Last week, three members of the Common Council--Rich Volo (Fourth Ward), Jennifer Belton (Fourth Ward), and Margaret Morris (First Ward)--tried to get a resolution on the agenda opposing the Mill Street Lofts project. Despite what is stated in the Common Council Rules of Order (see Rule #4), Council president Tom DePietro refused to add it to the agenda. One of the reasons he gave was that the Common Council should not opine on matters before the Planning Board.
At the informal meeting of the Council last Monday, Jack Hornickel, who lives on Mill Street and has been a spokesperson for his neighbors at Planning Board meetings, brought up the one aspect of the project that was an appropriate issue for the Common Council: alienation of parkland. Hornickel argued that the playing field on which Mill Street Lofts is to be built is dedicated parkland and hence cannot legally be sold for any other purpose without an act of the state legislature. What Hornickel told the Common Council can be heard here, beginning at 2:15:31.
Gossips raised the issue of alienating parkland back in January 2023, when the Council was about to vote on a resolution to sell the Mill Street parcel--originally part of the playing fields of Charles Williams School--to Kearney for developing housing. The post specifically cited a resolution passed by the Common Council in May 2006, dedicating eleven acres, including the three acres now proposed as the site of Mill Street Lofts, to "total park use." That gesture constituted the City's match for an Environmental Protection Fund grant for Charles Williams Park.
When this was brought to the attention of DePietro, he dismissed it, with this statement:
First of all, the resolution calls for a filing of an easement or covenant, but no such easement or covenant has been filed anywhere based on a search of the county and city database, and the deed itself. According to the HANDBOOK OF ALIENATION AND CONVERSION OF MUNICIPAL PARKLAND (2017), "land acquired or improved with State Parks grant funding" is subject to restrictions. However, no money at all was spent on the lot on the southern side of Mill Street. Based on these two facts, our attorney, Andrew Howard, sees no problem with proceeding with the sale.
Hornickel's evidence argues that these perceived sins of omission on the part of the City Hall in 2006 should not matter. The parcel was already parkland. Hornickel followed his presentation to the Common Council with a letter and forty-two pages of supporting documentation. In the letter, Hornickel recounts the history of the parcel
The “Mill Street Lofts” parcel is about 3+/- acres and has the tax number 109.36-1-10. It was originally the playground facility for the Charles Williams School, which was built in 1924 and operated until 1970. During the 1970s, the parcel hosted the Hudson Men’s Softball League, a program operated by the City of Hudson Youth Department, and in 1983, the Hudson City School District transferred the parcel to ownership by the City of Hudson. That deed, which continues to be the document of ownership, states that the parcel “shall be used for park and recreational purposes” only. The Hudson Men’s Softball League continued into the 1980s.
In the 40 years since this transfer, the City of Hudson has continued to maintain this parcel as an open field, mowing it and making it available for recreational use by residents of Hudson. We all have friends or neighbors who have played softball, soccer, or cricket at this field. There are also numerous written documents that show the common understanding of this parcel as parkland.
Attached for your convenience is a list of reports and their excerpts published by City of Hudson and collaborating organizations. These documents consistently refer to the parcel as open space, recreational, play area, and parkland. Some documents refer to it as the “old ballfield;” others include it in mapping of Charles Williams Park. In their application, even the developer of the “Mill Street Lofts” project acknowledges the “open field on site is used for recreation.”
Perhaps most convincing is the 2006 grant application from the City of Hudson for funds to develop the north side of Mill Street as the “Charles Williams Park.” The application makes it clear that the 12+/- acre parcel on the north side of the street would be an expansion of the existing 3+/- acre parcel on the south side of the street, identified as Charles Williams Park. While this might sound confusing, since the sign for “Charles Williams Park” now appears on the north side of the street, it is consistent with the history of the playground on the south side of the street, dating back to 1924. This understanding is also supported by the 2011 Concept Plan for the North Bay Recreational Area, by Columbia Land Conservancy, which refers to the north side as the “expansion site” of Charles Williams Park from the south side “old ball field.”
Hornickel submitted his letter and the documentation to the members of the Common Council on May 14, but DePietro has declined to post the information as a communication on the City of Hudson website so the public can review it. Readers who would like to see the evidence assembled by Hornickel should contact their councilmembers and ask that they send you a copy. Hornickel's letter to the Council concludes:
I prepared this research because I believe that good government, that which is transparent, honest, careful, and hardworking, is the promise of democracy. It requires those qualities from the elected officials and the residents that elect them. I felt it was important for me to bring light to this issue before the “Mill Street Lofts” parcel was sold, and I appreciated the opportunity to learn more about the history of our shared city.
The public trust doctrine is not a well-known area of law, but it is nevertheless an important public right. Parkland is protected because it is essential to human health and happiness. The protection keeps any given city government from making an irreversible decision regarding important public resources. Without the public trust doctrine, we could lose Promenade Hill to an expensive restaurant by a 6 to 5 vote at the Common Council. 40 years of public recreation on the “Mill Street Lofts” parcel deserve the same careful consideration before being developed.
 |
| Ultimate Frisbee on "Mill Street Lofts" parcel, June 8, 2024 Photo courtesy Jack Hornickel |
Since Tom didn’t post it on the Common Council’s communications, I’m sure we’ll all soon be able to read all of this under the plaintiff’s exhibits on the State Supreme Court’s website for the likely Article 78 proceedings. Hope they do a gofundme, I’ll chip in. It’s only fair since we’ll be paying the city to defend it though our taxes.
ReplyDeleteThis is torturous: if the Mill Street property owners want to stop this, relying on the PB or any other instrumentality of an administration and a council each of which is bent on ignoring the rule of law is not the way to go. Recalcitrant local "leaders" are precisely the reason the state legislature included Article 78 in the civil practice rules. If they can't afford to collectively hire an attorney to move their case, they should investigate the legal clinics at Albany Law -- I believe they have one that deals w/ local government and it will likely have some expertise in suing the same.
ReplyDeleteHi John -
Delete🤫 Speaking only on information and belief, and some limited direct knowledge... not as an attorney...
And of course you know all this... but conversing in public for the benefit of others and for Theresa Joyner (👋 Theresa)
- the Mill Street folks need to first see a final action / determination
- then the 4 month clock starts
- plaintiffs with standing have, allegedly, come forward
- top lawyers, have, allegedly, been contacted and briefed
If any interested lawyers or plaintiffs are reading this please reach out so that I may put you in touch with folks engaged on his this issue. Linda, Trixie, Jenny, and Margaret have also paid close attention and can make introductions.
~
⛳️ And if Michelle or Kamal are reading this from Union Street... if you really cared about housing in general, and specifically proportional and scatterplot housing, you could have:
- foreclosed years earlier on the tax delinquent properties
- Help turn 11 Warren Street into a mixed use / housing structure instead of gov building for the county and profit for Galvan
- not help pass local ordinances that are anti housing providers / investors (Rent Control / Good Cause etc.)
- and most of all; cowardly postponing a much needed city-wide tax re-assessment by almost a decade thereby making Hudson an unfair housing market and directly harming working families, retirees, and first time home buyers.
You had half a decade to follow proven practices, during a time when the nation and this City on a Clay Hill could not have been more supportive of all forms of housing... and you (and Bliss HHA) fumbled it by pursuing large scale Mass Blocks in flood zones and with tax breaks to billionaires and oddball poverty-industrial complex developers who then betrayed you.
Now in 2025... the national mood (and funding) has changed... the city has awoken to your tax poison pill, and as Union Jack pointed out, you don't even get the basic facts right about the City's STR numbers and enforcement?
If any of the above is wrong or if you disagree please chime in, email, write an Op-Ed etc.
We may disagree on policy, how conflicts of interests work etc. but we should speak from the same book of facts.
We pay you to be engaged on this issue.
Speaking of alienation of lands, it's worth noting that our hapless city government still has not acted on the controversial 4.4 acre parcel south of the Colarusso dock. Citizens have presented substantial evidence that a flawed real estate transaction in the 1980's means that the City still owns the beautiful and strategically important piece of land. So there is little reason to hope that the City will exhibit better behavior on Mill St.
ReplyDelete