What Price $10 Million?
Earlier today, Gossips posted the link to Hudson's successful DRI application, which prior to this afternoon had not been made public. I only had time to give the document the most cursory look, but tonight, a reader drew my attention to this paragraph, which appears on page 18 of the document:
You can click on the image to enlarge it and make it more legible, but the most confusing and alarming statement in the paragraph is this: "City officials and neighboring business owners support the expansion of Colarusso." What?
In the pursuit of $10 million, did those writing the application decide to cast aside, for reasons that are hard to fathom, the City's carefully constructed 2011 LWRP Core Riverfront zoning, which made the industrial activity of Colarusso a conditional use, a designation we all believed meant the City would like it eventually to go away not expand?
COPYRIGHT 2017 CAROLE OSTERINK
Those who wrote the application cast aside the truth rather than the zoning. While it's true that our City officials and their consulting attorneys have zero clue about the City's zoning, it's still the law.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the undeserving momentum it creates, which feels like it cancels out months of hard work in a few sentences, but it's not binding in any way and perhaps the application would have sunk without it.
Colarusso is merely listed as one of the "key improvements to be considered as part of the DRI-funded circulation and connectivity project."
Our job is still the same, to badger and pester City officials until they relent and finally address our claims about the zoning. It's been 16 months since citizens submitted the first of several papers explaining the content of the Core Riverfront District to City Hall.
So far there's been no response from anyone, and THAT's what we should be up in arms about.
Or this wonderful nugget, in reference to the Clean-Tech Cluster: "expands the reach of established small and family-run businesses—from gravel production to semiconductors to cross-laminated timber—to regional and global markets."
ReplyDeleteWho wrote this dreck? Sheena or Tiff? The Colarussos?
ReplyDeletePoorly written, corporate gobbedlygook.
Someone in the economic development hierarchy cooked up a blatant falsehood and inserted it into the language of the DRI application. There are no city officials or adjacent business owners who are on record as supporting the expansion of the Colarusso operation. This is not a small matter-- creating a lie designed to boost an industrial applicant while they are in the middle of a permit review process is completely out-of-bounds, and the person responsible should be identified and exposed.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more. Well-put.
DeleteYes, this didn't occur to me:
Delete"creating a lie designed to boost an industrial applicant while they are in the middle of a permit review process is completely out-of-bounds."
No question that it's altered the equation.
Thank you, Carole, and commenters. When the $10 million grant idea was first floated, I took a lot of heat for suggesting that we should first get our governmental house in order so that we would be able to spend the (public's) money properly. Not showing the proposal to the public before it was submitted was a kind of proof-of-pudding event -- and a bad sign. --peter m
DeleteHas anyone bothered to asked the writers of the economic grant why it was not publicly shown before it was submitted or why Colarruso was included or would you just prefer to throw stones and not be happy that we were chosen to receive the ten million bucks
ReplyDeleteDid anyone "bother" to ask?
DeleteIn your fantasy world, who do you suppose would bother to tell us?
I suspect one of three things Oldtyme: either you're a new arrival; you've spent your entire life ignoring how Hudson's local political culture works (no matter who's in office); or the venal arrangements hereabouts have always supported your interests.
Only one of those possibilities can account for your question.
Another Cuomo push to buy more votes and support. The application was held private because those who wrote it knew there would be an out cry and uproar as per Hudson quota goes. The writers also realised that omitting and excluding some sort of industrial improvement and "potential" job growth, whether real or perceived would lessen the chance of recieving the grant greatly. Personally I cant wait to see the quid pro quo that is certain to follow with grants as large as these. Follow the money. If anyones looking for stones to throw I hear there are some by the escarpment, hurry they are goung fast! Or you could support your local gravel company,they have all sorts and sizes to fit whatever need you have.
DeleteIt seems to me that you complain about everything that happens in Hudson. I have found the present administration very open with communication. Maybe there was a reason for their actions. Again I say ask. You are assuming from the past actions of other administrations. I am sure I have been in Hudson longer than you.
ReplyDeleteI did ask, and found the explanation half-assed.
DeleteWhy don't you explain the situation, to lessen the perception that anyone with whom you disagree is a merely a "complainer."
Please tell our fellow readers why local laws should be bypassed to satisfy the language of a grant application. That will be a matter of great interest to many of us "complainers."
You traffic in perceptions, whereas I'm talking about the law (to be specific, we;re referring to §325-17.1).
If you don't like the law, you're entitled to try and change it. Until then, in my eyes you're the "complainer."
For your studies, I recommend that you read the City's Comprehensive Plan, after which you should look for references to that plan in the City-adopted waterfront program (LWRP), which supplied the rationale for the 2011 zoning amendments. Outside of those documents, you're trafficking in hearsay and prejudice.
A development corporation that removed paying tourist and replaced them with users Who don't pay is now in charge of Hudson's economic development.
ReplyDeleteTwenty years ago the same people were developing industry here, they had to change their name to stay in business. Heaven help us.
It's the usual smoke and mirrors. The application should have been publicized before being submitted, and the fact that it was not proves that the usual chicanery was underfoot. We keep asking for transparency and not getting it.
ReplyDeleteSheena Salvino stated at the last Common Council meeting the group in charge of reviewing and approving DRI applications asked it not be shared until the award was announced. Apparently there was also some personal financial information in the DRI which needed to be redacted. In light of this whopper, I'm a bit skeptical if either of those statements was actually the case.
ReplyDeleteYes, "personal financial information" is a customary ruse to circumvent public participation, particularly useful when someone or other needs to justify an Executive Session.
DeleteI don't dispute your point. Having read the DRI application, it's understandable they chose to downplay any community disunity on the Haul Road/waterfront point. The state is looking to give the grant to communities with 'shovel-ready' project. What use advertising our lack of harmony? At any rate, I don't think this is going to be an arrow in Colarusso's quiver.
Delete