Letter: Future of Town(s) Fire/EMS Services

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

For generations, Berkshire County's fire departments have served their communities with pride. We all respect that history. But history alone cannot answer today's emergencies.

I write this as a son of Berkshire County. I grew up in West Stockbridge and remember the small-town fire service culture of the 1970s and 1980s. But those days are gone. The demands on fire and EMS today are greater, more technical, and more constant. We have got to change.

Massachusetts law sets real standards for firefighter retirement, safety, and training. Public employers must comply with workplace safety rules, and fire-service training is not optional or informal. These are legal and moral obligations. Ignoring them is not tradition. It is failure to the community and first responders.

That failure is sad, yet all too common. And it dismisses our obligation to the people who call 911 expecting a competent response.

We all love volunteers. They are a community necessity and always will be. But volunteers should not be the entire daily operating plan. Most calls now are EMS-related. Everyday response requires an essential core of professional, dually trained firefighters and EMS personnel, with volunteers strengthening the system when resources are strained.


The truth is already in front of us. Mutual aid exists because no town can do it alone. Some Berkshire communities are already moving toward shared-service models with full-time staffing, shared equipment, and regional planning. That is not a threat to local identity. It is the future of effective community safety.

We also need to be honest about waste. Small departments cannot keep spending limited tax dollars on redundant equipment, duplicate apparatus, and layers of administrative overhead while service gaps grow. The public deserves readiness, competence, and accountability.

The real question is simple: are we protecting today's communities, or preserving a bygone era because elected and appointed officials are afraid to think differently?

Berkshire County does not need less heart. It needs more honesty, more professionalism, and more regional leadership.

The path forward is clear. Towns must work together under one umbrella of care. Everything else risks becoming a defense of the status quo when the public deserves better.

Christian Tobin
Naples, Fla.

 

 

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

Lanesborough Planners Bring STR, ADU, Signage Bylaws for Town Vote

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Planning Board held a public hearing on the much anticipated bylaws for short-term rentals, accessory dwelling units, and signage to be presented at the annual town meeting.

For the past few months, planners have diligently been working on wordage of the new bylaws after Second Drop Farm's short-term rental was given a cease and desist because the building inspector said town bylaws don't support them.

The draft bylaw can be found on the website.

The board voted on each of the four articles and heard public comment before moving to entertain any amendments brought forward.

A lot of discussion in the STR section was around parking. Currently the drafted bylaw for parking states short-term rentals require two parking spaces, and with three or more bedrooms, require three spaces but never more than five.

There were questions about the reasons for limiting parking and how they will regulate parking renters choose to park on the lawn or the street. Planners said it is not their call, that is up to the property owner and if it is a public street that would be up to the authorities.

Some attendees called for tighter regulation to make sure neighborhoods are protected from overflow.

Lynn Terry said she lives next to one of the rented houses on Narragansett Avenue and does not feel safe with all of the cars that are parked there. She said there can be up to 10 at a time on the narrow road, and that some people have asked to use her driveway to park. She thinks limiting to five cars based on the house, is very important.

The wordage was amended to say a parking space for each bedroom of the house.

Rich Cohen brought up how his own STR at the Old Stone School helps bring in money and helps to preserve the historic landmark. He told the board he liked what they did and wants to see it pass at town meeting, knowing it might be revised later on.

He said the bylaws now should not be a "one size fits all" but may need to be adjusted to help protect neighborhoods and also preserve places like his.

After asking the audience of fewer than 20 people, the board decided to amend the amount of time an short-term rental can be reserved to 180 days total a year in a residential zone, and 365 days a year in every other zone. This was in the hopes the bylaw will be passed and help to deter companies from buying up properties to run STRs as well as protecting the neighborhood character and stability.

They also capped the stay limit of a guest to 31 days.

Cohen also asked them to add "if applicable" to the Certificate of Inspection rule as the state's rules might change and it can help stop confusion if they have incorrect requirement that the state doesn't need.

The ADU portion did not have much public comment but there were some minor amendments because of notes from KP Law, the town counsel.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories