Sunday, January 16, 2022

Rebecca Wolff Responds

The revelation that former First Ward alder Rebecca Wolff, the major force behind Hudson's law regulating short term rentals, was offering an apartment in her house as a short term rental on Airbnb brought a deluge of criticism, both in comments on Gossips, where the post exposing it has so far gotten more than 3,400 hits, and on Facebook. Yesterday, Wolff responded to the criticism in her publication, Fence Magazine. Her response can be found here.

20 comments:

  1. I have a title to an essay I will write about this whole saga in another life: Luxury Is For Losers: the Cult of the Cool.

    I have many character flaws, but being totally not cool is not one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What a stupid or obnoxious person.
    Was going to use the t word, but the woke would accuse me...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh, one other thing. If Ms. Wolff is house sitting elsewhere, then her legal lot is not owner occupied, and if she had Airbnb'd her unit, that would have been arguably
    illegal, depending on how "owner occupied" is defined by a court, since I don't think it is defined in the law (a majority of laws in Hudson are poorly drafted or mis-drafted, who knew?). Which raises the issue of whether Ms. Wolff would have written her screed, if she had not found a month to month tenant. She also does not reveal whether or not she registered the unit while advertising it as an Airbnb.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Via Hudson Short Term Rental Law, a person who owns a home in Hudson and lives there at least 50 days of the year may operate it as a short-term rental unit for a max of 60 days per calendar year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah yes, the second home exception. I forgot about that one. If she did airbnb at any time in 2022, she would have had to make sure to move back for 50 days during calendar year 2022 to make it legal.

      Delete
  5. “The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.”

    ReplyDelete
  6. The moral relativism of Ms Wolff’s self-justification is simultaneously disgusting and unsurprising. Because she feels that her overall affect on the city has been positive (a view few, if any, of her neighbors seem to share), she feels justified in engaging in behavior she identifies as negative. Comrade Wolff it seems is just another self-serving asshole ready to tell everyone else how to behave.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Is Rebecca Wolff really a “ cool “ person ? Her behavior and rancor, and her pushing if one agenda only, has taken the cool of if Hudson. In my opinion. These minimally talented lefty new arrivals to Hudson have turned it into the opposite of cool.


    ReplyDelete
  8. WOW! Wolff has somehow managed to elevate herself to a whole new level of ‘crazy’ with this unhinged, delusional, narcissistic rant (and in her self-published “magazine”- of all things- puhahahaha! Is she in 7th Grade?)

    It didn’t seem possible that Wolff could do anything more absurd to secure her position as the all time LAUGHING STOCK of Hudson- yet she has with this humdinger of a screed.

    It’s simply jaw dropping that she actually tries to justify her hypocrisy by stating that because of all the ‘good she has done’ for Hudson it is okay for her to rent her homes on AirBnB and at the top end of the market (luxury rate) – even though she has spent years (two as a member of the common council) shaming and viciously attacking her neighbors for doing those exact things.

    It’s equally galling that she seems to attempt to make a case that she is somehow morally superior because she lives a ‘simple life’ and has never really worked. (Is she attempting to say that because she lives off a trust fund and in a million dollar + home she gets to play by a different set of rules?) DESPICABLE!

    Hopefully Wolff is officially CANCELLED - but after everyone is able to stop laughing I think it is very important to remember that most of her actions as an alder were questionable and unethical and that before she ran for office she was a fixture at public meetings yelling obscenities and verbally harassing people, founded ‘Affordable Hudson’ which turned out to be a fake/unregistered non-profit - yet she ALWAYS had the unwavering support and endorsement of Common Council President Tom dePietro (who recently told all the Alders they should emulate her), The Mayor, Ward Supervisors Michael Chameides & Linda Mussman, and the Hudson City Democratic Committee. One must wonder what exactly about Wolff any of them found that was worthy of their abundant support.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The legislation Wolff championed regulates a detrimental kind of Airbnb non-owner-occupied landlords, while allowing owner-occupied units to be rented occasionally. I think this legislation is good for Hudson.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The legislation was neither good nor bad for Hudson: it affected 9 properties. Nine. Notice a material dip in rental rates since then? A non-material dip? No. The only change in rental rates is that they've gone up -- because Hudson is a desirable place to live and quite small. So any demand will be inordinately magnified in an municipality with an equally tiny residential rental inventory.

      Delete
    2. If your number is right then they had the foresight to adopt the regulation before profiteers got in the picture. I think that is good for Hudson. One wonders why some people act like the sky is falling from one regulation which still allows owner-occupied units to be rented occasionally.

      Delete
    3. You seem to be avoiding the crux of the biscuit: the law did nothing except keep 9 people from earning a market-driven return on their investment. Yay! In the meantime, rents have gone up regardless and unabated. So what's the point of a pointless law? You think there was a horde of would-be absentee STR owners waiting to descend on Hudson? What were they waiting for, the real estate prices to rise? You are celebrating a nonexistent victory over a nonexistent problem while the the rationale for the law wasn't met by any measure. All Comrade Wolff did with her pointless law was underscore how little municipal legislatures can do to impact macro economic forces. And she did by abrogating the common law property rights -- to no avail.

      Delete
  10. While the intent may have been to protect middle- and lower-income housing in Hudson, this law is ill-conceived and poorly executed.

    1. No agency in the city of Hudson has the capability of policing or enforcing this law right now. This has been dumped on the shoulders of the building department. Those folks obviously don't have the staffing to deal with this.

    2. So many properties on the north-east side of Warren are still in deplorable condition. Homeowners who take on these expensive renovation projects absolutely need to have the ability to pay back loans by renting on Airbnb as much as they need for as long as they need. It's not like they get a break on their property taxes during renovation. Also, no property tax breaks for creating rentals after.

    3. Businesses on Warren Street depend on Airbnb traffic to survive. Families who want to visit can't be expected to stay in expensive hotels with children. They need to rent homes.

    4. Rebecca Wolff should resign.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would beg to differ with point 3. Many businesses on Warren Street have survived and are surviving long before AirBnB raised its head. And, Rebecca Wolff has resigned as of Dec 31/21.

      Delete
    2. Let's be clear. Rebecca Wolff did not resign. Her term on the Council ended on December 31, 2021. She had not sought re-election.

      Delete
    3. She must have been aware about animosity building up. How could she not. That's close enough to resigning for me. A 2 year term is too short for anything constructive. Oh, that's right, that wasn't her agenda.

      And, Rose, you make good points.

      Delete