Dalton Special Town Meeting Set Monday

By Sabrina DammsiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
DALTON, Mass. — After a lengthy and contentious town meeting that spanned two days, voters will reconvene during a special town meeting to decide on six warrant articles this Monday at 7 p.m. at Wahconah Regional High School. 
 
During the annual town meeting on May 5, which garnered 277 registered voters, the police budget was singled out from the rest of the operating budget with an eye to making more cuts.
 
The Police Department requested a budget of $1,664,924, an increase of $129,668 over the previous fiscal year.
 
That line was pulled from the operating budget on a secret ballot and failed to pass 162-117. Finance Committee Chair William Drosehn made a motion to level fund the police budget, which also failed. 
 
Voters will decide on the budget again under Article one. During a Select Board meeting in May, the Police Chief Deanna Strout defended her department’s proposed budget and cautioned against significant cuts that, she says, would result in losing officers, K-9s, and community policing programs.
 
After her detailed presentation, the board voted to support the original police budget of $1,664,924 at the upcoming special town meeting. Select Board member Marc Strout, the chief's husband, was not present for that vote. 
 
The Finance Committee, however, voted on Tuesday to recommend a budget of $1,644,378, $20,546 less than what the Select Board voted to support. 
 
The decision narrowly passed 5-4, with committee members Drosehn, Thomas Irwin, Susan Carrol, and Shaun Beverly voting against. 
 
Carrol stated that she voted against the budget decrease because she wanted to hear from Strout first. Strout was unable to give a presentation to the committee because she was not informed of the meeting until 2:13 on the day of the meeting, and she was already scheduled to work the Taconic prom. 
 
Irwin, Drosehn, and Beverly voted against it because they believed that additional cuts could be made to the budget. 
 
Voters will also decide whether to transfer $45,000 from free cash to fund professional and technical work, including the possibility of a lawyer and an engineering company, to ensure the compliance of Berkshire Concrete Corporation’s special permit and town orders. More information here
 
For the last seven months, several dozen residents have been going to numerous meetings in town urging action to stop sand from leaving parcel No. 105-16, owned by Berkshire Concrete, a subsidiary of Petricca Industries.
 
During public outcry, it was discovered that a "clerical error" had omitted parcel No. 105-16 from the permit application, resulting in a cease and desist order to stop the dust from leaving the site. 
 
The residents organized a Clean Air Coalition to provide updates on what they described as slow progress towards a resolution. 
 
Several months passed, and residents still felt unheard by Petricca Industries and believed the board’s letters to their lawyers were performative and did not resolve the issue.
 
 
The conditions on the site improved, but a portion of the unauthorized dig site was not reclaimed because the coalition stated that Petricca and Alan LeBihan plan to apply for a special permit in June or July to continue excavating on lot 105-16, located at the back of Raymond Drive. 
 
The coalition also claimed that Petricca was "reluctant to have continuous dust pollution monitoring installed on the perimeter of Lot 105-16 and other key areas on the eastern edge of Berkshire Concrete's operation." 
 
Voters will also decide whether to amend Article 22 from the annual town meeting warrant, which appropriated from free cash $250,000 to purchase and equip a truck with sewer flushing equipment for the Department of Public Works. 
 
At the last town meeting, voters approved replacing the DPW’s sewer truck, which is a 1992 International that was an Army surplus. 
 
"We use it to tow the trailer, which is a 2007, which has, I think, a little over 3,000 hours on it," said Edward "Bud" Hall, DPW superintendent. However, not enough funds were allocated for the purchase. 
 
During the town meeting, Hall cautioned that the quotes for a truck and trailer were closer to $275,000, not $250,000; however, the town only approved $250,000. 
 
In a follow-up, Hall explained that the Finance Committee did not get input from him when the committee amended the article. 
 
Also included in the warrant is a request to reduce the amount allocated for the fiscal year 2026 operating budget by $90,500 due to lower amounts identified during the town audit and sewer treatment evaluation.
 
There is also a request to transfer $40,391 from free cash to cover a deficit in the “Snow and Ice” account. Of that amount, $23,461 is for salaries and $16,930 is for expenses.
 
Finally, there is a request to rescind the appropriation of $34,116 from the Sewer Stabilization Account to cover the City of Pittsfield's additional costs for sewage treatment.
 
