Sunday, February 2, 2014

More About the Purchase of Van Kleeck's

Yesterday, there was an article by Adam Clayton in the Register-Star about the sale of Van Kleeck's properties to the Galvan Initiatives Foundation. Today, there's another one, this one written by John Mason: "Van Kleeck received 'unanticipated,' 'excellent' offer from Galvan."  I guess that's another way of saying that Galvan made them an offer they couldn't refuse.

7 comments:

  1. OK. I wish Mr Van Kleeck all the best as he downsizes his business. Business people have to make decisions like this all the time

    But yet again, we have this quote from the Register Star article regarding Galvan's intentions:

    "'They have good ideas and intentions for the future use of the property,” though he said he didn't know what their intentions are.'

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dangerous Liaisons....................or "just say it's beyond my control". Thank you John Malkovich for that line. And Hudsonians also. Nothing like keeping that "ghetto" image on the corners of N 2nd & N 3rd on Warren, N 7th & State.
    Please add 4th & Warren too even if it's not a "G" thing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's a big problem, buildings being warehoused and boarded up add nothing to the community - brings down the work of those trying to improve things and takes away valuable housing for those who need it. How many homeless in Hudson? It's a shame.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's a big problem, buildings being warehoused and boarded up add nothing to the community - brings down the work of those trying to improve things and takes away valuable housing for those who need it. How many homeless in Hudson? It's a shame.

    ReplyDelete
  5. owners should be made to finish or rehab buildings before they can buy another

    ReplyDelete
  6. Looking at the county statistics recently, there are very few homeless now in the county. The problem is that many want to move here and the apartment inventory doesn't exist. He probably ties up about 110-125 apartments (Carol can correct me on this).

    ReplyDelete