Berkshire Mall Owners Offer Lanesborough Money to Dissolve Baker Hill Road District

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Berkshire Mall owners have offered the town a $1.25 million loan to dissolve the Baker Hill Road District, while the road district wants to take the property by eminent domain and says Target is on board. 

These proposals were put on the table during the Select Board's regular meeting on Nov. 24. The board agreed to meet with town counsel in executive session to discuss its path forward. 

"We need to come to an understanding, an agreement as a Select Board before we can move further to ask the townspeople what they want to do," Chair Deborah Maynard said. 

"All of this does depend on a town meeting vote, and we just are not at that point yet." 

In offering the town funds to dissolve the independent governmental road district district within Lanesborough, mall owner JMJ RE Holdings asked in return for an incremental rebate that caps the property's post-development value at $20.5 million for 10 years.  The Route 7/8 Connector Road would be taken over by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. 

"Capping the assessment at $20.5 million, over 2 1/2 times what the property is currently assessed for, will allow the town to continue to achieve its expected tax income from the mall, Target, and Baker Hill Road District, while simultaneously allowing JMJ Real Estate Holdings to earn back the money it has attributed through the initial contribution over a 10-year term," said consultant Timothy Grogan, of Housing Development Corp., on behalf of JMJ. 

While no actions were taken, Maynard immediately opposed capping the property's value for a decade. According to GIS information, JMJ purchased the mall in March 2023 for $100 and took on the mortgage. Its assessed value is $7.8 million. 

When the mall was operating in 2008, the total value of the property was more than $60.5 million, Maynard said. 

"I'm hoping that it's going to be at least $60 million with the new development, with your partners coming in, so to ask us to evaluate that mall at $20 million for 10 years is, in my opinion, totally out of the question," she told the holdings company. 

The road district is in litigation with JMJ over unpaid taxes for the Route 7/8 Connector Road. JMJ argues it is being over-billed and underrepresented, and Gorgan said getting rid of the BHRD is the "most risk-adverse and predictable way to satiate the town's tax needs, and, just as importantly, will breathe new life into this property with a fresh development." 

He reported that the case will not be heard in a courtroom until at least 2027. 

On the other hand, BHRD attorney Mark Siegars reported that Target positively responded to being a partner with the road district in the property's redevelopment. 

"They stated that they don't believe that JMJ has the wherewithal to redevelop the property. They would like to have it redeveloped as first-class retail space, but they recognized that it will have to be more than that in today's world, and specifically, there was a discussion about recreating a community center on the mall property, Target being the anchor partner in doing that redevelopment," he said. 

The Target department store is connected to the mall but owns its property. JMJ has proposed to reconstruct the vacant mall into senior living community. 

Siegars said the genesis of the road district was for economic development, and while it doesn't have the power to take the mall by eminent domain, it could be done through partnership with the town. He asked the board to establish a working group to mull the option. 

In October, the board had a tense conversation with JMJ about safety concerns brought forward by the police. Principal Jay Jones agreed to apply for demolition permits, and the 600,000-square-foot mall is estimated to cost as much as $7 million to take down. 

"Not many communities get that opportunity to work with an entity like Target to redevelop a piece of property that's going to hell in a hand basket," Siegars said. 

Target has not responded to iBerkshire's request for confirmation of Siegars' statement. Select Board members requested that a representative from Target be in the conversation. 

"I think the biggest thing in this whole room is Target's not here right now, and I think as part of this whole conversation, someone from Target should be in these meetings or part of this discussion, to be here to represent themselves," Select Board member Jason Breault said. 

 "I think this is not a fair process for this whole discussion." 

Select Board member Michael Murphy said town officials have gotten their information on the mall's development from local media, including iBerkshires.com, and pointed to changes in plans over the last few years from cannabis cultivation to affordable housing and assisted living. Tension arose again when he asked if JMJ is still pursuing housing on the site. 

Grogan said that, as of that evening, they are still pursuing housing but navigating some variables that are out of their control, such as getting permission from Target. 

Jones pointed to national media coverage about Target after ending its formal diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in early 2025. 

"I can't believe that, given everything Target has been through, that they would put themself in a position to try to be involved with taking a property from someone like me by eminent domain," he said. 

Mass Voters Retain Recreational Cannabis, Tighten Gun Laws in Midterms