Charter Revision Elsewhere

Some folks critical of the manner in which Council President Margaret Morris is approaching the task of assembling a charter revision commission have pointed to the City of Kingston as a model for how charter revision should be approached. For those curious to know how Kingston is doing it, the following is quoted from the City of Kingston website.  

Local Law 6 of 2025 established the Kingston Charter Review Commission and a timeline for its work. The Commission will be composed of 18 members. Of these, 3 will be appointed by the mayor, 3 will be appointed by the common council, and 12 will be drawn from the public at random. The task of the Commission is to review the city's charter and propose changes to it. Any changes to the charter would be submitted to Kingston voters during the general election in November 2027.

The city of Kingston has partnered with the National Civic League to facilitate the work of the Charter Review Commission, including the selection of its 12 public members and 2 alternate members, who will meet monthly over the next year to discuss possible changes. The National Civic League will use a specialized civic lottery to select these members. This process will ensure that Kingston's population is well reflected in the Commission.

The following information is provided about applying for the commission:

Residents of all backgrounds and perspectives are encouraged to apply, including youth over the age of 18. No prior experience or specialized knowledge is required.

The deadline for submitting an application to be on the commission was August 17. There is no indication of how long the "specialized civic lottery" process of selecting the "public members" will take.

The charter review process in Kingston also includes a survey and a public forum, which is to take place this fall. There is no indication if the monthly meetings of the commission will be open to the public.

Meetings and Events in the Week Ahead

As summer winds down and September begins, there is not much happening on the meeting front.

• On Monday, August 31, the Hawthorne Valley Farmscape Ecology Program presents an illustrated talk by Joan Maloof, professor emeritus at Salisbury College and former executive director of the Old Growth Forest Network, titled "What Makes Old-Growth Forests Special, and How to Save Them." The event takes place at the Hawthorne Valley Farm Learning Center, 327 County Route 21C in Ghent. For more information, click here.

• On Tuesday, September 1, the Conservation Advisory Council meets at 6:00 p.m. The meeting is a hybrid, taking place in person at City Hall and on Teams. Click here to join the meeting remotely.
• On Thursday, September 3, the Common Council Services Committee (Youth Department and Senior Center) meets at 5:30 p.m. The meeting may include a first report from Brittany Gillis, the recently appointed Commissioner of Senior Services. The meeting is a hybrid, taking place in person at City Hall and on Teams. Click here to join the meeting remotely.
• On Saturday, September 5, the third Hudson Family Reunion takes place from 1:00 to 9:00 p.m. at Henry Hudson Riverfront Park. The mass gathering permit for this year's event describes its purpose in this way: "To bring family and community together of all ages, open to all, vendors, entertainment, yard games."

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

11 Warren Street Update

It's been almost three months since Ray Jurkowski, Commissioner of Public Works for Columbia County, and the team from LaBella Associates presented these three options for exterior improvements to 11 Warren Street.

The plan, as explained by Jurkowski at the time, was to cobble together the input from the workshop and from a survey to create one final design, which would be presented in a second "public charette workshop." That was on June 9. Now, on the penultimate day of August, there is no information about when that workshop might take place.

In the meantime, at its July 10 meeting, the Historic Preservation Commission weighed in, suggesting the best thing that could be done would be to use landscaping to screen the building and make it as unnoticeable as possible. 

The building, a failed strip mall from the 1970s, is located on a premier block in a National Register and locally designated historic district. People must pass it to get from the city's central commercial district to Promenade Hill and the waterfront. It is, obviously, a noncontributing structure, but noncontributing structures are subject to review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Jurkowski has maintained that the county is exempt from Hudson's preservation ordinance. Gossips has never accepted that, and now, it seems, the City is not accepting it either.

At Friday's meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, Phil Forman, who chairs the commission, reported that he had written to the county suggesting that plans for exterior alterations to 11 Warren Street come before the HPC. He described his communication as "polite and whiny." He said that Nick Fox, our code enforcement officer, had also contacted the county requesting that the project come before the HPC. Forman described Fox's communication as "less polite and not whiny." Presumably both communications were sent to Jurkowski. 

There has been no response to either of the requests--Forman's or Fox's. Forman indicated that the next step is for the city attorney to contact the county attorney. It wasn't clear if by "city attorney" Forman meant Victoria Polidoro, who is legal counsel to the HPC, or Andy Howard, who is corporation counsel. Summing up the situation, Forman said, "We shouldn't be in the position of begging. They are in violation."

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

An Unveiling on Warren Street

The shroud concealing the work going on at 352 and 354 Warren Street was in place for more than a year. Its appearance was hailed by Mark Allen on Instagram on April 21, 2025.

The construction shroud came down yesterday, to reveal what appears to be a partially completed renovation.

It's been more than two years since the plans for the renovation of these two buildings, which formerly housed Johnny's Ideal Printing and were acquired by the Galvan Initiatives Foundation in 2019, were presented to the Historic Preservation Commission. The plan, as it was presented to the HPC in May 2024, was to combine the two buildings into a single apartment building and to re-create a storefront on the ground floor of 352 Warren, which evidence suggests it once was. Below is the drawing of what the buildings would look like with the changes proposed.

The drawing shows large windows, appropriate for a storefront, on the ground floor of 352 Warren. Those do not appear in the building as it is today. In fact, it appears that the only thing done on the facade of 352 was removing the paint from the brick on the second floor and painting the cornice, the oriel, and wood that sealed up the ground floor facade when the building was Johnny's Ideal Printing.

We await Nick Fox's inspection of the buildings and the explanation of why the renovation was not carried out as proposed and approved by the HPC.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

Historic Preservation and Code Enforcement

As a preamble to his reports on the violations at 123 Union Street and 402-404 Warren Street at the Historic Preservation Commission meeting yesterday, Nick Fox, who has been Hudson's code enforcement officer since February 2026, explained the respective roles of the HPC and code enforcement. This is the statement he made:

I have heard some recent discussion regarding the Hudson Public Hotel at Fourth and Warren and questions about the role of the Historic Preservation Commission when work does not conform to an approved Certificate of Appropriateness. I think it is important to clarify the respective roles of the Commission and the Code Enforcement Office.

The Historic Preservation Commission's responsibility is to review proposed work within the City's historic districts, determine whether that work is appropriate under the City's historic preservation standards, and issue a Certificate of Appropriateness when appropriate.

Once that approval has been granted, enforcement is not the responsibility of the HPC. It is the responsibility of the the City's Code Enforcement Office to inspect the work and ensure that construction is being performed in accordance with the Certificate of Appropriateness, the plans, renderings, materials, conditions, and other representations upon which that approval was granted.

When it is believed work may deviate from those approvals, it is the Code Enforcement Officer's responsibility to take appropriate investigative action. It takes time to conduct these investigations. We must thoroughly inspect the job site and materials, review plans, renderings, materials lists, review HPC meeting minutes, and conduct interviews. If enough evidence has been gathered to confirm the terms have been violated, that's when enforcement action is taken.

Last week, there were two Stop-Work Orders issued on two separate projects because the terms of the Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission were violated. One at the Hotel at 402 Warren, and one at 123 Union.

When an applicant is found in violation of Chapter 169, the next course of action is for the applicant to return to the Historic Preservation Commission and account for the work that differs from what was approved and explain why.

The Commission can then determine whether any of the unapproved changes are historically appropriate and may remain, or whether items must conform to what was originally approved and must be removed and replaced or repaired. But until that process is finished, no work will continue inside or outside those projects until it is decided if the noted discrepancies are acceptable, or must be rectified. Following the completion of that process, the Code Enforcement Office will determine what further action is warranted, including whether violations should be referred for prosecution and issued the applicable fines and/or penalties, including imprisonment.

To start this process, in today's meeting, I will present my findings on each of the projects and provide the applicant and Commission with a detailed list of the violations.

The applicant must then reapply to the HPC with these changes and any others that may not have been noticed . . . YET. Essentially starting from the beginning. If the new materials that were installed without consent are not approved by the Commission, they must be removed and replaced with what is.

Because that process may take weeks or months, in the meantime, the only activity
anyone should see at these sites is the removal of any fencing and construction barriers. With construction halted, there is no justification for continuing to inconvenience the public with barriers associated with work that is not permitted to continue until further notice.

Thanks to Fox, Hudson has entered a new era of code enforcement. Trust that Gossips will be following this story closely in the next weeks and months.

About Those Stop-Work Orders

Last week, Gossips reported there was a stop-work order posted on 123 Union Street, a property owned by Eric Galloway/Galvan, although the tax rolls now list the owner as Civis Holding Co. LLC.

Stop-work orders have also been posted at 402-404 Warren Street, the Galvan Foundation's Hudson Public Hotel.

This morning at the Historic Preservation Commission, Code Enforcement Officer Nick Fox reported on the violations of the certificates of appropriateness found at both sites which prompted the stop-work orders.

This is the list of violations found at 123 Union Street (click on image to enlarge):

Of all these violations, the most egregious, in Gossips' opinion, is that thirty windows, original to the building, which the HPC was told would remain, were removed and trashed. Unlike some of the others, that violation is irreversible. 

These are the violations found at 402-406 Warren Street, the Hudson Public Hotel:

In this case, the most egregious violation, even worse than the indiscriminate removal and replacement of the windows, is the loss of the surviving marble columns and lintel that were original to the building and bore traces of the building's and Hudson's history. 

As Gossips reported two weeks ago, those historic elements were removed and presumably trashed.

Photo: Matt McGhee

It was revealed at this morning's HPC meeting that the apparent plan was to cover the colonnade of the building with faux marble, which is something that was never presented to the HPC and certainly never approved. In light of this, it's interesting to recall what happened back in March 2023, when this project was being reviewed by the HPC. 

As Gossips reported, in a post titled "Taking Nothing for Granite," Walter Chatham, who was/is the architect for the project, originally thought the surviving stone on the facade of the building was granite and hence told the HPC that all the new stone needed to restore the colonnade would be granite. Matt McGhee, however, maintained that the stone was marble and suggested it was the same type of marble found on 260 Warren Street. As a consequence of McGhee's intervention, Chatham conceded that the stone on the building was in fact marble. This is what Gossips reported back in March 2023:

. . . Chatham investigated further and concluded that the stone was indeed marble, an opinion he said had been confirmed by sixteen people with stone expertise he had consulted. Based on his investigation and research, Chatham posited that the marble on the building was from Danbury, Maine, a specific type now known as White Olympian Danbury marble. According to Chatham, that is the marble that was originally used for the building and that is the marble that will be used to restore the colonnade of the existing building. The columns and entablatures of the infill buildings, as well as the lintels and sills, will also be marble.

All that erudition, and the plan is now to cover the colonnade with faux marble, which someone at this morning's meeting described as "plastic marble."

What happens next is that the Galloway/Galvan people must present new applications for both projects to the HPC describing what they actually did, and the HPC must decide if the actual work can be granted a certificate of appropriateness. If not, the buildings must be returned to the way they were. Sadly, much of what was done is irreversible. 

The one tiny bit of good news in all this is that, as long as construction is halted at 402-406 Warren Street, the area in front of the building cannot be closed off. So, for the first time in many months, the sidewalk is open and the parking spaces are once again available.  

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

News of Oakdale Lake

City Hall just issued the following statement:

Oakdale Lake is currently closed and under observation for a potential Harmful Algae Bloom (HAB). Out of an abundance of caution, as we wait for the test results, please keep all pets away from the water until further notice.

Nothing Is Ever Easy: Charter Commission

The work of revising the city charter promises to be long and arduous--as it should be. After all, the charter establishes the structure of local government. The process of creating a charter commission to undertake the task is also proving to be long and arduous, not to mention contentious. Common Council president Margaret Morris, who is attempting to create a charter revision commission to review the city's charter, which has not been comprehensively reviewed and revised in more than fifty years, is being questioned and criticized for the way she has approached establishing a commission. In the following statement, Morris explains her efforts in the past four months.   

At the Informal Meeting of the Common Council in April, I announced that I was beginning the process of establishing a Charter Revision Commission and invited interested members of the community to submit letters of interest to me.

The following morning, I received the first expression of interest from a community member. Over the course of several weeks, I was contacted by other community members to discuss the Commission. Some decided not to pursue membership on the commission. My approach was to have members of the community volunteer, rather than personally selecting people. I did not reject any of the individuals who came forward.

At the July meeting of the Common Council, I presented a draft Local Law establishing the commission. At that time five community members had confirmed their interest in serving. I proposed a Commission made up of five community members, the President of the Common Council and the Majority Leader. In discussion, the Common Council suggested that there should be a community member from each ward and that the Common Council should be included in the appointment process.

At the August meeting of the Common Council, I submitted a revised Local Law which addressed both of these concerns, with a proposed Commission made up of seven community members, with at least one from each ward, the President of the Common Council and the Majority Leader. Appointment to the Commission would be in consultation with the Common Council.

Prior to the August meeting, I reached out to every member of the Common Council and reviewed with each member the roster of candidates who had stepped up to volunteer for the Commission. Despite repeated attempts on my part, I was unable to reach Councilmember Cousin. I did, however, include a community member that she had proposed for the Commission in the list of potential members.

In addition to reviewing the list of potential candidates with the Common Council members, I also reviewed it with Mayor Ferris.

At the August Formal Meeting this week, the Common Council voted to table the vote on the Commission pending further revisions. The formal process for appointment of members in consultation with the Common Council--a process that Council Member Foster asked about in the meeting--would have been an executive session of the Council to discuss the appointments. I explained that process at the meeting.

Throughout this process, my intention was to include interested community members in the Commission and specifically to avoid a process where I or any other member of the Council would personally select the Commission membership.

Something New at City Hall

Perhaps the most memorable thing learned from today's Hudson Community Development and Planning Agency (HCDPA) meeting is that it appears Mayor Joseph Ferris is growing a goatee, the style of which is known as a "circle beard." 

  

It's been a slow news day.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

Overnight Parking Tonight

In addition to the usual overnight parking regulations (cars need to be on the even side of the street tonight), the Hudson Police Department has issued this parking advisory

NO OVERNIGHT PARKING--STREET SWEEPING

Please be advised that DPW has put up several NO PARKING signs in the following areas for street sweeping:

• Columbia Street--4th Street to 7th Street
• 6th Street--Prospect Street to State Street

Please move vehicles from these areas during street sweeping operations to avoid being ticketed.

**Please also continue to adhere to alternate side parking.**

Sloughing Toward Charter Revision

Once again, Council president Margaret Morris attempted to get the Council to pass a resolution to establish a charter revision commission, and once again, the effort was impeded.

In July, councilmembers took issue with the process of selecting members of the commission and insisted that it be "more open and inclusive." It was suggested that each of the five wards needed to be represented on the commission. At the July meeting, Morris invited people to send their comments about the proposed law to her, and, based on that input, she would make revisions and present the revised law at the Council's August meeting.

At the Council meeting on Tuesday, Morris did just what she said she would do. In the revised law, the number of members of the commission was increased from seven to nine, and it is stipulated that the commission include at least one member from each ward. This is the language relating to the number and method of appointing members:

The Commission shall consist of nine members and a quorum shall consist of five members. Seven community members shall be appointed by the President of the City of Hudson Common Council in consultation with the Common Council. At least one resident from each Ward shall serve on the Commission. The Common Council President and the Majority Leader shall serve, ex officio, as the eighth and ninth members. Each of the nine members shall have equal voting powers in any matter put to a vote of the members of the Commission. The President of the Common Council shall serve as Chair, one member of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission to serve as Vice-Chair to preside in the absence of the Chair, and one as Secretary to record the proceedings of the Commission.

Despite the changes, Councilmember Claire Cousin (Fifth Ward) expressed concern that too much of the selection power was vested in the Council president. She made this statement: 

I cannot support this appointment structure as written. I'm concerned that this version places too much appointment power in the hands of the Common Council President. For a process this important, appointments should be a collective decision of the Council, not concentrated in one person.

Cousin proposed the following amendment:

The seven community members shall be appointed by the Common Council, with a least one representative designated by each ward. No single officer of the Common Council shall have sole appointment authority over the community members.

Cousin called for further revision, although this seems unnecessary if the proposed amendment were to be adopted:

I'd also like to clarify what "in consultation with the Council" actually means. Does the Council have a meaningful role in approving or selecting these appointments, or is the final authority solely with the Council Pres? I would support language that makes that role explicit rather than leaving it open to interpretation.

Cousin made a motion to amend the proposed law which was not seconded. Councilmember Rich Volo (Fourth Ward) suggested the issue be tabled. Morris supported the idea of tabling, saying that she did not want to amend to the proposed law "on the fly." When the vote was called on tabling the resolution, there were just four votes opposed (Morris, Henry Haddad, Jason Foster, Dominic Merante). The other seven votes were in favor of tabling. What is to happen next is unclear.

In the public comment, Ronald Kopnicki said he wanted "a sense of how sweeping a change is being anticipated." It would appear this is something that has not been determined nor should it be. The proposed law provides this definition of the commission's scope of work:

The work of the Commission shall be governed by section 36 of the M.H.R.L.[Municipal Home Rule Law]. The Commission shall review the entire Charter of the City of Hudson, as directed by subdivision 5 of section 36 of the M.H.R.L. Notwithstanding such requirement, the Commission may leave part of the existing Charter unchanged and may propose amendments to parts.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK

The Hudson Mile Returns This Saturday

The 2nd annual Hudson Mile takes place this Saturday, August 29, on Warren Street. It is happening at a new time this year, from 10:00 a.m. to noon.

The one-mile race is open to runners and walkers of every age and ability, from first-time participants to competitive athletes. The course runs from Eighth Street to Front Street, finishing in front of Promenade Park, where an awards ceremony will follow the race. Warren Street will be closed to traffic for the event, with spectators, and local businesses lining the route. 

Race highlights include: 

• Prize money for Open and Master’s divisions in both the Men’s and Women’s races
• A free kids’ race for children 13 and under. First 3 boys and girls receive custom Hudson Mile tee shirts.
• Free hats for the first 250 runners to arrive 
• Hudson Mile racing socks to the top three in each age category 
• A dedicated prize category honoring Police, Fire, and EMS first responders 
• An after party at Wm. Farmer & Sons following the race 

All proceeds from the event benefit the race’s charity partner, Perfect 10 Hudson. Hudson Mile has been coaching members of Perfect Ten specifically for this race. 

“This race is for everyone—walkers, joggers, families, and elite runners alike,” said Jorge Pardo, race director of the Hudson Mile. “It’s one mile and one community, and we’re proud to bring it back to Warren Street for a second year.” 

The inaugural Hudson Mile, held in 2025, was the first-ever AIMS-certified one-mile race in the organization’s history, a recognition awarded by the Association of International Marathons and Distance Races. The course is USATF certified. 

Registration is open now at www.hudson-mile.com or directly at runsignup.com/Race/NY/Hudson/HUDSONMILE.

More Intersection Improvements on the Way

Last night, the Common Council approved a transfer of $5,000 from "Grant Writer Expense" to the Department of Public Works. Today, a statement from Mayor Joseph Ferris explains how the $5,000 will be used.

I am grateful to the Common Council and Council President Morris for their partnership in ensuring Hudson's streets are safe for everyone.

By approving the transfer of $5,000 in funds from my office's "Grant Writer Budget Expense" line to DPW's "Street Maintenance--Materials & Supplies" line, we [will] be able to implement the following much needed intersection improvements:

• Crosswalks at State Street and North 4th Street;
• Crosswalks at State Street and North 7th Street with "Yield to Pedestrians" signs installed in both directions on State;
• Stop signs for traffic in both directions on Front Street at the intersection of Front and Warren streets; and
• Stop signs for traffic in both directions on Front Street at the intersection of Front and State streets.

When installed in the coming weeks, these upgrades will complement improvements made earlier this month around the Public Square with two new stop signs, additional crosswalks painted at Columbia and North 7th streets, and the removal of parking spots around the park to daylight two dangerous intersections.

A safer network of streets and sidewalks is a priority of my administration. That is why--with Common Council authorization--we have applied for a United States Department of Transportation's Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Action Plan grant, and a Climate Smart Communities (CSC) grant through New York State's Consolidated Funding application.

The SS4A grant will provide the City the dedicated federal funding to identify data-driven street and pedestrian infrastructure improvements that will make our community safer for all. The CSC grant will provide Hudson with the funds to implement further pedestrian and streetscape improvements around the Public Square.

These improvements would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of the teams at both the Department of Public Works and Hudson Police Department.

SID Implementation: Year One

On Monday, the Public Works Board, which exists to oversee the implementation of the Sidewalk Improvement District (SID), met to decide on a course of action after bids had been received for the first phase of sidewalk replacement. As it turned out, the lowest bid, which was a half million dollars less than the highest bid, was still about $35,000 more than the amount available for the project. As a consequence, two of the eight areas designated for sidewalk replacement have been removed from the list: Third Street from Union to Partition street, west side, and Sixth Street from Rope Alley to State Street, west side.

The Public Works Board agreed to award the job to the lowest bidder, Frank Vosburgh & Sons. In support of the choice, Tyler Kritzman, Commissioner of Public Works, said, "They did a decent job last year. They finished everything on time."

The project, reduced in size, is expected to cost $273,985. The Public Works Board agreed to pay $50,000 back to the general fund as a first installment to repay the $500,000 taken from the general fund to finance the SID project upfront. The work at the six sites is expected to be done in October.

At last night's Common Council meeting, a resolution was approved authorizing the mayor to enter into a contract with Frank Vosburgh & Sons. The resolution, which includes the bids received from all five companies that submitted bids, can be found here.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK