We knew this was coming, thanks to Mayor Kamal Johnson's rooftop chat which appeared on Facebook a couple of weeks ago. Since the deal with Dunn & Done LLC fell apart, the City is looking for someone else to take on the redevelopment of the Dunn building.
 |
| Photo courtesy Dunn & Done LLC |
Toward that end, the City, that is, the mayor's office, has issued a new request for proposals. The following is the announcement of that development.
The City of Hudson is seeking qualified Developers who recognize the unique opportunity of bringing new life to a rare building that occupies a highly visible site on the historic Hudson River waterfront.
An experienced developer or development team is sought for the adaptive reuse of the former manufactured gas plant, commonly referred to as the Dunn Warehouse, constructed in 1853, situated on 0.63 acres on the corner of Broad Street and Water Street, directly across from the Hudson River and Henry Hudson Riverfront Park.
The City has recently completed a number of projects in the neighborhood as part of the Downtown Revitalization Initiative (DRI) including redeveloping Promenade Hill Park, replacing the Ferry Street Bridge, and adding complete streets along Front Street and lower Warren Street. Returning the Dunn Warehouse to an active and vibrant role in the community is a natural next step in reconnecting the Hudson River to community life.
Interested parties can tour the site on September 30, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. If you plan to join the tour, please RSVP to Justin Weaver at mayoralaide@cityofhudson.org by end of day September 29, 2025.
To submit a proposal, please provide three (3) complete printed copies and one (1) electronic copy in PDF format to be received no later than 4:00 pm on October 20, 2025 at the following address:
Michelle Tullo
Housing Justice Director
520 Warren Street
Hudson, New York 12534
housing@cityofhudson.org
Questions regarding this request may be directed to Housing Justice Director Michelle Tullo by email at housing@cityofhudson.org.
A comparison between the RFP issued today and one issued in 2023 (which can be accessed here) reveals a couple of interesting things. First, the 2023 RFP promised a qualified investor-developer funding "in an amount over $1 million dollars of NYS Downtown Revitalization Initiative Award funds." The new RFP indicates the City will "provide reimburse [sic] the selected developer up to $470,000 of NYS Restore funds." It seems amazing the money from the $500,000 Restore New York grant is still available. The City was awarded that grant in January 2017, more than eight years ago.
What's more interesting is what happened to the $1 million in DRI funds that were designated for the Dunn building. At the Hudson Housing Authority Board of Commissioners meeting on Monday, John Madeo of Mountco, HHA's development partner, spoke of money from a "defunct DRI project" being redirected to the HHA project. This is the second time Madeo has mentioned the possibility of redirecting DRI funds to the HHA project. In July, Madeo reported at an HHA meeting on a conversation with Mayor Kamal Johnson in which Johnson said he would try to get DRI funds redirected to the HHA project. In July, it wasn't clear what DRI funds Johnson had in mind. Now it's pretty clear that, even before the deal with Dunn & Done LLC fell apart, or at least before anyone outside the mayor's office got wind of the possibility that it might, Johnson was suggesting the $1 million in DRI funds meant for the redevelopment of the Dunn warehouse might be redirected to a project that has little or nothing to do with economic development. (As an aside, the website for Downtown Revitalization Initiative, which I checked to confirm my understanding of the program's goals, has as its banner illustration a photograph of Warren Street and City Hall Place, back in the day when Ca' Mea occupied 333 Warren Street.)
Another difference between the 2023 RFP and today's is that in 2023 Peter Bujanow, Commissioner of Public Works, was the person to whom questions and requests for clarification were to be directed and to whom proposals were to be submitted. This time, it's Michelle Tullo, Housing Justice Director.
Also worthy of note, today's announcement and the new RFP contain misinformation. (This is was case in 2023 as well, but I must have been more charitable back then.) The building was not a former manufactured gas plant. According to the inventory completed by Shirley Dunn for the Hudson Historic District's inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, the building was constructed circa 1850 as the Hudson and Boston Railroad Shop. The following, which is quoted from the 1985 nominating document, sheds light on why it is sometimes thought to have been part of the Hudson Gasification Works.
[A] rectangular building is shown located on this same corner as early as a map of 1851. On that map the word "Engine [Sh]op" are printed over the building; later maps identify it as belonging to the Hudson and Boston Railroad. Early brick bond on the lower parts of the present building, as well as the openings, suggest that the present building is the one shown in 1851. During the 1850's, a polygonal gas-holder house was erected northeast of the Hudson and Boston Railroad Shop.
