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.

Pittsfield Proposes 2.64 Tax Rate Hike

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The proposed tax rate for fiscal year 2027 is less than 40 cents per $1,000 valuation for residential properties and would increase the average property tax bill by about $146 per year. 

On Tuesday's City Council meeting agenda is a request from the mayor and Board of Assessors to use a residential factor of .8245 at a shift of 1.75, resulting in a residential tax rate of $17.88 and a commercial, industrial, and personal property tax rate of $37.95.

These matters are typically referred to the Committee of the Whole for deliberation. The proposed rates for residential and commercial are 38 cents and $1.05 more, respectively, from FY26. 

The average residential home, valued at $316,792 in FY27, has increased by about $1,500 from the previous fiscal year, and would pay $5,664.24 in yearly taxes.

This is a 2.64 percent, or $145.88, increase. 

The average commercial property worth $239,600 saw a $100 increase in value from the previous fiscal year, and would pay $9,092.82 in yearly taxes. This is a $255.27, or 2.89 percent, increase from the previous fiscal year. 

The FY27 tax levy of $124,468,317 is a $5.3 million increase from the previous year, or 4.45 percent. There is about  $388,000 in excess levy capacity, $2.3 million in new growth, and the levy limit is $124,856,412. 

According to the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, 11 single-family homes were added to Pittsfield's housing stock this fiscal year, increasing the city's total assessed value by $19,987,600 to $3,592,737,600. 

The city lost five two-family homes in 2027, and that housing type decreased by $3.2 million in assessed value, now worth $384,620,400. 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories