Letter: MGRS Needs More Responsible Approach to Field

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

Last week the Mount Greylock Regional School Committee grappled with how to advance the athletic fields improvement project. I came away from their meeting, disappointed with their approach to and the ultimate outcome of their decision. After having made a commitment in September 2019 to explore the possibility of a – much less expensive over the long-term – natural grass field along with an artificial turf field, the committee decided to proceed with only the artificial turf option.

Proponents of the artificial turf field argued that it was time to make a decision: they had worked long and hard enough on this issue. They avoided mentioning they had done next to nothing to address a committee vote made over a year ago to include a natural grass option in the bid documents. Last week, for the first time, they mentioned that it would cost over $40,000 in architect fees to include the grass, which they clearly wouldn't be considering anyway.

Inexplicably, this concern for spending does not seem to be relevant when they are considering the potential $3 million price tag. (This price reflects the cost of Title IX and ADA improvements, an artificial turf field, $100,000 premium for Brockfill infill, but not the $700k track.) The committee seemed to be feeling flush with funds, as the Williams gift has grown from $5 million to $6.8 million. It's important to note that between $1 million and $1.5 million has been set aside as an endowment to maintain the school, and $3.1 million has been committed to the administration building. That leaves $2.2 million to $2.7 million for the fields project.

Perhaps the current effort to value engineer some aspects of the project and a depressed economy will bring the bids in low enough. On the other hand, there was no mention of where the $400,000 to  $600,000 needed to replace it in 10 years time would come from.

Other financial pressures that could limit the available funds were also not discussed, such as an irrigation system that is badly needed to support the entire campus of grass fields (est. $200,000) already in use by numerous MGRS teams, or improvements to the poorly constructed John Allen Field or the unknown financial impact of COVID-19.

The School Committee argues that playability of an artificial grass field is of utmost importance. At times it sounds like the only way kids can get outside to run and breathe fresh air is if they have a plastic field. I'd prefer us to explore other options for athletics such as sharing resources with other schools, or investigating how we can creatively use that beautiful campus, and truly weighing the costs and benefits (educational, environmental, health and financial) before we make such a long term commitment.

With a majority of the School Committee members being replaced in November – which makes me wonder why the current committee is pushing for a decision now – I'm looking forward to open, reasoned and responsible dialogue and approach to decision-making in the future. At the very least, I expect commitments to be honored and spending decisions to be supported by a thoughtful financial plan.

Stephanie Boyd
Williamstown, Mass.




Tags: turf field,   

iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue; please keep comments focused on the issues and not on personalities. Profanity, obscenity, racist language and harassment are not allowed. iBerkshires reserves the right to ban commenters or remove commenting on any article at any time. Concerns may be sent to info@iberkshires.com.

Hike in County's COVID-19 Positivity Rate Drives Mount Greylock District to Remote Learning

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — Two days after Mount Greylock regional middle-high school went fully remote, the entire PreK-12 district followed suit.
Mount Greylock Regional School District Superintendent Jason McCandless on Thursday notified families that Lanesborough Elementary and Williamstown Elementary will be going remote because of an increase in the county's COVID-19 positivity rate.
On Thursday, the commonwealth reported that the county's rate was 3.01 percent in the Weekly COVID-19 Public Health Report.
"This summer we negotiated for a 3 percent test positivity rate in Berkshire County as a component in our metrics to determine a move to remote learning with input from public health officials and knowledge that our staff, as well as our students, draw from more than Lanesborough and Williamstown," McCandless wrote. "Berkshire County was and is our best proxy for regional trends across our community."
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories