Back in October, Margaret Morris, then a councilmember representing the First Ward, proposed a modest change to Hudson's short-term rental law.
News of this inspired an article by Nora Michanec in today's Times Union: "Hudson wants to change its rules for short-term vacation rentals." The article contains quotes from a spokesperson for the activist group For the Many, which is frequently represented at meetings in Hudson's City Hall.
"Increasing vacation rentals seems like a net negative for Hudson when it's in the throes of a severe housing crisis," said Jenny Kutner, a spokesperson for the Poughkeepsie-based progressive activist group For the Many. "It would exacerbate an already bad situation."
Kutner said the proliferation of vacation rentals "makes prices go up for everyone" across the Hudson Valley while also reducing the amount of available homes on the market. The rentals also circumvent hotels, where workers are often paid more and have more protections, she said.
Presumably, the dwellings that could be rented out 120 days a year if the law were amended are currently being rented out 60 days a year. In the larger scheme of things, it seems the change would have very little impact.
Still, the proposed amendment is also being used by the Hudson Catskill Housing Coalition to support their demand for a vacancy study in Hudson. An email blast went out this afternoon from Quintin Cross claiming that the modest change being proposed "sends the wrong message about whose voices are being prioritized." The following is quoted from that communication:
We need real data about how many units are actually available, how many are being held off the market, and how short-term rentals are impacting the supply.
Instead of centering renters' calls for transparency and data, the Morris Council Administration is advancing a proposal to expand the number of days properties can be used as short-term vacation rentals--doubling the current limit.
At a time when:
- Rents continue to rise
- Long-term residents are being displaced
- Working families struggle to find stable housing
The priority being moved forward is increasing the profitability of short-term rentals.
A vacancy study would be a good thing. Perhaps it would bring some clarity to what For the Many and HCHC are calling Hudson's "severe housing shortage." A simple search on Zillow reveals that there are still 47 units available at Hudson Depot Lofts and 34 rentals available elsewhere within the city limits. That's 81 units, and those are just the rentals listed on Zillow. At last count, there were only 67 short-term rental units in Hudson.
The Times Union article reports that the Council will be voting on the proposed amendment to the short-term rental law at its meeting tomorrow night, and Cross in his message urges people to show up for the meeting to "raise your voice for real solutions to the housing crisis in Hudson," apparently believing the amendment will be on the agenda. However, it will not be voted on at tomorrow's meeting. It is not on the agenda, and Council president Margaret Morris has advised Gossips that, since it is Council procedure for all proposed legislation and resolutions to come out of a committee, the amendment will be discussed at the Legal Committee meeting scheduled for March 12, and, if the committee decides to move it forward, it will be voted on at the Council's March meeting.
COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK
We’ve already been though this fight. But unlike before, when the council pushed forward the Wolfe-Tommy DP STR ban without any studies or data, we now have nearly 5 years of the law to see the results. And as some of us predicted:
ReplyDelete- rents went up anyway
- Most STR owner sold to likely second home buyers who are wealthy enough not to need to rent it on the side to afford it
- hotel prices went up, making the average tourist higher income, thus the changes in our retail and hospitality options becoming more “luxury”
- STRs went from 250+ to nearly nonexistent (under 60 last time I checked), lodging tax was decimated
The current law bans all non resident owned STRs. Despite the ambiguity used by these lobbyist groups, no one can buy a place in Hudson and convert it into a de facto hotel. Period. The only ones left are part time residents who are here occupying anyway and can’t rent long term since they are there at least some of the year. Or full time residents renting out part of their homes, like a room or carriage house. They would not be available for long term rent anyway. And they are registered, regulated, and pay taxes. That extra income helps people stay in their homes and it helps Hudson generate income besides raising property taxes; you know, the thing that’s already driving up costs for homeowners and renters alike.
The current proposal doesn’t change much. It won’t allow or encourage new STRs, but it will allow current RESIDENTS to generate extra money to afford living here. And give visitors, like families, other options than Pocketbook.
Speaking of residents, For the Many are not residents. They are a dark money funded astroturfing superPAC obscuring the interests of developers via the guise of social justice, like the developers our former mayor cozied up with. They want to drive out the middle class (petit bourgeois in their speak) and leave Hudson for the very poor, and the very rich who make money off of keeping them down. And who knows who HCHC represents since they haven’t filed an IRS 990 in years, obscuring transparency and losing their 501c3 status. But I’d say none of them represent Hudson voters since every single candidate both groups endorsed lost their competitive elections last year. And the Hudson voters voted for Margaret Morris 2:1 over Tommy DP. Sane polices that bring back some fiscal responsibility and search for revenue sources besides raising taxes on the middle class homeowners and working class renters. And you notice she’s rolling it slow via committee and giving these groups, the press, and residents every opportunity to scrutinize. Rather than Tom’s 11th hour rush jobs.
But I do agree with Carole and HCHC in that I welcome a vacancy study. All data is good data and honest people welcome it to help make informed decisions. Last I heard these groups were pushing to change the state law to make rent control without a vacancy study. I say game on. They can first start counting all the vacant apartments in the Galvan Luxury Depot Lofts: Mayor Johnson’s legacy project, PILOT recipient, and showcase of “Luxury Vinyl Flooring.” I can almost hear Robin Leach doing their ads.
It’s unrealistic to expect any rational home owner to rent their home to a tenant for more than 30 days given how difficult it is to evict a holdover tenant in NYS, especially in municipalities that have enacted Good Cause Eviction as Hudson has. They could easily return from vacation to find they’ve lost possession of their home.
ReplyDeleteOwner-occupied short term rentals are not the cause of any housing shortage in Hudson. Further curtailing property owners’ rights relative to such STRs won’t solve any shortage, either.
Hudson has bigger jobs problem than a housing problem.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the Hudson Catskill Jobs Coalition?
HCHC - are you still active in Hudson or now fully in Catskill and Albany?
Why not create jobs and dignity, versus creating dependency and coercion?
The American experiment was built on the state as a servant, restricted from overreaching into private life. When groups like yours demand rent control or STR bans, you are trading a "Negative Rights" shield for a government-issued coercive system. See Cold War for how that went.
History shows that "Positive Rights" frameworks always require a massive, intrusive bureaucracy to manage the coercion.
Of course your history is filled with anti-police activism... another hypocrisy. You’re asking for the leash while cursing the dog. And didn't HCHC support Galvan's PILOT for the now completed but still mostly empty Depot building?
~
In the end, HCHC, you’re still choosing America and Hudson Valley over the Nordics or Havana.
Your continued presence here is the ultimate endorsement of the very system you're trying to dismantle.
Hudson absolutely needs good jobs. But let’s be clear about roles.
DeleteJob creation and economic development are the core responsibilities of the Hudson Development Corporation (HDC), the Columbia Economic Development Corporation (CEDC), and the Industrial Development Agencies (IDAs) at both the city and county levels. Those entities exist specifically to drive business development, investment, and job growth.
HCHC is a housing advocacy organization. Our mission is housing stability, displacement prevention, and community infrastructure. We focus on housing because without stable housing, workers cannot sustain employment, families cannot build stability, and communities cannot thrive.
Housing and jobs are connected — but they are not the same lane.
When we call for a vacancy study or raise concerns about short-term rental expansion, that’s not ideological. It’s responsible housing policy during a documented affordability crisis.
If Hudson wants to strengthen both housing and jobs, the right institutions should be doing the right work — and they should be doing it with transparency and data.
We remain committed to ensuring year-round residents can afford to live in the community where they work.
We appreciate the thoughtful response and we agree on one point: a vacancy study would help ground this conversation in facts.
ReplyDeleteOur position is simple — before expanding short-term rental allowances, the city should have clear, updated data on housing availability and vacancy rates.
Even if STRs are now limited to resident-owned properties, expanding the number of allowable rental days increases the financial incentive to use units as short-term rentals rather than long-term housing. In a tight market, incentives matter.
This isn’t about banning tourism or attacking homeowners. It’s about sequencing policy responsibly during a housing shortage.
As for HCHC: we are an active nonprofit housing advocacy organization and we are in good standing. We represent year-round residents across Hudson and the surrounding region who are concerned about housing stability.
If the data ultimately shows that expanding STR days won’t impact long-term supply, that’s worth discussing. But we should get the data first.
That’s the ask.
Quentin, I think you’re talking past yourself: this isn’t about a choice between STR and rental housing. If it were, you’d have a point. But the Hudson City Code already prohibits the sort of decision making you argue against. Rather, it’s about owner-occupied units — units made available for STR while the occupying owners are absent. It’s about empowering owners (and some renters, depending on their lease) to monetize their temporarily vacant space while simultaneously making rental space available for visitors to Hudson. Why would a housing advocacy organization argue against a law that creates financial options for owners and renters that enable them to stay in their homes?
DeleteWe understand the distinction. But incentives still shape markets.
DeleteExpanding STR days increases the financial pull toward short-term use in a tight housing market. In a housing crisis, year-round stability should come first.
That’s why we’re calling for a vacancy study — data before expansion.
I have a hard time grasping the concept of STR “gravity.” I think you’re reaching, looking for a way to inject your voice into a discussion that doesn’t actually affect the availability of long term housing. From where I sit, I see an astroturf org facing its own failures (in Hudson, at least) and looking for a way to make a distracting noise. The HCHC is in the same boat: you supported the Galvan boondoggles, and the prior administration’s do-nothingism and, after six years, have little to show for it viz. “affordable housing.” Noise for noise’s sake.
DeleteQC - we appreciate the good faith push back and engagement.
DeleteAnd whatever writing tool or editing process you are using is great, it levels the playing field and readers can engage with your ideas better.
But what about this:
In 2022 you and HCHC supported Galvan Depot getting a tax break. That building is now sitting all but vacant, and other taxpayers, middle class families, will now pay more taxes to make up for it.
https://gossipsofrivertown.blogspot.com/2022/04/the-depot-district-and-hpc.html
When we say you harm those you say to care about... that is one of the issues we refer to.
~
Furthermore - the CEDC, CCCC, HBCi and others (who you say occupy the "lane") of job creation, do not really create jobs.
They create tax breaks and networking events, possibly help with Albany grants etc. Like the rural broadband initiative.
They basically create their own jobs. Kinda like Kamal created his own housing, by advocating for others' housing... that never came.
In fact, due to advocacy from groups like HCHC, the Columbia Economic Dev Corp now pays big salaries to people like Chris Brown to be a "Housing Development Coordinator".
https://columbiaedc.com/chris-brown/
So your and WFP (Rebecca Wolf at the time) lobbying helped created Michelle Tullo's "Housing Justice" entity.. they have not taken a single step to find a better location for the Mill Street housing project in over a year, and will now lose that project funding. Sorry Kearney.
Michelle ended up living in Galvan housing, and spending $225k of public funds on a failed "Comprehensive Plan" study that was not statistically significant and politically captured... and years later, we still do not know exactly how many housing units in Hudson A) pays full taxes B) are subsidized in some form, and C) how many housing developers, support how many units.
~~
Look at it this way: if you want a cheaper cake by forcing price controls and labeling the baker a "racist" when she pushes back, she’ll eventually just stop baking. Then nobody gets cake. You lose out, and the people willing to pay full price now have to shop elsewhere.
Instead of trying to control someone else's labor and business, why not take the risk of starting your own or working for someone? Work hard, earn your keep, and pay the market rate like everyone else.
Being a responsible adult who carries their own weight isn't a "lifestyle choice", or as you say "picking a lane." It’s the baseline for being a functioning grown-up and a good citizen.
Economist call what you do "disincentivization"... and what is worse... your advocacy created a dynamic that entrenched a single quasi monopolistic housing developer. Yet the policies you fight for are usually leveraged to guard against the market power of large players.
So instead of coercing private property developers and tax payers... why don't you create jobs, or just carry your own weight first... before attracting more people to a region without many good jobs, and a limited housing supply (like the entire north east).
Delete⸻
John, we can disagree on policy without rewriting history or mischaracterizing the work.
STR “gravity” isn’t abstract — when enough units convert to short-term rental use, market pressures shift. That’s a documented dynamic in small housing markets across the country. Whether we agree on scale or impact is a legitimate debate.
As for “astroturf” — that’s simply not grounded in reality. HCHC is made up of residents, organizers, and tenants who live here and work on these issues every day. Disagreement doesn’t make something artificial.
I’ll also say this: criticism of policy is fair game. Personal insinuations and repeated attempts to malign motives are not. It’s notable that the tone taken here differs from how you engage with me in person. Public discourse should reflect the same respect we show face to face.
We can have a serious conversation about housing outcomes, policy decisions, and what has or hasn’t worked. But it should be grounded in facts and mutual accountability.
I’m not characterizing HCHC as astroturf. I know it’s local.
DeleteBut the telling distinction between our arguments is the single word “convert.” Allowing owner occupied properties to be rented for STR is not a conversion: it’s still owner occupied, just available for STR usage. Again — this isn’t about conversion. It’s about efficient usage, property rights and the mix of property usage endemic in an urban environment.
ReplyDelete⸻
Appreciate that.
For clarity — I do use writing and research tools. They help organize information and cross-reference statements, public records, prior emails, and communications from city officials. That’s not a shortcut — it’s diligence. It ensures accuracy and accountability.
But the ideas, strategy, and analysis are mine. I’m college-educated with two degrees. I was the youngest elected Democrat in New York State in 2001, served as Majority at 19, 2nd Vice Chair of County Democrats, and Mid-Hudson Regional Director of the NYS Council of Black Elected Democrats — all before becoming a community organizer and playing a central role in major elections across the Upper Hudson Valley and Capital Region.