The "polygonal gas-holder house," in close proximity to the building we now call the Dunn warehouse, was the gasification works. More about the history of the building can be found in this Gossips post from November 2016: "Is It or Isn't It?" Incidentally, in 1985, the building we know as the Dunn warehouse was nominated for listing in the National Register both individually and as part of the Hudson Historic District. It was determined to be eligible for both, but it was not listed "due to property owner objections." In 1985, the building was owned by the Stockport Lumber Company.
These two photographs of the building accompanied the 1985 nomination documents.
COPYRIGHT 2025 CAROLE OSTERINK
Most developers would probably want to remove that "rare building" rather than adapt it. Since it can't be made into a hotel, maybe there's no "new life" to be found in it at all.
ReplyDelete1. Why is the "Housing Justice Director" (who is in a romantic relationship with the mayor, without conflicts of interests disclosures, possibly a party to an undisclosed Galvan lease?) running point on this RFP for one of the City's last central commercial/industrial waterfront buildings?
ReplyDeleteDid Kamal quietly promote her to City Planner, as some have suggested and as their preparations indicate?
2. Why is the RFP deadline so rushed (barely a month)?
For context, these processes are usually 8-12 weeks, a fast one is 4-6 weeks with months of lead-up advertising.
This timeline gives proposers only 13 calendar days from receiving final clarifications (7 Oct) to produce a complete proposal due on 20 Oct. Including weekends and holidays, that is less than two working weeks.
3. Why did the previous partner fall through? What can we learn from that story?
4. Does the national organization / grant funder of Michelle Tullo's salary (Enterprise Community Partners and the New York State Attorney General’s office) know that she is working on non-housing related DRI issues? Or is this now a re-allocation of DRI funds to housing?
In previous administrations, we believe, the mayor or City Clerk would spearhead these types of bid processes, then it would be reviewed for compliance with the RFP requirements, and eventually end up with Common Council sign off? Or is that not how it used to work? Can previous mayors or Common Council Presidents chime in?
4. This is all odd. The Housing Justice and Mayor's "Office" are both also almost 6 months behind on some very simple FOILs (about housing and curious discretionary fund disbursements) and kicking the can back until... after the November election.
Andy (Howard) - as City attorney what is going on here? Mayors come and go but you have to practice law in the Hudson and Kinderhook community for the foreseeable future.
This could be a misuse of DRI funding... or some DRI funds can go to the Hudson Housing Authority if its projects meet strict "eligibility rules" and fit Hudson’s DRI plan.
A competent mayor and transparent City Hall would have communicated all these considerations _up front_ in a written FAQ to residents. The DRI / Waterfront / Colorusso / housing issues are core concerns for most resident groups. Rooftop video QA not required... but why not film a Q&A video at the site now that we have Alley Chats and City Hall Rooftop videos?
Kamal and his dwindling number of allies claim that everyone is out to get him... that there is some "anti-housing" conspiracy by his political opponents... that everything and everyone is racist... and whenever he cannot answer legitimate questions about financial disclosures he pivots to "protecting my family".... when no one has attacked his family... and he is the one that voluntarily puts his family (only under 18 children) in the public spotlight in color posters and banners on street corners and mentions personal details about their lives at every public occasion and opportunity.
What if there is no conspiracy... maybe we are just missing basic competence and communication, and in the absence of clear information we now assume the worst given the historic mismanagement of the City of Hudson.
Kamal and Michelle, this is not your city. This is all of our city. The offices you occupy and the money you move around so freely is our public money, not your money. You work for all of us, not for yourself, and not for one segment of the city's residents. If you do a bad job as our employees we will fire you and not give you a good reference to find a new job.
~
This feels like déjà vu from the Restore NY grant mess. Every few months Kamal or Tom pulls a move like this, rushed and possibly in bad faith.
Is it Hanlon’s razor at work, simple incompetence, or after six years are we looking at a pattern of incompetence mixed with malice?Hudson deserves better.
Our taxes demand better.
Everything you say is true. And we now have a realistic race with Peter's graceful exit. But I've seen precious little of the Ferris campaign. That is to say, a handful of yard signs. It's well past time to begin discussing and debating the real and difficult issues facing this city and its residents and businesses. The public needs to know what the candidates actually have to offer for the future and how they're going to deliver it.
DeleteI guess it's OK to give the money to HHA if we rename DRI funding to be Degrading Residential Infrastructure funding.
ReplyDelete