Unpaid Mall Taxes Won't Increase Lanesborough Tax Rate

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

LANESBOROUGH, Mass.— Unpaid taxes to the Baker Hill Road District will not likely fall on residents this fiscal year. 

"I think at this point in time, we don't need to panic. I was truly panicked at the previous meeting. I will say that," Chair Deborah Maynard told the Select Board and Finance Committee during a joint meeting on Monday.  

"So that is the good news, we met with [The Department of Revenue], we put our heads together, and came up with some different options." 

At the previous meeting, town officials discussed some $500,000 missing from the road district's approved budget for fiscal 2026. The district and JMJ RE Holdings, owners of the Berkshire Mall, are in litigation over unpaid taxes, and JMJ argues that they are being overbilled and underrepresented. 

Officials thought the funding gap might have to be raised through the local tax rate, but after conversations with the state Division of Local Services and the Department of Revenue, they found they could fine-tune estimated receipts to close a good portion of it. The road district also receives payments from Target, which owns and operates its building. 

The town has another couple of months to complete its tax recap sheet and expects the road district will provide an estimated budget for the rest of the fiscal year. The tax rate is set in November. 

"We will have a better idea, more in October of if there is a gap that we have beyond that, but at this point, based on what we have looked at in terms our estimated receipts, we will not have an additional amount beyond what was the original increase to the tax rate that was already approved at the annual town meeting operating budget," Town Administrator Gina Dario reported. 

At the annual town meeting in June, voters approved an amended fiscal 2026 budget of $12,565,654, a 5.6 percent increase from the previous year. 

Finance Committee Chair Lyndon Moors said this is a "multi-year issue," pointing to the the proposed senior living center at the mall that has a timeline of roughly 2 1/2 years. There is also the ongoing litigation, which was taken up later in the meeting. 

"We're facing a longer-term issue, and that's given the assumptions of his most optimistic plans," Moors said. 

"I'll leave personal commentary out of it, but I'm just looking at it in terms of numbers. This is going to be an issue with us for a while. We just don't know how long, and we don't know how to deal with it yet." 

An executive session was held to discuss "litigation strategy with respect to the property located at 655 Cheshire Road, Lanesborough, where a discussion in open session would have a detrimental effect on the Town's litigation position."



A December 2024 lawsuit filed by the road district seeks $545,000 from the mall owner for taxes due in May 2024. JMJ has demanded a jury trial, saying it has no contract with the road district and that it is acting outside its legal authority.

Consultant Timothy Grogan, of the Housing Development Corp., told the Select Board on Monday that JMJ will not be paying those funds unless a judge orders it. 

"In actuality, our non-payment of the Baker Hill Road District supplemental taxes is strictly related to their routine financial abuse of the property," he said. 

"And rather than running away and selling the mall for modest gain, as previous owners have elected to do as a direct result from the pressures of the Baker Hill Road District, we have elected to litigate this privately and exclaim their abuses publicly, because we believe in this property and believe beyond doubt that we can transform it into something that makes Lanesborough and the surrounding community proud." 

He reported that MJ RE Holdings will collaborate with Integritus Healthcare to redevelop the shuttered mall into campus-style senior housing that includes supportive and ancillary retail space. For the retail aspect, they will work with Cypress Equities, based out of Dallas, Texas. 

Grogan said the road district has, because of its "absurd tax levy resulting from its bloated budget," subjected the property owners within the district to the highest combined tax rate in the state. He said the mall pays town taxes and a supplemental tax rate of roughly $70 per $1,000, amounting to almost five times the tax bill of any town business aside from Target. 

"This amounts to nearly 9 percent of the property's assessed value each year," he added. 

"Even if we were to exclude the town's property tax rate, we would still be subject to the highest tax rate in the state. Even further, if you were to subtract the town tax rate from the Baker Hill Road District tax rate, we'd still be subject to the highest tax rate in the state." 

He said the road district has three purposes per its legislation: to facilitate the paying off the bonds that were utilized to construct the road, develop the mall property through its economic development powers, and maintain the road. 

"The bonds were entirely paid off in 2014, and the Baker Hill Road District will never be able to purchase the mall property to be able to develop it," he said. 

"This leaves just maintaining the road. Now, if anyone could tell me how maintaining the road costs $947,000 a year, I'd be all ears." 


Tags: Berkshire Mall,   delinquent taxes,   fiscal 2026,   road district,   

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