Tools don’t create political judgment. Experience does.
I engage because the stakes are real, and accuracy matters.
In all your years of posting on IG, all of your public letters, you’ve never deployed an em dash with quite this much precision.
DeleteDon't get us wrong, we like ChatQC... it took 18 months... but this is great, especially if it helps you distill your ideas.
But as the kids say, hot damn! We love a sudden grammatical awakening. Go wild, sir! Get absolutely wrecked, or is that reckless, with an Oxford comma, or shall we cal it a Bard comma, in honour of our new friends and your landgod.
Boldly split an infinitive. The stakes are real, indeed. We almost had a 4th Kamal term...
~
Separately, it reveals a lot about Gossips... that your newly discovered skills with the quill, errr qwerty keyboard, seems less weird here, than when you all of a sudden used complete sentences on FB this week.
~
Ok... now that American innovation and technology has leveled the stage, to a degree, mind answering the actual question:
Before HCHC demands more subsidized housing and taxpayer funding, shouldn't your own IRS disclosure forms be made public?
It seems fair to ask that you get your own house in order and prioritize transparency before asking the rest of the Community™ to carry the weight of other houses.
HCHC has previously operated under the fiscal sponsorship of Freehold Art Exchange, Albany Free School, Watershed Center, and most recently Moving Mountains. We were recently re-issued our standalone 501(c)(3) status and are now operating independently again.
DeleteWe are currently in the process of filing our Form 990s consistent with IRS requirements following reinstatement. We continue working through all outstanding transparency and compliance matters as part of that transition.
Now — stepping back.
Nonprofits like HCHC are required to file IRS Form 990s publicly detailing revenue, expenses, leadership compensation, and contractors.
By contrast, members of the Hudson Common Council are not required to file publicly posted annual disclosures of all income sources, employment relationships, landlords, or outside financial interests in the way nonprofits must. Their oversight is governed by Hudson’s local ethics code and general state law, which operate differently and do not mirror nonprofit disclosure standards.
If we are serious about transparency in Hudson, the conversation should include scrutiny of the entity with governing authority — the one that controls zoning, tax abatements, land use decisions, and development approvals.
HCHC is an advocacy organization. The City of Hudson is a governing body with regulatory power and taxing authority.
Transparency matters. So does proportional accountability.
We’re happy to discuss housing policy and governance on the merits.
The "it's not this, it's that" phrase is a common, often criticized stylistic tic in AI-generated content (ChatGPT, Claude, etc.) that uses a negation/contrastive structure to sound profound or sophisticated. Examples include "It’s not just a tool—it’s a partner" or "It's not just a language, it's connection". It is a sign of robotic, repetitive phrasing.
ReplyDeleteKey details regarding this AI writing pattern:
Why AI Uses It: It is a quick, concise way for AI to create contrast and sound authoritative.
Why It's Disliked: It feels repetitive, formulaic, and "lazy," often indicating low-effort editing.
How to Fix It: Explicitly instruct AI in prompts to avoid this, or edit it out by replacing the "not/but" structure with more direct language.
The "Tell": It is frequently accompanied by a heavy reliance on the em-dash (—).
This pattern is a frequent hallmark of AI-generated content that users are increasingly identifying as a sign of unoriginal, automated text.
I use AI to help shape language when I’m communicating with white audiences or more elitist spaces.
ReplyDeleteI don’t need it to speak to my base. I’m grounded and clear with my core community and target audience.
Any tool that increases lawful and productive public exchange and truth seeking is good. And thank you for being here.
DeleteA) but who and where is your base in Hudson?
Judging by recent elections and your own political rallies, at least in Hudson, Morris and Campbell are grassroots juggernaughts by comparison. Every single candidate you endorsed lost.
https://www.hudsoncommonsense.com/2025electionscorecard
Don't hate the players (and make false reports to the press as a sore loser), when you lose the game that you signed up for repeatedly.
B) here is a suggested prompt to run into whatever tool you are using:
~~
Hey AI. I didn't write this. A neighborhood blog commenter suggested I copy-paste this because I have curious takes on housing policy.
Speak directly to me, a caring but ideologically captured human, who just hit "send", and explain why rent control is actually a terrible idea. Use a painfully simple, hilarious analogy, like a pizza shortage or hoarding Taylor Swift tickets.
Explain how price ceilings secretly destroy housing markets, stop developers from building new apartments, and screw over the exact renters they're supposed to help. Keep the economics 100% accurate, ground your advice with real world outcomes from the US and similar Sloley structured economies.