Test the Turf Collaborative
  • HOME
  • About Us
  • FAQ
  • Testing
    • Heat
    • G-max
    • Turf System Toxics
    • Environmental Contamination
  • Resources
  • Topics
    • Industry Tactics
  • News
  • Get In Touch
  • Donate
  • HOME
  • About Us
  • FAQ
  • Testing
    • Heat
    • G-max
    • Turf System Toxics
    • Environmental Contamination
  • Resources
  • Topics
    • Industry Tactics
  • News
  • Get In Touch
  • Donate

see THE LATEST UPDATES

$3.7M turfs were supposed to keep Midlands high school fields cool. They don’t, suit says

12/13/2023

 
Picture
Alexa Jurado
Wed, December 13, 2023 at 5:30 AM EST

​A Midland school district is suing two companies after it paid a premium rate for a product that the district says failed to keep athletic fields cool as promised.

Richland 2 contracted with Geosurfaces Southeast, a sports surfacing company, in February 2020 and gave it over $3.7 million for synthetic turf installation at four high schools: Blythewood, Spring Valley, Westwood and Richland Northeast.

A lawsuit filed Oct. 4 accuses the company, along with synthetic turf brand TCoolPT, of fraud, negligence and breach of contract.

Geosurfaces promised the school district “good and workmanlike” construction services, supplies and products for the project, including an infill material called TCool, for which Richland 2 paid a “premium price” — hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to the lawsuit.

The company promised the school district that using TCool would keep the athletic fields 35 to 50 degrees cooler than standard infill products. It also promised that TCool would save Richland 2 additional costs, because the school district would not need to install irrigation systems.

This wasn’t the case, according to the lawsuit.

Instead, the school district found that the synthetic turf fields installed at the four high schools become ”extremely hot.” The lawsuit alleges that the TCool infill product was a “complete failure.”

The school district said it obtained independent testing of the infill product, and determined it was no different than regular infill used at other locations. It either didn’t work, or was never installed.

“None of these conclusions (are) acceptable,” the lawsuit reads.

​Read the full story.

Comments are closed.
    Picture

    News About Synthetic Turf and Natural Grass

    We will share updates and news links here as they become available.

    Archives

    December 2025
    November 2025
    October 2025
    August 2025
    July 2025
    April 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    October 2024
    July 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023

    Categories

    All
    Back To Grass
    Bans And Moratoriums
    Board Of Health
    Cancer
    Chemical Exposure
    Communities Choosing Grass
    Cost
    Endocrine Disruption
    Field Failure
    Heat
    Injuries
    Lawsuits
    Microplastic Pollution
    MLB
    Natural Grass
    NFL
    PFAS
    Plastic
    Recycling
    Tire Crumb
    Toxic Chemicals
    Turf Debate
    Weather Closures

    RSS Feed

Test The Turf Collaborative ©2026