Pittsfield City Council: Make Polluters Pay

PITTSFIELD, Mass.— The City Council supports statewide efforts to make the largest polluters pay. 

On Tuesday, it voted to back Bill H.1014/S.588, "An Act Establishing a Climate Change Superfund," which is expected to generate $75 billion over 25 years from the largest oil and gas companies.  Councilor At Large Alisa Costa and Ward 1 Councilor Kenneth Warren requested their colleagues' support for the legislation. 

"I think it's really important to hold businesses accountable in ways that we are not able to do right now," Costa said. 

"…We see the impacts of climate on our community every day, whether it's our drought, fires, the increasing cost to just maintain our homes, upgrade, or build now. I mean, it just impacts so much in our community and our ability to thrive, never mind the rising of asthma in children and all those other things. So I think it's really important that we create the tools that will hold businesses accountable, because their goal isn't to protect us. Their goal is to make money. It's our job as city council and as government to protect our citizens and our climate." 

Earlier this month, climate activists gathered at Westside Riverway Park to discuss the Make Polluters Pay bill and how climate change has affected the region. 

Warren explained that municipalities are supporting this, and Pittsfield would be the first in Berkshire County.  He pointed to the city’s struggles with PCB pollution after General Electric vacated the area, and the struggle to mitigate damage even after a legal settlement. 

"So I think the Superfund is a great idea," he said. 

"It leverages pay in from the companies that do this, and all we're doing is approving it so that the state can see that there is interest in this." 

Jane Winn, former executive director of the Berkshire Environmental Action Team, said those who polluted the atmosphere should pay for the damage.

"Even as climate costs rise, fossil fuel profits continue to soar. The payers into the Climate Superfund will be fossil fuel extractors that were responsible for the most emissions, limiting the total number of payers to the biggest polluters, those who polluted the most," she said during public comment. 

"Community members shouldn't have to pay for the full cost of bigger, better road stream crossings that won't wash away with our more intense storms. We shouldn't have to bear the full cost of fighting wildfires made much more likely by drought caused by climate change. We shouldn't have to pay for retrofitting municipal buildings to add air filters to keep wildfire smoke from polluting our indoor air and add air conditioning, something that wasn't necessary when I was growing up in Pittsfield."

"Municipal resolutions show power. When our city council shows their support for Make Polluters Pay, they send a clear signal along with a literal letter to the State House: We want climate resilience, and the worst polluters should have to pay their fair share." 

The resolution explains that Pittsfield needs additional funding for necessary climate adaptation and resilience projects, and the proposed state legislation allocates 40 percent of the funding to projects

benefitting environmental justice communities.  

"If passed, this bill would establish a climate change superfund into which the largest oil and gas companies would pay $75 billion over 25 years, with each company's share proportional to their contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions between 2000 and 2018 and would provide the means for Pittsfield and other cities like it to adapt to climate impacts more adequately, equitably and meaningfully," the resolution reads. 

Ward 3 Councilor Matthew Wrinn voted in opposition.  

"I don't think I know enough, and I've talked to a few of my people that I represent, and this is more of a want than a need, I think, so I don't think I could support it tonight," he explained. 

"But I definitely, personally think this is a good idea in the right direction, but I'm leaning towards respecting my constituents." 

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.