Tonight, the Common Council voted to prohibit trucks not making deliveries within the City of Hudson from proceeding beyond the turnoff to The Warehouse, which is the point at which Route 9G is no longer a designated access highway. As a consequence, trucks passing through Hudson will no longer be allowed to travel on Third Street or Columbia Street.
.jpg)
When the resolution was introduced tonight, Council president Tom DePietro moved to table it until the Council could hold a special meeting "in a week or two." He argued that "many people were unaware that this was coming up" and claimed the resolution "hasn't really been circulated that well." DePietro, who lives on Worth Avenue, expressed the opinion that trucks denied the right to pass through Hudson on Route 9G "will most likely shift to Route 9," which enters the city from the south on Worth Avenue.
Although DePietro moved to table the resolution, his motion was not seconded, so the vote went forward. There were eight ayes, two abstentions, and one nay. Those who voted in support were Jennifer Belton (Fourth Ward), Vicky Daskaloudi (Fifth Ward), Dominic Merante (Fifth Ward), Margaret Morris (First Ward), Gary Purnhagen (First Ward), Mohammed Rony (Second Ward), Dewan Sarowar (Second Ward), and Rich Volo (Fourth Ward). The two councilmembers representing the Third Ward--Shershah Mizan and Lola Roberts--abstained. DePietro voted no.
At one point, DePietro suggested the mayor could veto the resolution. If that were to happen, a two-thirds vote of the Council could override the mayor's veto. The resolution passed tonight with a two-thirds majority, so at least one councilmember would have to change his or her vote for an override of the mayor's veto to fail.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
Ummm. I hate to say I told you so, but....He is going to try to get to one of them - JUST ONE - the change their vote, some way and some how. Let's pray he fails or Shershah and Lola change their votes to "aye".
ReplyDeleteDid the two who abstained give any reason for their decision?
ReplyDeleteNo. They did not.
DeleteThey abstained due to a lack of spines.
DeleteThis will reroute all truck traffic to Worth Ave. and 7th St. Park. I and my neighbors on Worth Avenue have spoken to Margaret Morris and the Truck Committee multiple times with our concerns. It is not right to simply concentrate the entire problem in another Hudson neighborhood. Anyone who cares about 7th St. Park and the Worth Avenue neighborhood and hospital access should oppose this simplistic plan.
ReplyDeleteI applaud Margaret and the team around her for leading the charge and rallying support for this cause. Let’s not forget—she and others were instrumental in dropping the city speed limit and getting the 25 mph signs placed outside Worth Avenue to slow down traffic, and from my direct experience, it seems to be working.
ReplyDeleteI also want to commend Margaret and the team for not only thinking about the street they live on, but for considering the broader impact on the entire community. This is about improving the community as a whole. Not only does this make sense from an infrastructure and cost-savings standpoint, but it also helps ensure truck traffic is better managed and doesn’t extend into other areas like Warren and State, which it often does on weekdays.
More importantly, the community is sending a clear message: pass-through trucks should seek alternative routes and avoid Hudson altogether. Hoping our Mayor also sees this from the same perspective.
1) As someone who was on the Truck Route Task Force in the ***1990s***, I can verify that generations of mayors claimed this couldn’t be changed. The DOT said we could, but people like Rick Scalera pretended we couldn’t. Why? Maybe protecting certain private interests, one suspects.
ReplyDelete2) The State truck route was not supposed to go through Hudson once the RVW Bridge and its access roads were built. But Chamber of Commerce types (and the politicians who loved them) freaked out, thinking that not having trucks originating in and headed for distant destinations—just passing through—would somehow hurt the Hudson economy.
3) In addition to DiPietro, you have the head of the Planning Board on the newly-isolated route. Theresa Joyner absolutely freaked out when the PB briefly debated having Colarusso trucks use her road, and barred it from being debated further. A clear conflict of interest if I ever saw one.
The following comment was submitted by email, with the subject head "just the facts please, Sam":
DeleteWhen Sam served on the Truck Route Committee under the Cranna Administration (at a time when I was not serving as Mayor) there was never any discussion about moving the Truck Route to any other street or neighborhood within city limits. The discussion always focused on the elimination of the Truck Route through Hudson all together, and DOT affirmed and reaffirmed that was not happening unless an alternative route was established.
Simply put, "I as Mayor never considered at any time pushing that Truck traffic exclusively, through any other neighborhood in our City and yes DOT always stated we had the power to do so!" Perhaps Sam could explain why he didn't when he served.
Rick Scalera
5th Ward Supervisor
Former Mayor, Hudson
He argued that "many people were unaware that this was coming up" and claimed the resolution "hasn't really been circulated that well."
ReplyDeleteAnd who would be responsible for circulating this information? Would this be an another example of his own incompetence? Hudson really does have some issues, but maybe they are starting to come more into the light.
The biggest, of course, the corrupt and incompetent "Mayor" who is picking the pockets of anyone who will allow him in exchange for favors.
Another example, 1st Ward Supervisor/Planning Board Member, Randall Martin, who is living in a Galvan owned property taking grants for his business from Galvan. Mr. Martin should not be on any planning board when he lives in a run down rental with trash in the back yard. How can he be making decisions in Hudson when he thinks it is acceptable to live in those deplorable conditions. Plus, you never trust anyone who does not like dogs, i.e. "No Dogs on the Grass" signs in his front yard.
I am sure there are many more examples.
How many signs will need to be installed at the intersection of 9G and 23 east of the bridge for trucks coming from the bridge to keep them off of 9G headed to Hudson to pass through? And who will pay for those signs and maintain them -- Rob Perry, Mishanda Franklin or DOT?
DeleteThis sounds workable on paper and coming from Margaret Morris' mouth, but it won't be at all. This is all a waste of time. You watch. We'll have another truck route committee in 5 years debating the same bullshit. And Tom Depietro will continue to do his best to derail things and offer no support.
What we need is a real truck route committee who job is to stand in front of traffic on Columbia Street, forces at least one tractor trailer to stop moving, gets arrested, gets out of jail or the lockup, and immediately does it again. Then DOT might help us out. Send the military to Hudson!
I look forward to seeing exactly how the city will prevent trucks passing through Hudson from traveling on Third Street or Columbia Street. I suspect that the vast majority of truck drivers rely exclusively on GPS, which simply plots the most efficient route from point A to point B. Accordingly, I expect to continue seeing many trucks on Third Street and Columbia Street, despite Common Council's good intentions.
ReplyDeleteTickets, if they’re smart they will push the police to give tickets, the majority of the trucks come from just a few companies. You ticket them until it becomes untenable to continue the status quo.
DeleteDrivers are supposed to be notified of all truck routes, and follow them.
DeleteI hope Common Council has considered the possible unintended consequences of banning trucks on Third Street. There's no way for a truck driver to turn around at the turnoff to The Warehouse, so the truck driver has two options. Option A is to keep going straight into Hudson on Third Street. Option B is to turn right onto Power Avenue, turn left onto East Court Street, and then arrive at Union Street. Then what?
ReplyDeleteSome truck drivers might turn left at the turnoff to The Warehouse, which will send them on a real odyssey through the streets of Hudson.
I think the strategy is stopping them, informing them, and telling them not to do it again, and then allowing them to pass through in Third and Columbia one last time.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteCommercial routing software vendors are required to alter algorithms to accommodate updates to laws as such.
DeleteLet’s also enforce the tonnage restrictions on our local streets, and rescind the police order that permits gravel trucks to utilize Front St.
Can someone write and sell the TV show of all this...
ReplyDeleteAlso, should we start a betting pool on which council member might buckle when Tom starts calling them 1 by 1... recall his rude "we need to talk" text to Trixie a few weeks ago.
1️⃣ Compare what constitutes a "conflict of interest" for the rent control law last year vs. the truck route.
In the former half the council had to abstain... if they were a renter or looked like landlord, to get that law to pass... but here Tom can change the timing of a vote, threaten a mayoral veto, all to get trucks off of his own personal driveway etc.
2️⃣ How many hundreds of hours went into this truck route study, debate, committee meetings, back and forth... all for what? The Common Sense, pareto efficient, answer was there all along.
3️⃣ This is like a mix of Parkinson's Law and the Peter (Tom) Principle
Parkinson's Law: The idea that "work expands to fill the time available for its completion."
The Peter (Tom) Principle: The idea that "in a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to their level of incompetence."
Just hire a City Manager already and stop wasting our time. Only Spark of Hudson, Friends of Hudson Youth, and other area not-for-profit" staff that rely financially (or for their status) on the mismanaged status quo can afford time and energy for this performative "playing City Hall".
To be clear and accurate, Tom did not directly “threaten” a mayoral veto. One of the council members asked if the mayor can veto and, yes, he could do so after the public hearing he’s required to do before signing. So it is totally speculative for anyone, including the Gossips commentariat, to guess whether the Mayor is going to pay a favor to his OG Bosom Buddy, Tommy DP. Usually these public hearings by the mayor are held at an inconvenient time, like 4pm on a Friday, and in-person only, obviously to keep the pesky public at bay. If the mayor decides to hold it in the evening, hybrid, and better advertised - that may give us a hint of how he will play it. It was clear that Tom’s failed delay tactic (a change from the usual rush job he’s known for) was an attempt to rally opposition and muddy the waters before holding a special meeting to kill what seems to be a logical, popular, and really the only solution available to improve the pass through truck traffic in Hudson. I’m not sure who else he can muster besides his Worth Ave. neighbors, like Planning Board impresario Theresa Joyner. Maybe he can convince “For The Many” to bus in the Young DSA Club of Marist College to come and scream at our council members.
DeleteAlthough it would really be poor optics, especially in an election year, for the mayor to veto this just on the basis that our council president is trying to NIMFY (Not In My Front Yard) this new traffic pattern. A patten than may not possibly change much for the people on the state mandated truck route, Rt 9/Worth Ave., but would definitely benefit a much larger portion of the city. If somehow they are able to defeat this, how will they explain this to asthmatic children of the 2nd & 3rd wards?
I am pretty sure there isn't going to be a veto forthcoming.
DeleteI also don't think Tom is NIMFYing here. I met with him this week (on an unrelated topic) and we briefly discussed this resolution as well. He's wondering if this won't result in more trucks snaking around the 7th St park now. So am I.
We agreed that an ideal solution would probably be to have the trucks continue onto Prospect Ave.
For that to happen however, something needs to be done first about the awkward double-Stop sign where Prospect Ave meets Columbia Turnpike and Columbia St.
Short of redesigning that intersection from the ground-up, a traffic light is needed for trucks to be able to navigate it.
I’m fully aware of the park and how important it is to his household, and the city at large. We can only deal with the current reality: The park is on the only current STATE mandated truck route, and we won’t know the outcome of the proposed diversion until after it happens. It’s only speculation. So for now let’s fix it for the majority of people in the one way we can and then evaluate and study how it affects the main route. After that, evaluate the feasibility and funding to reroute to Prospect. Longer term, work with state and feds to find and fund alternate route around Hudson entirely.
DeleteThis is a multi-step approach that will take time, but nothing has been done for decades, as Sam Pratt points out, because there wasn’t enough political fortitude to take the “good as it gets for now” first step because it’s not a perfect solution.
By the way, this is the type of long term thinking that a qualified civil servant, be it a city manager or city planner, would bring to the table. Politicians, like those who want to be 7-term mayors, sacrifice the long term vision of the city for short term pressure, personal and political. Also why we need reasonable term limits.
Here in the third ward --where plenty of the truck route exists -- we have (and by association, the entire city has) the unfortunate distinction of having the two worst "members" on this council and possibly ever in the history of Hudson. Not only did the worthless pair not vote on the truck route and trucks they see and hear every minute of every day, they were not in attendance at the meeting of the Finance Committee (of which they are both members) which took place before the council meeting. I should say that I am not 100 percent certain they didn't show up to the Finance meeting, but if they did, I can say for sure that neither of their voices was heard at that 40 minute meeting in which the committee updated parking ticket fees.
ReplyDeleteIt's not just that Shershah and Lola are unqualified to be on the council; not just that they both aren't involved; not just that they aren't helping matters or making life better for Hudson residents. Rather, by all signs, it appears as if they both simply have no sincere interest in being on the council or participating in a productive, engaged manner. How could anyone conclude otherwise after they abstained without reason from the vote on the truck route. Lola lives in the 500 block of Columbia!!!! Shershah lives in the house he owns at the intersection of Fairview and Green!!!! Who the hell voted for these useless and harmful so-called council members? They aren't members of the council, they aren't even participants -- at best, they are observers of the council, and poor ones at that. WTF?
Hi Bill, I appreciate your posting but have to add that your miserable Council people have company. Add Second Ward Councilmen to the list.
ReplyDeleteFor the most part, I am with you on Dewan's and Rony's worthlessness, except that Rony can sometimes be heard saying things other than AYE and NAY. He even constructs sentences that can be understood and wouldn't get a F in English 101!
DeleteHere is my list of ward council member pairs (with bonus contestants!), from worthless to possibly worthwhile: Kamal Johnson, Tom Depietro, 3rd, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 1st.
Rick Scalera, as usual, is trying to obfuscate and revise history.
ReplyDeleteRick loves to tout his multiple terms as Mayor, but never once lifted a finger to alter the truck route — either within or outside the City.
And every time it was raised when he was in office, he wagged his finger that it couldn't be done.
Why? Who knows. We do know that he always sided with industrial interests in Greenport over the well-being of people of Hudson. And never used any of his influence with Supervisors of neighboring towns to get them to see the public benefit of a change.
In any case, while Rick was ignoring the issue some of us (like John Porreca, and Pat Manning, and myself) were standing on street corners, counting trucks at places like Park Place and Warren. When we would flagging down truckers to ask them what they would prefer, 100% of truckers themselves said they wanted the route changed.
And BTW, that 90s truck route effort began when Rick was still Mayor — but continued after he decided not to run again, knowing in 1999 that he could not be re-elected due to his extremely unpopular stances on multiple issues. (He never attended its meetings, so how he could know what was advocated, I dunno.) We submitted many options and recommendations—but the effort was killed by Gerry Simons, and a Supervisor from Claverack. When Rick later came back into office, he resumed not caring about the issue and discouraging its discussion.
Limiting the route within the city was always an option, though ideally as one which would lead in a later phase to taking it out of Hudson entirely.
P.S. Those wanting further background on the endless truck route saga might want to review this article from... 2010. Which is mainly about events... 10 years before that:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.sampratt.com/sam/2012/04/down-on-the-corner.html
Here is another comment submitted by email:
DeleteWe all know how time flies, so just a reminder to Sam. I have not served as Mayor for 12 years now and yet no one seems able to remove the Truck Route completely from Hudson.
Could that be the fact that DOT has remained with a steadfast position over the past 20-30 years since we started entertaining Truck Route meetings with them (along with State and Federal Officials in attendance) their message has always been the same.
"The Truck Route by law will remain going through Hudson until an alternative route is found along with the millions of dollars secured to make that happen! Several times these officials would visit and revisit our meetings in Hudson only to repeat themselves.
The fact is that truckers that pass through Hudson ALWAYS had other routes they could have taken but all said the same thing....it added extra miles on them as well as time!
DOT Officials did indicate that if another town was agreeable to take on the truck traffic, that could be considered. But over the years, when that idea was presented to the surrounding local officials.....they repeatedly would answer with, "Thanks but no Thanks!" no surprise there!
So here we are in 2025 and the best solution being considered is sending the through Trucks to another Neighborhood, and not surprising they are saying "Thanks but no thanks too!
Oh, and Sam, for those that know me know I keep newspaper archives too not to mention still have a pretty good memory !
This will be my final response to you Sam, I have a life....have at it.
Rick Scalera
7 term Mayor
City of Hudson.......and proud of it!
Rick as usual wants to try to have it both ways... He wants to tout his experience in government, while pretending that he has been powerless to effect the change that everyone — residents, businesses and haulers alike — have called for.
DeleteRick knows that the only obstacle going back 25+ years has been Supervisors out in the County — yet he has never publicly used his bully pulpits as either Mayor or Supervisor to meaningfully bargain with them, or twist their arms. It used to be Jim Keegan standing in the way, then it was Kippy, etc. etc. Where was Rick? Not interested in helping, it would seem.
