-month period has elapsed.

Who would be affected

  • Municipalities and local governments (parks, schools, recreation departments) planning turf or synthetic field projects.
  • Contractors, vendors, and manufacturers of artificial turf products.
  • School districts, colleges, and athletic organizations that maintain or plan to install artificial athletic surfaces.
  • State agencies (EEA, DPH, local boards of health) tasked with evaluation and enforcement.
  • Residents and environmental/public-health stakeholders (concerned with PFAS, soil and water impacts).

Procedural and timing notes

  • Filed/presented in the Massachusetts Senate on 1/16/2025 (Senate Docket No. 1272). Sponsor listed as Jason M. Lewis (by request); bill text and committee referrals reference Massachusetts agencies.
  • Committee activity includes referral to Environment and Natural Resources, hearings, and reports; the record shows the Senate passed the measure on 6/10/2025 and it was delivered to the House/Assembly and referred to the Committee on Local Governments.
  • If enacted with the emergency preamble intact, the moratorium and evaluation requirements would be effective immediately on enactment; the moratorium would last at least 36 months from passage and the EEA’s report must be publicly released before any lifting.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Immediate halt to planned or contractually anticipated turf installations, potentially affecting budgets and project timelines.
  • A statewide review could produce science-based guidance or restrictions on turf materials (particularly regarding PFAS and related contaminants).
  • Municipalities may need to consider interim field maintenance or replacement strategies for deteriorating synthetic surfaces.
  • The emergency framing could accelerate agency action but also invites scrutiny of the scientific basis and scope of the moratorium.

Note: The document package provided contained some inconsistent metadata (an initial short title about golf carts and a list of sponsors that includes federal legislators). The substantive bill text and docket indicate this measure is a Massachusetts state proposal addressing artificial turf and PFAS concerns.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.