Roger Hannigan Gilson has an article in today's Times Union about the upcoming Democratic Primary contest between incumbent Kamal Johnson and challenger Joe Ferris: "Hudson newcomer challenges Kamal Johnson in mayoral primary."
Johnson, who became Hudson’s first Black mayor five years ago by running on the issue of affordable housing, argued he has delivered on his promise, naming a litany of housing developments that are nearly completed or in their planning stages.
Many may disagree with Johnson that he has delivered on his promise, given that the rents for the only project close to completion, the Depot District building at 76 North Seventh Street, range from $1,569 or $2,275 (depending on which source you look at) to $3,600 a month, and, as it was revealed at the last Planning Board meeting, only 9 of the 70 units in the controversial Mill Street Lofts project will be affordable to households with incomes of 30 percent of the area median income (AMI).
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
Also, from a WAMC story yesterday... is this true:
ReplyDelete"My first two terms, I didn't raise taxes single cent, and that includes during a global pandemic, where every city raised taxes. I've only raised taxes 1.5% during my time, and that's combined, in three terms. So I would say I've done a great job in protecting our budget," said Johnson. "
** https://www.wamc.org/news/2025-06-02/hudsons-mayor-faces-an-unexpected-challenge-in-this-months-democratic-primary
This is objectively false. He raised taxes by 1.5% this year alone. The previous year, he raised 3.875%. And that’s if you consider his very strict definition of raising taxes being just the mil rate (rate per $1,000 property assessed). If you factor in raiding the reserve fund, unequal assessments of new residents (Welcome Stranger practice), you begin to see the whole picture of how taxing and spending has ballooned under his watch. Not to mention fees like trash bags, water and sewer, have gone up way more than inflation—and new hidden taxes like the new sidewalk tax. I’ll have what he’s smoking.
DeleteEvery unit in the proposed Mill Street project is income restricted. As per a previous entry on this blog: 9 are at 30% of AMI, 54 at 60%, and 7 at 100%. Every single one of those units can be considered 'affordable housing'.
ReplyDeleteAt those AMI levels, this is, approximately, what rent limits look like:
1 BR: $634 (30%); $1268 (60%); $1691 (80%)
2 BR: $760 (30%); $1521 (60%); $2028 (80%)
3 BR: $879 (30%); $1758 (60%); $2344 (80%)
It is worth noting that AMI is based on household size, while rent limits are based on bedroom counts that assume 1.5 occupants per bedroom ('Efficiencies' assume 1 person).
Hudson's AMI is the same as the county's. For a two person household in 2025, 80% of AMI is $72,150. An affordable housing cost--ie, less than 30% of that household's monthly gross income, and including utilities--is about $1800.
The actual median income of Hudson's households is $55,394 (per the most recent American Community Survey), about 23% below the Area Median Income used to calculate subsidies. A two-person household at that income level has an affordability limit (less than 30% of monthly gross) of $1385 (and again, that has to include utilities as well as rent). A quick look on Zillow for apartments in Hudson priced below $1400 returns two results.
The Mill Street proposal would increase the number of available units affordable at the median income of Hudson households; from 2 units to 56.
This is not a defense of or support for that particular project; this is simply an attempt to provide this blog's readership with facts.
Minor correction: as there are no 80% AMI units, that rental cost info is irrelevant. However, the broader point stands: this project is entirely income restricted, with the vast majority of them (all but 7) at price points that are a) affordable at Hudson's median household income and b) almost entirely absent from the current market.
Delete💙 Chris - thank you very much for the detail and care with which you wrote the comment. It is genuinely helpful and appreciated.
Delete👩🏫 AMI and the Tax Mill Rate are in some ways simple… but I bet the vast majority of residents (in any city) would not be able to explain it to a neighbor, and it is at the core of so much in the City. It took me a while to mostly get it, and I have to try to explain it frequently to neigbours.
❓ Here are my questions for you, sir, or any supporter of the Mill Street project. as a direct follow up to your AMI data points. And I'd also welcome Kamal and Michelle to weigh in here, or on the City of Hudson blog with a Q&A…
🌊 Flooding and the legality of title deed transfer issues aside...
🎤 At the last few Planning Board Mill Street hearings there were many residents who were very vocal about this project specifically helping Hudson homeless people from the 7th Street park, or helping long-time City of Hudson residents who are housing insecure. There were also very vocal former residents who now live in Albany (one was previously a City assessor).
🙃 But then the developers admitted last week that there is no legal way to give Hudson residents preference in the lottery. I then called a Bronx public housing expert and he said that these lottery lists are centrally advertised by New York State, and that there are housing NGOs who also advertise the lotteries. And that often leads to thousands of eligible families applying due to the acute housing shortage in the state and Hudson Valley.
1️⃣ Observation 1: So it is therefore most likely that the vast majority of these 70 apartments, regardless of AMI, will not go to those CURRENTLY in Hudson, and in most need, but rather to other State residents who will move to Hudson if they are selected in the lottery on the AMI, background checks, and other parameters mentioned last week.
🛑 Q1: Do you agree or disagree with this observation? (Or please correct any flawed assumptions in my comment)
2️⃣ Observation 2: Michelle Tullo (Hudson Housing Justice Director, with whom you, I believe, serve on a land trust [https://www.trilliumclt.org/who-we-are] was not present at most of these public meetings, and I could not find any specific written comments from _Michelle_ arguing for or against the Mill Street project other than City of Hudson materials.
🛑 Q2: Michelle (presumably this falls in her bailiwick) has not answered these concerns, and Kamal (the mayor, for whom this is arguably a core project) does not answer these questions, certainly not in writing. Why? Is it not their job?
3️⃣ Observation 3: Why, for the first time in a public hearing, were the specific AMI levels and the exact number of apartments allocated to residents in extreme need (fewer than 10 out of 70) finally mentioned?
Am I mistaken and was this shared before in some report or in a previous public meeting? I have not been paying as close attention but this seemed like very new information to everyone in the room. Even PB member Randall Martin seemed to clarify it, raise an eyebrow, and write it down as something new and worth knowing. (He voted that same night to proceed with the project).
🛑 Q3: How can such a large project, with all of the deed, flood, AMI, and zoning questions, be greenlit if the core attribute of the project, how many apartments go to people in genuine need, is only revealed (or appreciated, if mentioned in some side meeting before) at the very last meeting, and only in response to a resident question?
A better functioning Planning Board and City, and "Housing Justice" office would have had your notes on AMI, and how many apartments go to each group, on large posters on display in City Hall over many months for residents to read and learn. Along with a scaled mock up.
~
🙏 Chris (or anyone) could you please be so kind as to answer Q1-3 since you seem better informed on this than many other residents.
Johnson to electorate: “don’t know if I’ve done a great job?! Just ask me, I’ll tell you.” Anyone else notice the emperor is naked?
ReplyDeleteis this another regrettable example "Hudson Hypocrisy"?
ReplyDeleteIn the end a dozen families on Mill Street, who paid for their homes, who pay taxes that fund our schools and pave our roads, some who have lived here for decades, who are as diverse as Hudson (Bengalis, Caucasian, African-American, more recent arrivals, families who have built their own Habitat for Humanity homes with their own hands, while helping area farmers and critical and beloved Community Supported Agriculture groups, all political stripes) are being very unfairly treated, and very likely irreparable harmed with flooding in their homes. Not to mention a yet to be modeled 6 by 20 foot flood water trench where a State park used to be…
What is moral and right here?
As a "community", as Tom/Kaya/Catie/Justin/Nick/QC likes to invoke, we need to look at this carefully and reflect.
The Albany grants and tax breaks, our tax dollars, that will pay Sean Kearney and his dad ~$2.5m right off the bat... those public funds can be used to build a similar housing development anywhere in the State and County, on other sites in Hudson, or in Greenport, the same distance to the schools, shops, and community here.
But those alternative sites will not harm existing Hudsonians who have quite literally paid their dues.
Is this not a form of "displacement"?
Replacing "locals" with "non-locals"?
This is like the famous "Trolley Problem" in moral philosophy... Hudson edition, except there is a 3rd track where no one gets harmed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
⚖️ I'd contend that Hudson is harming the rights and expectations and a neighborhood of long-term residents (for whom this is their primary residence, not some weekend home or investment property, or gasp, Airbnb) to benefit:
A) an already rich developer who does not live here and
B) other New York State residents who are not from Hudson.**
C) and whoever will pay for the food damage every few years....
And we are doing this just so that Kamal can say he built some (barely) affordable homes?
** Personally, I think the Hudson nativism has gone too far… but I am applying Kamal-Housing-Justice logic of helping the HUDSON community above all else. Not using our city's precious and finite land to build NEW housing for NEW people from Albany and Poughkeepsie.
By golly, you've got a point!
DeleteI would sure love to see Habitat for Humanity housing again. An organization building with purpose. The developers are purely for profit and every move illustrates it. Choosing this site is just the beginning. There is no iota of housing justice here.