Berkshire Planning Commission, Senator Talk Rural Affairs

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — State Sen. Paul Mark and the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission say the governor's creation of a statewide director of rural affairs is a good sign for the region.

The senator was thanked for his support of rural communities over the years.

"I think that's a very big step for our small towns across Massachusetts," Executive Director Thomas Matuszko said at last week's meeting.

The position, which is housed in the Executive Office of Economic Development, will cultivate rural economic development and coordinate with secretariats and state agencies to ensure that state government is attuned to the unique needs of rural communities. 

"I think it's a really strong signal from [Gov. Maura Healey] that she is committed to actually paying attention to us actually, making sure that rural communities aren't forgotten," Mark said.

"And hopefully this person, as it will exist, will be a direct interface with both the Rural Policy Advisory Commission and with the members of the rural caucus in the legislature, and then with town and regional governments as well."

He was one of the co-sponsors of a 2015 bill filed by the late Stephen Kulik, former representative of the First Franklin District, to establish an office of rural policy. This session, the bill is filed in the House and Senate.

"Long story short, the bill would have created this office of rural policy with a rural policy executive director, and they would report to the board of directors that would be the Rural Policy Advisory Commission," Mark explained.

He has heard that actions as simple as helping small towns access grants and resources, which was the intention of the bill that was filed.

"I am still going to push for that bill, but we'll see how the first year or two goes," he said. "I imagine the governor is going to want to test it out the way she wants to test it out at first and we'll see how that goes."

Sheffield alternate Rene Wood asked if Mark has input on the position's duties as an appointee to the Rural Policy Advisory Commission.

He believes that Healey wants the position to work as closely with people who are well versed in rural affairs to be as successful as possible and imagines that the person will become a member of the RPAC.

"I guess what I would hope from people I serve is, as we give this a chance, if we find it to be useful to let us in the Legislature know what is going well and if there are things that they're not doing that we want to fix," Mark said.



"We don't want this to become just nonsense. We don't want this to become just lip service. This is either going to be effective or it's not worth doing."

The panel also discussed Chapter 90 funding, the struggles of grant writing in smaller communities, and the countywide housing crisis, and transportation issues.

"We used to have county government like other counties throughout the commonwealth and no longer have that and I feel that the BRPC has kind of filled some of that void as a county government type of entity," Chair John Duval said.

"It really is the one place where all the communities come together and have these discussions and grants we work on."

He wondered if there is anything more that the planning commission can do to aid the issues that were raised in the meeting.

Mark said that the organization does a great job and urged members to maintain and build connections to the executive branch of state government.

There was also talk about the state of virtual meetings after the provision that allowed virtual meetings under the open meeting law expires at the end of this month.  Mark explained that the governor’s supplemental budget includes an extension until 2025.

"It’s as definite as it can be until it happens that this is going to be extended till 2025 and then the conversation continues about continuing indefinitely," Mark said. "I support it continuing. I think, especially in our area, it's extremely helpful."

The House and Senate have extended remote participation in committee hearings.


Tags: BRPC,   rural policy,   

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

Lanesborough Officials Take Road District Dissolution Off Warrant

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Select Board has removed a town meeting warrant article regarding the dissolution of the Baker Hill Road District.

JMJ Holdings development consultant Tim Grogan spoke in public comment saying the Berkshire Mall owner is currently has purchase-and-sale agreement for the mall. 

Back in February, the Select Board settled a tax dispute with JMJ Holdings by agreeing to move forward in dissolving the district if the company paid $1.1 million to the town. JMJ Holdings had to provide a signed development-and-purchase agreement 30 days before the town meeting. 

JMJ holdings did not submit a payment to be made by May 9. Because of that, the Select Board voted to take the article of the warrant to be voted at the annual town meeting.

Meanwhile, the Baker Hill Road District presented a slideshow defending the district and explaining what it does.

The district currently provides a non-resident-funded revenue stream of around $500,000 per year. These funds help pay for police cars and officer salaries, dump trucks, fire trucks, and more for the town.

"Dissolution would mean the district's three commercial property owners would no longer have to pay for upkeep of the Route Seven/Eight connector road. As a result, the BHRD annual contribution of more than $500,000 to Lanesborough would disappear permanently, since the services and maintenance costs associated with the Route Seven and Eight connector road would still remain," said Tom Caraccioli, PR consultant with AH&M Inc. "Lanesborough would have to absorb these costs and continue to provide emergency services to the mall and Target. The financial burden for these remaining expenses would then fall on Lanesborough taxpayers through higher taxes or the reduction of other important town services."

The proposal with JMJ would affect the town in a negative way Caraccioli claimed. 

"JMJ is proposing a one-time payment of $1.1 million to Lanesborough in exchange, JMJ would never pay BHRD taxes again. The decision to dissolve the BHRD by accepting this proposed $1.1 million would be a permanent choice that would have irreversible consequences," he said. "There will be no official system in place to cover recurring costs once the money from this single payment is spent. Therefore, the proposed one-time payment is not a long-term solution for the town of Lanesborough."

JMJ's dispute was that the Berkshire Mall no longer exists as a functioning entity and it should not be on the hook for protection and maintenance that had been based on the mall's operation in its heyday. The company is seeking to redevelop the site as senior housing and town officials were asking the state to take over the Connector Road. 

District officials said it's not guaranteed that the state would take over the road linking Routes 7 and 8, built to service the mall back in the '80s, and that the state Department of Transportation had historically discouraged the town from asking. Even if it happened, it could take three to five years, during which no BHRD funds would be collected if the district is dissolved. The state would not replace the revenue they support, and they argued the state is facing its own budget issues making it unlikely they would want to take over.

The road district was created by an act of the Legislature and would require another act to dissolve it. The town meeting article asked for voter support for a home-rule petition to start that process.  

After the presentation, it was asked what the current financial status of the BHRD, given that JMJ hasn’t paid in a long time and if the district actually has the money or if it is dependent on the mall sale.

Mark Siegars, attorney for BHRD, reminded the room that the mall is under a purchase and sale agreement and if the sale closes, the district expects to receive more than a million dollars because of the lawsuit and lien, but does not have that cash yet. If the sale does not go through, BHRD will take the mall and sell it. The district still gets payments from Target, which is separate from the mall. 

There were also some questions on the district's history, with Select Board member Jason Breault asking if the mall did not have a high tax rate from the district, would it still be solvent. The exchange became heated between Siegars and BHRD Chair Bill Prendergast.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories