A Response to Colarusso

Last Thursday, an attorney for A. Colarusso and Sons, T. J. Ruane, submitted a letter to the Planning Board asserting that Mayor Kamal Johnson had no authority to establish a working group to "review and deliberate or provide recommendations on an application before the Planning Board," and for that reason Colarusso would not be participating. The letter also called for the Planning Board to annul the vote to reopen the public hearing and for Planning Board member Gabrielle Hoffmann to recuse herself from the issue because she has an "impermissible bias toward the Applicant and the Application." The letter can be read here.

Today, Our Hudson Waterfront responded to the letter. The following is quoted from that response:

REQUEST FOR RECUSAL

The request for recusal of Gabrielle Hoffmann from the Planning Board on the basis of bias is preposterous and has no legal basis. Her letter to the Board--written weeks before she was even asked to serve--expressed a clear, responsible concern for public safety and the protection of a vital community resource. In it, she writes:

I hope with all my heart that as you contemplate the usage of our precious waterfront you keep in mind all the young and old citizens of Hudson who want their waterfront access to be safe, both physically and environmentally, and also as pleasant and user friendly as can be. Big dangerous trucks, gravel dust, and loud noises butting up against the only public waterfront access is hardly ideal. . . we are hoping that steps can be taken to secure as much protection to this important resource as possible.

These concerns are not only reasonable--they are exactly the kinds of issues the Planning Board is charged with considering under the zoning code: public health, safety, environmental impacts, and compatibility with community use. In fact, concerns about truck traffic were the very reason the Planning Board approved the private road agreement with Colarusso--to get the trucks off Columbia Street. These concerns reflect the shared values and priorities of the entire city--and are publicly stated by the Chair of the Planning Board, Theresa Joyner, time and again.

In our view, Colarusso's attorneys are twisting her words into a so-called conflict of interest. It's a bad-faith tactic. Any official who raises legitimate concerns about this operation is met with legal threats, pressure, and attempts to silence or disqualify them. This is bullying, pure and simple--meant to intimidate both private citizens and the public officials who represent them.

Gabrielle Hoffmann should not recuse herself from the Board. She is doing exactly what a conscientious planning board member is supposed to do.

CLAIMS OF DELAY TACTICS UNFOUNDED

Colarusso's attorney claims that "the decision to reopen the public hearing was to delay the board's deliberation on Colarusso's application to facilitate Johnson's working group, and to prevent public backlash on the working group's meeting being held."

In our opinion, this claim is incorrect. The Board repeatedly emphasized that the Mayor's work group is a separate and independent process, unrelated to the Planning Board's duties under the zoning code. The Board's attorney also made clear that neither the Mayor nor the Planning Board has the authority to interfere with the application review process.

As stated, the Board made clear that its review would not be delayed or influenced by the Mayor's initiative. In our opinion, it is therefore both inaccurate and disingenuous for Colarusso's attorneys to claim that the public hearing is being held solely because of a stakeholders meeting--and the record clearly shows otherwise.

The Board Chair said more than once that the Board is diligently reviewing the public comments submitted during the public hearing and will proceed with its review. The board's attorney stated that its review would also include an open forum discussion on the "conditions."

The prior public hearing was prematurely closed by a vote of four of six Hudson Planning Board members--despite multiple requests to keep it open, and before:

• Conducting a proper review under the City Zoning Code.
• Clarifying the full scope of review (which must include all dock operations).
• Receiving any response from the applicant regarding concerns raised.

NEXT STEPS?

Thank the Planning Board for doing the right thing by re-opening the public hearing. Require the applicant to reply to public concerns expressed thus far before the public hearing is closed.

The Hudson Planning Board not only can--but is obligated to--ensure that the applicant responds to public concerns before the hearing is closed. Just as importantly, the public must have the opportunity to respond to the applicant's answers. That is the entire purpose of a public hearing: to allow for an open exchange before a decision is made. Closing the hearing without this exchange would undermine transparency and violate the spirit of the law. We strongly urge the Board to uphold this process.

The petition regarding Colarusso's dock operations is still open and available for signing. Click here to access the petition.