These Massachusetts agricultural fairgrounds awarded funding for infrastructure repairs
GREENFIELD, Mass. (WWLP) – A total of $1,167,272 in state grants was awarded to 14 agricultural fairgrounds in Massachusetts to support infrastructure repairs, State Representative Natalie Blais announced.
Rep. Blais of Deerfield, who covers 18 communities of the 1st Franklin District, said the agricultural fairs infrastructure grant program is intended to fund capital improvement projects to rehabilitate existing buildings and build new construction.
Meeting to be held on new Springfield Regional Justice Center
'Steeped in history, our agricultural fairs are a tremendous asset to the Commonwealth, not only acting as an economic engine but also as a unique place for visitors to learn about the importance of our local food systems,' said Blais, who serves as House Chair of the Joint Committee on Agriculture. 'I am proud to have worked alongside the agricultural fairs in the 1st Franklin District and across the state to lay the groundwork for this monumental investment. This would not have been possible without their involvement and the broad support of legislators and stakeholders statewide.'
Agricultural fairs offer education on the farming lifestyle as well as demonstrations and skills competitions. It is said that the first agricultural fair on record in the U.S. was held in Pittsfield in 1811.
The following are the Agricultural Fairs Infrastructure grant recipients for 2025:
Bolton Fair: $100,000
Association of North Chester, Chester Hill, and Littleville, Inc- Littleville Fair: $100,000
Essex Agricultural Society dba Topsfield Fair: $85,595.68
Franklin County Fair: $100,000
Hampshire, Franklin & Hampden Agricultural Society- Three County Fair: $73,715
Heath Fair: $99,991.95
Highland Agricultural Society- Middlefield Fair: $23,995.01
Hillside Agricultural Society- Cummington Fair: $85,595.68
Marshfield Agricultural and Horticultural Society- Marshfield Fair: $100,000
Martha's Vineyard Agricultural Society- Martha's Vineyard Fair: $84,218
Middlesex County 4-H Fair: $50,000
The Westfield Fair Organization, Inc.- Westfield Fair: $100,000
Union Agricultural & Horticultural Society- Blandford Fair: $100,000
Williamsburg Grange Fair: $64,160.68
'Agricultural fairs are at the core of the communities they serve, bringing people together to enjoy and learn about agricultural traditions and practices and purchase locally produced food,' said Governor Maura Healey.
'Fairs have always been festive gathering spaces where attendees can learn more about our shared agricultural heritage while enjoying a fun atmosphere and where consumers can forge connections to the local food system by familiarizing themselves with how their local food is grown,' said Lieutenant Governor Kim Driscoll. 'Beyond the educational and entertaining factors that they bring, these events also boost economic activity which can trickle down to adjacent sectors increasing the overall economy in Massachusetts.'
'Agricultural fairs in Massachusetts are a cornerstone of our state's rich farming history and tradition,' said Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Rebecca Tepper.
Funding was provided by the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR). 'For hundreds of years, agricultural fairs have been a way for the public to understand the importance of farming and how a thriving agricultural sector benefits everyone,' said MDAR Commissioner Ashley Randle.
