The Harford County government acknowledged last week that the start date for installing an artificial turf field at Fallston High School has been pushed back until at least next May. The timetable now calls for the new, $1.55 million field to be playable by the start of the 2017 football season.
The Fallston project is already more than a year behind schedule and, with this one being pushed back even more, it means the turf field at Patterson Mill High is unlikely to be installed and usable before 2019, if then. These are the final two fields planned. The other eight county public high schools already have them.
Availability of money or, more properly, the unwillingness to borrow money, was the first reason cited by the county for the Fallston project's delay. Issues with bids submitted when the money finally was in hand was the second. Both are legitimate concerns.
It also should be noted that while the turf field program was started by the previous county administration with the goal of one field installed annually, some of those earlier installations also ran behind schedule. By the time the current administration took office in late 2014, the one-field-a-year plan was closer to one every 18 to 24 months.
By the time the last field goes in, the earliest ones installed at Harford Tech and North Harford will be more than a decade old, with those at Bel Air and Edgewood not far behind. That's likely to mean it will be time to consider upgrading/replacing the older fields.
The Aegis has long been supportive of the turf field installation program, which we believe was necessary to keep our local schools' sports programs on par with those in other counties. The fields make it possible for more fall and spring sports to be played on the same field with relatively reasonable maintenance costs.
This not to say the program hasn't been without its critics. Some Harford County Public Schools officials have expressed fears, privately, that the fields will become a drain on their budget as they age and require more expensive maintenance. And, when replacements are needed, will the county foot the entire bill as it did for the first ones?
More recently, there have been complaints from some parents that the fields benefit only a small part of the school community, while other programs, just as deserving, have seen their funding curtailed. It's a fair argument, but one that can be made about any school or government program.
On balance, we still think the turf field program was necessary and an appropriate decision by the former county officials who started it. Does that mean the turf fields should be replaced with something similar when they wear out? That's probably a question the folks in charge should start addressing soon. Nothing, after all, is forever.