Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Rent Stabilization and Hudson

Last week, the Common Council passed a resolution calling on the New York State legislature to extend rent stabilization, which now applies only to New York City and Nassau, Westchester, and Rockland counties, to the entire state and offering support for four bills now in committee pertaining to tenants' rights. The resolution passed but not with unanimous support. Three aldermen voted against it and two abstained, making it necessary for Council president Tom DePietro, who has chosen not to vote except in cases of a tie, to cast a vote.

To Gossips, the resolution seemed mostly to be part of a lobbying effort by Citizen Action of New York, but Roger Hannigan Gilson decided to pursue the topic. This morning, he published his consideration of the topic on his blog The Other Hudson Valley: "Could Rent Stabilization Come to Hudson?"


  1. Excellent article by Gilson -- cogently points out precisely why Bujan and Halloran are correct while the rest of the Council votes in knee-jerk reaction: besides being of little to no application in Hudson, they don't address the underlying problems (economic development and education reform) causing the symptom (a perceived "housing crisis"). Real leadership pertains, at least in part, to pointing out when ideas are poor, not just rubber-stamping them because they "start a conversation" (which has been on-going in the city for at least a decade).

  2. Rent Control in Hudson conflicts with high assessments and high taxes.

    You will end up with Hudson bankrupted like Detroit was bankrupted.

    I will not live to see it, but it is a really dumb idea. However, no one ever said the masses were smart.

  3. Gilson seems to have it right, but the story got to the important stuff -- "Hudson is really freaking out over the assessments" -- and then hid behind a paywall....