'The Franklin County Agricultural Society is incredibly appreciative of Rep. Blais and her colleagues in the Legislature for their support of this infrastructure grant' said Michael Nelson, president of the Society. 'The Franklin County Fairgrounds has a deep history of providing agricultural events as far back as the 1850s. Through this funding we will continue to make crucial investments in our facility to ensure this historic and beloved gathering space continues to enrich our community for generations to come'
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Oregon lawmakers scale back proposal for unemployment strike payments amid blowback
Hundreds of educators, parents and students joined a rally Nov. 1. 2023 at Roosevelt High School in north Portland to support striking teachers. Teachers like them could soon receive up to 10 weeks of unemployment benefits under a compromise negotiated by Oregon lawmakers.(Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle) A particularly controversial measure that would give unemployment benefits to public and private Oregon workers during labor strikes survived a key Wednesday hearing after lawmakers agreed to cut the length of time in which workers on strike could cash checks by more than half. Senate Bill 916 would have limited striking workers to receiving benefits for 26 weeks, in line with the current caps on unemployment checks for Oregonians. But after the Senate rejected an amended version of the bill on Tuesday, a bicameral conference committee voted Wednesday to set a new cutoff at 10 weeks after a two-week waiting period. Committee members voted along party lines, with the sole Republican present voting against the amendments. 'I do feel like this is a massive compromise,' said Rep. Dacia Grayber, D-Portland, the bill's lead author. 'It's not something I'm entirely thrilled with.' The measure would be a first-in-the-nation move by Oregon, establishing a right to strike for public and private employees while ensuring them the ability to apply for unemployment benefits. Aside from traditionally strike-exempt public employees such as firefighters and police, workers such as nurses and teachers could claim benefits after two weeks of striking. The bill has been among this session's most controversial measures, laying bare deep divisions over how best to use the state's $6.4 billion unemployment insurance fund. The changes come after support for a Democrat-led bill collapsed in a concurring Senate vote on Tuesday amid concerns from Republicans and a key dissenting Democrat. It had already drawn opposition from school board leaders who help negotiate teacher strikes, business groups, and local government leaders who contribute to the state's unemployment fund. 'We have a healthy fund today due in no small part because all the agreements in the years have been honored,' committee member Sen. Daniel Bonham, R- The Dalles, told his colleagues before voting against the amended bill. 'It is a healthy enough fund that I don't know that this will be a massive draw on it, but again the kids will lose if teachers are incentivized to strike.' House Democrats got the bill over the finish line in their chamber last week, arguing that the benefits would be used sparingly and not as a tool to prolong strikes, but to shorten them. A change made in a House committee would cap benefits to eight weeks if the state's unemployment fund is at risk, and lawmakers also included an amendment that mandates deductions in backpay for benefits claimed by teachers during strikes. Grayber on Tuesday repeated a promise she has made to continue monitoring the bill's implementation if it were to pass, but also signaled that she hoped to move past concerns that the bill would promote misuse of the unemployment system or dramatically hamper school life and public facilities. She said she's been 'guided by the math' behind the bill from the beginning, a subtle nod to the estimates from the state's employment department that the bill would not change existing tax structures for businesses and government agencies paying into the state's unemployment funding. 'I have heard the opposition,' she said. 'I very much look forward to moving past what feels like a worst-case scenario focus that we've maintained for several weeks now.' Oregonians who have lost a job can currently apply for unemployment weekly checks ranging from $196 to $836. The bill would allow benefits to kick in immediately if workers are locked out of facilities by their employer during negotiations. Sen. Mark Meek, D-Gladstone, is a sponsor of the legislation, but withdrew his support when it came up short in a 15-14 Senate vote on Tuesday. In a brief interview after the hearing, he declined to comment on whether he supported the proposed changes. He referred to another attempt at a transportation and infrastructure funding bill that the Legislature has taken up in the final weeks of the session: 'If there's time to pass a transportation package, there's time to get this right,' he said. The new amendment pushes the bill closer to a similar law passed in Washington that caps benefits at six weeks, but which doesn't go so far as to protect public employees like Oregon's proposed legislation. New Jersey and New York have also passed laws in recent years to provide unemployment benefits to striking private sector workers, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar effort in 2023 over fiscal concerns. Another bill extending benefits to striking workers in Connecticut is currently sitting on Gov. Ned Lamont's desk, but he is expected to veto it. The bill passed out of committee on a 4-1 vote. Rep. Lucetta Elmer, R-McMinnville, was excused. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Senate GOP unveil long-awaited SNAP proposals for Trump bill