Unlike Rick, many of us actually have tried to find solutions. Either in or out of office he did not participate in the meetings held a quarter-century ago at the Columbia-Hudson Partnership. Presumably like Linda Mussmann—who explicitly would not participate due to personal beefs with a few members of the task force—Rick cared more about partisan allegiances than the issue.
The failure to find a solution for 25+ years speaks for itself. Everyone who has been in positions of power has failed the people of Hudson on this issue.
And no, truckers can’t simply pick and choose which routes they use. They have to stick to approved State truck routes, taking the most direct line even if it actually slows them down. Again, not a single trucker we interviewed back in the day wanted to go through Hudson, even if going around meant more miles... because all travel through the City is slower. If they could avoid it, they said they would. One only wonders why politicians like Rick constantly need to act as if this is either a non-issue, or impossible to solve.
And BTW when we met with DOT in the *1990s* they said this could be done easily. They said once the decision was made all they had to do was have the State send out a notice to truckers and change a couple of signs. And that was in the days before GPS and other electronic means of notification to haulers became widespread.
Now: While clogging the route on the Park is by no means a permanent oridealsolution, it is an overall improvement for most of the City. It will not be fun for those in the 800 block of Warren or on Park Place, of sure. But inaction by past leaders like Rick has forced the current leadership to engage in triage. With hope this change will motivate a search for a more complete and comprehensive solution.
Some links for those who really want to get into the history of this issue:
Delete2009 My View in the Register-Star:
https://www.dailygazette.com/my-view-solving-truck-route-issue-requires-follow-through/article_eb2870ff-a98f-5cb4-894a-f3b280b6be3d.html
Letter to Mayor and Common Council in 2022:
https://cms3.revize.com/revize/hudsonny/Common%20Council/Agendas%20Meeting%20Documents/2022/July/statetruckroute-pratt.pdf
2022 Letter to Hudson from the Valley Alliance and Our Hudson Waterfront:
https://cms3.revize.com/revize/hudsonnynew/Common%20Council/Agendas%20Meeting%20Documents/2022/June/Hudson%20Waterfront%20&%20Valley%20Alliance%20Truck%20Route%20Status%20OHW_VA_06072022%20final.pdf
A 2023 comment on Gossips of some continued interest:
https://gossipsofrivertown.blogspot.com/2023/03/looking-back-seventy-years.html?showComment=1678064905688#c6573205926882767441
Sam, you make it sound so easy and wonderful. Yet, in your letter to Kamal and the council you yourself pointed out that Greenport, Claverack and Stockport are full of "reactionary Republicans" - a statement by the way that at least as far as Greenport is concerned, is factually false and would have been false even in 2022.
DeleteDo you not think said Republicans would have done everything to prevent the trucks from being rerouted through their municipalities? And do you not think DOT would be aware of that?
The truck route isn't something Hudson can solve by itself. The city needs to talk to its neighbors and have them agree to it. Only once that has been achieved, all of them need to talk to DOT.
Your narrative is simple and beautiful only because it skips all the tricky bits.
Sam brings receipts... 🧾
Delete🙌
One would have to be daft to review the history of this issue (or my comments) to think that anyone (or me) thinks the issue is simple.
DeleteThe only relatively obvious truths here are:
(a) Hudson has powers to resolve the issue;
(b) DOT has stated in the past that it can be resolved;
(c) Truckers would prefer not to go through crowded city streets even if it made their route technically longer in terms of miles though not travel time;
(d) Residents have no interest in having non-local delivery trucks pass through the City to distant locations;
(e) Various outlying towns have selfishly and irrationally objected to revising this relatively short portion of the State truck route—even though tons of trucks already pass through their towns on various State roads, which are well-equipped for the modest increase in volume;
(f) A long procession of Hudson Mayors, Council Presidents, Supervisors and Aldermen, appointed officers, legal counsel, et al. have shown either a total lack of interest in resolving the issue, or tepid interest at best, and a failure to call out those neighboring towns’ empty and even childish* objections;
(g) Now that there is finally some movement, we are seeing the inevitable last throes and tantrums of those who have obstructed this needed change for decades.
....................
* Example of a childish objection: Greenport huffing and puffing that they won’t even discuss the State truck route unless Hudson first approves Colarusso’s plan to trash the waterfront.
OOF ... 25 years of truck nonsense
ReplyDelete