Tuesday night's Planning Board meeting went on for more than three and a half hours. Just after the three hour mark, Theresa Joyner, chair of the Planning Board, declared, "It's time for us to move ahead with Colarusso." She went on to say, "We never really had a chance to get everything together and come up with our own comments as a Planning Board." After praising the board's consultants and attorneys, Joyner said, "We are not experts, so we have to depend on the experts. And don't think you have to know. You don't have to know, but you do have to put in the time to get to know." She then read a letter, interrupting herself frequently to elaborate on ideas expressed in the letter. The following is a transcription of the letter as she read it:
Allow me to emphasize the importance of fulfilling our responsibilities as members of the Planning Board. Every application that comes to the board deserves our full attention, independent judgment, and a thorough review. Each Planning Board member should independently evaluate all of the materials and documents related to each application available on the Planning Board Portal.
We are fortunate to have professional consultants and legal counsel to guide us in interpreting the laws, the codes, and procedures. If you have questions or need clarification on anything you have heard, read, or just don't understand, reach out to our consultants or attorneys before seeking answers elsewhere. They are here to help ensure that we are well informed, that our decisions are within the legal boundaries of the code, the laws, that they are fair and legally sound. Therefore, please review the consultants' notes, attorney memos, application materials, and public comments.
Most importantly, please base your decisions on facts rather than personal opinion or outside influence.
Up until this point, Joyner had interrupted the reading of the letter a few times to elaborate, but her comments at this point are particularly interesting. The following is a transcription of what she said:
You know, we do consider our public, but sometimes we have to know who our public is. And just because the loudest is always not the majority or not the interest of just the [unclear]. You got people that have financial interest in something, and then you have people that really, you know, have a concern.
Joyner concluded her letter with this statement:
We are seven individuals united as one board, dedicated to fairness, integrity, transparency, guided solely by facts, and share a collective responsibility to our city.
Having read the letter, Joyner asked: "Can we get at least four members on the 27th of August?" The members present--Veronica Conca, Gene Shetsky, Kali Michael, and Randall Martin--indicated they could attend a meeting on that day.
And so it was decided that the Planning Board will hold a special meeting on Wednesday, August 27, at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall to discuss Colarusso's application for a conditional use permit for its dock operations on the Hudson waterfront. It was made clear that, although the meeting will be open to the public, the public will not be permitted to speak.
.jpg)
The discussion of Colarusso and Joyner's reading of the letter can be heard here, beginning at 3:07:36.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSome of the most frightening words from this article…”the public will not be permitted to speak”….
ReplyDeleteIf the PB were to allow the public to speak at that meeting, would you expect any revelations from it? I can say with confidence that there wouldn't be any.
DeleteI've listened to and read every bit of public input on this topic and it is very repetitive, and has been for a couple of years.
The PB shutting this down is the only way forward. This is also in line with what was agreed upon at the last public hearing where they preliminarily closed it with the promise to reopen it if new information emerges. It is up to the Colarusso detractors to provide this new information.
What this meeting on Aug 27 is, by the way, is a PB workshop. The public is never allowed to speak at those. The letter also states the intent quite clearly: So far, the Planning Board hasn't had a chance to respond to the public feedback they received or even their particular perspective. If I understand Theresa Joyner correctly, this is what this is supposed to deliver.
Also keep in mind that Colarusso is perfectly happy with a never-ending public hearing as it means that they can continue to carry out their business at the waterfront with practically no conditions.
Our Hudson Waterfront has never understood their role in this. Their role is to find the set of conditions that is maximally strict yet still acceptable to this Planning Board (and ultimately Colarusso since they have attorneys). What they have done instead is submit a list of demands that, while maximal, stands no chance of being picked up.
Compare this to what the Hudson Sloop Club submitted. I predict that the Planning Board will be heavily favoring this, Nick Zachos', list of conditions as those stipulations are actually doable in practice.
Hopefully he has learned since his time at the youth center where he mismanaged and lost $250,000 of taxpayer funds.
DeleteI'm betting that the PB does not have the good sense or backbone to impose even one condition on Colarusso. ~ PJ
ReplyDelete