Senate Republicans on Wednesday rolled out a suite of proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as a key component of President Trump's 'big beautiful bill' – but it dials back some of the proposals sought by the House that drew intraparty concerns. The new legislative text from the Senate would require states to cover some of the cost of SNAP benefits, which are currently completely funded by the federal government, if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent beginning in fiscal 2028, while allowing states with rates below that level to continue paying zero percent. It also proposes states with higher payment error rates cover a greater share of benefit costs. If the error rate is 6 percent or higher, states would be subject to a sliding scale that could see its share of allotments rise to a range of between 5 percent to 15 percent. The House, by contrast, called for all states to cover 5 percent of the cost of allotments in its agricultural proposal passed as part of a broader plan to advance Trump's tax agenda last month, with states that had higher payment error rates having to pay anywhere between 15 to 25 percent. The softened proposal comes as Senate Republicans expressed concerns about how the House pitch would have impacted states. 'This bill takes a commonsense approach to reforming SNAP-cutting waste, increasing state accountability, and helping recipients transition to self-sufficiency through work and training,' Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman (R-Ariz.) said in a statement on Wednesday. 'It's about being good stewards of taxpayer dollars while giving folks the tools to succeed.' 'At the same time, our farmers and ranchers are facing real challenges,' he said. 'This legislation delivers the risk management tools and updated farm bill safety net they need to keep producing the safest, most abundant and affordable food, fuel, and fiber in the world. It's an investment in rural America and the future of agriculture.' Like the House bill, the Senate bill would also decrease the administrative cost the federal government is required to pay to help cover program operations in the states by 25 percent, but beginning in fiscal year 2027. The proposals in both chambers also seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future and beef up work requirements, as well as farm provisions that GOP leaders have argued will make it easier to craft a bipartisan farm bill in the months ahead – although Democrats have said otherwise. Republicans on the Senate Agriculture Committee estimated the recent legislation would generate $144 billion in net savings in the years ahead as the party looks to ramp up cost-cutting measures in Trump's plan amid concerns about the overall deficit impact of his tax priorities.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Connecticut's Ban Throws Water on 2025 Trend of States Setting Up Crypto Investments
Going against the recent trend of state governments in the U.S. pursuing cryptocurrency investments, the Connecticut General Assembly has thrown down a ban against that New England state following suit, even as others pursue digital assets reserves in their fiscal strategies. According to unanimous decisions in both its House and Senate, Connecticut passed a bill this week that blocks any part of the state's government from an ability to "purchase, hold, invest in or establish a reserve of virtual currency," and it also prohibits accepting crypto payments. This runs counter to efforts in states such as New Hampshire and Texas, which are moving toward establishing reserves that echo the intent of President Donald Trump's administration at the federal level. The lawmakers in Connecticut, which ranks in the middle of the pack among state economies, also tightened rules for crypto firms working under the state's money-transmitter license. After Trump issued an order to his administration in March to establish a reserve of bitcoin BTC, a long list of states jumped toward similar actions, though many of them were stymied by opposition or expiring legislative windows. New Hampshire was the first to cross the finish line. Texas has a similar bill awaiting a signature from Governor Greg Abbott, and Arizona also approved a more modest approach to setting aside unclaimed digital assets in a reserve. "As legislative sessions wrap up across the country, we're proud of the incredible momentum behind pro-Bitcoin and digital asset legislation," said Dennis Porter, the founder of the Satoshi Action Fund that's been advocating for state lawmakers to establish reserves. "Unfortunately, Connecticut has chosen to reject this opportunity—for now. But we remain optimistic. As more states embrace Bitcoin and see the benefits firsthand, we're confident Connecticut will follow suit." Porter said North Carolina and Ohio are both still a possibility for reserves this year. The federal government hasn't yet moved assets into a reserve. The relevant agencies, led by the Department of the Treasury, have been seeking to account for all of the digital assets held in various corners of the public sector. Once complete, Trump had directed all existing crypto be set aside as a long-term investment but that no taxpayer money be spent to acquire anything more than the government has seized in civil and criminal matters. Bo Hines, one of Trump's top crypto advisers, said at Consensus 2025 in Toronto that there are a lot of ideas on the table for acquiring more bitcoin in budget-neutral ways. In other state crypto legislative matters, California's lawmakers have been working on legislation that could allow digital assets payments in a state pilot program. The bill passed unanimously in its House and was forwarded to the Senate last week.
