Letter: Letter to the Mount Greylock School Committee

Letter to the Editor07:00PM / Monday, September 02, 2019Print Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

Below is the text of an email I submitted to the MGRSD School Committee today (Aug. 29):

Members of the MGRSD School Committee:

I'm writing to you in support of the work of your Phase 2 Subcommittee and its recommendation to install a turf field at Mount Greylock's campus.

I ask you to trust the members of the Phase 2 Subcommittee, and your members you appointed to that subcommittee, in their lengthy due diligence and public deliberation -- of both the financial and alleged health risks in light of current medical research -- in determining that a turf field is best for the school and its students.

As a parent of scholar-athletes involved in the field sports at Mount Greylock (soccer and lacrosse) since the fall of 2010, I can attest directly to the difficulties these teams have had regarding natural grass field conditions. Invariably, games played on natural grass in the county have been either postponed or canceled outright due to unplayable surfaces caused by weather and season conditions. Even well-maintained natural fields have fallen prey to our New England weather variations, more so recently.

For example, this past spring season the boys lacrosse team had to relocate five of its games to, wait for it, local turf fields (MCLA and Williams). It played on nine turf fields in a 20-game season. The girls team played a similar number of games on turf fields in a 22-game season. If Mount Greylock determines it shouldn't have a turf field due to alleged health issues, then should its field teams forfeit all games to be played at opponents' or neutral turf venues?

That's why so many surrounding educational institutions with athletic programs have adopted the turf field for their field sports teams. Area high schools such as West Springfield, Chicopee Comprehensive, Deerfield Academy, Berkshire School, Burr and Burton Academy, Chicopee, East Longmeadow, Agawam, Pope Francis, Springfield Central, South Hadley, Easthampton, and Northfield Mount Herman all have turf fields. Local colleges Williams, BCC, MCLA, Mount Holyoke, Amherst, UAlbany, RPI, Sage, Union, UMass, Smith, Elms, AIC, Westfield State, Western New England, Springfield and Skidmore all have turf fields.

My eldest son looked at 21 colleges in his pursuit to play collegiate lacrosse; all have turf fields. The college he's currently enrolled at and playing for, installed its turf field in 2015. My youngest son, now a senior at Greylock, has looked at 17 colleges this past year; all have turf fields.

I doubt any of these institutions would be using a turf field if their assessment of the health, financial, and environmental factors confirmed actual, material issues regarding the same. For support of that, just look at the recent analysis BCC went through with its field, a field many county schools now use due to its stable availability for play in any weather condition.

I urge you strongly to move forward with the turf field project and vote in favor of its installation at the school.

Respectfully,

Adam Filson
Williamstown, Mass.

Filson is a Mount Greylock grad ('83) and the parent of two children who have attended Mount Greylock (2016 and 2020).

Tags: high school sports, MGRHS, turf field,

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

rk MILES Blding Materials

Are You Ready to Update Your Home? Start With rk MILES. 4 Locations (800)670-7433

www.rkmiles.com

Save & Earn with Greylock

3.30% APY 6-month certificate. Click to learn more! Insured by NCUA.

www.greylock.org

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Vote No on 'Jungle' Primaries

Letter to the Editor02:05PM / Wednesday, September 30, 2026

To the Editor:

They don't call them "jungle primaries" for nothing.

Question 3 on the November ballot would trash two-party primary elections and replace them with California-style, chaotic — and extraordinarily costly — "jungle" primaries that would destroy the very political parties that have kept America stable since Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison created them in the 1790s.

Jungle primaries put all candidates, regardless of party, on one ballot with the top two vote-getters facing off in the general election — even if they're from the same party. That would create chaos, but the real issue is money: Jungle primaries give a distinct advantage to candidates backed by corporate money and the super wealthy. In short, jungle primaries move our primaries from the ballot box to big donor meetings long before campaigning even begins.

When something this radical is proposed, you have to look at who's behind it, who's funding it, and ask "why" they are doing it.

Their philosophical guru is Danielle Allen, a Harvard professor who ran for governor in 2022 but couldn't get 15 percent of the Democratic Convention vote to win the party's endorsement.

The money behind this extreme attack on small "d" democratic politics tells us more. With over $5 million in the bank as of Aug. 28, this is a very well-funded campaign — the lion's share of which came from wealthy Boston-area private equity individuals.

Twenty-two private equity executives gave $3.99 million, or 77 percent of all the money from individuals. Current and former Bain Capital executives contributed $1.92 million, and Berkshire Partners executives put up $1.32 million. In short, 22 rich people put up nearly $4 million to change how five million of us vote. Yes, it seems the ultra-wealthy want to destroy the two-party system that has kept our politics stable for 200 years.

View Full Story