Pittsfield Board of Health OKs Updated Tobacco Ordinance Draft

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — With the Board of Health's support on several proposed tobacco ordinance updates, the city now wants to hear from the public.

On Wednesday, the panel approved a slate of changes that extend the document from 16 pages to 18 pages. These include a clarified definition for blunt wraps, a raised minimum price requirement for cigars, and violations that incorporate state law.

This has been an almost six-month effort after Tri-Town Health Department Director James Wilusz came to the board in May to give an update on tobacco control.

Pittsfield's tobacco ordinance was last updated in 2019 before Gov. Charlie Baker signed an Act Modernizing Tobacco Control, which imposed new restrictions on the sale of nicotine vaping, flavored vaping, and tobacco products.

Wilusz warned the panel that such products can slip through the state's regulations without specific guidelines.

Blunt wraps are banned in both the new and old ordinances, though the definitions were tightened.

In the proposed new ordinance, a blunt wrap is defined as "any product wholly or in part from a tobacco product, manufactured or packaged with loose and removable leaves or section of a leaf, or as a hollow tube, that may be used by the consumer to wrap or contain loose tobacco or other fillers."

• A $1,000 fine for a first violation and a suspension for up to 30 days and no less than one day
• A $2,000 fine for a second violation and a suspension of up to 30 days and no less than seven days.
• A $5,000 fine for three or more violations in a 36-month period and a 30-day suspension.  

In the local regulation, the period between violations was changed from 24 months to 36 months and a section was added that allows the BOH to deny a tobacco license renewal if a retailer has sold to a person under 21 three times within the previous year.

The new ordinance also prohibits any new adult-only retail stores from existing within 25 feet of an existing tobacco permit.

There was a previous discussion about explicitly banning smoking bars but BOH members felt that the ordinance already bans them, as smoking is not prohibited in any bars within city bounds.

The town of Dalton has been on a similar path with Tri-Town, which has been administering a tobacco awareness program since 1994.

Pittsfield Tobacco Regulations by iBerkshires.com on Scribd

Dalton Board Signs Off on Land Sale Over Residents' Objections

By Sabrina DammsiBerkshires Staff
05:50AM / Tuesday, December 23, 2025

Residents demanded the right to speak but the agenda did not include public comment. Amy Musante holds a sign saying the town now as '$20,000 less for a police station.'

DALTON, Mass. — The Select Board signed the sale on the last of what had been known as the Bardin property Monday even as a handful of residents demanded the right to speak against the action. 

 

The quitclaim deed transfers the nine acres to Thomas and Esther Balardini, who purchased the two other parcels in Dalton. They were the third-highest bidders at $31,500. Despite this, the board awarded them the land in an effort to keep the property intact.

 

"It's going to be an ongoing battle but one I think that has to be fought [because of] the disregard for the taxpayers," said Dicken Crane, the high bidder at $51,510.

 

"If it was personal I would let it go, but this affects everyone and backing down is not in my nature." 

 

Crane had appealed to the board to accept his bid during two previous meetings. He and others opposed to accepting the lower bid say it cost the town $20,000. After the meeting, Crane said he will be filing a lawsuit and has a citizen's petition for the next town meeting with over 100 signatures. 

 

Three members of the board — Chair Robert Bishop Jr., John Boyle, and Marc Strout — attended the 10-minute meeting. Members Anthony Pagliarulo and Daniel Esko previously expressed their disapproval of the sale to the Balardinis. 

 

Pagliarulo voted against the sale but did sign the purchase-and-sale agreement earlier this month. His reasoning was the explanation by the town attorney during an executive session that, unlike procurement, where the board is required to accept the lowest bid for services, it does have some discretion when it comes to accepting bids in this instance.