Perhaps predictably, the Common Council passed the resolution adopting the Good Cause Eviction Law.
Because the Council Chamber and the lobby of City Hall were filled with people bearing signs urging the Council, in English and Spanish, to pass the law, Council president Tom DePietro suggested, after a presentation by Starr Whitehouse about plans for the Furgary, that they go directly to what he called "the main event": voting on the resolution to adopt the Good Cause Eviction Law. There was just one hitch: Dewan Sarowar (Second Ward) wasn't there in person. Because of what he described as "personal business," Sarowar was attending virtually. According to the law, councilmembers attending a meeting virtually can vote only if their cameras are turned on and they can be seen by the audience and other members of the Council. Sarowar's camera was not on, and he was not visible to the rest of the Council.
There were eight members of the Common Council present in person at the meeting. Rich Volo (Fourth Ward) and Vicky Daskaloudi (Fifth Ward), who had recused themselves from consideration of the Good Cause Eviction Law, were not present at the meeting. Dominic Merante (Fifth Ward), who also had recused himself from the issue, was present. Before the vote was taken, DePietro asked Merante to explain why he was recusing himself. Merante explained that because he was a renter he might benefit financially from the law, and for this reason he felt ethically compelled to recuse himself. For this, he was berated by the audience member.
Obviously, with just seven people present to vote on the issue, DePietro felt Sarowar's participation was critical. He determined the Council should postpone "the main event" and consider other matters before them while Sarowar tried to get his camera to work. When there were only three items left on the agenda, Sarowar's colleague, Mohammed Rony (Second Ward), managed to get an image of Sarowar on his phone. The vote was taken, with Rony holding up his phone so the other members of the Council could see Sarowar. Of the eight members who had not recused themselves, only one, Margaret Morris (First Ward) voted no, explaining as she has in the past that, although the intent of the legislation was good, she believed it would have a negative impact on renters. There was a smattering of boos from the audience when Morris cast her no vote.
The resolution needed six affirmative votes to pass; it got seven.
There were cheers from the audience after the vote was taken, with someone declaring repeatedly that the Council was "on the right side of history." The meeting was paused while the jubilant crowd made its way out of the building.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK
🗳️ While many might disagree with this particular law's impact and suitability, and the politicking and pressure campaign, everyone wants housing to be more affordable in Hudson. We just disagree on the "how" and that disagreement should be a civil and respectable one. And ideally more data driven and sincerely debated.
ReplyDelete👏 It is also important to congratulate others, even political opponents, and share in their happiness. So congratulations Tom, Kamal, Claire, Brahvan Ranga from _For the Many_, and those who traveled all the way from Albany and other towns to join Hudson residents for this campaign.
👏And a special honorable mention to Margaret Morris and Dominic Merante. Margaret Morris, the most well read and prepared member of the council, voted "no" and shared her analysis and also empathy. And Dom was present, and explained yet again why he respectfully recuses himself.
🚨 Gossips, or others who were there... for those who were not there... what did the gentleman say so passionately at the end on the way out after the vote at 36 minutes?
https://youtu.be/fdRpxKinvo4?si=hF-ADL1k9DBcUebr&t=2170
Well done, Hudson!
ReplyDeleteIt was uplifting to see all these youngsters, invited to the table by the laudable efforts of mayor Kamal and proto-progressive Tom DePietro, take an active stance for the right cause!
These young and bright people are the harbingers of a promising future for Hudson which for far too long has been held back by its landlords and crusty white holders of privilege.
Barriers are finally falling and in next to no time, property owners will have their day of reckoning, too. This day cannot come soon enough!
Property owners have a reckoning every time they open their property tax bill
DeleteThat was an interesting evening.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, one wishes that every meeting in the city was that well attended. It's a good thing when people show up and throw their support behind (or even their opposition in front of) a piece of legislation.
I also believe that the elation and joy exhibited by those who showed up in support of good-cause eviction was genuine when it passed. They had a plan, they were well organized and they succeeded in getting this legislation passed in very little time.
I was personally, just like the Friendly Immigrant, not a fan of good-cause eviction and continue to believe that it will have overwhelmingly negative effects on Hudson as time goes on. I am also worried that a lot of those folks that cheered when it was passed may wind up disappointed by what it will actually do.
Whether we want it or not, Hudson has now entered the crosshairs of political organizations operating at a national level. They will be back soon enough and it's going to be interesting to see if only one side will show up prepared or both. Hudsonians should brace themselves for the new times when complacency is no longer a viable option.