She went on to suggest that it was unfair to compare Hudson to other cities in New York State because "none of these cities were the number one choice of New Yorkers to move up here during COVID." She asserted that Hudson was a developing city. "It's not developed yet, because it has been neglected for years," Daskaoudi explained. "If you want to have a return on investment," Daskaloudi told Rasner, "you have to make an investment [in infrastructure and parks], so that the city looks nice, and it attracts people." She continued her lecture, telling Rasner, "Every time you the people want something, it costs money." She went on to mention the $50,000 increase in the City's contribution to the Hudson Area Library, which was approved by referendum and had to be accommodated in the city budget.
When Rasner had the opportunity to speak, he explained why he had done the comparison. He spoke about "benchmarking," comparing the operating performance metrics of similarly situated cities to see how much they are spending on various services and identify where Hudson is spending more and understand why. Rasner explained that his research—comparing the budgets and populations of all sixty-three cities in New York—was just a starting point. The department heads should be looking at the budgets for the other cities to help establish goals. When they find examples of cities doing things more economically, they should investigate how that was achieved. Rasner posed the question: "Why are other cities able to succeed with a much lower burden on the taxpayers?"
Rasner pointed out that since 2020 the city budget has increased by close to million dollars a year—from $14,910,741 to $19,771,551. He concluded by saying, "We should ask ourselves: Where did that money go? Are our lives better for it? . . . Do you feel better now than you did five years ago?"
Councilmember Gary Purnhagen (First Ward) suggested that the last question—"Do you feel better now than you did five years ago?"—be asked of the audience at the hearing. When it was, one voice was heard saying No.
Kristal Heinz commented, "It's the perception that Hudson is an expensive city to live in, and part of that is the taxes are expensive." She went on to say that it feels like most of the burden falls on the middle class, and warned, "If you want this to be a healthy, thriving community, you need to make sure that the middle class can actually afford to live here."
The theme was taken up by Nicole Vidor, who identified herself as a real estate broker. She asserted, "It's getting to the point where if you are a middle-class person, you cannot afford to live here, because the taxes keep going up, all the services keep going up, and we are the ones who are carrying the brunt of the burden." Vidor continued, "The people less fortunate are being taken care of, the very wealthy can absolutely take care of themselves, but the people here who are just normal working people . . . it's getting to the point that we are going to end up with a city that is very rich or very poor."
Vidor cited the example of neighbors of hers who are selling the house that has been their home for sixty years because they can no longer afford the taxes. Vidor maintained that the assessments were "askew," and there was no way her neighbors would be able to sell their house for the amount of its current assessment. She claimed, "I could show you a building that's assessed at $90,000 that's worth $2 million, and I could show you a building that's assessed at $750,000 that's not worth more than $500,000."
Councilmember Margaret Morris (First Ward) told Vidor that many of the points she made resonated with her. "Increasingly, we are becoming a city of the very wealthy and the very poor, and that is not a sustainable community. . . . I have only lived here for fifteen years, but I see the same pattern, and it is very alarming."
The entire hearing can be viewed here.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK
Always interesting to hear realtors weigh in on housing affordability. "The less fortunate" might be surprised to learn that they're "being taken care of". Big news if true.
ReplyDeleteI wish people would drop the trope about Hudson being the “number one choice of New Yorkers to move“ to post covid. It’s based on a click bait New York Times article about zip code forwarding the immediate months following the start of the pandemic. The fact is, according to the US Census Bureau, that Hudson’s population has continued to decline since 2020, from 5,984 to 5,790. Did wealthy people by second homes upstate, including Hudson? Has housing prices and rents increased along with inflation, as it has worldwide? Yes and yes. We’re not special or magical and definitely not above being compared to similar municipalities. Sure, NYC has a comparatively low tax burden. They get revenue from many sources besides their residents (tourism sales/lodging tax, wall st transactions, tons of federal money). Also, why would we need to invest to “attract people” if everyone already moved up here in its current condition? Contradictions galore.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of contradictions, I do agree with the Council’s criticism about the library referendum. But that’s why we shouldn’t let the budgeting be done by “mob rule.” If everything was based on a vote, the public would vote for a subway to be built down Warren St, a public pool on every block, all the while reducing property taxes by 90%. As much as I’m critical of our electeds, I’d rather have the council approve the budget, with the guidance of our very competent treasurer, a thousand times above the low-information voters. Furthermore, I’d more prefer a very competent city manager, dept heads and treasurer propose a budget to the council.
Nicole Vidor strikes a similar point that I’ve been repeating here: the assessment role is very much unbalanced and unfair. There are many homes valued at 10% of current market values while others are as high as 120%! Look it up for yourselfs on the county’s website. Just look at your own block. It will blow your mind. I truly feel sorry for the neighbors she gave an example of. They weren’t well heeled city slickers. They just made the mistake of changing their title and got swept up in a “welcome stranger” assessment. So take that as a warning, don’t change your deeds and titles. This is also why many people I know haven’t done renovations or have done them under the radar without permits. They don’t want to get pinged and put up to market value and wait another decade before their neighbors get rebalanced. If all values were updated equally and annually, as the state suggests, people wouldn’t be so quick to flip and sell, and more home projects would be properly permitted. Also, people would see the annual increase in taxes reflected from the increasing budgets and this budget meeting would so over crowded they’d have to hold it at the Opera House.
P.S. Carole, I must applaud your choice of thumbnail image for these budget related posts. The Monopoly Man holding his hands up like “who cares?” is perfect.
It's dissapointing that Ms. Daskaloudi would fall back on the old trope that citizens who didn't come to a prior meeting shouldn't exercise their right to speak at a later meeting. It's really a bad look for a legislator to "take attendance" like that. Beyond that, Mr. Rasner asks eminently reasonable questions that require substantive answers from the Council and the Mayor's office. The citizens -- who are being told they will foot these bills -- deserve meaningful responses to their questions.
ReplyDelete