Following the town meeting, it was determined that the town does not require this additional amount. The original budget is sufficient to cover the revised invoice from the City of Pittsfield, which has been reduced by $141,292.
 
The town meeting warrant is here, and the explanation sheet is here

Tags: special town meeting,   

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

BRTA Focuses on a New Run Schedule

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Berkshire Regional Transit Authority is still working on maintaining its run schedules after dropping the route realignment proposal.

Last Thursday's meeting was Administrator Kathleen Lambert's first official meeting taking over the reins; retiring director Robert Malnati stayed during a transition period that ended last month.

Lambert is trying to create a schedule that will lessen cancellations. There was a two-hour meeting the week before with the drivers union to negotiate run bids and Lambert is working with the new operating company Keolis, which is taking over from Transdev.

The board spoke about anonymous emails from drivers, which Lambert said she has not seen. iBerkshires was not able to see those letters, but has received some. 

"They were lengthy emails from someone describing themselves as concerning BRTA employee, and there was a signed letter from a whole group of employees basically stating their concerns. So, you know, to me, it was a set of whistleblowers, and that, what my understanding is that this really triggers a need for some type of process to review the merits of these whistleblowers, not going to call them accusations, but basically expressions of concern," said member Stephen Bannon.

A letter iBerkshires received spoke of unhappy drivers who were considering quitting because of decisions being made without "input from frontline staff," frustration and falling morale, and the removal of the former general manager shortly after Lambert came in.

Lambert said it's difficult to navigate a new change. She also noted many drivers don't want to do Saturday runs and it has been hard negotiating with drivers on the new runs.

"I would like you all to keep in mind that the process of change is super difficult. Transdev has been here for 20 years, and some of these drivers have never known any other operating company, the way some of the operations have been handled has been archaic," she said. "So getting folks up to speed on how a modern transit system works is going to be painful for them. So I don't want to say that I'm unsympathetic, because I am sympathetic, but I am trying to coax people along with a system that's going to seem very strange to them."

The board spoke about better communication between them and Lambert, citing cooperation will be best moving forward.

"There's just a lot of stuff in the air right now, and there are a lot of fires to put out to make this a coordinated effort. And if we don't keep our communications open and be straightforward, then you get blindsided about how you know the input that you could get from us about your position, and how you know what's going on in your direction, and we get blindsided. And I think that we have to make sure that this is a collaboration," said member Sherry Youngkin.

"Both sides have responsibilities, because in the long run, this advisory board is going to have to make decisions as to how we brought forward and if we've gone forward in a fair and helpful way. And I think that's hopefully what everybody is looking for also." 

Transdev and Keolis held a three-day recruiting event interviewing almost 40 candidates and offering jobs to eight, but only three stayed on to start training. Lambert said it was disappointing but she will keep trying to retain more people.

In her first report to the board, she noted that ridership dipped a little over 10 percent, but still remains higher than last year, adding that was because of cancellations of services because of the lack of drivers.

Like the last meeting, some of the advisory board members were torn over the start of the Link413 service, worried that the start of the service took drivers away and the numbers of riders are low.

Lambert, however, said the ridership has doubled from last month.

"As I've spoken before, we have, generally, a six-month adoption for brand-new service before you can really go in and evaluate, are you being successful based on the grant that my predecessor wrote along with the team for PBTA and RTA, we are ahead of schedule, which is pretty good, so I'm hoping that will continue to improve," she said.

Member Renee Wood said the board never approved the service, adding the only thing she could find in the minutes was a vote to accept the equipment. She said it was supposed to be put on the agenda to discuss.

"The Link413 service has been three years in the making. It's been a grant that was accepted and has been working with our partners, PVTA and FRTA, to put into place. So I don't have the entire history of how that process worked, but it's been three years in the making, and did we not understand that once we accept that grant that we were going to put in new service?" Lambert said.

The board discussed if Title VI, the Civil Rights Act, was followed with an accurate review and accurate amount of time for public comment period on the service changes and if its attorney should review if the  grant conditions were properly followed.

Lambert said changes had the 60-day comment period included in the proposed route realignment packet, giving the opportunity for the community to respond to that as well but will look into the legality of the situation with their attorney.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories