As we've reported before, the Department of Justice expects the City to come up with some plan to address the sorry state of our sidewalks before the end of the year. The legislation forwarded by the Legal Committee to the full Council was that plan. According to the legislation, all property owners, whether or not they pay property taxes, whether or not they currently have sidewalks, would be assessed an annual fee, which would go toward the repair, replacement, and construction of sidewalks throughout the city.
Tonight, when it came time to lay the proposed law on the councilmembers' desks, the first step in the process of enacting the legislation, Councilmember Dominic Merante (Fifth Ward) moved to table it. He argued that there had not been sufficient time for constituents to respond, especially in light of the fact that City Hall has not had a functioning email system since December 2. He also asserted that most of his constituents do not have sidewalks.
Councilmember Vicky Daskaloudi (Fifth Ward) concurred, reiterating that many of her constituents--the constituents she shares with Merante--do not have sidewalks.
Councilmember Margaret Morris (First Ward) reminded her colleagues that the City has an obligation to propose a solution to the sidewalk problem to the Department of Justice before the end of the year and warned, "We need to be very careful about tabling this." Crystal Peck, counsel to the Council, reported that it was unlikely that the DOJ would grant an extension for even a month. Still, when the motion to table came to a vote, six councilmembers voted in support of tabling the legislation: Daskaloudi, Amber Harris (Third Ward), Merante, Dewan Sarowar (Second Ward), Malachi Walker (Fourth Ward), and Ryan Wallace (Third Ward).
Council president Tom DePietro expressed his disappointment with the outcome of the vote, saying, "It speaks to me of lack of civic concern." He went on to say, "Just remember, if we bond for this, which would be beyond $5 million, everyone will have to pay." Morris clarified that if the City did a bond issue, only property owners subject to property tax would be paying off the bond, whereas with the proposed legislation tax exempt properties, properties owned by not-for-profits, would also to subject to the annual sidewalk fees.
Toward the end of the meeting, Merante told DePietro that he resented the implication that he and Daskaloudi were not civic minded. Merante continued, "To say that to Vicky and I, as representatives of the Fifth Ward, is a bully tactic. Who are you, Trump? That's wrong. That's a bully tactic, and I think you owe Vicky and I an apology." DePietro responded, "Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture, and I don't think that's what the Fifth Ward is doing at this point." By way of apology he said, "I stand corrected. I shouldn't have challenged your civic responsibility or civic attitude . . . your civic pride, but I am vastly disappointed."
Exactly how this problem will be resolved, if it will be resolved, in the next ten days remains to be seen.
COPYRIGHT 2022 CAROLE OSTERINK
Tommy DiPietro once again fails in his primary role as manager of the house. Having dithered for years and years and years on this matter he tries to pull a Scalera and bully the members into railroading their constituents. Good on those voting to table a bill that wasn’t meaningfully discussed or debated in public. Who votes for this schmuck?
ReplyDeleteJohn,
DeleteYou're calling someone a schmuck while hoping for more considered discourse. Worth thinking about how you might actually get the outcomes you claim to want by working with others in good faith rather than name-calling and shitposting. I just don't think it's going to get you anywhere useful.
For what it's worth it seems to me the sidewalks have been discussed to death for years and tabling the proposal is just a way to do nothing, yet again, as we all suffer the consequences.
Nathan
Woodhull/Nathan,
DeleteYou assume I'm trying to get somewhere. I gave up on that, politically, years ago. Instead, I prefer to underscore the hypocrisy, the stupidity, the craven, meaty center of what passes for civic management in Hudson. It's not my job to debate or draft any longer, so I chose not to do it. But that doesn't disqualify me from observing and drawing conclusions.
Let's say I own a property and my sidewalk is great condition. I am still assessed a fee to pay for those property owners that DON'T maintain their sidewalks?! Why should I have to pay for their "lack of civic responsibility"? Once again the slackers benefit from the wallets of those that follow the law. I agree that those people that don't even have a sidewalk shouldn't have to pick up the tab either. You, Tom, knew the deadline was coming and as usual wait until the 11th hour to take action. Heather better get Hudson's checkbook out 'cuz there's a fine a-comin'.
ReplyDeleteLast week at the informal meeting, Depietro and someone else made it clear that this proposal would be put in front of the PUBLIC for comment BEFORE being voted on, and nothing of the sort took place. Yes, this all took place much too quickly and tabling it was wise.
ReplyDeleteWe should remember that the city-wide sidewalk issue is outside the scope of the DOJ agreement. The DOJ, from 3 years ago, is requiring certain sidewalks and curb ramps be repaired or replaced to ADA standards. This was the easier part - replace those sidewalks and ramps at City expense to satisfy the DOJ. Not one bit of that has happened. Why are they concentrating on the much more difficult, larger and time-consuming (!) city-wide sidewalk issue? I don't think the DOJ cares if we have a SYSTEM in place to deal with our sidewalks -- they want several sidewalks and ramps repaired or installed where missing, not every one of them throughout the city.
It seems to me, and correct me if I am mistaken, that city hall does not have its priorities in line.
It's also worth noting that just this summer the council spent about $1,200 to notify all residents via a letter in their water bill that the sidewalk in front of their property was their responsibility to repair and maintain. This is no longer the direction the sidewalk/legal committee is headed. Is it any surprise that people are confused and disinterested and our sidewalks are still an insulting, dangerous mess?
Bill Huston
The goal last night was simply to lay the legislation on the desks of the councilmembers, where it would ripen for a period of time--ten days or two weeks, I can't remember which--before the Council would vote on enacting it. It is during this "ripening" period that it is expected the members would hear from their constituents so that their vote on enacting the legislation could represent their constituents' interests. During that period, the Council would also hold a public hearing. Merante's motion to table the legislation preempted that process.
DeleteThank you for clarification, Carole.
DeleteI think hiring someone to be the sidewalk tsar, if you will, BEFORE the council discusses and votes on this would be wisest. Someone in charge from the get-go. It makes no sense to wait and hope you find that person. Who is in charge now? Who will answer the questions professionally and coherently and be accountable throughout the process?? Crystal Peck? Tom? The legal committee, made up primarily of regular folks? I hope not, cus that is a recipe for failure. B Huston
ReplyDeleteI think not! Another salary, more benefits? Not needed.
DeleteSo everyone doesn't have a sidewalk. So what? Everyone uses them. Not everyone uses the school, the police, or the roads. Not everyone drinks public water. But everyone pays into the costs for those things. Why? So we can try and have a decent community for everyone. Everybody talking about civic responsibility, but acting selfishly. Hardly surprising.
ReplyDeleteI believe the system of school taxation was created by NYS. Everyone benefits from the police and roads, even if you don't drive, your food and other essential items are delivered to stores on the roads. Everyone takes a shower or bath and washes dishes, even if they buy bottled water. If their residence catches on fire, the fire department puts it out with city water. Sidewalks on the other hand are currently required to be maintained by the property owner and it is their civic responsibility to fix them, no on else.
DeleteYes, I get the current situation. My point being that one could try and avoid using the things I mentioned, but it's certainly not practical. Same goes for sidewalks. Everyone benefits from sidewalks in the same way, and thus should be paid for in the same way.
DeleteThere is a very simple solution that will not raise taxes. It is enforcement of the current law, if your sidewalk is a mess, you are required to fix it or be fined (income from fines.) If you still don't fix it, the city pays for it and adds the cost and fines to your tax bill. Why is the existing law so hard to enforce? Instead we are supposed to swallow a complicated new law, with millions of dollars in new debt and a new city official with another salary and more benefits to pay for, why? -- so some people who refuse to fix their own sidewalk don't have to pay for it. Sure, I'd like to get a new sidewalk worth several thousand installed for $75.00, who wouldn't? This makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteMany properties in the 5th ward do not even have sidewalks, so why should they pay for a slacker who lives a mile away on the other side of town to fix their sidewalk? Dominic and Vicky represent those people and are simply doing their job. No shame on them, the people who have no civic concern are the ones who refuse to fix their crumbling, broken up sidewalks.
The ridiculous law that requires people to raise the sidewalk should also be repealed. That is a barrier to sidewalk replacement as it greatly increases the cost.