Wednesday, January 17, 2018

Galvan, Homelessness, and the Sunset Motel

There is some irony in the fact that the Galvan Foundation, which owns about seventy residential properties in Hudson, most of which stand vacant, is making a proposal to help solve the county's homeless problem, but they are. Last night, at a special meeting of the Columbia County Board of Supervisors' Health and Human Services Committee, the committee and the public learned about what is being proposed.

The meeting started out with Robert Gibson, Commissioner for Social Services, describing the problem of homelessness in Columbia County. He spoke of the Department of Social Services (DSS) having in recent weeks to find shelter for 93 people every night, and the shelter provided is in motel and hotel rooms throughout the county. He said that the Galvan Foundation had approached him last February with a plan and returned in the summer with an enhanced plan. Galvan would make the 25 rooms at the Sunset Motel, which the foundation owns and is now in the process of renovating, exclusively available to DSS clientele, and 30 percent of the revenue would go to pay for services for the people housed at the motel. Gibson noted that the county was already providing transportation to Columbia-Greene Community College, and the motel was nearby.  

Robert Gibson, seated; Dan Kent, standing
Dan Kent, who returned to the Galvan Foundation last fall as Vice President of Initiatives after a year of working elsewhere, told the committee that "housing is a central part of the Galvan mission." He said Galvan was creating 20 more units of "voluntary low-income housing" by the end of the year. He also made reference to the plan for a homeless shelter, "Galvan Quarters," proposed back in 2013. He explained that the 25-room Sunset Motel was now under renovation and would be finished in April 2018. The renovation was being done "with green design standards." Each room would have a microwave oven and a refrigerator; there would be a community kitchen and computer stations in the building. There would also be units designed to accommodate families. He explained that the county would pay for emergency services "as they now do," but the motel would provide supportive services on site not available at other motels.

Comments in support of the proposal came from the expected sources: Tina Sharpe, of the not-for-profit Columbia Opportunities; Michael Cole, director of the Columbia County Mental Health Center; and former Fourth Ward supervisor Bill Hughes, who explained that he had been "the lead on the previous project" proposed by Galvan. Hughes praised the proposal, calling it "perfect for the homeless population" and "a model that other counties should follow."

Not everyone shared Hughes' enthusiasm. Tom Alvarez, whose modular and manufactured home business, John A. Alvarez & Sons, is located immediately adjacent to the Sunset Motel, recalled when the property was "a nice mom-and-pop motel" and went on to recount the problems that occurred when the motel was being used by DSS for emergency housing: his office had been burglarized and computers stolen; there was damage to model homes on the site; motel residents would panhandle at the entrance to his manufactured home community for seniors and come into his office to ask to use the phone. Alvarez said he wanted the homeless shelter to be in Hudson. "I cannot approve this type of facility so close to my adult manufactured homes and my operation."  

Also speaking out against the plan was Jennifer Strodl, the director of the Liberi School, a one-room school for children ages 5 to 10 being operated in the building across the road and a little east from the Sunset Motel. Strodl said the school was "creating a trusting, loving environment" and wanted to know if the presence of the school, which opened three years ago, had been considered when the plan was conceived. 

Two parents of children attending the Liberi School and Nicole Vidor, who revealed that she was Strodl's mother-in-law, expressed their concern about threats to the safety of children posed by sheltering homeless people in close proximity to the school. Their comments raised the fear that child molesters and sex offenders might be sheltered there, but Gibson assured them that DSS "will not put any level of danger in a situation where there are families with children." One of the parents, who said he was a volunteer fireman, spoke of emergency calls to the Yorkshire Motel four miles away, which also houses DSS clients. He predicted that the proposal "guarantees something bad will happen," saying of the Yorkshire Motel, "Terrible things happen there all the time."

The meeting began at 5 p.m. and was still going on at 6:15 when I left to go the Common Council public hearings at City Hall. I have since learned from Sarah Sterling, First Ward supervisor, who serves on the Health and Human Services Committee, that Gibson, who said of the proposal, "It's not my project, not my money, just my need," plans to meet with the people potentially impacted "to talk about how we could make this safer." Meanwhile, Sterling told Gossips that the committee has not yet seen the proposal they are being asked to accept or deny in the form of a written contract.
COPYRIGHT 2018 CAROLE OSTERINK

18 comments:

  1. "Ironic" is not quite the word to use in this situation, but the Galvan organization certainly needs to explain its housing operation to the public -- which, to my eye, is causing much of the increase in housing costs in Hudson and contributing to homelessness -- before the public signs on to this proposal. There are many other reasons to say No to the Sunset deal, chief among them the location, on a busy road far from any grocery and other services. Hudson has such services and it has the buildings, some of them owned by Galvan. We need to revive the discussions we had a few years ago about the homeless and with a new Housing Task Force and a new Common Council Committee on Housing, the time is right to do so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You wrote: "a busy road far from any grocery and other services. Hudson has such services ..."

      Maybe, but Hudson has few groceries.

      The Sunset Motel is 8/10ths of a mile from Hanneford's, which is about the same distance from Shop-Rite to Stewart's in Hudson.

      It's likely that people will use taxis to get groceries at either location.

      Further, we need a better understanding of the "services" required, and also which services travel to where the clients are anyway.

      For years the Sunset Motel has been used for such purposes. It was also used as temporary housing when the Obama stimulus refurbished the Hudson Terrace apartments (pursuant to Section 8). Is our government so irresponsible with our money that on no occasion has it collected data on the costs of transporting people to groceries and services from the Sunset Motel?

      If such figures exist, and if they're available, then they may put a crimp in the truism and generalization that the Sunset Motel is in the middle of nowhere.

      Speaking as someone who doesn't own a vehicle, I'm envious of those who live only 8/10ths of a mile from Shop-Rite. That would make my life so much easier.

      Delete
  2. Mr. Meyer appears to be confused; or at the very least, advancing contradictory positions. In his post of 1/7/2018 at 8:46 PM (“An Unanticipated Outcome”), he lists “top priorities” for the City of Hudson, including (undefined) ”Absentee Bnb landlords” and “property taxes.” Though he doesn’t elaborate on what precisely he advocates for either, in the context of previous statements he’s made on these subjects, it’s not a stretch to assume that he wants property taxes to go down, and “Absentee Bnb landlords” to be put out of business. In his post of 1/13/2018 of 5:47 PM (“What’s Planned for the Sunset Motel”) he mentions “these are some of the questions that the Hudson Housing Task Force is addressing.” Then in his post above, he apparently endorses the idea of Galvan’s homeless shelter being in Hudson rather than Greenport.

    If Mr. Meyer has any concern for Hudson property taxes (as he seems to state in the first-cited post above), he knows that Hudson’s being forced to absorb more not for profit facilities that will take even more property off its tax rolls permanently will only serve to increase the property tax burden for its hapless residents who DO pay property taxes. Furthermore, he is also presumably aware that a huge percentage of Hudson’s budget goes to pay its police force. If Gibson’s representations in the article above are correct, and DSS “will not put any level of danger in a situation where there are families with children,” then those residents of Greenport opposing this development are simply voicing Not in My Back Yard sentiments and have nothing to fear. If Mr. Gibson’s assurances are not to be credited, then certainly Hudson would not want to incur additional costs (and thus additional property taxes) in police labor to handle situations such as those described by Mr. Alvarez (above). Transportation to and from the Sunset Motel location is already being handled by DSS; services will be provided at the Motel; and Mr. Hughes, who has substantially more experience in these matters than Mr. Meyer, endorses the proposal. It’s time that municipalities in Columbia County other than Hudson shouldered some of the burden of the County’s social service facilities. Hudson’s tax base cannot handle any more. These concerns for broadening the tax base were also mentioned by Don Moore in a DRI meeting last year, as well as by ex-Mayor Hamilton when she declined to endorse the designation of 241 Columbia Street as “historic.”

    Finally, it is ironic that while Mr. Meyer purports to be concerned about property taxes in Hudson, when he inveighs against (undefined) “Absentee Bnb landlords,” he’s attacking property owners who host transient guests bringing revenue to other businesses in Hudson, DO pay property taxes (in addition to collecting and remitting Lodging Tax), operate legally, and are regulated by City statute. Yet by supporting the siting of a homeless shelter in Hudson, he is supporting (a) the influx of an additional transient population that will bring no revenue to anyone other than those who profit by providing social services, and (b) the permanent removal of even more property from Hudson’s tax rolls. This is not a question of “Not in My Back Yard.” It’s “No MORE in My Back Yard.” A healthy City economy for all residents, including those struggling to pay their property taxes, depends on a sustainable tax base. On Hudson's 2017 Tax Roll, about one third of the property (by assessed value) is already designated “wholly exempt.” Mr. Meyer is a member of the Housing Task Force. If he’s voicing the opinion of that Task Force (and I hope he’s not), then it needs to be reminded of its responsibility to consider the financial burdens of all taxpaying property owners in the City of Hudson.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Fiordigli, could you give me the url citation for my Jan 7 post/comment? Thanks.

      Delete
    2. I've now reviewed the various comments Fiordigli refers to above and see the problem. He mistakes questions about issues for opinions about issues. As a journalist for 40+ years that's what I do: ask questions. The goal is get the facts. And that makes many people uncomfortable because, as I've found over the years, people hang on to opinions as they do their favorite hat or shoes--and don't want to give them up when facts suggest that they're too small or too large or.... etc. In the comments Fiordigli refers to I am suggesting that Hudson has many housing issues -- defined as subjects that people care about -- and should probably look into them. I don't speak for the Task Force, but I am a member of it and hope -- this is my only opinion -- that it can help shed light on our community's housing issues so the community can make smart and well-informed decisions. cheers, --pm

      Delete
  3. Does anyone know if Scalera still works for Galvan?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oldtymehudson--Rick Scalera provided the answer to your question:

      I work for Galvan on an as needed basis. In reference to this proposal I did not participate in discussions’ as former supervisor Hughes and Dan Kent did most of the leg work along with current DSS Commissioner Bob Gibson. When the vote comes in front of the board of Supervisors I will abstain to satisfy those that want to make it a “conflict of interest” issue but clearly I stayed removed from this proposal. Now that said I have been working on the city and county level for years dealing with the homeless problem with little success due mainly to the NIMBY pushback. Finally it appears there is a proposal that will help address the homeless housing need but clearly the county and city need to do more and sooner than later. Year after year there is much talk and that’s the extent of it. It’s time we all work together to find a solution to a problem that is one that can and must be fixed.

      Delete
    2. Mr. Scalera is certainly right about the existence of the homeless problem, but he needs to explain the "NIMBY pushback" and how we seem to have ("finally") a proposal seemingly without benefit of a public RFP (Request for Proposal) that would lay out the County's needs and expectations. If there has been "much talk" about the problem, as Mr. Scalera suggests, the proposal from Galvan seems to have emerged fairly well formed, with the assent of the DSS director without any public talk. Those "talks" need to be made public.

      Delete
  4. Why are there 100 homeless people in Columbia County?
    Solve the problem(s), stop the pulpit preaching.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fewer employment opportunities nowadays?

      Delete
    2. Are you aware of the side effects of de-industrialization and capitalism or are you another neo-liberal shark?

      Delete
  5. What specifically "substantially more experience" does Mr. Hughes have with regard to actually successfully developing any kind of housing?

    Susan Lynn Troy

    ReplyDelete
  6. One more question: Is Mr. Hughes employed by the Galvan foundation?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mr. Hughes, at least at the AHH Fora, appeared to at least be familiar with the various income brackets and types of affordable housing, could respond to questions about same, and could discuss potential funding sources. That appeared to be substantially greater familiarity with the subject than that shown by Mr. Meyer, who referred attendees asking for definitions of "affordable housing" to handouts available at the back of the room, which had been assembled by someone else. To the best of my knowledge, and I could be wrong, neither of them have successfully developed any kind of housing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Fiordiligi, I'm not an expert on housing (though I have siblings who are developers and one who is an architect) and have never represented myself as one. I asked to moderate the AHH Fora, which I did, and part of a moderator's job is to steer audience members to information sources on the topic, which I did. And I will continue to refer people to what I consider good information sources on the topic -- http://hudsondri.org/housing-task-force/ and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5zVrDtWzGEnNmZ0Qm85X2oyTTZKVmFPVklwMlpjeWs1Unhr/view -- as well as ask questions of those who claim expertise on the subject. But my main interest in the topic at hand is as a citizen of Hudson, a town I care deeply about. Thank you.

      Delete
    2. Correction: "I WAS asked to moderate..."

      Delete
  8. Thank you for your kind response. Peter Meyer of course, is not in the business of actually developing any kind of housing, and his participation on the Housing Task Force is voluntary, with no County paycheck or benefit package. His involvement, it seems to me, is altruistic. A rather refreshing motive.

    Mr. Hughes, however, served for many years as a Supervisor. A paid position with benefits. And he has talked a great deal, a great deal about the need for various types of housing in Hudson. Reciting data usually prepared by others. Because if a Supervisor calls an organization looking for housing data, the staff in that office is told to jump; to get right on it. If a citizen calls an organization for that same data, the turnaround time is. . . longer. If a Supervisor calls an organization to ask for a sit down meeting to discuss housing data, staff schedules are immediately re-arranged to accommodate that Supervisor. Should a citizen call, that person may or may not be shown the same courtesy or his/her request, the same urgency. So naturally Mr. Hughes was more familiar with generally, the issue and the data.

    I think for regular citizens (as opposed to those citizens who have held elected positions previously and whose relationships and influence still hold sway) with regular
    jobs and professional obligations, to volunteer time and talent to a cause, with absolutely zero chance of personal gain, is laudable.

    Susan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Because public officials are compensated, they're more likely to have unpleasant motives. Altruism is ostensibly disinterested and should be thanked not challenged.

      Or:

      2. The more publicly anyone speaks out on any issue, to that same degree, whether as public or private individuals, they assume an ever-increasing responsibility to the subject matter.

      The first argument is theoretical, while the second leads to the value-neutral observation that "neither of [the two gentlemen] have successfully developed any kind of housing."

      Delete