Federal Cuts That Will Hit Your Wallet, Your Workplace, & Your Community

By Deborah LeonczykGuest Column
Print Story | Email Story
 
Congress is considering cuts that would eliminate the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) and deeply reduce the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). These proposals may look like budget decisions on paper — but here in the Berkshires, they will have immediate, tangible consequences.
 
If you think these programs don't affect you, think again. Whether you run a business, teach in a school, work in health care, pay property taxes, or simply live in a neighborhood — you will feel the impact.
 
CSBG and LIHEAP aren't just safety nets. They are economic stabilizers that protect working families, support local spending, and reduce pressure on emergency systems. When these programs disappear, so do jobs, consumer dollars, and community stability.
 
At Berkshire Community Action Council, CSBG is the core funding that allows us to meet local needs in real time. It helps keep 2,300 children warm each winter through our Children's Clothing Program. It supports our Food Depot, which supplies pantries across the county. It funds the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program, which helps low- and moderate-income residents claim refunds and tax credits — money that goes straight back into our local economy.
 
CSBG also fills the gaps no other funding can. It allows us to respond when a family faces eviction, when a senior can't afford transportation to a medical appointment, or when someone falls behind on a utility bill through no fault of their own. If this funding disappears, so does that flexibility — and so do those services.
 
LIHEAP, meanwhile, provides heating assistance to over 8,000 Berkshire households every year. That's not a statistic — it's a full quarter of our population. In a region with long, harsh winters, LIHEAP is not optional. It keeps homes warm, children safe, and older adults healthy.
 
LIHEAP also pays for emergency heating system repairs and replacements, ensuring that families don't face life-threatening cold with a broken furnace. When LIHEAP is cut, fuel assistance drops, repair services decline, and households are forced to choose between heat and other essentials.
 
You may not receive LIHEAP or CSBG support, but you will feel their loss:
  • If you're an employer, you'll see more missed shifts, transportation issues, and distracted workers juggling crises that used to be managed quietly and effectively.
  • If you're in education, you'll notice more children arriving unprepared for the weather, unfocused in class, or struggling with basic needs.
  • If you work in healthcare or public safety, you'll encounter more avoidable emergencies — illnesses from unheated homes, stress-related health problems, and increased pressure on ERs and shelters.
  • If you're a taxpayer, you'll pay more for local services that must pick up the slack — from emergency housing to crisis response.
  • If you run a small business, expect fewer customers. VITA refunds won't flow into local stores. Fewer heating oil deliveries will mean less work for contractors. Spending drops when families are in survival mode.
These aren't theoretical outcomes — they are predictable economic consequences of removing basic protections.
 
Some will argue these programs should be scaled back to "cut costs." But that ignores the cost of doing nothing. When CSBG and LIHEAP prevent a crisis, they save money downstream — on hospital stays, shelter placements, court proceedings, and lost productivity. It is far more expensive to respond after the fact than to prevent hardship in the first place.
 
And it's not just about economics. It's about who we are as a community. These programs reflect our shared values: that children should go to school warm, that no one should freeze in their home, and that help should be available when it's needed most.
 
That's why I'm urging our federal delegation — Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, and Congressman Richard Neal — to protect CSBG and LIHEAP from elimination or reduction. These are not fringe programs. They are foundational supports in rural regions like the Berkshires.
 
I'm also asking you, the reader, to take action. Call your legislators. Share your story. Donate or volunteer if you're able. These programs work because they are local, responsive, and rooted in community. Losing them would be a blow not only to the families who rely on them — but to the entire regional economy we all depend on.
 
When we lose safety nets like CSBG and LIHEAP, the most vulnerable fall first — and without intervention, we all fall further, and the cost of recovery is one we all share.
 
Deborah Leonczyk is executive director Berkshire Community Action Council.

 


Tags: BCAC,   LIHEAP,   

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

Dalton Board Signs Off on Land Sale Over Residents' Objections

By Sabrina DammsiBerkshires Staff

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.
 
View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories