An article that appeared in the Register-Star on the last day of 2011 celebrated the birth of a new not-for-profit--the Galvan Initiative Foundation: "Nonprofit's goal: city's improvement." In that article, Tom Swope, executive director of the foundation, defines the foundation's purpose in this way: "Our mission is to enhance the quality of life in Hudson through acquiring [an] architecturally significant group of houses, renovating them, returning them to the housing stock and renting them out at market rates. It will enable people who are gainfully employed to find decent places to live right in town."
Recently Gossips, at the suggestion of a reader, took a look at the Galvan Initiative Foundation's registration documents in the New York State Charities Bureau database. The foundation's registration statement defines its purpose in this way: "To preserve the unique heritage of the City of Hudson, New York, by acquiring, interpreting, conserving and maintaining buildings of architectural and historical significance." That sounds like a mission statement that could belong to a preservation organization like Historic Hudson. The certificate of incorporation, however, expands on this statement of purpose to say: "It is their [the antecedent of their is Donors' and Trustees', both of whom are Henry van Ameringen and T. Eric Galloway] further intent that said Foundation direct its efforts specifically toward the promotion of affordable housing and related services to low-income and otherwise disadvantaged persons living in the vicinity of the City of Hudson, New York State, by: (a) sponsoring, planning, acquiring, developing, restoring and operating fee and leasehold properties in the area of the aforesaid City of Hudson; and (b) conducting any and all lawful activities which may be useful and desirable in furtherance of the foregoing."
So what are Galvan's rentals to be--market rate, affordable, or low income? Developers recognize these as three distinct categories of housing based on rents charged. Market rate housing has the highest rents; low income the lowest--significantly below market rate.
Probably all three. Am I right in assuming from Tom's statement and their statement that that does not include Section 8?
ReplyDelete"To preserve the unique heritage of the City of Hudson, New York, by acquiring, interpreting, conserving and maintaining buildings of architectural and historical significance." This quote from Galvan's registration statement lets Hudson know what it intends to do, and what it has already done to the great harm of the city, with the city's historic buildings: "interpret" them.
ReplyDeleteThe proof is in the pudding.
ReplyDeleteFrom all that we have observed already ... keep your expectations low.
This is going to be most painful for those who know historic architecture and appreciate the beauty of the ages.... and trees I might add.
On an up note GALVIN will be paying a huge part of the town and school taxes ... unless there's some 'back room deal' going down.
ReplyDeleteIt's about time we had a frank conversation about the issue of Hudson playing host to all sorts of disadvantaged persons. Surely we all are sympathetic to the needs of anyone who is facing challenges in life, and and as a society we have to figure out how to accommodate their needs. But does it make sense to concentrate a large population of people who are disadvantaged in various ways all in one community? Given that we are the county seat where most social services are headquartered, Hudson is already home to a disproportionate number of residents who require public support. I have never seen another town anywhere where such a high % of the populace needs help. If we continue to build and maintain facilities for the disadvantaged, then by definition we are choosing to become a low-income community, with all the problems that entails. Making that choice will make it much more difficult to attract new private investment to Hudson. There are issues of fairness here that need to be confronted; is it fair to ask one community to bear the burden of sheltering more than its share of struggling persons? And, is it fair to those unfortunate persons to be concentrated in one place? This is not a recipe for a viable community.
ReplyDeleteIts a recipe for disaster Gizmo. A town cannot raise money to pay their bills if its inhabitants are predominantly not for profits or gov't subsidized. It seems to be a good old boy political football that leaves out any real vision for real growth for this town. Its a lose lose situation.
ReplyDeleteThe City will not get wise but maybe it will be overwhelmed by the times. Say Marina Abramovich gets her way with the Rem Koolhaas
ReplyDeletePerformance Art Space and brings Andre Balzas to do a hotel and then all the art people come - - might one outweigh the other?