At the Common Council meeting last night, an amended sidewalk law was laid on the councilmembers' desks. Prior to the meeting, the proposed law had been revised to waive sidewalk maintenance fees for volunteer firefighters and veterans. Another revision involved adding properties in Mt. Ray Estates to the list of excluded properties because they are located on private streets where there is no City-owned right-of-way, and the City would not be creating sidewalks in the condominium development. During the course of the meeting, the Council also voted to amend the law to reduce the sidewalk fee by half for properties currently without sidewalks. Below is the amendment approved by the Council.
All councilmembers voted in favor of the amendment except Margaret Morris (First Ward) and Council president Tom DePietro. To Gossips' knowledge, no one has calculated if these fees will be sufficient to make substantial improvements to the city's sidewalks.
The Council is expected to hold a special meeting on Friday, January 27, at 6:00 p.m. for the purpose of voting to enact the legislation.
COPYRIGHT 2023 CAROLE OSTERINK
We also have no idea what the costs will be to replace and repair sidewalks. The work will be put out to bid, and it is a good bet that our friends at Colarusso will get the job(s), just as they do every other year when street replacement goes out to bid.
ReplyDelete14 months ago Colarusso replaced several corner curb ramps where they replaced city streets, as is required - curb ramps are essentially sidewalks, it's concrete work, just a little more difficult. Two curb ramps Colarusso created at 6th & State, and one at 5th & Prospect, began cracking within weeks. There is loose concrete at 6th & State because of the cracks. Apparently the city is perfectly fine with shoddy but expensive concrete work as Colarusso has not returned to replace the crap they sold us.
Do you see the big red flag waving over City Hall?
So, this fee has confusing carve outs that will take a lot of administrative time to figure out... firefighters, veterans, non-legacy non-sidewalk owners, year-round families (how does one define or figure that out?)... How do they even figure out the billing? Also, if the city takes over responsibly for the sidewalks, does that make it liable for any slip-n-fall litigation that happens anywhere in the city? Usually the property owner and their insurance would be liable, as it should be. This is a disaster in the making.
ReplyDeleteIf you walk around Hudson and take a look at the extent of the sidewalks needing repair, it is pretty obvious this fee isn't going to pay to fix them. It's going to require the city to go deeper into debt to borrow the money to pay for it. Who will pay for that? - the taxpayers who will see their taxes continue to climb. Then there is the question of fairness, property owners who have perfectly good sidewalks will be paying thousands of dollars for years to come to repair the sidewalks all over Hudson. The street with the best sidewalks, Warren St, who already pay the highest taxes, will be paying the highest fees. One example, the Ukrainian church on 2nd and Allen has a totally destroyed sidewalk spanning half a block on two sides. A church that pays no taxes, that has a large congregation who could pay for it's repair, but the taxpayers will finance this multi thousand dollar concrete job. This makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteIf the city is incapable of enforcing the current, quite simple rules, how are they going to manage this project without being ripped off? It's not going to happen. I don't see what is so hard about making people fix their own sidewalks.
Churches and other not-for-profits are subject to the sidewalk fee even though they may be exempt from property tax.
DeleteIs that right? NFPs will be levied the sidewalk fee? Maybe they will be -- but I don't think they have to pay it: it's a property tax as only property owners are subject to the charge. Call it a fee, it's still a tax. I'm pretty sure that's the state of the law in NYS. So the Council can state it, but the courts will likely negate it. By the way, Union Jack makes a might strong point: this new law is not well drawn, subject to innumerable carve-outs to protect the pols' pals (one imagines they have pals or at least those with business before the City). Unworkable and underfunded. Nice job Council -- you appear to have screwed the pooch out of the gate.
DeleteWill there be any break (as with the old law) for people who recently replaced their sidewalks for a few thousand dollars?
ReplyDeleteThere are credits for people who have recently replaced their sidewalks.
DeleteWhy should someone who doesn't have a sidewalk have to pay a fee, reduced or not? Has anyone calculated A) approximately how much this whole disaster is going to cost and B) How much money will be raised by these fees? My guess is...no.
ReplyDeleteWhy do some properties not have sidewalks in the first place? Is it a zoning thing? Besides the suburban-like 5th Ward, there are a handful of properties in most residential zones that are missing sidewalks altogether. Seems like a good deal for them; pay half price, get a new sidewalk and be brought to code on your neighbor's dime. If you're paying the sidewalk fee, you should eventually get a sidewalk yourself, right?
DeleteI still don't understand why the current law was not, and can't be in the future, simply enforced. The constant hand wringing over the past year or so has only made the sidewalks worse. Why would anyone with a crumbling sidewalk invest the money to fix it if the city is talking about shouldering the responsibly? If enacted, this law will continue to make the sidewalks worse as it would guarantee all property owners will not take it upon themselves to fix and will be at the whim of the city's schedule. If other city projects are a predictor, the process will be slow and ineffective. It will requiring hiring more city employees to administrate the confusing billing structure, as well as evaluating sidewalks, deciding priorities, and project management. Most of the money raised will probably be wasted on administration and as the sidewalks continue to deteriorate, further lawsuits will come, costing more tax dollars. When the real costs of the repairs are realized, the fees will skyrocket and this will just be an additional property tax to the city/county/school taxes, making Hudson even more unaffordable to the middle class. The initial proposed amount is just a foot in the door. You think $100-200 is enough? Also, how will the repairs be prioritized and will that process be transparent? Get ready to hear about how social justice and equity will decide what get's repaired. Organizations like Galvan will use their influence to lobby repairs to their properties, in the name of the "common good." The contracts will go to Colarusso. What a joke. Just enforce the current law. NYC and most cities do it that way for a reason. It's an expense, bureaucracy and liability not worth managing.
ReplyDeleteDoes this mean I don't have to shovel my sidewalk anymore. Obviously this is a responsibly too hard for us property owners and our neighbors should pay to have it done for us.
The list of City owned Parcels Excepted from the SID is interesting. The vacant lot at 514-516 Columbia has a HORRIBLY DANGEROUS sidewalk. The city don't need to replace it! The Union Street municipal lot, 701-713 Union, is also excepted. Rob Perry has known for years about the awful tripping hazards on that sidewalk, next to the lot entrance. Now he'll never have to fix them! There are others, including the sidewalk in front of City Hall. The hypocrisy is rich.
ReplyDeleteB Huston
Seems to me that without spending much at all the city could add a notation to the waterbills and tax mailings informing all property owners of the requirements to maintain their sidewalks with a deadline of six months or a year from the first notice for repairs to be made. If not made, the property owner would be fined monthly for failure to repair.
ReplyDeleteNot hard to do and the fines would generate revenue, as opposed to the proposed law that will end up costing everyone a load of money in taxes, fees, administration and service to debt.
A scandal in waiting ...
ReplyDelete