Berkshire Concrete Sues Dalton

By Sabrina DammsiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
DALTON, Mass.— Berkshire Concrete is taking the town to court over the Planning Board's decision to deny its special permit. 
 
"As of this evening, around 4 p.m., we were served by the law firm representing BCC related to the [Planning Board's] decision," Town Manager Eric Anderson told the Select Board on Monday. 
 
"We haven't even opened it, so we are getting sued by BCC over the Planning Board's decision. So, I'm sure that'll be in the court system for the next three to five years."
 
At the time of writing this, the case has not been posted on the state website. 
 
In March, the Planning Board voted to deny Berkshire Concrete's special permit after five meetings. 
 
The decisions stemmed from recurring concerns raised in previous meetings: the company's lack of clear mitigation plans and ambiguous documentation outlining its work plans.
 
Additionally, Berkshire Concrete's public hearing to appeal its $10,000 fine, that was set for Tuesday April 14, has been rescheduled. 
 
At the time of publishing, the item is still on the agenda and the Board of Health is still meeting on Tuesday.
 
The board may decide to table the item because it was said during Monday's Select Board meeting that the hearing has been pushed to April 28 as their lawyer can't make it.
 
"It seems another delayed tactic," Clean Air Committee member Richard Hall told the Select Board when informing them of the change.  
 
The board attempted to fine Berkshire Concrete on March 2, issuing a $5,000 fine for creating a public nuisance by allowing sand and dust to leave the property and for failing to submit an adequate dust mitigation plan despite numerous orders
 
This fine went unpaid and was not appealed. However, Berkshire Concrete did appeal the subsequent fine of $10,000. 
 
The reported violation of dust in the community opens Berkshire Concrete up to additional fines. They can theoretically be fined up to $10,000 a day for repeated violations, Town Manager Eric Anderson previously said. 
 
The neighbors of Berkshire Concrete have been working to combat the sand from leaving the site for over a year and since then have successfully had the town install air monitors which recently showed data that was off the charts.
 
During the public comment period, Hall quoted the appeal from Berkshire Concrete, a subsidiary of Petricca Industries, saying that the Board of Health did not "establish the existence of a nuisance through objective evidence." 
 
He also shared an April 6 correspondence between Petricca Industries' attorney Dennis Egan Jr. of Cohen Kinne Valicenti & Cook LLP, and Brian Duval, the zoning enforcement officer. 
 
"In fact, your email below is the first time any Dalton town official has suggested that the reclamation undertaken in 2025 was not satisfactory and there has been no objective evidence to date to support such a position," Hall quoted Egan writing in the email. 
 
Hall questioned these assertions because the enforcement order dated Oct. 15, 2025, does just that. 
 
 
This surmise proved to be true as Berkshire Concrete applied for a special permit to continue excavation in that area. This permit was denied but Berkshire Concrete can reapply before its current permit expires in December 2027.
 
According to the current permit, earth removal, such as excavation, processing, and reclamation is allowed on lots 217-3 and 106-55.1, but is subject to several conditions set forth in 1992, 1994, and 2000. 
 
Conditions include hours of operations, traffic regulations, restoration requirements, and other stipulations. 
 
 
Berkshire Concrete attempted to appeal this but the board maintained the decision and ordered that the digsite be fully remediated or covered to abide by town bylaws. To date, the digsite is still not fully remediated. 

Tags: berkshire concrete,   lawsuit,   permitting,   

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

Pittsfield Families Frustrated Over Unreleased PHS Report, Herberg Slur Incident

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — Parents are expressing their frustration with hate speech, bullying, and staff misconduct, which they said happens in Pittsfield schools. 

Community members and some elected officials have consistently advocated for the release of the redacted Pittsfield High School investigation report, and a teacher being placed on leave for allegedly repeating racist and homophobic slurs sparked a community conversation about how Pittsfield Public Schools can address injustices. 

The district's human resources director detailed the investigation processes during last week's School Committee meeting.

"People are angry. They feel like when they spoke up about Morningside School, it was closed anyway. They feel like they speak up about the PHS report, and that's just kind of getting shoved under the rug," resident Brenda Coddington said during public comment.

"I mean, when do people who actually voted for all of you, by the way, when does their voice and opinion count and matter? Because you can sit up here all day long and say that it does, but your actions, or rather lack of action, speak volumes."

Last month, School Committee member Ciara Batory demanded a date for the 2025 report's release to the public.

Three administrators and two teachers, past and present, were investigated by Bulkley Richardson and Gelinas LLP for a range of allegations that surfaced or re-surfaced at the end of 2024 after Pittsfield High's former dean of students was arrested and charged by the U.S. Attorney's Office for allegedly conspiring to traffic large quantities of cocaine in Western Massachusetts.

Executive summaries were released that concluded the claims of inappropriate conduct between teachers and students were "unsupported." Ward 7 Councilor Katherine Moody countered one of the unsupported determinations, writing on Facebook last week that she knows one person can conclude with confidence and a court case that pictures of the staff member's genitalia was sent to minors. 

"During this investigation, we sought to determine the validity of allegations about PHS Administrator #2 sharing a photograph of female genitalia with PHS students on her Snapchat account," the final executive summary reads. 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories